AB 1634 OPPOSITION POINTS
Compiled by Dr. Margaret Cleek - Here are opposition points to AB 1634 that I prepared. Anyone is welcome to use them in any way. The numbers are verified.

This bill will neither reduce the costs to Animal Control nor decrease the euthanasia rate. In fact similar coercive legislation has increased costs and euthanasia rates and progressive thinkers have moved beyond Manditory Spay Neuter while AB 1634 proponents are escalating commitment to a losing strategy.

AB 1634 will not reduce shelter costs to California because the greatest percentage of AC costs are fixed costs. Facilities, administration, bare bones staffing and vehicles. Animals in the shelter is a variable but very small cost. Even if reductions occur costs would increase as the Hayden bill provides that animals be cared for if space is available. Killing is significantly cheaper than providing board and vet care.

AB 1634 will have disastrous consequences because it attributes killings in shelter to just one cause-animal births. It fails to note that dogs and cats are in shelters for different reasons and neither reason is the planned breeding of purebred pets. Pedigreed cats make up a mere 6% of the cat population and hardly ever are in shelters. AB 1634 would have no impact on unowned or casually owned cats and their unweaned young which make up the bulk of the shelter population. The shelter dog population is made up of mostly random bred adult dogs whose owners have failed them. Education re training is needed. There is a actually shortage of puppies, especially small breeds documented by the number of animals smuggled in from Mexico requiring a Border Puppy Task force to be established.

AB 1634 will not reduce costs and numbers because we have an open system with non-substitutability. The senior citizen with a size restriction on dogs cannot substitute an 80 lb shelter dog for a predictably small toy breed. The family with small children may rightly fear bringing a grown dog of unknown behavioral and genetic background into their home. MSN will actually increase the numbers of adult dogs in shelters, because the supply for young puppies will not be met by California hobby breeders but by commercial puppy producing operations and by a large increase in puppy smuggling from Mexico. This will cause deterioration in health and behavior, resulting in even more adult dogs being relinquished to shelters.

AB 1634 will cause significant sales revenue flow out of California.
Going out of California to out of state and of-shore puppy mills in
Eastern Europe and Mexico to buy purebred pets will entail a significant flow of revenue out of the state and lower quality animals at higher cost to Californians.

AB 1634 does not provide exemptions for hobby breeders and would destroy some gene pools. Hobby breeders are not businesses and cannot meet the license requirements. Without a "'breeder license" cat/dog breeders can't meet the first exemption. Jurisdictions may or may not have this available - it is not required to set up a program and most will not. The second exemption requires a cat to be shown/earn a title. Many cats and dogs valuable in breeding programs can not be shown but are needed in the gene pool to maintain health of the gene pool.

AB 1634 would result in significant loss of revenue from dog and cat shows. Hobby breeders pour money into their pastime--so much that most of us lie to our spouses about the actual amount. Registries such as AKC and CFA conduct ongoing research regarding the economic benefits of our events, and their estimates conclude that these exhibitors contribute nearly 100 million annually to local California economies. This is the contribution from dog shows and does not include the money spent on vets, groomers, handlers, supplies, pet food, etc. California has a reputation for not being friendly to people wanting to make money. AB 1634 makes it unfriendly to people wanting to spend money in the state.

AB 1634 also will entail significant costs to every one of the 536
jurisdictions in the state incurred in establishing and maintaining the regulatory licensing system imposed by the bill. These costs will be incurred before any revenue is generated from licensing and permitting and some jurisdictions, especially those who have successful alternative programs or are financially strapped will be unable or unwilling to foot the costs. In poorer jurisdictions, citizens will be unable to comply as no affordable or available S/N services exist. This will lead to disastrous consequences.

AB 1634 cannot be effective without incurring substantial enforcement costs. Research on compliance indicates that if the scofflaw rate is above 5% enforcement is required. With dog license compliance at less than 25% and cat at less than 3%, Enforcement for AB 1634 will require vet reporting which would reduce rabies compliance, or door to door canvassing which is an invasion of privacy, requires self-incrimination, and the cost of which society will not bear considering the other issues we face such as drunk driving, illegal immigration, crime and drug use.

AB 1634 is unnecessary -- 75% owned dogs, 95% owned cats are neutered. So Levine is "legislating for the choir". S/N education has been one of the most successful education movements of this generation.

AB 1634 will be counter productive. You do not need to legislate that which can be easily "sold" as being in the best interests of the populous. Voluntary S/N is happening. 70% of owned dogs and 85% of owned cats are sterilized nationwide and numbers are estimated to be even higher in CA. Consider the base rate of licensing, 25% for dogs and 3% for cats in jurisdictions which license cats. Do you really think you can triple the rate of dog licensing enforcement & achieve a 16-18 times increase in cat licensing to even begin to catch up to the current voluntary numbers already S/N pets. That makes MSN legislation a complete waste of time and money. Meanwhile, very few ideas are easier to sell than dog & cat sterilization. That is why we have a S/N rate many times that of licensing. Legislation is costly and unnecessary.