U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 06-09-2007, 07:29 PM
1,210 posts, read 1,107,418 times
Reputation: 540


Read the Bill: HTML | PDF

By a vote of 41-38, the State Assembly has approved AB 1634, a measure to require the forced sterilization of nearly all dogs and cats in California. We now must double our efforts to defeat this inhumane measure in the State Senate. See how they voted

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 06-10-2007, 10:25 PM
Location: Between Here and There
3,684 posts, read 11,002,088 times
Reputation: 1658
Why would it be bad to require pet owners to spay/nueter their pets? Isn't that a good thing?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-11-2007, 03:52 PM
Location: central WI
45 posts, read 134,345 times
Reputation: 26
Default Spaying and neutering is a GOOD thing.

If any person thinks it is not a good thing, should go volunteer at a shelter and see how many unwanted animals there are.And now that it is spring,the place is loaded with unwanted puppies/kittens.I volunteer at a local NO KILL shelter.There are so many stupid people that think it is ok to just have pets and then dump them.We always get pregnant cats/dogs ALL the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-11-2007, 11:43 PM
Location: Alexandria, VA
1,078 posts, read 3,499,709 times
Reputation: 488
Originally Posted by natrlvr2 View Post
If any person thinks it is not a good thing, should go volunteer at a shelter and see how many unwanted animals there are.And now that it is spring,the place is loaded with unwanted puppies/kittens.I volunteer at a local NO KILL shelter.There are so many stupid people that think it is ok to just have pets and then dump them.We always get pregnant cats/dogs ALL the time.
The law is a horrible law, it is about controlling people not protecting animals.
Good idea bad law.
One of the major sponsors is PETA who wants to remove all pet ownership.
Here is why it is a bad idea:
Assembly Bill 1634 The California Healthy Pets Act
The wrong people and animals will pay, dearly!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 07:04 AM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123
Default Pet Extinction Act

Assembly Bill 1634 The California Healthy Pets Act

More commonly known as the Pet Extinction Act!!

Please help us write letters to Legislators and let them know we what
them to vote no on California AB 1634. It represents an all out assault
on pet owners' property rights.

Although AB 1634 provides specific exemptions for pets that qualify, it
does so by first removing rights that have been fundamental pet owners'
rights throughout history; and the exemptions it grants can be removed
later. Pet owners' property rights are on the line in AB 1634.

Forcing pet owners to have surgery performed on their pets is outrageous
and potentially dangerous to the health of young puppies and kittens.

Early sterilization of some puppies and kittens has proved harmful to
their long term health and development.

Responsible breeders maintain the health and integrity of ancient breeds
and provide a wonderful variety of dogs and cats so that millions of
people worldwide can select a pet of the size, coat type, temperament,
appearance, and character that will fit their lifestyle. These breeders
should be given incentives to continue breeding. Their fundamental pet
ownership rights should not be weakened, which AB 1634 does, even if it
also grants a special permit.

Having a good source of healthy well-bred dogs and cats to choose from is
good for consumers and for the community. Laws aimed at discouraging
accidental and careless breeding should take great efforts to avoid
harming responsible breeders.

Careless breeding should be discouraged through licensing incentives,
funding low cost neutering clinics and public education.

***The over population isn't caused by breeders, it's caused by consumers,
rescues and shelters. Did you know that there are some shelters and
rescues who are shipping in animals from other countries so they can make
money. Some of them are actually breeding these animals together to create
more to sell. Instead "real" shelters, rescues and reputable breeders
should be working together. ***

This bill is an assault on pet owners' property rights.

This bill isn't about healthy pets. It is about government control of dog
and cat owners and breeders and unreasonable fines for noncompliance.

Please protect the rights of the citizens of this state and kill this
dangerous un-American bill.

The fine print says by 2009 there will be NO exceptions and
(Even those that are Show, K9, Narcotic, Bomb, Farm, Hunting,
Herding, Coursing, Agility, Service, etc.)
Several other states are being hit with spay/neuter laws.
If you want to keep you rights and be able to purchase a healthy pet from
a responsible breeder, then please help do what you can.

Please cross post every where. We all need to send letters & sign
petitions no matter where you live. Your state will be next!!!!

Here are some helpful links regarding this issue.

Save Our Dogs

AKC Info
American Kennel Club - CA Spay/Neuter Action Center
They have letter you can download, customize and send to all of the
assembly members listed.

Online petitions

COPS : Save the Dogs - AB 1634

Oppose CA AB1634 - Make Petitions at Petition Spot

PetPAC: Sign the Petition Opposing AB1634

This is a link to a YouTube video made up in a hurry to combat the
folks in favor of passing this mandatory state wide Spay/Neuter bill
in CA called AB 1634.The bill calls for sterilizing all puppies and
kittens before they are 16 weeks of age. They call it "The Healthy
Pet Act." Anything but healthy

YouTube - Welcome to California, SORRY, NO PETS ALLOWED

Opposition to AB 1634, CA Healthy Pets Act (http://www.ab1634.com/index.htm - broken link)

Blue Dog State

Here is a great website where you can compose a letter, print it out and fax it.
You can write your own letter using some of the topics that I have posted
above and add in some of their paragraphs also. They will email you
a copy of your letter. Remember it's much better to print it out, so
you can fax it or send it ASAP. No emails!!

Their system will send this email to the appropriate assembly
NAIA Trust | For the protection of animals, animal owners, and animal enterprises

Check other legislations around the country on this same website.
NAIA Trust | For the protection of animals, animal owners, and animal enterprises

See what other people have to say about Levine, author of AB1634.
Please share your thoughts on the subject!
(scroll to the bottom to comment)
We Need To Require Spaying and Neutering of Pets in California and To Pass AB 1634 This Week - California Progress Report (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/06/we_need_to_requ.html - broken link)


Daily Kos: CA AB 1634 - Please Help Stop It

What California AB 1634 Means for Breeders of Pedigreed Cats


California Federation of Dog Clubs

NCNC Blog Blog Archive NCNC Opposes CA Assembly Bill 1634 (http://ncnc.org/blog/2007/04/27/ncnc-opposes-ca-assembly-bill-1634/ - broken link)

OPPOSE & FIGHT California Bill AB 1634

United Houndsmen Of California, Inc. | Northern California (http://www.freewebs.com/uhci/legislationinformation.htm - broken link)


http://www.dpca.org/L (broken link)

ADOA (broken link)

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601- (broken link)
this is a link to the whole bill.
At the end there is a list of all of the allowed permits for
unaltered animals,
but all of this is negated by that one paragraph.
It is only valid until 2009
(e) Any person who, on or after April 1, 2008, is in possession of
any document issued by the local jurisdiction or its authorized
animal control agency that permits the owner to possess an unaltered
cat or dog shall be deemed in compliance with this act until the
document expires, or January 1, 2009, which ever whichever occurs

Here are a couple of articles on the effects of early spay/neuter

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDog (broken link)

Canine Sports Productions: Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete

AB 1634 - Send Biscuits
Here is something that everyone can do to help no matter where you live.
Stop California AB1634

POLL on MSNBC - Do you think states should require pets to be spayed and
neutered? Vote NO!!
Calif. considers bill requiring pets be fixed - Pet Health - MSNBC.com (broken link)

Please fax your letters to the following Legislators

The Honorable Karen Bass, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2147
The Honorable Rudy Bermudez, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2156
The Honorable Ronald Calderon, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2158
The Honorable Edward Chavez, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2157
The Honorable Judy Chu, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2149
The Honorable Hector De la Torre, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2150
The Honorable Mervyn Dymally, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2152
The Honorable Dario J. Frommer, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2143
The Honorable Jackie Goldberg, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2145
The Honorable Jerome E. Horton, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2151
The Honorable Robert Huff, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2160
The Honorable Betty Karnette, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2154
The Honorable Paul Koretz, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2142
The Honorable Lloyd Levine, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2140
The Honorable Ted Lieu, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2153
The Honorable Carol Liu, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2144
The Honorable Cindy Montanez, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2139
The Honorable Dennis Mountjoy, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2159
The Honorable Gloria Negrete McLeod, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2161
The Honorable Fabian Nunez, Speaker of The Assembly
Fax: (916)319-2146
The Honorable Jenny Oropeza, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2155
The Honorable Fran Pavley, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2141
The Honorable Keith Richman, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2138
The Honorable Mark Ridley-Thomas, Assembly Member
Fax: (916)319-2148
The Honorable Sharon Runner, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2136
The Honorable Audra Strickland, Assembly Member
Fax: (916) 319-2137
The Honorable Richard Alarcon, Senator
Fax: (916)324-6645
The Honorable Debra Bowen, Senator
Fax: (916)323-6056
The Honorable Gil Cedillo, Senator
Fax: (916)327-8817
The Honorable Martha Escutia, Senator
Fax: (916)327-8755
The Honorable Sheila J. Kuehl, Senator
Fax: (916)324-4823
The Honorable Alan Lowenthal, Senator
Fax: (916)327-9113
The Honorable Bob Margett, Senator
Fax: (916)324-0922
The Honorable Tom McClintock, Senator
Fax: (916)324-7544
The Honorable Kevin Murray, Senator
Fax: (916)445-8899
The Honorable Gloria Romero, Senator
Fax: (916)445-0485
The Honorable George Runner, Senator
Fax: (916)445-4662
The Honorable Jack Scott, Senator
Fax: (916)324-7543
The Honorable Nell Soto, Senator
Fax: (916)445-0128
The Honorable Ed Vincent, Senator
Fax: (916)445-371

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Web page:http://www.ca.gov/s/governor/mail.html (broken link)

Thank You!!

Last edited by CADRMNDANES; 06-12-2007 at 07:24 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 07:06 AM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123
This bill will hurt the pet industry and all involved if it passes. Shows and animal events will be boycotted. Breed clubs will pull their shows and go to other states, which will mean tourism $$$ will be spent elsewhere. ALL dog clubs, in every state, will be 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. "The AKC/Eukanuba National Championship show (Nationals) provides huge economic benefits to the citizens of Long Beach who repay our largesse by supporting draconian animal rights legislation that severely limits the rights of dog lovers.

Many of the people targeted by AB 1634 participate in dog and cat shows, which bring California more than $100 million in tourism dollars each year.

If this bill passes here, it will spread like wild fire to other states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 07:07 AM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123

23969 NE STATE RTE 3




ACF has filed a complaint linking Assemblyman Levine to radical animal rights activists and organizations. The documented complaint was filed with the FBI, US Attorney's office, Homeland

Security and several other governmental agencies. ACF is circulating copies of the complaint to the entire California Senate. Radical AR groups are supporting AB1634 and its believed that radical activists approached Levine to sponsor AB1634.

ACF believes AB1634 will cause serious economic damage to the pet industry and Assemblyman Levine is responsible for attempting that. AB1634 also will violate dog owners constitutional rights.

ACF is filing a lawsuit if the bill should pass. ACF is in federal court litigating LA County over mandatory spay and neuter at this time and hearings are set for September 2007.

C McCammon



AR and pushing the pet extinction bill

It could be considered a way of legally maneuvering the system to get around the AETA to cause economic damage, by

1. Calling it "healthy pets" Act when much evidence shows physical harm to many animals if done at too early of an age (4 months)

2. Claiming it will STOP shelter animals from dying, when there shelter animals are already mandated to be ALTERED

3. By using numbers which are "hypothetical" and not actual statistics which have been done using statistical verified methods, the proponents tell people it will save 250M in killing animals. They also stated inflated numbers of pets that entered the shelters.

4. Proponents purposely wrote the law to EXCLUDE every single type of dog from procreating, EXCEPT the dogs that are actually purebred, registered with certain registries, AND are titled/or shown (must be all three). Out of ALL canines in the USA, the number of dogs that are actually purebred and registered ? out of that number less than 1% are titled/or shown.

5. That means 99% of the dogs are purposely left out, which include, but is not limited to, working dogs, canine dogs, breed stock for working dogs, breed stock for canine dogs, therapy and service dogs, breed stock for therapy and service dogs, all cross bred dogs, all mixed breed dogs, all so called mutts, all so called designer dogs. No dogs are grandfathered in.

In addition, nearly every cat is left out as most are not shown at all. Despite most cats not being shown, the cat fanciers group is dead set against the bill. (Most cats killed in shelters are feral cats, and this bill would not stop feral cats since they are not owned.)

It appears that lobbyists for animal extremist groups have been involved/or signed up to lobby the bill. HSUS is signed up for this year. The clear implication is that by taking out all the dogs/cats which exist (aside from those few which are exempt) the proponents want to cause the economic collapse of the pet industry market starting with California.

If you take the coincidental pet food poisoning nationwide, and then take this bill which eliminates nearly 99% of all dogs/cats surely you will be creating economic damage to ALL pet businesses in the STATE. The pet industry is huge at $39 BILLION per year. Taking out the animals of California would be like NIRVANA to the animal extremists---they know they could never accomplish it by simply burning down businesses, or demonstrating outside KFC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 07:08 AM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123
SACRAMENTO, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/

The anti-pet movement has found a sponsor in the California legislature
for a bill that strips pet owners of their traditional rights and, in
the process, sharply reduces both the quantity and quality of
purpose-bred dogs and cats -- including those bred for assistance to the
disabled, and for search & rescue operations.

AB 1634 is backed by the extremist group People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals (PETA) and sponsored by Assembly Member Lloyd
Levine (D-Van Nuys). If it passes, most California pet owners will have
to sterilize their pets.

"This bill comes with a noble-sounding name but AB 1634, the so-called
California Healthy Pets Act, will not improve the health of California
pets," says Patti Strand, National Director of the National Animal
Interests Alliance, one of the nation's most respected animal welfare

The bill is fraught with unintended consequences. Among them: a
predictable flood of unregulated -- and typically unhealthy -- dogs from
Mexico, already the proven source of up to 10,000 illegal dogs sent to
California each year according to US Customs and Border Protection:
(CBP Today - June/July 2006 - Smuggled puppies a concern to California)

"In a global marketplace," according to Strand, "over-regulating the AKC
and CFA hobby breeders who are the best source of healthy,
well-socialized, home-raised puppies and kittens, creates a vacuum,
effectively 'outsourcing' pet production to other countries that don't
come close to reaching US standards of animal health, care or quality."
The increasing demand for puppies has also led to the importation of
strays rescued from foreign countries that are being marketed through
non-profit organizations like The Animal Place (Animal Place - Home page) and
Compassion Without Borders (Welcome to Compassion Without Borders International Animal Welfare Organization). This influx harms California
consumers and poses a significant public health threat.

Despite the claims of the bill's supporters, many respected California
veterinarians oppose AB 1634, including one the state's most
distinguished vets. Dr. John Hamil is past president of the California
Veterinary Medical Association, founder of the California Council of
Companion Animal Advocates that sponsored biannual Pet Overpopulation
Symposia (now the Animal Care Conference), member of the American
Veterinary Medical Association's Animal Welfare Committee and the
National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy and author of the
CVMA and AVMA positions on early spay/neuter.

Dr. Hamil, a leader in spay/neuter programs, terms AB 1634 "divisive
legislation [that] will not help and may aggravate the situation."
Noting that young puppies and kittens are not biologically mature enough
for spaying and neutering in many cases, Dr. Hamil states: "It is
inappropriate to mandate a controversial and possibly life-threatening
surgical procedure."

Also strongly opposed to AB 1634 is Sharon Vanderlip, DVM, former
shelter animal veterinary clinician and surgeon, a longtime advocate of
voluntary spaying and neutering. "This bill is not a 'healthy' pet act,"
said Dr. Vanderlip. "It will not help animals or improve their health.
It will not reduce the shelter animal population. It will not reduce the
number of animal euthanasias. To the contrary, the number of animals in
shelters and the number of euthanasias will increase as people who
cannot afford to alter their pets, or pay fines associated with
non-compliance, will abandon their animals, relinquish them to shelters,
or have them euthanized. This has already happened in municipalities
that attempted similar legislation."

Christian Osmond, DVM, board-certified veterinary surgeon, opposes the
bill on similar grounds. Dr. Osmond says he cannot reconcile his
professional oath to "above all else ... do no harm" with programs that
place political agendas above sound veterinary practice, a priority that
could put pets at risk.

Canine Companions for Independence, an organization supporting
assistance dogs for the disabled, opposes AB 1634 because even with
exemptions for today's carefully supervised dogs, the bill's long-term
effects would greatly reduce genetic diversity and threaten the
existence of their breeding program.

Law enforcement groups -- representing tens of thousands of uniformed
officers -- oppose AB 1634 because it will drastically reduce the future
supply of dogs suitable for apprehending criminal suspects and
performing vital Homeland Security tasks.
(Letters Opposing AB*1634). The U.S. Congress has recognized the
critical need to breed more dogs for Homeland Security work with pending
legislation HR 659. AB 1634 would send this important bipartisan effort
into a tailspin. "AB 1634 would shrink the pool of dogs that are
suitable for search and rescue, undermining our ability to do this
life-saving work," says Laura Sanborn, California K9 search and rescue

The Mixed Breed Dog Clubs of America supports spay and neuter programs
and in fact requires compliance for all MBDCA registered dogs. But
president Cindy Leung said that AB 1634 will not solve the problem it
claims to address. Instead, she said, the bill "punishes organizations,
animal shelters, businesses and responsible breeders that have been
among the few sources of education in regard to responsible pet
ownership and breeding. Over 87% of animals relinquished to shelters are
there due to behavioral problems; if California truly wants to solve the
pet overpopulation problem it should promote training and behavior
education rather than mandatory spay and neuter."

Animal shelter studies demonstrate that pet owners are well on their way
to solving the pet population problems of yesterday. Today, California's
largest animal problem is feral cats (cats without owners); but AB 1634
establishes no programs for these cats. Worse yet, it imposes penalties
on cat breeders who breed and place their kittens with care.

NAIA director Strand notes that AB 1634's chief advocates claim they
have "no relationship to animal extremists." However, PETA operatives
play key roles in Social Compassion, a sister group to the bill's public
supporter, CA Healthy Pets Coalition.

"Beyond AB 1634 itself, the issue at stake is responsible political
process," NAIA's Strand concludes. "Will the California Assembly rely on
the expertise of the state's animal professionals - including leading
veterinarians, experts in law enforcement and service dog breeding
programs, dedicated breed enthusiasts, animal welfare groups, the
leading organizations for cats and dogs like Cat Fanciers Association
(CFA) and the American Kennel Club (AKC), county Boards of Supervisors,
and other respected individuals and organizations - or will they listen
to groups that oppose all pets, healthy or not?"

"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

For more information contact:
National Animal Interest Alliance
Patti Strand, National Director
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 09:17 AM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123
National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA) California Healthy Pets Act Assures Elimination of California Healthy Pets

Permission to reprint items found in the NAIA and NAIA Trust Newsletters or on the websites is granted with proper attribution to the author and source, including the website address for each organization. We hope you will publish this article in your club newsletter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-12-2007, 10:52 PM
375 posts, read 1,561,645 times
Reputation: 123


AB 1634 now goes to the Business, Professions and Economic Development
Committee of the California SENATE. This committee meets the 2nd and
4th Monday of the month. The next scheduled meeting where Levine can
present this bill is June 25. If it fails at this meeting, it can be
reconsidered on July 9. All business must be completed by July 20 as
the Senate recesses on vacation for a month. Any amendments to this bill
need to be to the committee 4 days before they convene.

Please write these members as we did with the Assembly Business and
Professions Committee. The AKC website still has sample letters. Also,
contact your own Senate Representative and let them know that you are
opposed to AB 1634 as it passed through the assembly.

Mark Ridley-Thomas - Chairman
State Capitol, Room 4061
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4026
Fax: (916) 445-8899

San Aanestad - Vice Chair
State Capitol, Room 2054
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-651-4004

Ellen Corbett
State Capitol, Room 2054
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4010
Fax: (916) 327-2433 fax

Jeff Denham
State Capitol, Room 3076
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-651-4012
Fax: 916-445-0773

Dean Flores
State Capitol, Room 5061
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4016
Fax: (916) 327-5989

Tom Harmon
State Capitol, Room 2052
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4035
Fax: (916) 445-9263

Joe Simitian
State Capitol, Room 2052
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4035
Fax: (916) 445-9263

Leland Yee, PhD
State Capitol, Room 4048
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4008
Fax: (916) 327-2186

Please everyone!!! Fax a letter to the above people and tell them NO on this bill. We need everyone to help out. Don't take it for granted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top