Dire Consequences
The "California Healthy Pets Act", AB1634' is a disaster for California pets and their owners. Under AB 1634 virtually all pet dogs and cats will have to be sterilized by the time they are six months old. AB 1634 will not decrease shelter populations or euthanasia rates in California. The authors keep amending AB 1634 but all that has done is make an already unworkable bill more complicated by trying to inject ever-more-complicated exceptions to the mandatory sterilization requirements. AB 1634 is fundamentally flawed: It attempts to solve a "problem" that is overstated and grossly misunderstood by the authors and in attempting to do so, it dramatically impinges on the property rights and demeans the intellect of California pet owners.
What Can You Do To Stop AB 1634?
What's Wrong With AB 1634?
What Can You Do To Stop AB 1634?
Terminate the Long Beach AKC Show
Are you feeling helpless in the wake of the Assembly vote to pass AB 1634? Dog fanciers everywhere can fight back now.
The swing votes in the passage of AB 1634 by the California Assembly came from two Long Beach Democrats: Karnette & Richardson. They obviously think “their dog show”, the AKC/Eukanuba Nationals, will not be affected by passage of AB 1634. We need to prove them wrong.
Long Beach is not a dog-friendly place. It banned dog breeding for thirty years (reluctantly changed in 2005) and it still severely restricts breeders’ rights. Now Long Beach’s elected officials openly support legislation that will end dog shows and hobby breeding in California. Long Beach needs to pay the price for electing such offensive lawmakers.
In a recent election on June 27, 2007, Assemblymember Richardson won the majority vote in Long Beach to move up to the U.S. Congress. The voters chose her over another candidate who had pledged to oppose AB 1634. Clearly, a majority of the people of Long Beach continue to be the enemies of dog lovers.
We want ALL dog clubs, nationwide, to adopt a resolution asking AKC to withdraw the AKC/Eukanuba National Championship show from Long Beach. Even if we ultimately defeat AB 1634, Long Beach has proven yet again that it is not a place to bring your show dog. All they want is our money. AKC should permanently cancel the Nationals in Long Beach.
Take this RESOLUTION to your club and ask the Board or the members to pass it immediately. Then forward a copy, on club letterhead, to your national breed club and to AKC. Send a copy of the resolution to the Long Beach Convention Center and to Eukanuba, the show sponsor. Here's Contact Information for AKC, LB Convention Center & Eukanuba.
Every owner of an AKC registered dog should also send a personal letter to AKC asking them to move the Nationals from Long Beach. If enough of us act now, AKC will understand our urgency and, perhaps, the California Senate will understand that we will do what it takes to fight this reprehensible legislation.
Please Note: We are asking AKC to MOVE the Nationals, not cancel the event. Moving the show will send a message that we will not spend our money where we are persecuted. Canceling the show would hurt fanciers, many of whom plan to boycott the Nationals if AKC persists in holding the event in Long Beach.
Write to Lawmakers - Oppose AB 1634
Send written letters of opposition to each member of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, to the consultant for the Committee and to your own Assembly Member. We have prepared a Sample Letter with suggestions of what to say. Letters should be mailed, FAXed or dropped off personally.
Printable Sample Letter
Sample Letter-MS Word format
Complete List of 2007 Assembly Members - FAX Numbers
Assembly Members - Alphabetical (online)
State Senators - Alphabetical (online)
Find Your Senator or Assembly Member
Senate Committee on Local Government
Visit or Call Your State Assembly Member or Senator
Your are a voter and what you want is important to politicians who seek your future votes. Call or visit the local office of your Assembly Member or Senator and voice your opposition to this bill. You can find your representative Here.
Contact the Press
The proponents of AB 1634 have cranked up their professional, well-funded PR machine and suddenly numerous pro-AB 1634 articles are appearing prominently in major newspapers and large-market TV stations. These favorable articles are easy for the big city press, most of which was already inclined to support this kind of law. We don't have the PR machine, so we must rely on individuals to help get a balanced review in the press. Whenever you see an unbalanced, pro-AB 1634 article or news story, please write a response immediately. These typically become "Letters to the Editor" and, if printed at all, get buried way back in the paper. So you should also make a request that the publication allow you to submit a full opinion article to provide a balanced presentation of the "other side" of the issue. We can arrange to have a complete article authored by one of the experienced professionals who is helping us oppose AB 1634. If you are a local resident you have a slightly better chance that your opinion will be published or that the paper will accept an article. If you would like assistance in responding please contact us and we will do our best to help.
Give A Brochure To A Lawmaker
If you need handout materials to take to a lawmaker's office you can get them by clicking here.
back to top
Contact Your Veterinarian
CVMA, the California Veterinary Medical Association, is the professional organization for veterinarians in California. CVMA is a co-sponsor and supporter of AB 1634. Many working veterinarians are not even aware of AB 1634. When they learn about AB 1634 many vets oppose it and know nothing about CVMA's endorsement of it. You should contact your personal vets and make sure they are aware of AB 1634 and ask them to oppose it. Ask your vet to write opposition letters to lawmakers and CVMA. If your vet favors AB 1634, consider changing vets. We have a Sample Letter.
Printable Sample Letter
Sample Letter-MS Word format
Here are sample letters for Veterinarians to use to register their opposition to AB 1634. The first can simply be printed, signed and sent (FAXed). The second is in MS Word format so the sender can open the file, edit and then print, sign and send it.
Printable Sample Letter for a Veterinarian
Sample Letter for a Veterinarian - MS Word format
What Veterinarians Have To Say
Here are two letters from veterinarians who oppose AB 1634. They also object to CVMA's co-sponsorship of the legislation. One is a past President of CVMA
Past CVMA President's Letter
Letter from Vet Reproductive Specialist
Here is a letter written and signed by several veterinarians that was recently sent to the Governor, Assemblymembers and to CVMA. These vets vigorously oppose AB 1634 and explain their reasons in the letter. Please consider passing this letter on to your Vet.
Kensington Veterinary Hospital Letter
And, here is what the retired Director of the UC Davis Veterinary Teaching Hospital thinks of AB 1634.
Vet Professor's Letter
Vet Professor's Letter - Sporting Dogs
Vet Professor's Letter to CVMA
Get Your Club to Oppose AB 1634
If you are a member of a cat or dog club get your club to write letters of opposition, on club letterhead, expressing the club's opposition to AB 1634. We have the information you need Here.
Sign Our Petition - Say No To AB 1634
Join the thousands who have already signed our online petition opposing AB 1634:
Dog & Cat Owners Say No to AB 1634
back to top
What's Wrong With AB 1634?
AB 1634 Doesn't Solve a Real Problem
The proponents have their facts wrong. They claim that California has a growing problem with abandoned pets resulting in over 1,000,000 animals being surrendered to shelters and 500,000 euthanized annually at a cost to California taxpayers of $250 million. In fact, that is simply not true. The number of incoming dogs and cats at California shelters has been decreasing for many years, as has the number of animals euthanized. Most animals surrendered to shelters are either feral cats or other dogs & cats who are too old, too sick or who have behavioral problems that make them unsuitable for adoption. Thus, they have to be euthanized. In fact, California shelters have such a shortage of adoptable dogs that they import dogs from out-of-state to fill the demand. The proponents' arguments for this bill don't stand up to a test of the facts. Shelters will not save money from the passage of AB 1634 because the numbers and types of animals they receive and euthanize will not be affected by such a law. This proposal is a smokescreen to eliminate the breeding and ownership of quality pets in California.
Mandatory Spay Neuter Doesn't Work
Where it has been tried, MSN has been a failure. MSN has resulted in reduced licensing compliance and, therefore, reduced revenue for shelters. Reduced licensing compliance has resulted in fewer rabies vaccinations (a primary purpose of pet licensing is to assure that mandatory rabies vaccinations take place) thereby endangering the public's health. Public fear of the penalties associated with MSN have led to increased dumping of unwanted pets and reduced adoption of unowned, stray animals. Most jurisdictions have rescinded their MSN laws.
back to top
AB 1634 is Bad Health Policy for Animals
The proposal requires spay/neuter of pets by the time they reach six months of age. Sterilizing that early is dangerous for many animals and is extremely poor health policy for most. The decision whether to neuter a pet, or when, should be made on a case-by-case basis, not arbitrarily because an animal reaches a certain, very young age. Such decisions should be made by responsible owners with the advice of their veterinarians, not by politicians.
There are many reasons not to sterilize an animal too early including: orthopedic risks, increased risk of cancer, adverse behavioral consequences, incomplete development and other health risks. There has been much research of this subject and many in the veterinary community are concerned about too early sterilization. See this article for additional information and for many scientific references.
back to top
Many "Breeds" Will Disappear
Many working dogs, and rare breeds of dogs and cats, are not "registered" with any registry. Even as purebreds, they could not be exempt from AB 1634 and, as a result of mandatory sterilization, their lines would die out in California. Even if they could be registered as purebreds, most working or service dogs would not be exempt because they do not "compete" nor are they "being trained" before they are 6 months old. They would, therefore, fail any tests for an exemption and would have to be sterilized. Most future working and service dogs would have to come from out-of-state as certified trained adults. Californians would no longer be able own and train such animals as puppies. Here's why the bill will eliminate working dogs.
Responsible Breeders will Disappear
Most purebred dogs and cats in California are raised by hobby breeders who have occasional litters in their homes. The requirements for a breeder exemption are so harsh most California hobby breeders could not comply. They do not qualify for a business license in most jurisdictions and, therefore, could not receive an exemption. Without this large pool of responsible breeders Californians will have to rely on corporate or out-of-state breeders as their only source of purebred pets.
back to top
AB 1634 Will Cost Californians a Fortune
Shelter populations, rather than decreasing, will increase as fewer citizens are willing to take in stray animals resulting in significant increased costs for animal shelters throughout the state. In order to assure compliance with AB 1634's complex requirements every local jurisdiction in California will have to increase its enforcement staff. Enforcement costs alone could add $50-100 million to already overburdened local govenments. Public health costs will increase as rabies vaccination compliance drops and as ever poorer quality pets are imported from out-of-state (see what U.S. Customs has to say). Police officers and the public will be at greater risk if there are no more police dogs.
AB 1634 provides a limited exemption for non-residents visiting the state. Many out-of-state residents will not risk confiscation of their show animal. As a result tourism will suffer and dog and cat shows will cease to exist in California. Currently there are thousands of cat and dog shows held in California every year. Millions of dollars are spent at these events for entry fees, hotels, meals and supplies. Vendors who sell millions of dollars worth of goods at these shows will lose their livelihood and the state will lose the sales tax.
back to top
Reputable California Breeders Are Not the Problem
Hobbyist breeders of dogs and cats will become extinct with AB 1634. Such breeders of purebred animals have limited resources and only breed occasionally. They stay involved in their offspring forever. Disreputable breeders don't care about laws and will continue in spite of AB 1634. Only the good guys will be hurt and the bad guys will produce just as many "throwaway pets" as ever. Reputable breeders adhere to a Code of Ethics that requires that their “pet” offspring be neutered as a condition of sale and that their “show” offspring be actively shown or neutered. These same breeders remain responsible for ANY offspring they sell should the purchaser no longer want an animal or if an animal is not being properly raised. Their puppies and kittens DO NOT become part of the abandoned animal population. Such breeders should not need expensive special licensing that will drive most out of business and raise the costs for any who remain. This is supported by actual shelter statistics from San Jose where purebred dogs make up 46% of the dog population but only 25% of the shelter intakes. Since 100% of healthy purebred dogs are adopted from shelters, they actual become a profit center for many shelters. If AB 1634 passes, most purebred dogs and cats will come from out-of-state and such out-of-state breeders will have limited contact with and, therefore, limited ability to "rescue" their offspring. That entire task will fall to our shelters increasing their burden, not lessening it.
back to top
Current Laws Are Adequate
A new state law is not necessary. Nearly every local jurisdiction in California currently has a dog licensing requirement. Shelters are required by existing state laws to charge a larger licensing fee for intact animals than for neutered animals. And, they are required to sterilize every animal before it can be adopted from their shelters. This system works very well to monitor the reproductive status of the registered dog population. The problem is compliance. Law abiding citizens already comply with existing laws, including licensing their pets. Scofflaws do not comply with existing laws and will not comply with this new proposal. Enforcement of existing laws would largely eliminate any perceived problems with pet overpopulation.
AB 1634's Exceptions Will Not Work for Show Animals
As amended, AB 1634 requires show animals not owned by breeders to meet unrealistic criteria for exemption. AKC requires show dogs be over 2 years old to obtain all of their mandatory health clearances. For that and other reasons, many are not shown until after they are two years old. AB 1634 requires animals to be shown at least once in its first two years. To qualify for any exemption, the animal's breed must be included in some, as yet to be specified, "registry." There is an exemption to allow out-of-state residents to enter California with animals they own. However, non-owner custodians of those same animals will not be exempt if they are in California without their owners, for example if they are a show dog in the care of his California-resident handler. Ask your legislators to be sure they understand the way dog and cat shows actually work and read the language of the proposal carefully before voting.
back to top
The Authors' of AB 1634 Don't Understand
The authors' of AB 1634 labor under the fallacy that the competitive show ring is what determines whether a cat or dog is worthy of breeding. That is simply not true. Many breeders choose not to show an animal until it is mature. In slow maturing breeds that may not happen until the animal is 3 or 4 years old. Working farm dogs are important to our agricultural industry, but they never compete. Other animals who have great genetics and strong breeding potential may never get to compete due to career ending injuries that disqualify them from competing but do not negatively impact the benefits they can contribute to their breed. None of these animals could qualify for an AB 1634 "intact permit" and their superior genetics would be lost forever.
