|
|
|
Uploaded: Tuesday, February 7, 2012, 1:07 PM
Fur flies over proposed change to animal shelter law
Valley Humane Society wants to keep 4- to 6-day holding plus record keeping, vet care
|
|
by Dolores Fox Ciardelli
Pleasanton Weekly Staff
Photos
 
| Valley Humane Society would be negatively impacted if Gov. Jerry Brown's proposal to repeal the 1998 Hayden Law goes through. It mandates that public shelters must hold animals for four to six days before euthanizing. If the law is repealed, animals will have 72 hours.
"A lot of people claim their animals four or five days after they've been brought in," said Melanie Sadek, executive director of nonprofit adoption organization on Nevada Street in Pleasanton.
They may be on vacation and have hired someone to watch their pet, or they may wait to see if the animal returns on its own.
"The biggest issue is cats," Sadek said. "People will assume they will come back or maybe put up posters first. They don't realize that the place they should call first is the county shelter."
The repeal, which would save the state $23 million, also would do away with mandating veterinarian care and record-keeping, which Sadek said would hurt Valley Humane Society. The nonprofit rescue group gets many of its animals from East County Animal Shelter in Dublin and Tri-City Animal Shelter in Fremont, and it helps adoptions immeasurably to know an animal's background.
"We need to know as much as possible because we need to work with issues that animal has," Sadek said. "And we can't take an animal in that has no vaccinations."
If the shelters don't keep records, she pointed out, even if a Pleasanton Animal Services officer says he turned your pet into the county shelter, it would have no record of having received it or if it had been adopted out or euthanized. Or if it had been given to Valley Humane Society to find a home for it.
"I could have your cat here and wouldn't even know it," Sadek said.
The repeal could also result in cats deemed feral to be euthanized immediately, although there are rescue groups who specialize in socializing feral felines, she said.
"California has really led the way as far as legislation in humane treatment," Sadek said. "If we repeal this, we are setting ourselves back 14 years."
California Department of Public Health records show that 576,097 dogs and cats were euthanized in county shelters in 1997. The number dropped to 327,991 after the law went into effect.
Gov. Schwarzenegger proposed repealing the law in 2009 but backed off after public opposition. Nonetheless he suspended payments to reimburse shelters, and that year the number of euthanized animals went up to 455,046.
The time was right for the legislation when it was introduced by State Sen. Tom Hayden in the late 1990s, according to a report on the Maddies Fund website written in 2004 by Taimie Bryant, a UCLA law professor who assisted Hayden.
"The idea had taken root that, regardless of the circumstances that brought an animal to a shelter, the animal himself or herself deserves an opportunity to live," she wrote.
Also people began to realize that animals needed to be held longer than the 72 hours required in California, one of the shortest holding periods in the country.
The Hayden Law also requires shelters to release animals to nonprofit adoption groups rather than euthanize them.
Sadek said people who want to save the Hayden Law should write to the governor and their state senator and assembly member.
"The letter can be one sentence," she said. "Just let them know it is unacceptable."
She recommended that pet owners microchip their dogs and cats because, by law, shelters much check each animal for a microchip and make every possible attempt to contact the owners.
The Hayden Law is one of 31 reimbursements made by the state to local governments being proposed for change by the governor. Others include SIDS autopsies and stolen vehicle notification. Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Janet, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Feb 8, 2012 at 9:43 am PLEASE write a letter to stop the repeal of Hayden's Law. Animals deserve a chance to live.
|
|
Posted by Animal Lover, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Feb 8, 2012 at 9:57 am Could someone please post the addresses of each individual where the letter should be sent for anyone living in the Danville community?
Thank you.
Sadek said people who want to save the Hayden Law should write to the governor and their state senator and assembly member.
"The letter can be one sentence," she said. "Just let them know it is unacceptable."
|
|
Posted by San Ramon Oberver, a resident of the San Ramon neighborhood, on Feb 8, 2012 at 10:15 am
San Ramon Oberver is a member (registered user) of Danville Express Animal Lovers,
The best way to cut the expense of housing and euthanizing stray pets is to order a Pet Lovers License plate Web Link and show you care. This program will pay for free or low cost spay and neuter programs to reduce the number of unplanned and unwanted litters of dogs, cats, rabbits, and other pet animals. This would reduce pet overpopulation and make it easier for older animals to be adopted.
CA Spay Plates needs another 3850 preorders by the end of this June, or they will not be accepted by the DMV and tens of thousands of innocent animals will continue to be killed in shelters. Please order one or two or one for every member of your family NOW.
Roz
|
|
Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Feb 8, 2012 at 11:26 am
Tom Cushing is a member (registered user) of Danville Express Animal:
Here is a link to a letter generator, in Danvillains' case to the Guvnah, Senator DeSaulnier and Rep Buchanan.
Web Link
Just put your zip code in the upper right corner box. And thanks for taking action!
|
|
Posted by CathyK, a resident of the Blackhawk neighborhood, on Feb 8, 2012 at 4:55 pm Everyone....please put tags on your dog with name and phone number. Also, please have your dog microchipped with a tag on its collar.
|
|
Posted by Patty, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Feb 9, 2012 at 10:36 am I just received this email from Alley Cat Allies. If you go on their website you'll see a printed letter/email that you can sent Gov Brown. Check it out !! Send it in! I volunteer for ARF and that 72hrs wouldn't give rescue places enough time!
|
|
Posted by Janet, a resident of the San Ramon neighborhood, on Feb 10, 2012 at 2:28 pm There is actually a petition that you can sign ONLINE!!
Simply go to: www.straycatalliance.org
OR
there is a website where you can also read more and sign another petition:
Web Link
OR
CALL Governor Brown at (916) 445-2841 (9 am to 5 pm)
FAX your letter of opposition to (916) 558-3177
|
|
Posted by Douglas, a resident of the Blackhawk neighborhood, on Feb 12, 2012 at 1:43 pm Yes, cuts hurt, but they must be made in order for California to get back on the right track. Balancing the budget takes everyone and everything taking a hit in order for this runaway train to stop! If owners are made aware of the new change, they they obviously shouldn't wait to hope an animal comes back on its own. Would you wait for a child to come back on thier own? I think not, so why the difference for your so beloved pet? In my neighborhood there are quite a few irresponsible pet owners so why should my tax dollars go to help them. Something is very wrong with that.
|
|
Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Feb 13, 2012 at 9:35 am Douglas: I disagree with you for at least three reasons -- probably more, but I've got work to do.
First: as to irresponsible owners, life is just not so simple and pat as you describe. Even the most careful folks have lapses (that's why we all have insurance), which, at just the wrong time, can be tragic. I've worked at shelters, we'd get panicked influxes after the 4th of July, after any windstorm, etc. -- life happens, and animals can travel great distances under their own steam, or after being picked-up by a Good Sam. Those extra days are really important in raising the probability of redemption to the keeper.
Second: when we rush to Judgment (Day), the animal pays with its very Life. I believe your approach devalues that life, which I believe is intrinsically valuable -- a companion animal is not just a possession, but a sentient being worth saving for its own worth as one of Earth's creatures. Animals adopted into other homes bring to it -- and experience -- the great joy of living. That alone is worth the cost of my tax dollars -- are your that much more precious to you?
And third -- the claimed $23M "savings" Is.Completely.Illusory. Those state give-backs to the local shelters were suspended in 2009 and are Not being paid, anyway! What the Guvnah is proposing would have no real economic impact -- the cut was effectively made three years ago! ALL it does is fray this little portion of the only safety net pets get. Where (oh where...) is the taxpayer value in THAT? How does it "help get California back on the right track??"
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
