Chula Vista, CA Townhall To Discuss Possible Mandatory Spay/Neuter Ordinance – This Saturday!

Please share this information with club members in the Chula Vista area.

 

Chula Vista City Councilman Rudy Ramirez will hold a townhall this Saturday, October 29^th to discuss a possible mandatory spay/neuter proposal. There is not a draft  available at this time, so responsible dog owners and breeders are encouraged to take this opportunity to educate the councilmembers about the ineffectiveness of mandatory spay/neuter programs. A review of the statistics from Chula Vista Animal Services shows that the city does not currently euthanize any healthy, adoptable dogs. Click here for a link to AKC's talking points on this important issue.

 

Chula Vista Townhall

Saturday, October 29^th

9am

Chula Vista City Hall

276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910

If you are unable to attend the meeting, please contact the mayor and councilmembers to express your opposition to a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance.

Mayor Cheryl Cox

ccox@chulavistaca.gov

619-691-5044

Councilmember Rudy Ramirez

(619) 691-5044
(619) 476-5379 Fax

rramirez@ci.chula-vista.ca.us

Councilmember Patricia Aguilar

(619) 691-5044
(619) 476-5379 Fax

PAguilar@chulavistaca.gov

Councilmember Pamela Bensoussan

(619) 691-5044
(619) 476-5379 Fax

pbensoussan@chulavistaca.gov

Councilmember Steve Castenada

(619) 691-5044
(619) 476-5379 Fax

scastaneda@chulavistaca.gov

 

 

Protect dog ownership rights - action alert - Chula Vista

The AR crowd is spreading misinformation about the numbers of cats and dogs impounded in Chula Vista, in order to drum up support for the MSN law.

Below is an article based on a recent TV report. "A huge jump in stray cats and dogs"? Where is the evidence of that? Claiming there is a spike in impounds? That is just plain false. There is a reduction of intakes this past year of 316, and a reduction in "euths" by 185....based on the CVAC own data.

Please, come to the town hall meeting next Saturday, October 29. Let city officials know that you are opposed to these proposed laws. We need a show of solidarity! If passed in Chula Vista, these ideas will likely soon spread to surrounding communities.

Saturday, October 29th, 9 a.m.

Chula Vista City Hall

276 4th Ave

Chula Vista, CA

http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/kswb-chula-vista-considers-mandatory-spay-and-neuter-program-20111020,0,3927886.story

Chula Vista mulls mandatory spay, neuter program

By James Koh

FOX 5 San Diego Reporter

8:53 a.m. PDT, October 21, 2011

CHULA VISTA, Calif. - Chula Vista officials are conducting public meetings to discuss a potential program that would force pet owners to spay and neuters their animals.

A huge jump in stray cats and dogs has meant ballooning costs for an animal services department that covers the Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, and Lemon Grove areas.

"There's definitely a spike but some of it can be attributed to the economy," .....

Ramirez said the city is also considering a mandatory microchipping or registration program as well.

"We're looking for options to stem that flow," Ramirez said. 

(More at link)

 

Be there for the meeting!

Saturday, October 29th, 9 a.m.

Chula Vista City Hall

276 4th Ave

Chula Vista, CA

You can also contact the Mayor and Councilmembers at that address.   They all use the same phone number (619) 691-5044 and FAX  number (619) 476-5379

Deputy Mayor Rudy Ramirez                     rramirez@ci.chula-vista.ca.us          
Mayor Cheryl Cox                                         ccox@chulavistaca.gov               
Councilmember Steve Castaneda              scastaneda@chulavistaca.gov
Councilmember Patricia Aguilar                 paguilar@chulavistaca.gov
Councilmember Pamela Bensoussan         pbensoussan@chulavistaca.gov

Update - hearings regarding Chula Vista MSN

Despite record low shelter numbers, and over ten thousand dogs per year brought in to San Diego County from Mexico, the City of Chula Vista has drafted a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance. Public hearings will be held on the City of Chula Vista's proposed mandatory spay/neuter law. They will be taking questions. The law has "exemptions" for breeders. Chula Vista City Hall 276 Fourth Ave. (Fourth and F St) Chula Vista, CA 91910 Monday   October 17 @ 6 pm Thursday October 20 @ 1 pm Saturday October 29 @ 9 am

If you live in San Diego County please make sure to attend.

We all know the reasons why mandatory spay/neuter laws are terrible, but perhaps the Chula Vista City officials are unaware of the serious problems spawned by such punitive ordinances. This is our opportunity as knowledgable dog experts to educate them on the issue.

• MSN laws drive up shelter numbers.
• More people will drop out of the licensing system.
• Noncompliance with rabies vaccination and licensing creates a public health risk.
• Mainstream animal welfare groups who OPPOSE MSN -  
• American Veterinary Medical Association
• American Humane Association
• Best Friends Animal Society
• The American Kennel Club
• Alley Cat Allies
• the ASPCA
• American College of Theriogenologists
• American Dog Owners Association
• California Federation of Dog Clubs
• American Herding Breed Association
• National Organization of Dog Obedience Instructors
• International Association of Canine Professionals
• California Responsible Pet Owners Coalition
• Concerned Dog Owners of California
• Save Our Dogs
• Mandatory spay/neuter has been a failure wherever it has been tried
• The vast majority of owned animals are already sterilized. Voluntary collaborative educational efforts are working. Punitive laws will reverse this success.
• Feral cats are more than half of all shelter intakes. Their numbers will not be reduced by any mandatory spay/neuter law. If anything, feral cat caretakers will be fearful to participate in TNR programs for fear of facing penalties and fines.
• Spaying and neutering can produce many serious adverse health effects. Sterilization should be a decision between an owner and his veterinarian, and not mandated by government officials. 

Action alert - PUPS

Please contact your senator and congressman. A suggested message that you can cut/paste into the online email form is below.

PUPS - - FOREBODING NUMBERS - - DO THE MATH!!!!

A message from Frank Losey ("Spay/Neuter the HSUS" campaign)

WARNING:  If the PUPS Bill - - which was drafted by the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) - - is enacted into Law, it may affect every single breeder in the U.S who breeds as few as one dog a year.  That's right . . . one dog!   And the PUPS Bill could affect you in more than 20 different ways, and would create a "slippery slope" that would inevitably lead to other intended or unintended consequences that may affect all dog owners - - even those who do not intend to breed dogs.

Slowly, quietly, methodically, and behind the scenes, the HSUS has been recruiting more and more co-sponsors for PUPS each week.  Currently there are 124 U.S. Representatives who are on record as being either the Sponsor or Co-Sponsors of PUPS; and 15 U.S. Senators who are also on record as being either the Sponsor or Co-Sponsors of PUPS.

I have said in the past that when the numbers reach 150 in the House and 34 in the Senate - - slightly more than 1/3 in Both Houses of Congress - - the HSUS will make a full Court Press to bring the PUPS Bill to a vote.  It is only a matter of time before the thresholds of "150" and "34" are met - - first in the House, and then in the Senate.  That  is inevitable unless Members of Congress realize that the HSUS has a "Dark Side" and is not what it has been perceived to be.   THAT IS WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT THAT ALL LETTERS SENT TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS INCLUDE AN "ATTENTION-GETTING," FIGURATIVE "LIGHTNING BOLT" IN ORDER TO GRAB THE ATTENTION OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO ARE "APPROACHABLE" BY THE HSUS, BUT WHO HAVE NOT YET BECOME CO-SPONSORS, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE CURRENT CO-SPONSORS OF THE PUPS BILL WHO MIGHT CONSIDER WITHDRAWING THEIR CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE PUPS BILL.

Why do I say "approachable?"    In March of this year, the HSUS presented its 2010 Legislative Awards to 144 Members of Congress who best supported the HSUS Lobbying Agenda in 2010.  Fifty-eight (58) of the 108 U.S. Representatives who received the HSUS Awards are currently co-sponsors of the PUPS Bill.  That means that if only 26 of the remaining 50 "uncommitted" Representatives who were "honored" by the HSUS were to co-sponsor the PUPS Bill, the "Magic Number" of 150 would be reached.  So far, only 11 of the 36 Senators who were honored by the HSUS in March of this year have Sponsored or Co-Sponsored the Companion PUPS Bill in the Senate.  Thus, if 19 of the "uncommitted" 25 Senators who were honored by the HSUS in March of this year were to co-sponsor the Senate version of the PUPS Bill, the "Magic Number" of 34 would be reached.  Both are very reasonably attainable.

So what can be the "LIGHTNING BOLT???"   I believe the most effective "LIGHTNING BOLT" WOULD BE A POTENTIAL "SCANDAL" ASSOCIATED WITH THE HSUS, SUCH AS THE ON-GOING INVESTIGATIONS OF THE HSUS AND ITS CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES BY THREE DIFFERENT FEDERAL AGENCIES - - ONE OF WHICH IS BEING REVIEWED BY THE U.S. OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS.

Ideally, the Offices of every Member of Congress need to be "flooded" with E-Mails that call attention to the "Dark Side" of the HSUS, as well as the fact that the HSUS has become the subject of Investigations   by three separate Federal Agencies.  The recommended wording for these E-Mails would read as follows.

********************************************

"Dear Senator/Representative:

No caring American supports the activities of those few "substandard kennels" that do exist.  Unfortunately, the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) has mischaracterized and slurred the activities of thousands of caring breeders by referring to them as "puppy mills."  Deceptively, the HSUS has never publicly acknowledged or disclosed the fact that these thousands of breeders are either Licensed and Inspected by the Federal Government, or by the State Government, and many of them are "Hobby and Show Breeders," as well as breeders of Search and Rescue dogs and breeders of dogs for owners with special needs, such as the blind.  Unfortunately, the HSUS's grotesque distortion of the true facts have worked up so many into a frenzied, false belief that the PUPS Bill will solve the purportedly systemic  "problems" that have been "highlighted" by the HSUS, but simply do not exist.

Throughout the History of the U. S., there have been charlatans who have deceived much of the American Public and many Government Officials.  By analogy, it took years before the scandal involving Mr. Bernie Madoff exposed the magnitude of his deception - - and so many, in the Government and outside of the Government, blindly trusted and followed his recommendations to their detriment.  That is why I am equally concerned that the PUPS Bill is deceptively flawed, and requires a more in-depth review before the Congress moves forward to vote on the PUPS Bill, especially since the three Senior Government Officials listed below have been briefed on the status of on-going investigations in each of their respective Federal Agencies.  These investigations involve the allegations of improper activities of the HSUS and their current and former employees.  And that is why, I urge you to contact each of the three Government Officials listed below, and ask them to brief you on the nature of the investigations involving the Humane Society of the U.S., and its current and former employees, before the U.S. Congress votes on the PUPS Bill.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) - - INSPECTOR GENERAL PHYLLIS K. FONG:  Ask about the status of the on-going investigation involving allegations of a "Conflict of Interest" and a "Misuse of Government Position" by Ms. Sarah L. Conant, a former HSUS Litigation Attorney who was a hired by USDA but two days after she resigned her position with the HSUS to become the Chief of the APHIS Enforcement Branch.  Also ask about the preliminary review by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics of Ms. Conant's alleged "Conflict of Interest."

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - - ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY KEITH MORGAN IN THE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA:  Ask about the status of the Complaint that he has received concerning the allegations that the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS); and its self-described "Lobbying Arm" and "Lobbying Affiliate," the Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), which has submitted thousands of pages of lobbying documents to the Federal Election Commission; and the Senior Leadership of both the HSUS and the HSLF have violated the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.  Despite the fact that the HSUS, the HSLF and the Senior Leadership of those two tax-exempt organizations were required by Law to register with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and with the Secretary of the U.S. Senate because of their thousands of "Lobbying Contacts" with "Covered Executive Branch Officials and "Covered Legislative Branch Officials," THEY HAVE NEVER DONE SO!

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY - - INSPECTOR GENERAL J. RUSSELL GEORGE:  Ask about the inquiries made by at least Eight Members of Congress concerning the "apparent inappropriate activities" of the HSUS and its "tax-exempt status."   Also ask about his response to Senator Lugar that was dated August 24, 2011, in which he stated that "we have recently initiated an audit to determine whether the IRS's Exempt Organizations function is accurately accounting for referrals of alleged violations of Federal tax law."

While I personally believe that it is inappropriate for you to support the PUPS Bill, I only ask that you come to your own conclusions after you gather the "all of the facts" from the USDA, the Justice Department and the Treasury Department.  In short, the "lessons learned" from blindly following the seemingly logical and persuasive recommendations of Bernie Madoff may very well apply to following the seemingly logical and persuasive recommendations of the Humane Society of the U.S. which is the subject of on-going investigations by three different Federal Agencies, and which has been aggressively lobbying Members of the U.S. Congress to support the passage of the PUPS Bill.

Respectfully Submitted,

*******************************************************

1.     To send an E-Mail to your U.S. Representative, Log onto www.house.gov/writerep/

2.     To send an E-Mail to your Two Senators, Log onto    www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Chula Vista considering MSN proposal

Mayor and City Council Members

City of Chula Vista

276 Fourth Avenue

Chula Vista, CA 91910

(619) 476-5379 Fax

 

Dear Mayor Cox and City Council Members,

 

The California Federation of Dog Clubs, founded in 1990, represents thousands of dog owners across our state. We are dedicated to the promotion of responsible dog ownership and to protecting the rights of responsible dog owners. Among our current projects are implementation of a breed identification workshop for shelter workers, distribution of a dog care and training brochure for new owners who adopt from a shelter, and establishment of a 1-800 help line for pet owners struggling with behavior or training problems. We also maintain and administer a relief fund for animals affected by disasters such as earthquakes or fires. We are active in support of animal legislation that provides positive benefits to society, such as CA SB 390 (LaMalfa) and CA AB 258  "Molly's Bill" (medical exemptions for rabies vaccination), for which we are a co-sponsor.

 

It has come to our attention that the city of Chula Vista is considering a mandatory spay-neuter ordinance. From your city's website: 

 

The Chula Vista Animal Care Facility encourages owners to always spay and neuter their pets. There is a serious pet overpopulation problem in San Diego County that has resulted in thousands of euthanizations each year.

 

The fact is that euthanizations in San Diego County are down significantly. In 1998, 15,474 dogs were killed in San Diego County shelters. By 2010, that number has dropped by nearly 70%, down to 4862. In 2009, there were only 371 dogs euthanized for the year in the entire county of San Diego. Remember, some of these euthanized animals were severely injured, sick, aggressive, or otherwise not savable. Clearly, great progress is being made in the reduction of euthanization of adoptable animals, and success has been possible without the use of coercive legislation.

 

"A serious pet overpopulation problem in San Diego County"? There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion. There are over 3 million residents in San Diego County. Let's put the figures into perspective. Last year, one animal entered a shelter for every 63 residents. One dog was killed for every 637 residents. One cat was killed for every 327 residents.   

 

When animals are killed in shelters, it cannot be reasonably blamed on "overpopulation." In fact, the US Border patrol estimates at least 10,000 puppies are smuggled into San Diego County each year from Mexico.* More than DOUBLE the numbers that are killed in shelters. There is a market for pets in San Diego and spaying/neutering all the local dogs and cats will remove the best sources for healthy, well-bred and well-socialized animals. People won't own less pets; they'll just get them from somewhere else. Your mandatory spay/neuter proposal would only serve to increase the black market demand and to promote the breeding of dogs in foreign puppy mills.

  

While the goal of reducing deaths in animal shelters is laudable, mandatory spay-neuter laws don't help. In fact, the opposite is true. Every locale that has enacted a mandatory spay/neuter law has seen a RISE in shelter admissions and killings.

 

San Mateo County's Peninsula Humane Society, which spearheaded the nation's first "breeding ban" in the name of reducing shelter deaths, did not have the expected success with that approach. In the areas of the county where the ordinance was implemented, dog deaths increased by 126 percent, while cat deaths went up by 86 percent. Licensing dropped by 35 percent.

 

 Fort Worth, Texas repealed their mandatory spay and neuter law as licensing and compliance plummeted, and cases of rabies increased.

 

Memphis passed a mandatory spay and neuter law last year. Since then, shelter intakes have risen 8% in that city.

 

Los Angeles is another case in point. After decades of steadily declining shelter numbers, LA reversed the good trend in one fell swoop with enactment of a mandatory spay and neuter law. Intakes and deaths immediately rose by over 30% and continue in an upward spiral.

 

No mainstream animal welfare organization supports mandatory spay and neuter. The American Veterinary Medical Association opposes it. So does Best Friends Animal Society, American Humane Association, Maddie's Fund, Alley Cat Allies, the American Kennel Club and the No Kill Advocacy Center. The ASPCA also opposes mandatory spay neuter, saying: 

 

"The ASPCA is not aware of any credible evidence demonstrating a statistically significant enhancement in the reduction of shelter intake or euthanasia as a result of the implementation of a mandatory spay/neuter law."

 

Mandatory spay and neuter does not work because it does not address the reasons that animals enter shelters. Those reasons are varied, but they have nothing to do with births. Animals enter shelters due to social problems like loss of a job, home foreclosure, or divorce or death of the owner. Mandatory spay/neuter does nothing to help pets remain in their homes. Ownerless cats make up a large portion of shelter intakes and spay-neuter laws won't reduce the numbers of feral cats. Trap-neuter-release programs are proven methods for feral cat population control.

 

Sometimes there are behavioral issues for which training programs might provide a useful solution. To help get more animals adopted, shelters could implement more proactive ideas like extended hours, foster programs and off-site adoptions. Advertising campaigns can help educate prospective pet owners to consider a shelter animal when they are thinking of getting their next pet.

 

Besides, a recent national pet population survey reveals that 78% of owned dogs and 88% of owned cats are already sterilized. The public is cooperating with voluntary spay and neuter...in droves!  Voluntary, low-cost sterilization clinics have been very successful. We believe that voluntary, collaborative, supportive and science-based programs always outperform programs that are punitive and coercive. We urge you to reject any mandatory spay/neuter law. Such ordinances are not in the best interests of pets or their owners. Please feel free to contact us if we can be of any further assistance. 

 

Sincerely yours, 

 

 

 

Geneva Coats, R.N.

Secretary

California Federation of Dog Clubs

 

CC: Cheryl Cox, Patricia Aguilar, Pamela Bensoussan, Steve Castaneda, Rudy Ramirez

 

*http://www.cbp.gov/xp/CustomsToday/2006/jun_jul/other/puppies.xml

 

 

 

 

 

From "Maddie's Fund" website:

 

"Saving all of our healthy and treatable shelter dogs and cats by 2015 is more than possible - we're almost there!"

 

 

 

Irvine ordinance update

The City of Irvine is considering an ordinance to ban the retail sale of pets and to ban circuses and rodeos in the city.

 

To make your voice heard, call or fax the city council.

 

Mayor and City Council Members

City of Irvine

1 Civic Center Plaza

Irvine, CA 92606-5207

 

Phone 949-724-6205

 

FAX 949-724-6188

 

Local residents should plan to attend the meeting tomorrow, October 11, at 4 pm.

 

 

Suggested talking points:

• Exotic animal exhibits provide invaluable educational experiences for adults and children alike
• Banning retail sales of dogs and cats sends an anti-ownership message and does nothing positive to promote animal welfare
• Sales bans create undesirable, unregulated black markets
• Animal exhibitors such as circuses, zoos, carnivals etc. are already federally regulated and licensed through APHIS. Strict animal welfare guidelines must be adhered to.

 

 

Public Hearings are scheduled for a time certain of 4:00 p.m., unless noticed otherwise, or as soon thereafter as possible.  Those wishing to address the City Council during the Public Hearing must complete a form and provide it to the City Clerk prior to the hearing. Notice:  Public Hearings listed for continuance will be continued as noted and posting of this agenda serves as notice of continuation.  Any matter not noted for continuance, will be posted separately.

 

2.1	APPROVAL OF ANIMAL WELFARE ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT RETAIL SALES OF DOGS AND CATS, CIRCUSES FEATURING WILD OR EXOTIC ANIMAL ACTS, AND RODEOS IN THE CITY OF IRVINE

 

	ACTION:
1)	Receive staff report.
2)	Open the public hearing; receive public input.
3)	Close the public hearing.
4)	City Council comments and questions.
5)	Introduce for first reading, and read by title only ORDINANCE NO. - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRVINE, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 4-5-506, 4-5-1111, AND 4-5-1112 TO THE IRVINE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 4-5-101, 4-5-501 AND 4-5-515 OF THE IRVINE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION OF RETAIL SALE OF DOGS AND CATS IN COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS, AND THE PROHIBITION OF CIRCUSES DISPLAYING OR EXHIBITING WILD OR EXOTIC ANIMAL ACTS, RODEOS AND SIMILAR EVENTS

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Limited to 3 minutes per speaker) - 6:30 P.M. Public comments will be heard at approximately 6:30 p.m. or prior to adjournment, whichever occurs earlier.

 

 

 

	If you have problems viewing this email click here
	www.asm.ca.gov/Hagman Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov   Governor Jerry Brown Signs Molly's Bill into Law I am pleased to announce that Governor Brown signed AB 258, affectionately known as "Molly's Bill" into law. AB 258 will protect California canines from unintended consequences of regular anti-rabies vaccine.  It will create an exemption from anti-rabies vaccine for dogs a licensed veterinarian determines are likely to have dangerous or lethal reactions to the vaccine. I would like to thank the Governor and all the dog lovers who supported this bill along the way. I could not have done it without you. It has been a long road but is fantastic that man's best friend now enjoys this protection! Thank you for your ongoing support. It is an honor to serve you and the State of California.  Assemblyman Curt Hagman District 60       Welcome I am proud to keep you informed about issues affecting the 60th Assembly District, as well as the California State Legislature.   Section Name   ·         AB 258 - Molly's Bill       DISTRICT OFFICE 13920 City Center Drive, #260 Chino Hills, CA 91709 (909) 627-7021, (909) 627-1841 fax   CAPITOL OFFICE State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 916-319-2060, 916-319-2160 fax        © 2011 Assembly Republican Caucus | Disclaimer

 

 

AB 1117 signed into law

AB 1117 deals with animal asset forfeiture and sets onerous penalties for "abuse".


Governor Brown has signed AB 1117 into law. AB 1117 would extend civil asset forfeiture to include animals. Existing law requires a convicted person to pay for the costs involved with seizing and impounding their animals. AB 1117 would extend the lien on animals based simply upon a correctly issued warrant. This is not only unjust, but onerous and cost-prohibitive to most owners, who would be forced to forfeit their animals even if innocent. The animals would then further add to the financial strain on local shelters, and many would end up being killed.


This bill requires any order prohibiting ownership to also prohibit the person from possessing, maintaining, having custody of, residing with, or caring for animals of any kind. This bill creates 5 and 10-year probation periods. This bill creates a new misdemeanor offense for a person found to be in violation of the animal-possession injunction.



Sentencing terms and conditions of probation are best left to the discretion of judges based on each individual case. For instance, a case of neglect may be as minor as leaving an animal without water, yet the offender would be prohibited from owning or residing with family members who have animals for a proscribed period of between five to ten years. This could adversely impact those households with guide dogs or other service animals.


The California Judges Association opposes the elimination of judicial discretion and noted in the May 18, 2011 analysis: "An enjoining order would probably be appropriate in most cases of animal abuse, but exceptional cases can arise". The California Judges Association concludes:


"AB 1117 goes too far."


AB 1117 is unnecessary. Judges already have the discretion to enter an order forbidding persons from caring for animals when warranted.
 
This bill will probably need a challenge in court, which will be very costly to pursue. There is an obvious conflict of interest on the part of the seizing agency, who may jump at the opportunity to abuse their power to grab animals and either kill or sell them, while having the owner pay all the costs.
 
Thank you to everyone who called, faxed and wrote the legislative bodies in opposition, as well as contacted the Governor to request a veto.

Governor Brown bill action

Some good news; Governor Brown signed AB 258; this bill allows medical exemptions from rabies vaccination. California Federation of Dog Clubs was a co-sponsor of AB 258, and, needless to say, we are thrilled that it has now become law.

We are pleased to report that the governor also vetoed AB 1121, the puppy licensing/seller reporting bill. The governor believes this should be a matter for local jurisdictions to decide, and not a statewide mandate. Reporting sales of animals to animal control entities is certainly government over-reach, and downright onerous for rescues and most breeders, so thank goodness this one is gone, at least for now.

Also vetoed was SB 702, which would have required animals released from shelters to be microchipped. Mandated microchipping would increase the costs to adopt, thereby driving down shelter adoption rates, and costing animals their lives; what a relief to see this bill vetoed.

SB 390 was signed, good news for search and rescue teams.

Unfortunately, AB 1117 was signed into law by the Governor, despite an aggressive campaign of opposition by California Federation of Dog Clubs, CARPOC, The Animal Council and many other respected animal groups. We will devoted a separate entry to that subject.