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