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