BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE AB 1856
Office of Senate Floor Analyses
1020 N Street, Suite 524
(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) 327-4478
.
THIRD READING
.
Bill No: AB 1856
Author: Vincent (D), et al
Amended: 7/7/98 in Senate
Vote: 21
.
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 5-3, 6/23/98
AYES: Burton, Lockyer, O'Connell, Sher, Schiff
NOES: Haynes, Leslie, Wright
NOT VOTING: Calderon
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 43-31, 5/27/98 - See last page for vote
.
SUBJECT : Dog and cat overpopulation: spaying and
neutering
SOURCE : Author
.
DIGEST : This bill requires all public animal control
agencies or shelters, society for the prevention of cruelty
to animals shelters, humane shelters, and rescue groups in
counties over 100,000 (and cities within those counties) to
spay or neuter any dog or cat that it sells or gives away.
If a dog or cat is injured or too sick to be spayed or
neutered, it may be released to a person who pays a
sterilization deposit and agrees in writing to have the
animal sterilized.
For counties with populations under 100,000 (and cities
within those counties), the bill prohibits the public
agency or shelter from releasing a dog or cat that has not
been spayed or neutered, unless the party to whom the
animal is released pays a sterilization deposit and agrees
in writing to have the animal sterilized.
The bill also imposes new fines and penalties upon owners
of unspayed or unneutered dogs or cats which are impounded
by an animal control agency, shelter or society. The bill
would impose a $35 fine upon a first impoundment, and a $50
fine upon a second impoundment and $100 upon a third
occurrence.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides that no public pound,
society for the prevention of cruelty to animals shelters,
or humane shelter may sell or give away an unspayed or
unneutered dog or cat, unless it collects a refundable spay
or neuter deposit. It provides that the deposit shall not
be returned unless the owner of the pet provides proof that
the dog or cat has been spayed or neutered within 60 days
or six months, depending on the age of the animal. It
provides that the spay or neuter deposit shall not exceed
$40 for dogs and $30 for cats.
This bill provides that all public animal control agencies
or shelters, society for the prevention of cruelty to
animals shelters, humane shelters, and rescue groups in
cities or counties over 100,000 must spay or neuter any dog
or cat that it sells or gives away. If a dog or cat is
determined by a licensed veterinarian to be too injured or
too sick to be spayed or neutered, it may be released to a
person who pays a sterilization deposit of between $40 and
$75 and agrees in writing to have the animal sterilized.
Any animal so released would be required to be sterilized
within 14 days of the time a licensed veterinarian
determines that it is healthy enough to be spayed or
neutered. All deposits forfeited or unclaimed shall be
maintained by the agency that collected same for purposes
of spaying and neutering dogs and cats and for follow-up
purposes.
For public animal control agencies and animal shelters in
counties with populations under 100,000, and cities within
those counties, the bill would prohibit the release of a
dog or cat that has not been spayed or neutered, unless the
party to whom the animal is released pays a sterilization
deposit of between $40 and $75 and agrees in writing to
have the animal sterilized. Any animal so released would
be required to be sterilized within 30 days. The bill
would provide for civil penalties of $50 and $100 for
submitting false information relating to sterilization or
writing a check for insufficient funds for a spay or neuter
deposit, and would authorize any animal control officer,
humane officer, police officer, or peace officer to write
citations for those penalties.
The bill defines a rescue group as a for profit or not for
profit entity, or a collaboration of individuals with at
least one of its purposes being the sale or placement of
dogs that have been removed from a public animal control
agency or shelter, society for the prevention of cruelty to
animals shelter, or humane shelter or that have been
previously owned by any person other than the original
breeder of that dog.
Existing law authorizes local animal control agencies to
impound free roaming animals under specified circumstances.
This bill provides that the owner of an unspayed or
neutered dog or cat that has been impounded must pay a $35
fine upon a first impoundment and a $50 fine upon a second
impoundment and $100 for the third or subsequent
occurrence.
These fines are for unneutered impounded animals only and
are not in lieu of any fines or impound fees imposed by a
local entity, as specified.
This bill makes the following findings and declarations:
"(a) The Legislature finds and declares that overpopulation
of dogs and cats in California is a problem of great public
concern. The overpopulation causes public health problems,
adversely affects city and county animal control
departments, and results in needlessly euthanized dogs and
cats.
"(b) It is the intent of the Legislature, by enacting this
act, to reduce the number of unwanted dogs and cats in
California. In order to reduce the number of stray dogs and
cats on the streets, and the number euthanized in shelters
each year, the birthrate must be reduced. Although the
point may seem obvious, humans generally give birth to a
single offspring, while dogs and cats give birth to
litters. Additionally, dogs and cats reach sexual maturity
relatively young and their gestation periods are
comparatively short. The single most effective prevention
of overpopulation among the dog and cat population is
spaying and neutering."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/27/98)
Animal Protection Institute
T Minus 30 Films
Orange County Coalition for Pet Population Control
Physicians for Social Responsibility, LA
SPCALA
A-PAL
County of Calaveras
State Humane Association of California
Association of Veterinarians for Animal Right
Bob Barker Productions
Coalition to Protect Animals in Entertainment
In Defense of Animals
Feral Cat Coalition
United Activists for Animal Rights
Peninsula Pet Rescue and Placement League
American Bird Conservancy
Asians for Humans, Animals and Nature
International Aid for Korean Animals
Benevolent Animal Rescue Committee
Peninsula Pet Rescue and Placement League
Spay and Neuter Action Project
Education and Action for Animals
Pet Adoption Fund
The Humane Society of San Bernardino Valley
Lake Elsinore Animal Friends
Animal Legislative Action Network
Orange County People for Animals
Animal Emancipation, Inc.
Actors and Others for Animals
numerous individuals
OPPOSITION : (Verified 7/27/98)
Contra Costa County
Contra Costa Humane Society
The Fund for Animals, Inc.
The American Kennel Club
American Staffordshire Terrier Club
Irish Setter Club of San Diego
Samoyed Club of America Associated Obedience Clubs of
Northern California
Golden Gate Labrador Retriever Club, Inc.
Irish Setter Club of Southern California
Pet Lovers Protective League
South Bay Collie Fanciers, Inc.
California Federation of Dog Clubs
Afghan Hound Club of California
Antelope Valley Kennel Club
Aztec Doberman Pinscher Club of San Diego
Bull Terrier Club of California
Cabrillo Club of California
California Canine Hikers
Channel City Kennel Club
Cocker Spaniel Club of San Diego
Diablo Valley German Shepherd Dog Club
Western Hound Association of Southern California
Golden Retriever Club of Greater Los Angeles
Golden Gate Akita Club
Golden State Chow Chow Club
Golden State Rottweiler Club
Great Pyrnees Association of Southern California
Kennel Club of Riverside
Kennel Club of Palm Springs
Kern Valley Kennel Club
Lake Matthews Kennel Club
Mensona Kennel Club
Orange Coast Rhodesian Ridgeback Club
Dalane Golden Retrievers
Samoyed Club of Los Angeles
San Angeles Saluki Club
San Joaquin Kennel Club
Santa Maria Kennel Club
Santa Clara Valley Kennel Club
Shoreline Dog Fanciers Association
Southern California Beagle Club
Southland Weimaraner Club
St. Bernard Club of San Diego
St. Bernard Club of Southern California
Western Fox Terrier Breeders Association
Ventura County Dog Fanciers;
Society Collies
Keeshound Club of Southern California
National Animal Interest Alliance
Collie Club of America, Inc.
San Gabriel Valley Collie Club
Simply Corgis
South West Dog Sports of California
Saga Welsh Springer Spaniels
The Welsh Springer Club of America
The Art Network; Pricilla Eiden, Inc.
Balua Sur Kennel Club
Kayra Kennel
Killija Labradors
Dalmatian Club of Southern California
Golden West Fox Terrier Association
Custom Canines Obedience
Tioka Norwegian Elkhounds Bulldog Club of Southern
California
BisSchips CB Schipperkes
JMC Service
CRIS'S K9 Training
Coyote Hills Kennel Club
American Dog Owners Association, Inc.
ASTRO
The Animal Council; Animal House, Inc.
Animal Lovers Unlimited, Inc.
Authentic Bengal Cat League
Bahia Sur Kennel Club of Chula Vista
Barbary Coast Bull Terrier Club
Bear County Cattery
Bijou Bleu Cattery
Borzoi Club of California
The Cat Care Clinic
The Cat Fanciers Association, Inc.
Del Sur Kennel Club
Embergain Golden Retrievers
Feather River Dog Training Club
Fresh Start Victorian Cat Shelter
Golden Empire Brittany Club
Great Companions Dog Training
High Desert Cat Club
Human/ Animal Bond in Society
International Bengal Cat Club
Just Persians Cat Club
Malibu Cat Club
Mother Lode Bulldog Club
Nakota Siberians
National Pet Alliance
Northern California Alaskan Malamute Association
Pet Pantry
Pups are Us Pet Store
Rowe's La Mesa Pet Hotel
Sacramento Council of Dog Clubs
Saluki Club of Greater San Francisco
San Diego Cat Fanciers
San Francisco Dog Training Club
Sandy Oak Chesapeakes
Santa Clara Cat Fanciers Association
Sierra Foothills Dalmatian Club
Tahoe Bengals
Two Cities Kennel Club
Western Abyssinian Cat Club
West Shore Shorthair Cat Club
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : This bill has been introduced as
part of an effort to curb dog and cat overpopulation. The
author's office argues that too many dogs and cats are
produced in California, and as a consequence a high number
must be euthanized. He claims that last year nearly 600,000
dogs and cats were euthanized in California at an average
cost to taxpayers of $78.12 per animal. The author's office
argues that by reducing the number of dogs and cats that
can reproduce, this bill will reduce the number that must
be killed and reduce the burden on taxpayers.
The author's office cites three ways in which this bill
will lower the dog and cat population. By requiring that
all animals that are released by pounds, shelters and
rescue societies in counties with populations over 100,000
are spayed and neutered, it will reduce the number of
released dogs and cats in those counties that are capable
of reproduction. By increasing sterilization deposits and
fines in counties with populations under 100,000, it will
encourage sterilization without imposing excessive burdens
on shelters in those counties. Lastly, by sterilizing dogs
and cats that are impounded three or more times, the bill
encourages owners not to let their dogs and cats roam free,
and allows for the sterilization of dogs and cats that
habitually roam.
Numerous humane and animal rights organizations support
this bill. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, Los Angeles (SPCA, LA) argues that it is very
difficult to enforce spay and neuter deposit agreements and
that over 70 percent of people who adopt animals from
shelters do not get their animals sterilized. Instead,
they treat the deposit as an adoption fee and simply absorb
the cost. SPCA, LA also points out that many humane
organizations already spay and neuter all animals prior to
adoption.
Animal Protection Institute claims an additional
consequence of dog and cat overpopulation is an increase in
the number of free roaming and homeless animals, which
heightens the potential for animal abuse. They claim that
"nuisance" animals are often mistreated by people who lack
empathy for their plight and suffering.
The American Bird Conservancy (ABC) claims that
free-roaming cats kill hundreds of millions of birds and
other wildlife each year. They also have a significant
negative impact on populations of endangered birds. ABC
argues that the bill would be a positive step towards the
preservation of those species.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Sharon Coleman, President of
the Animal Council argues that the bill would deny the due
process rights of dog and cat owners. The bill does not
provide for an administrative hearing of any kind.
The Animal Council states, "We oppose legislation that
mandates sterilization of privately owned dogs and cats,
i.e., those not owned by public animal control agencies or
private shelters with public contractual support. We do
not believe that the declining numbers of animals
euthanized by public shelters is adequate reason to compel
persons to sterilize animals other than as they deem
appropriate as to time, place and expense. Privately owned
animals are included in this bill's mandatory
sterilization, because of the inclusion of 'rescue' groups.
"'Rescue group' is now defined for purposes of these
sections as 'a for profit or not for profit entity, or a
collaboration of individuals with at least one of its
purposes being the sale or placement of dogs (or cats) that
have been removed from a public animal control agency or
shelter, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals
shelter, or humane shelter or that have been previously
owned by any person other than the original breeder of that
dog (or cat).' This language is so broad as to include two
members of a household who might occasionally rescue a
stray cat or kittens.
"legal title to animals in the private rescue process is
held either by individuals or these private associations or
entities. Almost all such animals ultimately are altered.
Subjecting these owners to this mandate entails due process
issues. For example, a charitable rescue organization
could receive from an estate a valuable cat or dog that
could be sold, intact, for thousands of dollars to the
benefit of the organization and other animals. In the
event that title to the animal should not be clear prior to
transfer -- a not unheard of occurrence -- the 'rescue
group' has potential liability to the owner for damages to
property. The broad range of activities encompassed by
rescue and almost always performed by volunteers --
frequently at their personal expense, sometimes involving
interstate management, as well as intermedi-ate, temporary
or provisional transfers in or out of state -- should not
be burdened by making veterinary decisions in a particular
location, or collecting, paying or administering deposits."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Alquist, Aroner, Baca, Bowen, Brown, Cardenas,
Cardoza, Cedillo, Davis, Ducheny, Escutia, Figueroa,
Firestone, Floyd, Gallegos, Granlund, Havice, Hertzberg,
Honda, Keeley, Knox, Kuehl, Lempert, Machado, Martinez,
Mazzoni, Migden, Murray, Ortiz, Pacheco, Papan, Perata,
Shelley, Strom-Martin, Sweeney, Thomson, Torlakson,
Vincent, Washington, Wayne, Wildman, Wright, Villaraigosa
NOES: Ackerman, Aguiar, Alby, Ashburn, Baldwin, Battin,
Baugh, Bordonaro, Bowler, Campbell, Cunneen, Frusetta,
House, Kaloogian, Kuykendall, Leach, Leonard, Margett,
McClintock, Miller, Morrissey, Morrow, Olberg, Oller,
Poochigian, Prenter, Pringle, Richter, Runner, Takasugi,
Thompson
NOT VOTING: Brewer, Bustamante, Goldsmith, Napolitano,
Scott, Woods
RJG:cm/ctl 7/27/98 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****