BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 2269|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                   THIRD READING 


          Bill No:  AB 2269
          Author:   Waldron (R), et al.
          Amended:  8/2/16 in Senate
          Vote:     21 

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  7-0, 6/28/16
           AYES:  Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning,  
            Wieckowski

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE:  7-0, 8/11/16
           AYES:  Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  77-0, 4/25/16 - See last page for vote

           SUBJECT:   Animal shelters:  research animals:  prohibitions


          SOURCE:    Cruelty Free International  
                     State Humane Association of California


          DIGEST:  This bill prohibits a person or animal shelter from  
          euthanizing an animal for the purpose of transferring the  
          carcass to a research facility or animal dealer, prohibits the  
          transferring of live animals to a research facility or animal  
          dealer, as specified, and makes other conforming changes. 


          ANALYSIS:  


          Existing law: 









                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  2



          1)Declares that it is the policy of this state that no adoptable  
            animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a  
            suitable home, and that no treatable animal should be  
            euthanized if with treatment it could become adoptable with  
            reasonable efforts.  (Civ. Code Sec. 1834.4.)


          2)Provides that whenever an animal is delivered to a  
            veterinarian, dog kennel, cat kennel, pet-grooming parlor,  
            animal hospital, or any other animal care facility, and the  
            owner of the animal does not pick up the animal within 14  
            calendar days after the day the animal was initially due to be  
            picked up, the animal shall be deemed to be abandoned.  (Civ.  
            Code Sec. 1834.5 (a).)


          3)Requires the person into whose custody the animal is placed  
            for care to try for at least 10 days to find a new owner for  
            the animal, or turn the animal over to a public animal control  
            agency or shelter, society for the prevention of cruelty to  
            animals shelter, humane society shelter, or nonprofit animal  
            rescue group, provided that the shelter or rescue group has  
            been contacted and has agreed to take the animal. (Civ. Code  
            Sec. 1834.5 (a).)


          4)Authorizes the animal care facility to have the abandoned  
            animal euthanized if it is unable to place the animal with a  
            new owner, shelter, or rescue group as described above.   
            Existing law further authorizes a veterinarian to euthanize an  
            animal abandoned with the veterinarian or with a facility that  
            has a veterinarian, if a new owner cannot be found after  
            following the specified procedures for holding the animal  
            described above.  (Civ. Code Sec. 1834.5 (a) and (b).)


          5)Prohibits any animals abandoned at veterinarian hospitals,  
            kennels, pet grooming parlors, and animal hospitals from being  
            used for scientific or any other type of experimentation.   
            (Civ. Code Sec. 1834.5 (e).)


          6)Requires any pound or animal regulation department of a public  







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  3


            or private agency who turns over living or dead animals to  
            biological supply facilities or research facilities to post a  
            specified notice clearly visible to the public stating that  
            animals turned in to the pound or department may be used for  
            research purposes or to supply blood, tissue, or other  
            biological products.  (Civ. Code Sec. 1834.7 (a).)


          This bill: 


          1)Prohibits a person or animal shelter from euthanizing an  
            animal for the purpose of transferring the carcass to a  
            research facility or animal dealer, as specified. 


          2)Prohibits a person or animal shelter that accepts animals from  
            the public or takes in stray or unwanted animals from selling,  
            giving, or otherwise transferring a living animal to a  
            research facility, animal dealer, or other person for the  
            purpose of research, experimentation, or testing.


          3)Requires a posting of a specified notice only when an animal  
            shelter entity transfers dead animals to a biological supply  
            facility or a research facility. 


          4)Prohibits a research facility, animal dealer, or other person  
            from receiving a living animal from procuring, purchasing,  
            receiving, accepting, or using a living animal for the purpose  
            of research, experimentation, or testing if that animal is  
            transferred from, or received from, an animal shelter or other  
            person that accepts animals from the public or takes in stray  
            or unwanted animals. 


          5)Provides that nothing in the bill's provisions prohibit a  
            research facility from working in collaboration with an animal  
            shelter to investigate problems and provide services to  
            shelter animals. 


          6)Establishes a civil penalty of $1,000 for a violation of the  







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  4


            bill's provisions, in an action to be brought by the district  
            attorney or city attorney of the county or city where the  
            violation occurred. When collected, the civil penalty shall be  
            payable to the general fund of the governmental entity that  
            brought the action to assess the penalty.


          7)Defines "animal dealer" as a person who, in commerce, for  
            compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or  
            transports, except as a carrier, or who buys, sells, or  
            negotiates the purchase or sale of any animal, whether alive  
            or dead, for research, teaching, exhibition, or biological  
            supply.


          8)Defines "animal shelter entity" as including but limited to an  
            animal regulation agency, humane society, society for the  
            prevention of cruelty to animals, or other private or public  
            animal shelter.


          9)Defines "person" as an individual, partnership, firm, limited  
            liability company, joint-stock company, corporation,  
            association, trust, estate, governmental agency, or other  
            legal entity.


          Background


          Pound seizure became common in the United States in the 1940s,  
          with the biomedical industry actually spearheading legislation  
          in several states to legally require animal shelters to provide  
          dogs and cats to research laboratories either directly, or  
          through animal dealers who collect animals from shelters and  
          other sources and sell them into experimentation. 


          After media accounts of family pets being stolen and sold by  
          animal dealers in the 1960s, Congress passed the Animal Welfare  
          Act in 1966 to regulate pound seizures and the theft and resale  
          of animals into experimentation.  Among other things, the Animal  
          Welfare Act requires animal shelters and pounds to hold cats and  
          dogs for a minimum of five days before they are sold to a  







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  5


          dealer, and requires dealers to provide the recipient of the cat  
          or dog with a certification containing certain information, such  
          as a description of the animal and the name of the shelter it  
          came from.  (7 U.S.C. Sec. 2158.)  According to Cruelty Free  
          International, however, the Animal Welfare Act "fell short of  
          its intended goals and public expectation." Specifically, by  
          making it slower and more cumbersome to obtain animals from  
          pounds, some individuals began stealing more pets in order to  
          sell them to research and biomedical institutes.  In addition,  
          it created a financial incentive for some animal shelters to  
          sell animals to research institutes instead of making them  
          available for adoption. 


          Currently, California law prohibits the sale of animals that are  
          abandoned at veterinarian hospitals, kennels, pet grooming  
          parlors, and animal hospitals into any type of research, but  
          condones the practice if the animal is transferred from an  
          animal shelter entity, as long as appropriate signs at shelters  
          inform the public of the practice.  Seeking to bring consistency  
          to state law, this bill prohibits the sale or transfer of live  
          animals from pounds and animal shelters to any animal dealer or  
          research facility, and prohibits the euthanizing of a shelter  
          animal for the purpose of transferring the carcass to a research  
          facility or animal dealer.


          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:YesLocal:   Yes


          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:




           Local agency animal shelters:  Significant ongoing care and  
            treatment costs, potentially state-reimbursable (General Fund)  
            to local agency animal shelters that accept and care for stray  
            and abandoned animals that will be prohibited from selling,  
            giving, or otherwise transferring living animals to research  
            facilities or animal dealers, as well as prohibited from  
            euthanizing animals for the purpose of transferring to a  
            research facility or animal dealer. The Commission on State  







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  6


            Mandates (CSM) in its decision on the claim Animal Adoption  
            98-TC-11, determined that only local agencies are mandated by  
            the state to accept and care for stray and abandoned animals.  
            As a result, despite the fact that the imposition of specified  
            activities is imposed upon both public and private animal  
            shelters, private shelters are not required to take in stray  
            and abandoned animals whereas local agency shelters are  
            required to do so. Therefore, to the extent the provisions of  
            this bill constitute a higher level of service imposed on  
            local agency public shelters to provide care and treatment for  
            stray and abandoned animals for an extended period of time due  
            to the prohibition on selling, giving, or transferring  
            animals, local agencies could potentially be eligible for  
            reimbursement for the increased costs. Staff notes the  
            reimbursable mandate Animal Adoption has been suspended in the  
            annual Budget Act. Thus, any additional activities mandated on  
            local agencies that accept stray or abandoned animals  
            potentially may not be subject to reimbursement during the  
            period the mandate is suspended should the CSM make that  
            determination.   




            University of California (UC):  The UC has indicated no  
            significant fiscal impact based on the latest amendments to  
            the bill that clarify under what circumstances an animal may  
            be transferred to a research facility.




           New civil penalty:  Potential minor increase in civil penalty  
            revenues (Local Funds) to the extent district attorneys or  
            city attorneys bring forth actions for violations of this  
            section.




          SUPPORT:   (Verified8/12/16)


          Cruelty Free International (co-source)







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  7


          State Humane Association of California (co-source)
          Beagle Freedom Project
          County of Riverside
          Cruelty Free International
          Humane Society of the United States
          Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association
          League of California Cities
          New England Anti-Vivisection Society
          Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Los Angeles


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified8/12/16)


          None received 


          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:     In support, the League of California  
          Cities writes:


            Current law already prohibits animals that are abandoned at  
            veterinary hospitals, grooming parlors and kennels from being  
            used for experimentation. AB 2269 would merely extend this  
            prohibition to pounds and animal shelters. A number of cities  
            have already banned this outdated practice, including West  
            Hollywood, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, Scotts Valley,  
            Laguna Woods, Nevada City, and Paradise.


            Additionally, leading medical research institutions have begun  
            to question or prohibit the use of animals acquired from  
            pounds or animal shelters for experimentation. In fact,  
            according to a 2009 report commissioned by the National  
            Academy of Sciences, demand for random sourced animals (a  
            category of animals that includes those from pounds and animal  
            shelters) has significantly fallen over the last 30 years.  AB  
            2269 is a common sense measure that builds off local  
            ordinances that have already prohibited this unnecessary  
            practice.                 



          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  77-0, 4/25/16







                                                                    AB 2269  
                                                                    Page  8


          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,  
            Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,  
            Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper,  
            Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines,  
            Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson,  
            Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger  
            Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey,  
            Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes,  
            McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte,  
            O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas,  
            Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner,  
            Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Wood, Rendon
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Chang, Olsen, Williams

          Prepared by:Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
          8/16/16 9:15:10


                                   ****  END  ****