H$U$ (Humane Soceity of the United States)Strikes Again

Senator Lieu of California has introduced SB917 to amend and add to Section 597 of the California Penal Code. This bill, as of 6/22/11 is reported as "Do Pass" from Committee and re-referred to Appropriations. This bill would now make it illegal to display and sell animals of any kind anywhere, except on private property, according to Section 2 of the bill.
Exempt from this are: "Events held by 4-H clubs; Future Farmers Clubs; Junior Farmers Clubs; the California Exposition and State Fair; County Fairs; district agriculture and association fairs; stockyards (with requirements); public cattle, equine, sheep, swine and goat sales; live animal markets (with requirements) and the sale of fish (with requirements). Included in the bill is the following: "This bill provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to do either of the following: (1) sell or give away as part of a commercial transaction, a live animal on any street, highway, public right-of-way, parking lot, carnival, or boardwalk, (2) display or offer for sale, or display or offer to give away as part of a commercial transaction, a live animal, if the act of selling or giving away the live animal is to occur on any street, highway, public right-of-way, parking lot, carnival, or boardwalk." The California Legislature passed a very similar law last year, but this was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. According to Around the Capitol, "This bill would revise the punishment for this offense to provide that it is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or in the state prison, or by a fine of not more than $20,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would make other technical, non-substantive changes. By revising the penalty for an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program... By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state mandated local program."

One thing that clearly "shouts out" in this bill is the exemption for shelter, rescues and humane societies from criminal charges for selling animals "not on private property." Specifically, "that display/ sales of animals are illegal, but that non- profit animal groups selling/displaying animals is not illegal. Everyone else would be guilty of animal abuse by doing so and will be subject to forfeiture of the animals, as stated: "Section 1.5-Upon the conviction of a person charged with a violation of this section by causing or permitting an act of cruelty, as defined in Section 599b, all animals lawfully seized and impounded with respect to the violation by a peace officer, officer of a humane society, or officer of a pound or animal regulation department of a public agency shall be adjudged by the court to be forfeited and shall thereupon be awarded to the impounding officer for proper disposition. A person convicted of a violation of this section by causing or permitting an act of cruelty, as defined in Section 599b, shall be liable to the impounding officer for all costs of impoundment from the time of seizure to the time of proper disposition." According to Pet Defense, "Generally speaking, rescues or any animal welfare person selling or picking up or delivering animals are not exempted from any commercial transaction according to any cited laws on this topic as far as alleged "abuse" is concerned. When the government contracts to have a third party private agency do their work, that might be another question under the law as the third party is actually benefitting from the contract. Whenever a contract with the government and a contracting agency comes into play, it brings along the issue of immunity, potentially under 42 U.S.C. 1983, and whether or not the agent was or was not exempted. Further, HSUS has defined, in various legislation, "rescue" as a for profit, or not for profit individual or group whose focus is on re-homing animals from pounds or other places. Yet in this law, the only exempted groups are non profit rescues/shelters, etc...Animal rescues use contracts, and must file documents showing how much income, expenses, and profit was made. Lack of a profit does not exclude any rescue group from being in a commercial business. The HSUS is a commercial business despite having a non -profit status."

While the bill claims that it exempts only cat, dog or bird shows (no mention is made of reptiles or fish or rabbits or any other animal), and must be competitive; exhibited, or judged, the proposed bill also states: (d) and "the show's sponsor or permitee ensures compliance with all federal, state, and local animal welfare and animal control laws"...How does the "show sponsor" ensure compliance, since they do not employ the exhibitors and has no agency business relationship with them? Another odd thing about this bill is that the California Constitution provides for a reimbursement to local agencies for certain expenses, yet this bill, for specified reasons, provides for no reimbursement required. Hmmm. It also states "alternatively for a crime punishable by a misdemeanor or a felony and a fine of not more than $20,000.00." Which is it, and at whose discretion?

If an individual wants to sell or give away a litter of kittens for example, but do not want people coming to their home, for safety and security reasons, and agree to meet the potential new owners in a public parking lot, if the animal is transferred from car A to car B, they are guilty of animal abuse and face criminal charges and possible jail time in an already overcrowded penal system and severely strained budget for the state. Let's look at another example: According to Amber H., "Last November I had the great privilege of transporting 5 of the rarest rabbit breeds in the world to knowledgeable breeders working to save these precious, dying breeds from extinction (some of which only 300 animals are believed to exist in the WORLD). SB 917 makes switch off at meeting points during transport relays for critically endangered animals a felony." Given that numerous people, some of which may not be "rescues, etc.", who aid and assist sea mammals and transport them to receive aid and then back, would they now be guilty of animal abuse? If a breeder agrees to meet a buyer halfway to deliver the animal, they are guilty of animal abuse. However, non-profit groups can do this anywhere at any time! Hmmm...let's eliminate the competition, don't you think?