June 30, 2007

Senate Local Governments Committee

Room 5046, State Capitol,

Sacramento, CA 95814

ATTN:  Peter Detwiler, Committee Consultant

                 Ryan Eisberg, Senate Republican Local Government Consultant

RE: OPPOSE - AB 1634, California Healthy Pets Act, as amended.

Dear Chairperson Gloria Negrete McLeod and Committee Members:

The International Cat Association (“TICA”) opposes AB 1634 as amended June 27, 2007. TICA requests inclusion in the listed opposition for the Bill Analysis in your committee.

TICA is the largest genetic registry of domestic cats with members in the United States and throughout the world. Many TICA members and exhibitors live in California. More fanciers come to California to exhibit at the several TICA shows currently held in California each year. TICA clubs and fanciers make the time to help educate cat owners, help shelter and rescue efforts, and help address the feral cat issues.

AB 1634 is a punitive measure attacking pet owners without addressing the real problem with regards to cats. Feral or unowned cats and kittens is usually the largest cat problem faced by shelters. Mandatory spay/neuter (“MSN”) and “spay or pay” ordinances do nothing to address the problem of unowned cats reproducing unchecked. AB 1634 won’t improve the cat euthanasia rate and does not even address the real problem!

AB 1634 ignores several realities:

• 87% to 95% of owned cats are altered. Intact cats do not make good pets. Combine that fact with education efforts, low cost resources for pet owners in lower income levels and feral cat management and you have a shelter intake rate that has been declining for years without abusive legislation.
• 94% or more of cats are random bred. Pedigreed cats make up less than 6% of the entire cat population yet pedigreed cat hobby breeders are the target of AB 1634.
• Few, if any, hobby breeders of pedigreed cats can meet the so-called exemptions contained in AB 1634.
• Lower income pet owners who cannot afford regularly priced sterilization surgeries also cannot afford to acknowledge ownership of a seized intact animal.
• People who contribute their time and money to trap/neuter/release feral cats will not risk a $500 “possession of an intact cat” fine for the privilege of trying to help manage and reduce California’s feral cat population.
• Unowned cats, the major source of shelter cat euthanasia rates, simply cannot comply with AB 1634.

MSN, whether 4 months or 6 months (or any month), will not save lives by reducing the numbers of unowned cats. California cannot realistically address the issue of cats without owners by targeting pet owners (the majority of who already spay or neuter their cats). MSN also creates government interference in the fundamental relationship between the veterinarian and client. No studies have been done on the effects of early spay/neuter on the various breeds of pedigreed cats. If and when a pet undergoes the risk of surgery should be a decision made on an individual basis and not by arbitrary legislation.

Most pedigreed cat hobby breeders would not meet the exemptions in AB 1634. Few would qualify for a business license. AB 1634 would also severely reduce the breeding population of pedigreed cats reducing the genetic diversity necessary for a healthy breeding population. Cats are not shown for their entire breeding careers. Not all cats important to a healthy breeding population can be shown. For example, tailed Manx cats cannot be shown but they are important for a healthy Manx breeding population. Foundation cats to a breed cannot be shown in competitive classes. Developing breeds must go through a rigorous process before they are accepted for showing in competitive classes and are ineligible for titles. Not every cat that would be competitive likes to show but they are also important to breeding programs.

AB 1634 will not decrease the demand for pedigreed animals. It only makes pedigreed cats and dogs more expensive for the citizens of California who choose a breed for the predictable characteristics of that breed. California citizens will not even have the opportunity to see the cat they are purchasing or premises where it was raised before receiving the cat unless they travel out of state to do so.

AB 1634 will also cost California and California businesses millions of dollars in lost income from pedigreed cat and dog shows as the shows are held where the show cats and dogs are located.

AB 1634 programs will not pay for themselves. Supporters claim that MSN and spay or pay programs will pay for themselves with reduced shelter costs. However, considering 87% to 95% of owned cats are altered and over 70% of owned dogs are altered, just how many owners of intact cats and dogs will there be to shoulder the financial burden of enforcing AB 1634? The burden of the taxes from the license fees will cause many of the hobby breeders of quality pedigreed pets to stop breeding further reducing the number of people to pay for these programs. Owners of random-bred cats or dogs that can’t afford to sterilize their pet also can’t afford to pay the $500 fine and simply will not claim their pets if seized.  On the cost reduction side to presume shelter costs will decrease with euthanasia rates is erroneous. Much of a shelter’s expenses are fixed expenses that do not fluctuate with euthanasia rates. As shelter space becomes more available citizens will rightfully expect shelters to keep animals longer to maximize adoption potential and increase adoption rates. With the incomplete reporting by shelters (even though required by California code) and jurisdictional differences in costs, the data of cost savings provided by supporters is questionable at best.

AB 1634 will be expensive for jurisdictions. Not only does AB 1634 not have the funding base claimed by supporters, but to enforce it effectively and fairly will cost California jurisdictions lots of money and resources. Every jurisdiction will have to review their law to determine compliance with AB 1634. Many jurisdictions will find their law not compliant with AB 1634 and those jurisdictions will have to go through the further expense of passing new laws and assigning resources to enforce the new law. Many jurisdictions will choose not to have intact permits making hobby breeding impossible. Even choosing the easy route will cost jurisdiction resources during the deliberation process and in enforcement as more restrictions translate into more complaints.

AB1634 is ill conceived and beyond repair. No amendments can fix this misguided legislation. Please stop AB 1634 from moving forward.

Sincerely,

Kelly Crouch

Chair, TICA Legislative Committee

                Kay Devilbiss, TICA President