|You are not authorized to post a reply.
|07/11/2007 6:37 AM
|> Subject: [petlaw] AB1634 BILL EXPECTED TO BE KILLED IN SENATE
> Reply-To: email@example.com
> BREAKING NEWS
> by Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> Published 12:00 am PDT Wednesday, July 11, 2007
> Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3
> Spay-neuter bill in big trouble
> A Senate committee is expected to kill the controversial plan today.
> Legislation to require mandatory sterilization of kittens and puppies
> California has sparked grave concerns among lawmakers and is likely
> to be killed
> today by a Senate committee.
> "I could probably say, yeah, it's in trouble," said Sen. Gloria
> McLeod, D-Chino, who chairs the Senate Local Government Committee
> that will
> decide today whether the bill lives or dies.
> The measure would require spaying or neutering of millions of
> California pets
> in an effort to reduce the burden on animal shelters that euthanize
> than 400,000 dogs and cats annually.
> All five members of the committee agreed that the legislation,
> Assembly Bill
> 1634, is on shaky ground for today's hearing.
> Three votes would kill the measure -- and no committee member
> enthusiasm or support for it Tuesday. But most said they want to hear
> before making a final decision.
> "There's a lot of problems with the bill," said Sen. Tom Harman,
> "It's a very controversial issue and I want to listen to both sides.
> right now, I'm tending to think that I'm going to be voting no on it."
> Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, a Van Nuys Democrat who proposed AB 1634,
> said he
> is aware of the senators' misgivings. But he has not abandoned hope
> of passing
> the measure, he said.
> "The bill has appeared to be in trouble in the past, and we have
> managed to
> overcome that trouble," Levine said.
> "Once people get a chance to see my supporters and the opponents side
> side, it's clear which side has logic and reason and fact on their
> side," he
> AB 1634 has produced some of the year's most passionate, crowded and
> contentious legislative hearings, routinely attracting more than 400
> supporters and
> Roughly 20,000 people have sent letters or signed petitions to argue
> case to members of the Senate Local Government Committee, according
> to a Senate
> analysis of AB 1634.
> "They've broken my fax machine," said Negrete McLeod, smiling.
> The campaign promoting AB 1634 received a blow last week when the
> Veterinary Medical Association, a former co-sponsor, switched its
> position to
> neutral because of division within its ranks.
> Another committee member, Sen. Dave Cox, R-Fair Oaks, said outright
> that he plans to vote no on the bill.
> "My position is that this is a local issue, this is something that
> ought not
> be a mandate," Cox said of mandatory pet sterilization. "One size
> doesn't fit
> Cox said he represents 12 counties with differing needs and "from that
> standpoint, this is not a bill I can support."
> AB 1634 is designed to reduce the number of unwanted animals in
> California by
> making it impossible for most pets to reproduce.
> Taxpayers spend more than $300 million annually to house, feed,
> euthanize and
> dispose of unwanted dogs and cats, Levine said.
> AB 1634 would require puppies and kittens to be spayed or neutered by
> the age
> of 6 months. Owners could be fined $500 for ignoring the law.
> Exceptions would be made for police dogs, guide dogs, signal dogs,
> dogs and various other working canines.
> Pets also would be excused if a veterinarian states that they should
> not be
> sterilized because of age, illness or poor health.
> Permits could be purchased to possess an unaltered dog or cat under
> conditions, for example, if it is a purebred animal that competes in
> As a concession that helped win narrow passage of his bill in the
> 41-38, Levine agreed to allow local officials to issue permits
> households to have one litter of mixed-breed puppies. The provision
> would expire
> in January 2012.
> AB 1634 is not meant to spark a door-to-door search for violators,
> but if a
> roaming dog or cat were impounded, a "fix-it ticket" could be issued.
> Levine and others say it is inhumane to allow indiscriminate breeding
> hordes of unwanted animals that are destined to be euthanized.
> But opponents lambaste AB 1634 as largely unenforceable, and say spay
> neuter decisions should be left to local government.
> The two sides also disagree on whether mandating sterilization at a
> young age
> poses any significant risk to a pet's health.
> Numerous hobbyist breeders claim that AB 1634 could put them out of
> by charging for breeding permits and restricting the types of animals
> to reproduce.
> One member of the Senate Local Government Committee, Sen. Christine
> D-San Diego, said she considers it relevant that the state veterinary
> association withdrew its support for AB 1634.
> Records show that numerous other animal agencies continue to support
> bill, including the California Animal Control Directors Association
> and the
> State Humane Association of California.
> Kehoe said AB 1634 would impose an entirely new program on San Diego
> which she represents, because local government there does not
> license cats.
> "The bill does appear to be in trouble," Kehoe said. "I'm going to
> listen to
> testimony. I never promise my vote ahead of time. But I do think that
> a lot of concern about whether the bill should continue to move."
> Stephanie Hart
> Southern California
> NO ON AB1634
> _http://www.ckcscsc.com/blog.htm_ (http://www.ckcscsc.com/blog.htm)
> _http://www.caillouxcavaliers.com_ (http://www.caillouxcavaliers.com/)
> ************************************** See what's free at
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new
> Messages | Files | Photos | Links
> No mail - firstname.lastname@example.org ~~
> Unsubscribe - email@example.com ~~
> Digests - firstname.lastname@example.org
|You are not authorized to post a reply.
You must be logged in to use this module.