CaRPOC
Summer Newsletter 2010
|
|
|
|
WHY California Responsible PET Owners!
Why "PET" owners?
Why does CaRPOC, California Responsible PET Owners Coalition have the word PET in its name?
BECAUSE CaRPOC is committed to those who choose to own pets and pets of their choice. CaRPOC believes that a person should be allowed and able to have any animal as a pet as long as the person is knowledgeable about their choice and has the ability to care for that animal humanely.
People choose to have many different kinds of animals - reptiles, birds, lagomorphs,and llamas as pets and the list goes on. The groups that would restrict people's choice of pets to only those animals that are considered "safe" (by whose standards?) are out of touch with the broad diversity of true animal lovers. Actually, those groups would have no ownership of any animals, and having pets is especially abhorrent to them.
CaRPOC is concerned with the humane treatment of all animals, from bison to alligators. CaRPOC finds itself limiting its support to areas of more traditional domestic pets, because of the difficulty of support those in the wider world of the non-traditional pets. We do our best to work for the greater world of animal as much as possible.
We're departing from CaRPOC's usual newsletter approach. This newsletter is primarily about Legislation (but not entirely!). Please read it carefully, because the animal that you protect today may be the animal you own or may hope to own tomorrow.
|
Federal Issues
Senators Richard "Dick" Durbin (IL) and David Vitter (LA) introduced PUPS/Puppy Protection and Safety Act (S-3424) May of 2010. The bill is a reincarnation of three previous bills, all of which have failed. This proposed bill would define a breeder as anyone owning or co-owning one intact female four months or older, and who sells or offers to sell fifty dogs of unspecified age per year.
Owning or co-owning four females who produce large litters can easily bring a breeder under USDA rules, even if in the case of the co-owner no income was received from those sales, or even if they lived states away from the kennel. The proposed bill also prohibits sales by internet or telephone.
Substandard kennels of any size should be closed and the animals removed to a safe environment. There already are laws in place that do that. There is no need for more restrictive laws if present laws were properly enforced . The inspection report of the USDA Inspector General Office emphasizes that inspectors have not been actively enforcing the regulations and have not been notifying local governments when substandard kennels conditions have been observed.
Please read the PUPS bill for yourself. Read the report on APHIS (Animal Plant Health Inspection Service) inspections on the same site. Read the analysis of the bill on IFDCO
 Federal
bills can be found Here
|
California Legislation
The legislative year is not over yet, but these summaries include those bills that created the most interest so far. These bills and others presented for the 2010 year may be viewed at the CaRPOC Legislation Webpage.
SB 250 - Florez-Mandatory Spay/Neuter Bill carried over from 2009 is still viable, but there's been no action.
SB 1277 - Florez-Public Registry of Animal Abuser was stalled in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Failed
SB 1417 - Cox-Strengthening laws regarding non-profit humane societies. This bill received strong opposition from those societies and is now being amended to relax most of the bill's strong points. In the Assembly Appropriations Committee as of 6/24/2010.
AB 2000 - Hagman-With the last amendments, this bill exempts dogs from Rabies shots und er certain specified circumstances. This bill has strong support from all except for the California Department of Public Health which is concerned about the absence of a quarantine of exempted dogs. This bill remains in the Senate Committee of Public Health.
AB 2012 - Lieu-Creates In cases of animal abuse and neglect, this bill creates criminal punishment for misdemeanors as felonies. With little opposition, it has passed through committees and the Assembly and is now in the Senate Appropriations Committee
AB 2243 - Smyth-Prohibits discrimination of SAR/Search and Rescue dogs in restaurants, hotels, planes, etc.The most recent amendment protects those establishments from unruly or destructive dogs.
AB 2411 - Jones-With amendments, this bill would establish a separate line of pet insurance; covers California residents with out-of-state insurance; requires pet insurance companies to disclose pre-existing exclusions and more.
AB 2743 - Nava- This bill would forbid landlords from requiring debarking or declawing of animal as a requirement of tenancy. It allows prospective tenants, if applicable, to sue for fines. It also allows non-profit organizations to enforce the law and receive proceeds from those fines
While these bills may not be of concern to the casual pet owner or dog exhibitor, many of them have potentially far-reaching effects, and could possibly have unintended consequences that WOULD affect all dog and cat owners.
|
Local IssuesAll listed cities' ordinances and proposed ordinance may be found here. Riverside City: After listening to a presentation of strong opposition by local and out-of-area people and strong opposition, the City of Riverside passed an ordinance that put limits on ownership of animals and mandated sterilization and microchipping
with some exceptions. *Here is the proposed ordinance A second meeting on the ordinance may occur before this issue is emailed.
Riverside County: The meetings that were to have been held by stakeholders to discuss and monitor the passed mandatory sterilization of dogs were never fully realized. Some supervisors never appointed a member to represent their district, other appointees seldom or never attended any meetings. *Here is the dog/cat ordinance regarding sterilizing and microchipping for Riverside County.
Los Angeles County: After several meetings with L.A. County Kennel Owners, the Los Angeles Department of Animal Control canceled the scheduled meeting with L.A. County Supervisors and will present new amendments at a later date.
Los Angeles City: Various motions and amendments are being presented and moving through the departments. A Transfer Fee is to be established for all animal transfers, Administrative Citations, and a motion
to increase Pet License Fees all are moving forward, new standards of care were established without public review for licensed kennels, a motion to INCREASE Pet Limits L.A.Dept of Power and Water was requested to turn in addresses of residences with dogs, Brenda Barnette, former CEO of the Seattle Humane Society has been tapped as the new General Manager of the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services to replace former General Manager, Ed Boks
San Bernardino County: Despite postponing the vote to spay/neuter Bull Terrier type dogs, the San Bernardino County presented the proposed ordinance and passed it.
Santa Barbara City: A committee was formed to discuss whether Santa Barbara City would accept the mandatory spay neuter, microchip ordinance of Santa Barbara County. That committee's decision was presented to the Santa Barbara City Council on June 29, 2010. |
| For information and tools you need to fight this and other oppressive legislation being introduced.
|
|
About CaRPOC
11301 W. Olympic Blvd.#121-596
Los Angeles, California 90064
CaRPOC |
|
|
|
|
|
