I am urging all my California Friends to contact their California State Representative! This bill: AB 1634 if passed will make my beloved 10 pound male Chihuahua/ Miniature Pinscher an outlaw in my native state of California, and will in turn make me an outlaw, a criminal! I will NOT comply with this bill. I keep my little beloved 10 pound dog in my control, the control of whether I cut off his balls will not be in the hands of legislature in Sacramento! Please help me oppose this bill! Otherwise I will become a criminal in my native state of California! Bill, San Francisco [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) _http://www.dogster.com/dogs/235178_ (http://www.dogster.com/dogs/235178) ____________________________________ _No On AB 1634 - No Mandatory Spay Neuter_ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html) _http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html_ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html) 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 four months old. AB 1634 will not decrease shelter populations or euthanasia rates in California. Within a generation, only licensed breeders of purebred animals will own unsterilized dogs and cats. Responsible amateur breeders will no longer exist. Service and police dogs will no longer be bred or trained in California. Alert AB 1634 was approved by the Assembly Business & Professions Committee on April 24, 2007 on a straight party-line vote with all seven Democrats on the committee approving the bill. On May 16, 2007 the Assembly Appropriations Committee approved the bill and sent it to the full Assembly for consideration._ Read AB 1634 _ (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_bill_20070509_amended_asm_v95.pdf) as updated May 9, 2007. Please send Opposition Letters to every member of the California Assembly. If you represent a Club or Organization, or are a Veterinarian, please send another letter on your letterhead. We will soon post sample letters of opposition. Support PetPAC _PetPAC_ (http://www.petpac.net/) is a Political Action Committee established specifically to fight bad animal legislation like AB 1634. It represents a broad constituency - dogs & cats, show and working animals, service and police dogs, mutts and feral cats, any animals and their owners targeted by onerous animal rights laws. PetPAC is new but its founders are experienced at fighting these battles. Please support PetPAC with your contributions of time and money. See the web site at _www.petpac.net_ (http://www.petpac.net/) What Can You Do To Stop AB 1634? Write to Assembly Members - 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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Letter%20Opposing%20AB%201634.pdf) _Sample Letter-MS Word format _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Opposition%20Letter.doc) _Committee Contact Information _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Appropriations%20CommitteeMemberInfo%20rev4_30.pdf) Visit or Call Your California Assembly Member 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 and voice your opposition to this bill. You can find your representative _Here_ (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html) . 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_ (http://www.noab1634.com/resources.html) ._ back to top _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Letter%20Rev2.pdf) _Sample Letter-MS Word format _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Letter%20to%20fill%20in%20Rev2.doc) 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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Letter%20For%20Vet%20to%20sign&send.pdf) _Sample Letter for a Veterinarian - MS Word format _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Letter%20For%20Vet%20to%20fill%20in%20blanks.doc) 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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Kensington%20Veterinary%20Hospital.pdf) 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_ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/ClubActionApprCommRev.pdf) . 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_ (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/414897802) _ back to top _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#top) AB 1634 is Bad Health Policy for Animals The proposal requires spay/neuter of pets by the time they reach four 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 is concerned about too early sterilization. See _this article_ (http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html) for additional information and for many scientific references. _ back to top _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 4 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_ (http://www.noab1634.com/dox/ABCA_opposition_to_AB1634.pdf) 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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 governments. 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_ (http://www.cbp.gov/xp/CustomsToday/2006/jun_jul/other/puppies.xml) ). 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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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 _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#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. _ back to top _ (http://www.noab1634.com/Index.html#top) ____________________________________ See what's free at _AOL.com_ (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503) . ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
<<inline: 100_2827.jpg>>
