AKC -Pasadena -URGENT ALERT!-Monday,October 7th- 7PM

 

                    

AKC -Pasadena -URGENT ALERT!-Monday,October 7th- 7PM

AKC Delegates, Club Officers, Judges and Breeders,

Please pass this message along to any of your club members in the Pasadena (Los Angeles) area. The AKC apologizes for the short notice, the city agenda containing this language was only posted Thursday evening.

The Pasadena City Council will vote on a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance this Monday, October 7th. This measure will require dogs and cats over the age of four months to be sterilized unless the owner qualifies for an exemption.

If a dog or cat is impounded it will not be released until it has been sterilized by a city approved veterinarian, even if the owner has a current intact license. It is imperative that responsible dog owners and breeders immediately contact their elected officials to oppose this ordinance.

Additionally, any intact dog owner who wishes to breed their dog shall deemed a kennel and is prohibited from maintaining the dog within 1000 feet of any dwelling other than the owner's home. Current law also requires that dog kennel operators purchase a business license.

The current code defines a dog kennel as "any lot, building, structure, enclosure or premises wherein 5 or more canine animals 4 months of age or older are kept or permitted to remain or where any dog gives birth to 2 or more litters within a 12-month period." It is unclear what the process will be if a resident possessing fewer than 5 dogs wishes to breed a single litter. This language could be interpreted to prohibit anyone who does not meet the definition of a kennel from engaging in breeding.

Pasadena City Council Meeting

Date/Time: Monday, October 7, 2013, 7:00 PM

Location: Council Chamber, Pasadena City Hall, 100 North Garfield Avenue, Room S249, Pasadena, CA 91101

Provisions of the Ordinance:

Prohibits the ownership of an intact dog or cat over four months of age unless the owner qualifies for a specific exemption.
Exemptions:
Medical – must provide written confirmation from a veterinarian that sterilization is a threat to the animal's health.
Law enforcement dog.
Dogs trained and actively being used for guide, signal or service dog work or enrolled in a breeding program for these dogs administered by a person licensed under the California Business and Professions Code.
A dog used to show, to compete or to breed, and which is registered with AKC, UKC, ADBA or other approved breed registries. The owner must also meet one of the following criteria:
The dog has competed in at least one dog show or sporting competition sanctioned by a national registry or approved by the Pasadena Humane Society & SPCA within the last 365 days.
The dog has earned a conformation, obedience, agility, carting, herding, protection, rally, sporting, working or other title from a purebred dog registry referenced above or other registry or dog sport association or Pasadena Humane Society & SPCA.
The owner is a member of a Pasadena Humane Society & SPCA approved purebred dog breed club which maintains and enforces a code of ethics for dog breeding that includes restrictions from breeding dogs with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten the breed.
Provides that any resident who wishes to breed their intact dog is subject to the definition and regulations pertaining to "dog kennels."
Intact dog licenses can be revoked if:
The city receives two complaints within a twelve-month period, verified by the Poundmaster, that the applicant or licensee has allowed a dog to run loose or escape, or has otherwise been found to be neglectful of his/her dog or other animals.
The applicant or licensee has been previously cited, ticketed, sued, fined and/or prosecuted for violating a state law, county code or other municipal provision related to the care and control of animals.
The unaltered dog has been adjudicated as dangerous or vicious, or to be a nuisance.
Any other unaltered dog license held by the applicant has been revoked.
What You Can Do

Attend the Pasadena City Council meeting Monday, October 7th and oppose these burdensome restrictions on responsible owners and breeders.
Call or email the members of the Pasadena City Council and ask them to oppose this ordinance.
AKC Resources
AKC Position Statement: Breeding Restrictions
AKC Position Statement: Canine Population Issues
AKC Position Statement: Spaying and Neutering
Mandatory Spay-Neuter Issue Brief
Issue Analysis: Why Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws are Ineffective
Issue Analysis: Conformation Shows- More Than Just a Pretty Face
Sample Letter to Lawmakers – Mandatory Spay Neuter – Word | PDF | Text

Pasadena City Council

Mayor Bill Bogaard Phone (626) 744-4311
Fax (626) 744-3727 Email bbogaard@cityofpasadena.net

Vice Mayor Jacque Robinson, District 1 Phone (626) 744-4444
Fax (626) 396-7300 Email district1@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember Margaret McAustin, District 2 Phone (626) 744-4742
Email mlmorales@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember John J. Kennedy, District 3 Phone (626) 744-4738
Fax (626) 744-4774 Email ChristianCruz@cityofpasadena.net or jwest@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember Gene Masuda, District 4 Phone (626) 744-4740
Email nsullivan@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember Victor M. Gordo, Esq. District 5 Phone (626) 744-4741 or (626) 831-8609
Fax (626) 398-1836 Email vdelacuba@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember Steve Madison, District 6 Phone (626) 744-4739 Email smadison@cityofpasadena.net

Councilmember Terry Tornek, District 7 Phone (626) 441-4802
Fax (626) 441-4806 Email ttornek@cityofpasadena.net

 

 

__._,_.___

 

   

.

__,_._,___

Pasadena Mandatory Spay-Neuter Law: Monday, Oct. 7 City Council Mtg!

 

Hi Folks,

 

I wanted to alert you that the Pasadena City Council agenda for this coming Monday includes the draft mandatory spay neuter ordinance (the agenda was posted this evening).  This is a "first reading", and essentially, THIS is the time to provide comments.  As people involved in pure bred dogs in Pasadena, I strongly encourage you to read the draft ordinance and share you thoughts with City Council via email, letter or in person at the meeting if you have any concerns.  There are some new measures in there that were NOT in the original staff report back in July (like what happens if an unaltered dog ends up in Pasadena Humane Society's shelter!).  

 < /o>

While I'm not contacting you to encourage you comment one way or another on this issue, I am very concerned that not enough people involved with pure bred dogs in Pasadena are aware of this, so please share with others who might be interested.  Here is some information that might be of use:

 

 

The City Council agenda can be found at:  

http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/councilagendas/2013%20agendas/Oct_07_13/agenda.asp

 

And the draft ordinance and fact sheet (which is attached to the agenda) can be found at:

http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/councilagendas/2013%20agendas/Oct_07_13/AR%209.pdf

 

City Council contacts where you can send your comments:

 

City Clerk's office comment form: http://www.cityofpasadena.net/CityClerk/Contact_Director/

 

Mayor Bill Bogaard: bbogaard@cityofpasadena.net

Mayor's Field Representative Rhonda Stone: rstone@cityofpasadena.net

 

Councilmember Jacque Robinson (via her Field Representative Tina Williams): 

district1@cityofpasadena.net

 

Councilmember Margaret McAustin (via her Field Representative Margo Morales): 

mlmorales@cityofpasadena.net

 

Councilmember John Kennedy (via his Field Representatives Christian Cruz and Jana West):  

ChristianCruz@cityofpasadena.net 

jwest@cityofpasadena.net

 

Councilmember Gene Masuda (via his Field Representative Noreen Sullivan):

< span style="font-size:9.0pt;background:white;">nsullivan@cityofpasadena.net 

 

Councilmember Steve Madison (from what I understand, he started the 'ball rolling' on all of this...his original concern was dog aggression/ public safety and with breed specific legislation not an option, moved onto MSN as a strategy):

smadison@cityofpasadena.net

 

Councilmember Terry Tornak:

ttornek@cityofpasadena.net

 

 

 

Thank you!

Anne Dove 

(Pasadena resident - Cairn Terriers)

  ;

__._,_.___

Reply via web post

Reply to sender

Reply to group

Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback

.

__,_._,___

Fwd: APHIS Final Rule Revising Pet Seller Exemptions and You

APHIS Final Rule Revising Pet Seller Exemptions and You

 

SAOVA Friends,

 

As  you know by now, APHIS published the Final Rule September 10, 2013 which revises the definition of "retail pet store" under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) licensing and regulations. The new definition of retail pet store means a place of business or residence where the seller, buyer, and animal are physically present in the same location. Not only dogs, but cats, rabbits, mice, small exotic animals, and other small pets will no longer be sold at retail without either public or APHIS oversight.  If you cannot qualify for the retail pet store exemption in the AWA by selling only face-to-face, then you must either obtain a federal license or be limited to 4 or fewer females bred and raised on your premises. This limit of 4 is an aggregate number of females regardless of species (i.e., 2 dogs, 1 cat, 1 rabbit).

 

The transaction does not have to take place at the seller's home.  A meeting place can be set up to transfer the animal. However, everyone needs to be aware that many municipalities have ordinances restricting sales in public places and should plan accordingly. It appears APHIS will allow a third party to be designated as the agent to stand in for the breeder or buyer in the face-to-face transaction, but this needs additional clarification.

 

Anyone selling dogs for hunting, breeding, security purposes, or as working dogs is excluded from the definition of Dealer and from the definition of Retail Pet Store.

 

APHIS held a teleconference to announce the final rule.  If you could not attend, we urge you to read the transcribed call which is posted at the SAOVA website http://tinyurl.com/nyb4s5g   

 

In general, APHIS says this rule is driven by purpose of breeding and method of delivery for the sale; and that their goal is only to end sight-unseen sales.  However, since breeding programs do not fall into nice neat categories, and scenarios change from breeder to breeder and species to species, covering the retail sector with such a regulation creates many areas of uncertainty for the average breeder. 

 

The list of questions is long:

Can hunting dog kennel owners sell pets

Can breeders ship sight-unseen where relationships have been well established

Can litters be whelped inside the house

Are rescues still exempt if they ship sight-unseen

Can animals, other than rabbits, be shipped for preservation of the species

Do the APHIS regulations take precedence over state license regulations

How can we believe the answers from APHIS staff who do not understand the questions

Does APHIS plan to offer any protection for newly licensed breeders so that kennel photos are not added to the ASPCA "puppy mill" data base and other sensationalized uses

If you are reported to APHIS as needing a license, are investigators required to have a warrant to enter your premises

Is everyone on the same premise required to be licensed if one person must be licensed

 

The rule is overly complicated, inconsistent, and certainly not easy to understand. The internet and chat groups are full of conversation about this rule with a number of interpretations and a wide variety of opinions being circulated.  APHIS also posted another Question and Answer Fact Sheet with their explanations to some of the major concerns submitted during the rule making process.  Again as last year, the Q&A contains many half, incomplete, or misleading answers.  The reality is that the final interpretation of the rule and its definitions will be at the discretion of APHIS inspectors and staff.    

 

Rather than attempt to analyze the rule and/or interpret how it will impact hundreds of thousands of breeders in dozens of varying situations we'll review what we do know regarding the new rule and current AWA standards.

 

The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register September 18, 2013 and is effective 60 days from publication. APHIS plans a phased implementation of the rule. Kevin Shea, APHIS Director, stated in the teleconference, "We will be trying to identify the facilities that aren't currently licensed that should be licensed under the rule. We'll be doing this, using publicly available data - breed registries, advertisements that folks are doing on the internet, etc., to identify the facilities that we need to approach about getting licensed."  APHIS is still finalizing their "outreach" plan and we will share that information when it becomes available.

 

The AWA Standards of Care for housing, facilities, exercise, cleaning, sanitization, employees, housekeeping, and pest control will not be revised.

 

Living under USDA licensing is NOT an option for the average home-based retail seller. The average house cannot be converted to a USDA compliant facility. Federal standards for licensed facilities dictate sanitation measures not feasible in a normal home, surfaces that are impervious to moisture, ventilation, bio-hazard control, veterinary care, exercise, temperature controls, waste disposal systems, diurnal lighting, drainage systems, washrooms, perimeter fencing, as well as transportation standards for regulated animals.

 

We are very concerned about the Q&A section regarding use of your homes. The answer is disingenuous and we trust those who have read it do not believe they can continue utilizing their homes once they are licensed.  The revised APHIS Q&A asks the question: Will regulated breeders who keep their dogs in their homes have to put them in a kennel?  APHIS answers "generally not" and proceeds with a misleading explanation that APHIS will determine if your home meets their standards; and states that a number of currently licensed wholesale breeders maintain their animals in their homes. 

 

IF you can give up a room in your house and convert it to be the moisture proof, sterile environment described above, AND gain approval from an APHIS inspector, you may be able to crate or pen animals in that room. This room would then be for either adults or puppies/kittens but not both. Under the USDA standards puppies and kittens under 4 months of age cannot be housed in the same primary enclosure with adults, other than the dam/queen or foster dam/queen. Since the remainder of your house does not meet the above requirements, allowing animals to roam freely would cause you to be in violation of the AWA. And unless your bedroom is coated in epoxy and has a floor drain, you won't be doing any whelping there.

 

A separate facility will be needed for females by two weeks prior to whelping. Even if you make one room in your house compliant with the AWA standards, females cannot be whelped in that room. That means an additional room will be required, plus one for each additional litter within the next 3.5 months.

 

Any room in your home used for whelping or birthing must meet USDA standards – impervious to moisture – meaning tile floor and vinyl-coated walls.

 

All surfaces touched by animals must be waterproof and sterilized every two weeks with your choice of live steam under pressure, 180 degree water and detergent with disinfectant, or a combination detergent/disinfectant product.

 

You must have a separate food preparation area from your kitchen.

 

In addition to a written exercise plan and veterinary plan you must now have an emergency plan that documents your awareness and understanding of your responsibility to protect your animals in emergency situations.

 

The USDA license may classify you as a commercial business. You will need to know the allowed uses for your property in the current zoning and land use regulations and whether home businesses are allowed. Your property tax status may be affected and your tax liabilities could change, depending on state and local laws.

 

Finally, your information, photos of your property, and inspection reports will be the subject of Freedom of Information Act requests by activists.  Inspectors will always write you up for something or it looks as if they are not doing their jobs, thus giving activists something to read and complain about.  Activists are not above taking the information out of context and using it to suit their purposes.

 

The new rule centers on shipping sight-unseen which at this time presents unanswered questions, and could target you for investigation as to whether you need a license.  Until APHIS issues meaningful dialogue on their intentions and we know how inspectors should interpret the new rule, it might be best to delay use of commercial shipping if possible.  If you have more than four females, rely on shipping to keep your program viable, and have no alternative options, then you will have to contact USDA and ask for an application kit and begin the licensing process.  

 

When you contact APHIS with questions, record the answers.   If you make the decision to go forward and apply for a license, record the conversations and the inspections and have a witness with you during the pre-licensing process. 

 

It is impossible to predict the full impact and potential damage on breeders once this rule is actually in place and enforcement begins.  In the meantime, please do not start reducing your kennels, catteries, and small businesses, and jeopardize the years of hard work that went into building your breeding programs.  There is more to learn on this rule and what can be done so that we can continue to pursue our hobbies, avocations, and livelihoods.  Many people are working on your behalf and we will not go down quietly.

 

Cross posting is encouraged.

 

Susan Wolf

Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance

Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators

saova@earthlink.net

__._,_.___

                                        

      

 

   

                 

.

__,_._,___

Oceanside Pet Sales Ban

 ALERT/UPDATE
Cat Fanciers' Association
Forwarding encouraged

Fanciers;

WE NEED YOUR HELP to defeat the Oceanside "Pet Store Ban" Ordinance.

The City Council Clerk has informed us that the issue could come up at any
time during the Public Meeting starting at 4PM and that the City Hall may
be very crowded. Try to be there before 4PM.

Wednesday, Sept 25
Hearing at 5:00 PM, (Public meeting is open at 4PM)
City Hall - 300 North Coast Highway, Oceanside.

We expect the proposed language to be the same as in San Diego and that
they will try to get the "breeder exemption" with a threshold of 3 cats/dogs
or no selling. San Diego Humane is mobilizing. You do not have to speak -
we need a turn out to sign up and donate minutes to those who do want to
speak.

Local residents carry the most weight. Try to reach any kitten buyers.

CONTACT COUNCIL MEMBERS:
You can send one email to reach all 5 Council Members. So far we believe
we have two on our side, Feller and Kern. The swing vote is Felein who may
be undecided. Concentrate phone calls and emails to these three to keep
and/or gain their support.

http://www.ci. oceanside. ca.us/gov/ council/default. asp

Suggested Points:

**A pet store ban is not necessary when stores buy from USDA regulated
breeders/dealers. Don't condemn legal businesses. People should have a
choice of their pet. Pet stores are well regulated in CA, with warranties to
protect buyers. Buyers can see their puppy prior to purchase.

**When the demand for puppies is not met they will increasingly come from
unregulated and undesirable sources. Puppies are already being imported
from Mexico and elsewhere and sold underground. Rescue groups are not
regulated and some bring in imports.

**There are few if any "kitten factories" in the US; pedigreed cats are
rarely raised commercially nor are they sold in Oceanside pet stores. Any
substandard catteries reported to CFA are handled through our disciplinary
system.

**Rabbit breeds are going extinct and are rarely sold in pet stores.

**The proposed ordinance is an empty "Puppy mill statement" by those who
want a monopoly on only shelter/rescue animals sold. This is a step in the
attempt to see that purebred dogs/pedigreed cats bred and raised by
breeders will become extinct.

This is not just an issue of a "Pet Store Ban" on selling puppies. The
people picketing and supporting this next want mandatory spay/neuter. Don't
let our breeds, breeders and cat shows go down because of this push by
activists in our County. Let's stop this in Oceanside !!!


Joan Miller
CFA Legislative Information Liaison
JMillerArt@aol. com
San Diego California
619-269-0107
_www.cfa.org_ (http://www.cfa. org/)

 

__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Oceanside retail pet sales ban proposal

You've got to hand it to the Humaniacs, they are relentless. I wish I had half their energy.

 

"I am writing to ask for your support in helping Oceanside ban the sale of puppies/dogs, kittens/cats and rabbits in retail establishments, similar to the ban recently passed in San Diego."

 

http://www.sdhumane.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=12341.0&dlv_id=32583

Letter to the governor regarding AB 272

Please contact Governor Brown today to respectfully request his veto of this bill. Thanks!

 

Governor Jerry Brown

State Capitol, Suite 1173

Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: (916) 445-2841

Fax: (916) 558-3160

September 9, 2013

Re: CA AB 272: Rabies: vaccinations (Gomez) as amended August 20, 2013 : OPPOSE.

REQUEST FOR VETO

Dear Governor Brown,

The California Federation of Dog Clubs, founded in 1990, represents thousands of dog owners across our state. We are advocates for animal welfare and for protecting the rights of responsible dog owners. The CFoDC conducts breed identification workshops for shelter workers, distributes a dog care and training brochure for new owners who adopt from shelters, and provides a toll-free help line for pet owners who are struggling with behavior or training problems. We also maintain and administer a relief fund for animals affected by disasters such as earthquakes or fires. CFoDC sponsored 'Molly's Law", which allowed for medical exemptions from rabies vaccination, in the immediate past session.

The CFoDC is OPPOSED to CA AB 272 and respectfully requests your veto.

This bill would lower the age for puppies to receive their rabies vaccination to three months old. Vaccination of puppies at an early age flies in the face of science and is counter to the advice of the medical community. Early-age vaccination is often ineffective due to the interference of maternal antibodies. This would mean that a large percentage of young dogs in the community would be presumed immune to rabies after an ineffective early-age vaccination, when in fact they are not immune and could acquire and transfer rabies to humans.

The current law requiring puppies to be vaccinated at 4 months of age is and has been effective at controlling rabies in California's canine population. There is no epidemiological or scientific rationale for changing this law. Owners who wish to vaccinate at an early age already can do so if they wish; however, in the interest of public health and safety, we should not encourage the practice of rabies vaccination prior to the age of four month. An exemption may be written into current law if desired for already-vaccinated puppies brought into California from other states.

Please veto AB 272.

Sincerely yours,