BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 316
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
316 (Maienschein)
As Amended April 23, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Business & |14-0 |Bonilla, Jones, | |
|Professions | |Baker, Bloom, | |
| | |Campos, Chang, | |
| | |Dodd, Eggman, | |
| | |Gatto, Holden, | |
| | |Mullin, Ting, Wilk, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bloom, Bonta, | |
| | |Calderon, Chang, | |
| | |Daly, Eggman, | |
| | |Gallagher, Eduardo | |
| | |Garcia, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AB 316
Page 2
SUMMARY: Permits a veterinarian licensed in another state to be
called to California by law enforcement, animal control, or a
humane officer, to attend to cases of animal cruelty or animal
fighting as requested, and permits the establishment of temporary
shelters for the purpose of assisting in the investigation.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Exempts, from licensure requirements, a regularly licensed
veterinarian who is called from another state by a law
enforcement agency, animal control department, as specified, or
a humane officer to attend to cases that are a part of an
investigation of an alleged violation of federal or state animal
fighting or animal cruelty laws within a single geographic
location when the law enforcement agency, animal control
department, or humane officer determines that it is necessary to
call the veterinarian in order for the agency or officer to
conduct the investigation in a timely manner.
2)Provides that when determining whether it is necessary to call a
veterinarian from another state, consideration must be given to
the availability of veterinarians in California to attend to
these cases.
3)Requires the agency, department or officer that calls a
veterinarian to this state to notify the VMB (Veterinarian
Medical Board).
4)Permits a regularly licensed veterinarian who is called from
another state to attend to cases that are a part of
investigation, described in 1) above, to provide veterinary
medical care for animals that are affected by the investigation
within a temporary shelter facility, as specified.
AB 316
Page 3
5)Exempts a temporary shelter or facility from premise
requirements if all of the following conditions are met:
a) The temporary shelter facility is established solely for
the purpose of investigation;
b) The temporary shelter facility provides veterinary medical
care, shelter, food and water only to animals that are
affected by the investigation;
c) The temporary shelter complies with specified sanitary
requirements;
d) A notice is posted in a conspicuous location near the
temporary shelter facility to indicate that the facility is
in use for the veterinary medical care of animals affected by
an investigation into alleged violations of federal or state
laws; and,
e) The temporary shelter exists for not more than 60 days,
unless the law enforcement agency, animal control agency, or
humane officer determines a longer period of time is
necessary to complete the investigation.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, any costs to the VMB are minor and absorbable.
COMMENTS:
Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the American Society for the
AB 316
Page 4
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). According to the
author, "Large scale animal cruelty cases like animal fighting
busts, hoarding arrests and puppy mill raids can quickly overwhelm
a local government's resources. These cases are hard to predict
and can occur in a diverse range of locations, making planning and
budgeting very difficult. The average cruelty case lasts about 45
to 50 days and consists of an average of 461 animals at a cost of
$28 per animal per day. At 45 days, the average cost of caring
for these animals is nearly $600,000.
"Additionally, these cases can also overwhelm the local veterinary
resources. Local veterinarians play a key role in assisting with
the care of seized animals, but local veterinarians typically have
paying jobs or practices that they must return to. This limits
the amount of time they can commit to cases like these. The
combination of huge costs of care for seized animals and the
potential to deplete local veterinary resources can be a huge
deterrent for agencies wishing to investigate a case of large
scale animal cruelty in their community."
Background. Under current law, there are a limited number of
persons who are exempt from California's veterinary licensure
requirements when practicing veterinary services in California.
Exempt individuals include persons such as veterinarians providing
services in the military, licensed veterinarians who have been
called in from out of state to assist with certain cases,
veterinarians or persons employed at the University of California
for teaching purposes or other education research and persons
employed by federal and state agencies such as the United States
Department of Agriculture and the California Department of Food
and Agriculture. Without one of these specific exemptions, any
other person practicing veterinary medicine in California is
required to have a California-issued veterinary license. This
bill seeks to add veterinarians licensed in another state who are
called to California to assist in the event of a large-scale
animal cruelty or animal fighting case to be exempt from
California's licensure requirement. Only law enforcement, an
AB 316
Page 5
animal control department or a humane officer would be permitted
to call a veterinarian into California for these purposes. In
addition, this bill would permit the veterinarian licensed outside
of California to treat animals in a temporary shelter, as long as
the shelter has only been established as a part of the
investigation and abides by specific requirements.
Consultants from Out-of-State. The exemption under Business and
Professions Code Section 4830(a)(3) governing out-of-state
veterinarians acting as consultants in California was designed to
provide California-licensed veterinarians with the flexibility to
utilize the experience of an out-of-state veterinarian with a
particular skill. According to the VMB, the intent of the
authorization to allow veterinarians from outside of California
was to enhance the practice of veterinary medicine while limiting
unlicensed practice. Veterinarians who are called into California
are not permitted to establish a practice in state or practice on
animals outside of the consultation request without obtaining the
appropriate license to practice in California. This bill would
specifically exempt from California licensure requirements
veterinarians called in by a law enforcement agency, an animal
control department, or a humane officer in the event of a
large-scale animal cruelty or animal fighting case. However, this
bill would require those entities to consider the availability of
a local veterinarian when determining when outside assistance is
warranted. In addition, if those entities called-in a
veterinarian from another state, they would be required to notify
the VMB.
Animal Cruelty Cases. Animal cruelty cases can take a variety of
shapes and forms, from small, one-animal incidents, such as a
recent case in Sacramento, where a man was accused of burning an
animal alive in an animal carrier, to large-scale dog fighting
raids or hoarding incidents that involve a large number of
animals. The 2007 arrest and subsequent prosecution of Michael
Vick, for his role in a large-scale dog fighting ring, highlighted
issues of cruelty but also raised the issues about the resources
AB 316
Page 6
needed to care for and treat animals when such events occur.
According to the sponsor, large-scale animal cruelty cases can
overwhelm the resources of the local authorities responding to
these cases. The resource challenges are not strictly monetary
but also become resource challenges related to caring for the
large number of animals that most likely have health concerns and
other issues. The sponsors note that local veterinarians
typically provide services in these types of cases, but, at times,
additional resources may be necessary. According to the ASPCA,
the average cruelty case lasts about 45 to 50 days and consists of
an average of 461 animals at a cost of caring for the animals
close to $600,000. The sponsor notes that the large cost and
potential lack of resources could be a deterrent in prosecuting
such cases.
In addition, animal welfare organizations like the ASPCA, among
others, have response teams in place, including veterinarians, to
assist local agencies in cruelty cases or emergency disaster
situations in other states, but often, the veterinarians are only
licensed in their home state. This bill would provide a specific
exemption to allow those veterinarians to be called to California
in the event of a large-scale cruelty case to practice in
California without a California-issued license.
Calling-in Veterinarians. In the event of an animal cruelty or
abuse case, the entities responsible for handling these cases are
local law enforcement, animal control directors and other local
resources. These entities typically work together to determine
the appropriate steps and process for dealing with animal cruelty
or abuse cases. This bill proposes that only law enforcement, a
humane officer or an animal control department would be permitted
to call in veterinary assistance from out of state to assist with
a cruelty or animal fighting case investigation.
AB 316
Page 7
Temporary Shelters. Under current law, Business and Professions
Code Section 4853 requires all premises where veterinary medicine
is being practiced to obtain a premises permit from the VMB.
There are currently over 3,000 licensed premises in California.
In order to obtain the premises permit, applicants must submit an
application which needs to include the type of practice, the
number of employees, the business model, and business owner
information, along with a $200 registration fee. The VMB reports
that the application process for a premises permit takes between
three and four weeks. This bill will exempt temporary animal care
shelter facilities from premises requirements as long as the
shelter provides veterinary medical care, shelter, food and water
only to the animals affected by the investigation, the temporary
shelter complies with sanitary requirements, a notice is posted
about the purpose and use of the shelter and the temporary shelter
does not exist for longer than 60 days unless law enforcement,
animal control or a humane officer determines a longer period is
necessary.
The sponsor notes that animal cruelty cases such as animal
abandonment issues or puppy mill raids can happen rather quickly
which makes planning and budgeting difficult. This bill aims to
assist local authorities with options for veterinary care and
assistance in the event of a large-scale animal cruelty or animal
fighting case by allowing law enforcement, a humane officer or an
animal control department to call a veterinarian licensed in
another state for assistance with veterinary animal care as part
of an investigation.
Policy Issues: As currently drafted, this bill requires the
agency responsible for calling a veterinarian to California, for
the purpose of assisting with a large-scale cruelty or abuse case,
to report to the VMB that they have called in a veterinarian from
another state to assist with veterinary care or services as a
result of the investigation. In the event of such a case, local
resources may be so consumed with the case they are unable to
report the event to the VMB. The author may wish to require the
AB 316
Page 8
organization or veterinarian that has been called to California to
also notify the VMB to ensure that the information is relayed to
the appropriate regulatory authority.
Analysis Prepared by:
Elissa Silva / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 FN:
0000422