BILL ANALYSIS AB 241 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 28, 2009 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS Mary Hayashi, Chair AB 241 (Nava) - As Amended: April 13, 2009 SUBJECT : Dogs and cats: breeding for sale. SUMMARY : The Responsible Breeder Act of 2009 (Act) prohibits a person from having more than a combined total of 50 unsterilized dogs and cats, as specified. Specifically, this bill : 1)Prohibits a person from owning, possessing, controlling, or otherwise having charge or custody of more than 50 unsterilized dogs and cats at any time for the purpose of breeding or raising such dogs and cats for sale as pets, and makes a violation a misdemeanor. 2)Requires a person who must reduce the number of intact dogs or cats in order to comply with this section to spay or neuter the excess animals or sell, transfer, or relinquish the excess animals within 30 days of notification by authorities. 3)States that if necessary, any euthanasia procedures shall be performed by a licensed California veterinarian. 4)Permits a peace officer, humane officer, or animal control officer to lawfully take possession of an animal kept in violation of the Act when necessary to protect the health or safety of the animal or the health or safety of others. 5)Does not apply to: a) a publicly owned animal control facility; b) a duly incorporated private animal shelter; c) a veterinary facility; or d) a research facility, as specified. EXISTING LAW : 1)Makes it a misdemeanor to permit an animal to be in any building, enclosure, street, lot, or judicial district without proper care and attention, and states that any peace officer, humane society officer, or animal control officer shall take possession of a stray or abandoned animal and shall provide proper care and treatment for the animal until the animal is AB 241 Page 2 deemed to be in a suitable condition to be returned to the owner. 2)Requires commercial breeders to maintain basic humane standards in regards to sanitation, nutrition, space, socialization, exercise, and veterinary care. 3)States that it is the policy of California that no adoptable treatable animal, as specified, should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : Purpose of the bill . According to the author's office, "A 'puppy mill' is a large-scale commercial breeding facility that mass-produces puppies for sale. The World Animal Foundation explains that, 'puppy mill kennels usually consist of small wood and wire-mesh cages, or even empty crates or trailer cabs, all kept outdoors, where female dogs are bred continuously, with no rest between heat cycles. The mothers and their litters often suffer from malnutrition, exposure, and lack of veterinary care.' "Continuous breeding takes its toll on the females; they are killed at about age six or seven when their bodies give out, and they can no longer produce enough litters. The puppies are taken from their mothers at the age of four to eight weeks, and sold to brokers who pack them into crates for transport and resale to pet shops. Puppies being shipped from mill to broker to pet shop can cover hundreds of miles by pickup truck, tractor trailer, and/or plane, often without adequate food, water, ventilation, or shelter. "Between unsanitary conditions at puppy mills and poor conditions in transport, only half of the dogs bred at mills survive to make it to market. Of those that eventually do make it to stores, thousands of puppies each year are often sold to 'impulse buyers' and ultimately end up in shelters. Nearly one million dogs and cats land in California shelters every year, of whom approximately one-half are ultimately euthanized. AB 241 Page 3 "A criminal bust of a single puppy mill can yield massive expenses to the state and local jurisdictions due to the cost of shelter, food, and veterinary care. A puppy mill bust last year in which 249 animals were rescued in Buxton, Maine cost the state $440,000. Humane organizations in the region raised approximately $70,000 in additional funds to assist with the rescue operation. "AB 241 will curb pet overpopulation, eliminate mass breeding efforts, and save state and local jurisdictions vital dollars during our ongoing economic crisis." Background . According to information provided by the author, "The U.S. Department of Agriculture is tasked with monitoring and inspecting kennels to ensure that they are not violating the standards of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA.) Unfortunately, kennel inspections are a low priority. In the U.S. there are more than 1000 research facilities, more than 2,800 exhibitors, and 4,500 dealers that are supposed to be inspected each year. There are three Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service sector offices with a total of approximately 70 veterinary inspectors who are supposed to inspect, unannounced, the various types of facilities covered by the AWA. This means that 70 inspectors are expected to cover more than 8,300 facilities nationwide. "Two other states - Louisiana and Virginia - have laws that cap the number of animals a breeder may maintain. Twenty-nine other states are also currently considering animal cap legislation." Support . According to the Humane Society of the United States, "AB 241 addresses the problems puppy mills create by limiting the number of intact cats or dogs a seller can maintain. By limiting the number of animals who can reproduce, this legislation will improve enforcement of existing state law and enable animal control to more effectively and efficiently deal with complaints about dogs and cats living in squalid conditions and receiving inadequate care. This legislation also addresses pet overpopulation and the stress that large-scale breeders place on animal shelters and our communities." The San Diego Animal Advocates write in support, "[w]e have seen the cruel consequences and the huge financial costs to taxpayers of pet overpopulation. Puppy mills and kitten mills are not only a huge part of that problem but are inherently cruel in AB 241 Page 4 their practices. AB 241 is an important tool to curb this ugly business and stop the suffering of innocent animals." Born Free states, "The documented problems of puppy mills include over-breeding, inbreeding, minimal veterinary care, overcrowding of cages, poor quality of food and shelter, lack of socialization with humans, and the killing of unwanted puppies or adult animals that can no longer reproduce. "In spite of these awful conditions as well as the millions of dogs put to death each year for lack of a home at local animal shelters, puppy mills continue to churn out puppies. By placing a cap in the number of animals that can be kept at a facility, AB 241 will help to improve conditions at these commercial breeding facilities, thereby helping animals and protecting consumers." According to the Pet Overpopulation Task Force, "In the year 2008, the City of Stockton Animal Shelter took in 6,430 dogs and 6,547 cats. These numbers include puppies and kittens. Of the 12,997 dogs and cats taken in at our shelter, 3,868 and 5,837 cats were euthanized. The opponents of this bill will tell you that most of the dogs and cats killed at shelters are feral and not suitable for adoption. This simply is not true. Many of these animals were healthy and docile but there simply were not enough homes for them. [I]t is time to look at and address the facts of the pet overpopulation crisis and stop listening to special interest groups that are selfishly protecting their personal interests at the expense of mixed-breed animals that have the misfortune of being born in a state that is willing to spend a quarter of a billion dollars a year to destroy unwanted animals." Opposition . According to the Animal Council, "2009 is the first time we have ever seen legislative proposals to regulate dog or cat owners based on a cap of unaltered animals, so this is a novel and untried concept, particularly if applied to economically viable businesses conducted under satisfactory husbandry standards. Would we limit dairies the number of cows or factories the number of producing machines? No, because there are other ways to regulate business as to safety and quality standards. As to animals, California already has such statutes in addition to many local ordinances. AB 241 would create an unworkable, difficult to ascertain standard for a criminal offense that is not rationally linked to criminal AB 241 Page 5 activity or conduct of an economically viable business." The California Responsible Pet Owners Coalition writes in opposition, "AB 241 is vague in intent, definition and application?. The vagaries of the bill's language opens the door to potential abuse of power, invasive investigation, and arbitrary enforcement. "AB 241 is taking an inappropriate approach to attempt to address issues of care and husbandry. This proposal mandates new regulations to state and/or local agencies yet denies reimbursement by the state for implementation. "Limit laws like the 50-dog limit contained in AB 241 are based on arbitrary numbers and have been found to be unenforceable as well as vulnerable to court challenges. "Responsible pet and hobby breeders should be treated as partners in helping to improve kennel standards and to eliminate negligent breeders. Instead, this bill threatens to alienate the very community that can help most. "What is needed is appropriate enforcement of existing cruelty and nuisance laws to crack down on those who disobey the law, not more regulation for reasonable law-abiding citizens." The Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council writes in opposition, "The provisions of this bill to prohibit the possession of a specified number of breeding dogs have been introduced in states throughout the United States already in 2009. Thus far, every such legislature has rejected this provision because it is adverse to the interests of animal welfare. It is important to note that there is no correlation between the number of animals in a facility and the quality of care those animals receive or the quality of the dogs offered to the public. Some of the largest commercial breeding operators in this country employ state-of-the-art facilities, exceptional and frequent veterinary care, and the highest standards for breeding and raising their animals." According to the Cat Fanciers' Association, Inc., (CFA), "This criminal bill is based on a cap on owning 50 unaltered cats. It is virtually impossible to breed pedigreed cats as an economically viable business; i.e., a 'kitty mill' so this bill would more likely ensnare citizens trying to care for unaltered AB 241 Page 6 feral or neighborhood cats, criminalizing a labor of love. Capping unaltered animals is a new policy concept and the likelihood of lowering a cap will be a liability to both our constituent hobby breeders as well as community cat caretakers. Finally, creating a new misdemeanor crime adds unfunded costs to the criminal justice system without offsetting benefits." Previous legislation . AB 1634 (Levine) of 2007 requires all cats and dogs in the state over four months old to be spayed or neutered unless the owner has been issued an intact permit, as defined, allowing the animal to remain unaltered. AB 1634 died in the Senate. SB 861 (Speier), Chapter 668, Statutes of 2005 allows cities and counties to enact breed-specific ordinances for mandatory spaying, neutering and breeding restrictions. AB 1856 (Vincent), Chapter 747, Statutes of 1998 requires all public animal control agencies or shelters, other specified shelters, and rescue groups in counties over 100,000 to spay or neuter any dog or cat that it sells or gives away. AB 1856 also imposes new fines and penalties on owners of unsterilized dogs or cats that are impounded. SB 1785 (Hayden), Chapter 752, Statutes of 1998, requires shelters to hold adoptable dogs and cats for a minimum time period, and permits nonprofit organizations to adopt animals in an effort to find the animals permanent homes. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support American Society for the Protection of Cruelty against Animals (co-sponsor) The Humane Society of the United States (co-sponsor) Social Compassion in Legislation (co-sponsor) Born Free California Peace Officers' Association California Police Chiefs Association City of Fresno Compassion for Animals Henry T. Perea, Council Member, 7th District, City of Fresno Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association Last Chance for Animals AB 241 Page 7 Madera County Animal Services PawPAC PetPAC The Pet Care Foundation Pet Overpopulation Task Force of Stockton Placer County Animal Shelter San Diego Animal Advocates Shasta Animal Welfare Foundation Stockton Police Department United Animal Nations Numerous individuals Opposition American Herding Breed Association Animal Council American Kennel Club California Federation of Dog Clubs Cat Fanciers' Association Feline Friends International German Shepherd Dog Club of America Golden Retriever Club of Greater Los Angeles Miniature Schnauzer Club of Northern California Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) PetPAC Responsible Dog Owners of the Western States, Inc We the People for Pets United States Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Others Numerous individuals Analysis Prepared by : Whitney Clark / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301