The following is a brief overview of the proposed California pet microchip legislation
Authored by the Animal Legislative Action Network
revised 7 February 2006
Puppies and Kittens are adorable. They are cute, comical and easy to care for.
"Oh! Look! Mommy. Can we take this cute puppy home? Please?"
This marketplace creates a steady demand for puppies and kittens.
"I said, I need puppies. They're selling like hotcakes. I don't care what they cost or where they come from, just get me puppies!"
But like babies, puppies and kittens grow and become like teenagers.
"I'll tell you why I'm here: she eats too much, she is getting too big, she takes up too much space, she wants out with the girls every night, she always wants her way. She claims I don't understand her. I've changed my mind about having children."
Demand saturates and market forces move in the direction of excess supply.
"Shuurr I'll take those dogs and cats off your hands for ya..., but it is going to cost ya!"
1. Declining interest in a pet can lead to neglect, poor supervision and poor containment. Animals wander off and do not return home.
2. Owners, ashamed of not wanting their pets, abandon them in areas they believe they might find a permanent home.
3. Owners under pressure to give up a pet may relinquish to another caregiver without sufficient assurances.
4. Owners destroy their own pets in unsupervised ways.
How do owners who no longer wish to be pet owners respond in a marketplace where there is an overabundance of pets? Who will take them?
"It's just not working out. She's very smothering and I need my space. I'm sure there is someone else out there for Fifi. She is so smart, loving, loyal, obedient, has a pedigree. I'd let her go for $100."
With California increasingly urbanized, abandoned dogs and cats create problems for local governments:
1. abandoned pets interfere with commerce, mail delivery, and traffic.
2. abandoned pets are a vector for rabies, fleas and scabies.
3. abandoned pets are a public health risk by incurring bites, deaths and traffic accidents.
Communities often have no way of connecting a problem-causing pet with the household responsible for its care.
" He came from over there officer, he was a medium size brown dog with a long tail. He didn't have a collar, but he was unforgettable. If you saw him, you would know it him for sure… or was it a her?."
For 75 years or more in this state, local communities have supported agencies to keep their neighborhoods as free as possible of the impediments created by abandoned dogs.
Previously, these facilities were "catch and destroy" operations. But increasingly the public has demanded better facilities and better attempts at adoption of animals that, although vagrant, may be socialized and have the potential of being wonderful family pets. These new demands on animal control facilities have added to the cost.
" When I was a kid we use to just shoot those varmints. Now they got homes, beauty parlors, warm meals, maid service, personal trainers and color TV. And you know who is payin' for it? You and me. Bullets were sure a lot cheaper."
Now the public animal control facilities have more to deal with than the difficult job of rounding up abandoned pets. They have been forced into the difficult position of accepting unwanted pets rather than see them abandoned to the streets or killed. Irresponsible pet owners have seen this as an entitlement, making it easier for them to dump unwanted "merchandise."
" Look Bro! I have twenty four 13th generation fighting Pit Bull puppies that I don't want any mo'. Now, I can drop them off between here and Pacoima or… Now who do you want to take responsibility for these dogs?
Taxpayers are now forced to bear the burden of the burgeoning "residence a minute", "relationship a minute", "fashion a minute" pet trade -- loyal, healthy companion animals discarded like last year's wardrobe, to make room for this year's fashions.
"Yes she's a beautiful Dalmatian, but Dalmatians are so retro. I mean golly, I might as well be seen with my last year's Golden Retriever. Stinko! I saw an ad for a Pressa Canaria. Such a hunk! And they come in fawn."
No elected official likes to create burdens on constituents. No elected official likes to create more bureaucracy. But this problem is crying our for attention, crying out for solutions to a problem creating greater and greater burdens on taxpayers, and a increasingly more obvious public relations nightmare.
Companion animal overpopulation is a solvable problem. But it needs attention to the social and market forces driving it. Information gathering, local cooperation with regulations and enforcement will all play a role. Other countries have dealt with this problem successfully, and we can too.
1a. Anyone wishing to sell a dog or a cat that is under the age of 6 months must have a physical address and register their name, address, telephone number and number of animals sold the previous year with the animal control agency having jurisdiction over the area of that physical address. The seller is required to maintain that the information in this registry remains correct. The seller is responsible for paying to the above agency any fees required to cover the maintenance of this registry. Any infraction of this requirement could result in a fine levied by the agency.
" Well yes, we did have a litter so Junior could see the miracle of birth. Then we thought, well, why not sell just a few, to learn a little about business. We were so proud. We were able to buy him a new bicycle.
1b. These sellers must publish any registration number given to them by the animal control agency in their jurisdiction in a clearly legible form in any advertisement for the sale of a dog (s) or cat (s). Advertisements would include, but not be limited to, newspaper ads, magazine ads and internet ads. Sellers would be required to provide this same registration number at point of sale to any potential buyer prior to that sale. Sellers will be responsible for bearing the cost of publishing this registration number. Any infraction of this requirement could result in a fine.
1c. The sellers must have a microchip placed in each dog or cat prior to sale. The implanted information from each chip must be registered with the animal control agency having jurisdiction over the area where the buyer will reside. Any infraction of this requirement could result in a fine. The animal control agency may impose a fee upon the seller for the retention and maintenance of this microchip information registry.
"Lets see now, we've recorded the serial numbers for the TV, the stereo, the microwave, the toaster… what are we forgetting?
1. The State of California would require that any owner / guardian of a dog or cat:
1a. Who discovers their pet missing or lost, must report the loss to animal control within 72 hours of making the discovery. Failure to do so is currently a misdemeanor and punishable by law. Should the animal be found, it is required that the owner notify animal control within 72 hours of making this discovery. Failure to do so may result in prosecution under the existing law.
1b. Who wishes to relinquish responsibility for a dog(s) or cat(s) must register the name, physical address and telephone number of the individual assuming responsibility with the animal control agency having jurisdiction where the new owner has a physical address. Any infraction of this requirement may result in a fine.
"You say he went through two red lights at ninety, clipped a parked car and then rear ended a police vehicle? Officer I swear, I gave that car thief to my brother-in-law two years ago."
1. All animal control agencies in the State of California wholly or in part funded by taxes are required to:
1a. create, back-up and maintain an electronic registry of the names, physical addresses, telephone numbers and numbers, for animals sold the previous calendar year, of any sellers of a dog (s) or cat (s) under the age of 6 months within their jurisdiction.
1b. dispense a registration number to each seller who registers within their jurisdiction at a cost that covers the creation and dispensing of the registration number. There is no penalty imposed by the state for any agency that is unwilling or unable to fulfill this requirement.
1c. create, back up and maintain an electronic registry of the implanted microchip information received from sellers of dogs and cats under 6 months of age and guardians / owners of dogs and cats transferred, within their jurisdiction. This information must remain in the registry for twenty years. The agency may charge the seller a fee that covers the cost of maintaining this registry. There is no penalty imposed by the state on any agency that is unwilling or unable to fulfill this requirement
2. It will be the ultimate responsibility of animal control to enforce compliance with these new requirements on sellers, owners and guardians but they are encouraged to use volunteers to assist them in these efforts. Fines levied are to be retained by the enforcement agency and should be set sufficiently high so as to support enforcement costs.
Local animal control is requested to use the most efficient enforcement tools available to them. It is recommended that they apply to their local decision makers for the right to levy fines through computer programs and phone call checks on sellers, and without the requirement of physical on site inspections.
These requirements are in no way to be interpreted as a state mandate. No action is required unless revenues support the action.
The combined effect of these several requirements is to create a chain of responsibility for dogs and cats born in California, so that they can no longer be discarded as anonymous refuse or left with animal control agencies without accountability.
These burdens on sellers are imposed because it is asserted that record-keeping is far cheaper and more cost effective than warehousing pets. We believe that as microchipping compliance increases, the need to kennel dogs and cats, even temporarily, will decrease. Animal control agencies will have the ability to report numbers of animals sold, and numbers of animals destroyed, so that future policy is solidly based on fact. Animal control agencies will know at any one point in time who is the party responsible for each pet in its jurisdiction, making responsibility for liability and public nuisance issues easier to determine.
Pet abandonment, an activity that is currently a misdemeanor, will be prosecutable. The requirement for microchipping closes the loophole of denial of responsibility for "unreported" lost pets. Prosecutions should cause abandonment to dry up since it will be harder for owners to know if their pet does or does not have the information implanted to link them to a crime. It will be easier for the animal itself to be evidence of wrongdoing.
50% of all animals housed and destroyed at public expense were abandoned by owners and guardians. This evidence alone should diminish the burden upon our shelters if local jurisdictions will take the lead in prosecuting this crime.
It is hoped that communities in compliance will put pressure on communities that are not in compliance to re-consider their priorities.
Finally, if communities will make serious efforts to comply with these state requirements, the companion animal overpopulation problem will become manageable enough for private interested, animal welfare organizations who care the most passionately about this problem to take over the registry responsibilities and free up public funds for other uses.
If sellers will comply willingly, it will be easier to distinguish between responsible and irresponsible sellers. Eventually, responsible sellers will be able to advertise based upon the assurance of quality that transparency will produce.
If they help in the elimination of this problem, they will no longer have shelter animals competing with them for available homes, but have 100% market share to themselves.
Owners / guardians for their part will have the assurance that when they buy an animal it will have implanted in it the information that will allow it always be returned to them, alive or dead, in case of loss, disaster, or theft.
There are many positive changes that can occur in the lives of pets and their families with the passage of this bill. But it will take the willingness of members of both political parties to ignore the self-serving, alarmist arguments of burdened parties.
This problem has no political philosophy. Its very existence, in an era when data (such as the pet microchip database) is so easily entered, stored and retrieved, seems somehow antiquated. It seems the least that we can ask is that our tax-supported elected officials give these proposed changes a fair hearing, before Californians are forced to pay even larger amounts of money for an animal control system that does not deserve more government funding, but rather, replacement with an empowered and self-supporting asset to society.
-