Jump to content

California Assembly Bill 1634 (2007): Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
GreenC bot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,482,898 edits
m 2 archive templates merged to {{webarchive}} (WAM)
Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v1.3.2.3) (Cyberpower678)
Line 12: Line 12:
The bill was generally opposed by pet owners, [[breed club]]s,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/CA_action_center.cfm|title=American Kennel Club AB 1634 page|publisher=Akc.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cfainc.org/exhibitors/alerts.html#State |title=Cat Fanciers Association legislative alerts |publisher=Cfainc.org |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20101201091711/http://cfainc.org///exhibitors/alerts.html |archivedate=December 1, 2010 |df=mdy }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Levine|url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_cfa_20070423_093742_asm_comm.html|title=Assembly policy committee Bill Analysis|publisher=Leginfo.ca.gov|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> breeders of [[working dog]]s, [[Search and rescue dog|search-and-rescue dog]] associations,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.carda.org/CARDA%20AB%201634%20Oppose%20v4.pdf |title=AB 1634 opposition letter from California Rescue Dog Association |format=PDF |website=Carda.org |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120209110019/http://www.carda.org/CARDA%20AB%201634%20Oppose%20v4.pdf |archivedate=February 9, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> [[Police dog|K9 law enforcement]] associations,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cops.cc/news/press_releases/public_opposition_to_ab_1634/ |title=Press Release about AB 1634 from the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs |publisher=Cops.cc |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110706215149/http://www.cops.cc/news/press_releases/public_opposition_to_ab_1634/ |archivedate=July 6, 2011 |df=mdy }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.doggonecalifornia.org/NAPWDAPosition.pdf |accessdate=November 4, 2007 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002400/http://www.doggonecalifornia.org/NAPWDAPosition.pdf |archivedate=November 29, 2007 }}</ref> organizations that provide [[guide dog]]s for the blind and [[service dog]]s for the disabled,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caninecompanions.org/national/pdf_files/CH%20Letter%20Opposing%20AB%201634%20ADI.pdf|title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Assistance Dogs International, Inc|publisher=Caninecompanions.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caninecompanions.org/national/pdf_files/Letter%20Ted%20Rogahn%20contra%20ab1634.pdf|title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Canine Companions for Independence|publisher=Caninecompanions.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> California's agriculture industry, [[Rescue group|animal rescue groups]], leaders in the [[No-kill shelter|No Kill]] movement, and many veterinarians.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/opposeAB1634petitionList.cfm|title=Petition list of California veterinarians opposed to AB 1634|publisher=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/opposeAB1634.htm|title=California veterinarians against AB 1634|publisher=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref>
The bill was generally opposed by pet owners, [[breed club]]s,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/CA_action_center.cfm|title=American Kennel Club AB 1634 page|publisher=Akc.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cfainc.org/exhibitors/alerts.html#State |title=Cat Fanciers Association legislative alerts |publisher=Cfainc.org |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20101201091711/http://cfainc.org///exhibitors/alerts.html |archivedate=December 1, 2010 |df=mdy }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Levine|url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_cfa_20070423_093742_asm_comm.html|title=Assembly policy committee Bill Analysis|publisher=Leginfo.ca.gov|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> breeders of [[working dog]]s, [[Search and rescue dog|search-and-rescue dog]] associations,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.carda.org/CARDA%20AB%201634%20Oppose%20v4.pdf |title=AB 1634 opposition letter from California Rescue Dog Association |format=PDF |website=Carda.org |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120209110019/http://www.carda.org/CARDA%20AB%201634%20Oppose%20v4.pdf |archivedate=February 9, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> [[Police dog|K9 law enforcement]] associations,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cops.cc/news/press_releases/public_opposition_to_ab_1634/ |title=Press Release about AB 1634 from the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs |publisher=Cops.cc |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110706215149/http://www.cops.cc/news/press_releases/public_opposition_to_ab_1634/ |archivedate=July 6, 2011 |df=mdy }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.doggonecalifornia.org/NAPWDAPosition.pdf |accessdate=November 4, 2007 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002400/http://www.doggonecalifornia.org/NAPWDAPosition.pdf |archivedate=November 29, 2007 }}</ref> organizations that provide [[guide dog]]s for the blind and [[service dog]]s for the disabled,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caninecompanions.org/national/pdf_files/CH%20Letter%20Opposing%20AB%201634%20ADI.pdf|title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Assistance Dogs International, Inc|publisher=Caninecompanions.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caninecompanions.org/national/pdf_files/Letter%20Ted%20Rogahn%20contra%20ab1634.pdf|title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Canine Companions for Independence|publisher=Caninecompanions.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> California's agriculture industry, [[Rescue group|animal rescue groups]], leaders in the [[No-kill shelter|No Kill]] movement, and many veterinarians.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/opposeAB1634petitionList.cfm|title=Petition list of California veterinarians opposed to AB 1634|publisher=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/opposeAB1634.htm|title=California veterinarians against AB 1634|publisher=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref>


Supporters of the bill claim that legislative action is needed, because about 400,000 animals are euthanized (killed) in California's shelters each year,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://theanimalcouncil.com/files/2005AnnualReportofLocalRabiesActivities-Final.pdf|title=California Department of Health Services report for 2005 showing numbers for impounded and euthanized cats and dogs|format=PDF|website=Theanimalcouncil.com|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that animal shelter services cost California taxpayers $250 million a year,<ref>{{cite web|last=Gardner|first=Michael|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070423/news_1n23animals.html|title=AB 1634 report by San Diego Union-Tribune|publisher=Signonsandiego.com|date=April 23, 2007|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that a dog born in California currently has nearly a 1 in 4 chance of being ultimately euthanized in a shelter, that similar laws in individual communities in California have been successful, proving the validity of the mandatory spay/neuter concept, and that [[Neutering|spay and neuter]] improve animal health.{{cn|date=December 2015}}
Supporters of the bill claim that legislative action is needed, because about 400,000 animals are euthanized (killed) in California's shelters each year,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://theanimalcouncil.com/files/2005AnnualReportofLocalRabiesActivities-Final.pdf|title=California Department of Health Services report for 2005 showing numbers for impounded and euthanized cats and dogs|format=PDF|website=Theanimalcouncil.com|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that animal shelter services cost California taxpayers $250 million a year,<ref>{{cite web|last=Gardner |first=Michael |url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070423/news_1n23animals.html |title=AB 1634 report by San Diego Union-Tribune |publisher=Signonsandiego.com |date=April 23, 2007 |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081008020228/http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070423/news_1n23animals.html |archivedate=October 8, 2008 |df= }}</ref> that a dog born in California currently has nearly a 1 in 4 chance of being ultimately euthanized in a shelter, that similar laws in individual communities in California have been successful, proving the validity of the mandatory spay/neuter concept, and that [[Neutering|spay and neuter]] improve animal health.{{cn|date=December 2015}}


Opponents of the bill claim that erroneous shelter statistics are being used to support the bill,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/BigLieGraphs.pdf |title=Microsoft PowerPoint - Big Lie Graphs.ppt |format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> and that the experiences where mandatory spay/neuter laws have been implemented show that they increase costs to the taxpayers,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/SC%20budget.pdf|title=Santa Cruz Animal Services Budget before and after mandatory spay/neuter ordinance|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> and increase shelter impound and euthanasia rates,<ref>[http://network.bestfriends.org/news/4108.html ]{{dead link|date=December 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://action.alleycat.org/c.mmL3KgN3LzH/b.853085/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?aid=8393|title=AB 1634 report by Alley Cat Allies|publisher=Action.alleycat.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that non-punitive [[No-kill shelter|No Kill]] programs have proven to be more effective solutions, and that official state shelter statistics indicate that impound and euthanasia rates have been generally trending downward in California for more than 30 years,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/state%20dog%20chart6.pdf|title=Long-term California shelter statistics for dogs|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that passage of the bill would harm breeding programs for pets, [[guide dog]]s and [[service dog]]s, [[Search and rescue dog|search-and-rescue dogs]], [[police dog]]s, [[war dog|military working dogs]], [[hunting dog]]s, and working [[Herding dog|herding]] and [[Livestock guarding dog|livestock guardian dogs]], and that spay and neuter have [[Neutering#Disadvantages|adverse health impacts]] that need to be weighed against the benefits,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf|title=Long-term Health Risk and Benefits of Spay/Neuter in Dogs|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html |title=Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete |publisher=Caninesports.com |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120102002948/http://www.caninesports.com:80/SpayNeuter.html |archivedate=January 2, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> therefore [[Neutering|spay and neuter]] should be decisions made between the owner in consultation with their veterinarian based on the health needs and circumstances of each individual patient, rather than one that is dictated by the state,<ref>[http://www.dogplay.com/Articles/MyArticles/againstAB1634.html] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070825142157/http://www.dogplay.com/Articles/MyArticles/againstAB1634.html |date=August 25, 2007 }}</ref><ref>[http://www.noab1634.com/dox/CVMA%20Past%20Prez%20Hamil%20Against%20AB1634.pdf] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002400/http://www.noab1634.com/dox/CVMA%20Past%20Prez%20Hamil%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |date=November 29, 2007 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Repro%20Expert%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |accessdate=November 4, 2007 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002358/http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Repro%20Expert%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |archivedate=November 29, 2007 }}</ref> and, finally, that a majority of veterinary medical associations in California oppose AB 1634.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dvmnews.com/dvm/News/Controversy-kills/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/451756 |title=Controversy kills: CVMA withdraws sponsorship of mandated sterilization to placate disgruntled members |website=Dvmnews.com |date= |accessdate=2015-12-13}}</ref>
Opponents of the bill claim that erroneous shelter statistics are being used to support the bill,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/BigLieGraphs.pdf |title=Microsoft PowerPoint - Big Lie Graphs.ppt |format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> and that the experiences where mandatory spay/neuter laws have been implemented show that they increase costs to the taxpayers,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/SC%20budget.pdf|title=Santa Cruz Animal Services Budget before and after mandatory spay/neuter ordinance|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> and increase shelter impound and euthanasia rates,<ref>[http://network.bestfriends.org/news/4108.html ]{{dead link|date=December 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://action.alleycat.org/c.mmL3KgN3LzH/b.853085/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?aid=8393|title=AB 1634 report by Alley Cat Allies|publisher=Action.alleycat.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that non-punitive [[No-kill shelter|No Kill]] programs have proven to be more effective solutions, and that official state shelter statistics indicate that impound and euthanasia rates have been generally trending downward in California for more than 30 years,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/state%20dog%20chart6.pdf|title=Long-term California shelter statistics for dogs|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref> that passage of the bill would harm breeding programs for pets, [[guide dog]]s and [[service dog]]s, [[Search and rescue dog|search-and-rescue dogs]], [[police dog]]s, [[war dog|military working dogs]], [[hunting dog]]s, and working [[Herding dog|herding]] and [[Livestock guarding dog|livestock guardian dogs]], and that spay and neuter have [[Neutering#Disadvantages|adverse health impacts]] that need to be weighed against the benefits,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf|title=Long-term Health Risk and Benefits of Spay/Neuter in Dogs|format=PDF|website=Naiaonline.org|accessdate=December 16, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html |title=Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete |publisher=Caninesports.com |accessdate=December 16, 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120102002948/http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html |archivedate=January 2, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> therefore [[Neutering|spay and neuter]] should be decisions made between the owner in consultation with their veterinarian based on the health needs and circumstances of each individual patient, rather than one that is dictated by the state,<ref>[http://www.dogplay.com/Articles/MyArticles/againstAB1634.html] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070825142157/http://www.dogplay.com/Articles/MyArticles/againstAB1634.html |date=August 25, 2007 }}</ref><ref>[http://www.noab1634.com/dox/CVMA%20Past%20Prez%20Hamil%20Against%20AB1634.pdf] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002400/http://www.noab1634.com/dox/CVMA%20Past%20Prez%20Hamil%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |date=November 29, 2007 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Repro%20Expert%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |accessdate=November 4, 2007 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002358/http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Repro%20Expert%20Against%20AB1634.pdf |archivedate=November 29, 2007 }}</ref> and, finally, that a majority of veterinary medical associations in California oppose AB 1634.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dvmnews.com/dvm/News/Controversy-kills/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/451756 |title=Controversy kills: CVMA withdraws sponsorship of mandated sterilization to placate disgruntled members |website=Dvmnews.com |date= |accessdate=2015-12-13}}</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 14:44, 25 May 2017

AB 1634 was a controversial bill[1] (authored by Democrat Lloyd Levine) in the California State Legislature which would require that dogs and cats in California be spayed or neutered by 6 months of age.

The bill would have provided limited availability for purchased "intact permits" and a small number of exemptions. The bill passed the California Assembly by the narrowest of margins on June 6, 2007, but was deferred by Assemblyman Levine on July 11, 2007 when it became apparent that it would not pass in the California Senate Local Government committee where it had been assigned. Levine has stated his intention to reintroduce the bill in 2008. The sponsor of the bill, Social Compassion in Legislation, has introduced a new spay/neuter bill, Senate Bill SB 250.[2]

Bill supporters and bill opponents both claimed a large number of followers, and the 2007 hearings on the bill in Sacramento resulted in some of the largest and most passionate crowds of the year in the Capitol. The bill generated the most letters and calls of any California legislation in 2007.[3]

Support and opposition

AB 1634 was generally supported by animal shelter directors and workers, animal rights groups,[4] animal rescue groups,[5] Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,[6] humane societies,[7][8] and the Los Angeles city government. The bill received an enormous amount of media attention.

The bill was generally opposed by pet owners, breed clubs,[9][10][11] breeders of working dogs, search-and-rescue dog associations,[12] K9 law enforcement associations,[13][14] organizations that provide guide dogs for the blind and service dogs for the disabled,[15][16] California's agriculture industry, animal rescue groups, leaders in the No Kill movement, and many veterinarians.[17][18]

Supporters of the bill claim that legislative action is needed, because about 400,000 animals are euthanized (killed) in California's shelters each year,[19] that animal shelter services cost California taxpayers $250 million a year,[20] that a dog born in California currently has nearly a 1 in 4 chance of being ultimately euthanized in a shelter, that similar laws in individual communities in California have been successful, proving the validity of the mandatory spay/neuter concept, and that spay and neuter improve animal health.[citation needed]

Opponents of the bill claim that erroneous shelter statistics are being used to support the bill,[21] and that the experiences where mandatory spay/neuter laws have been implemented show that they increase costs to the taxpayers,[22] and increase shelter impound and euthanasia rates,[23][24] that non-punitive No Kill programs have proven to be more effective solutions, and that official state shelter statistics indicate that impound and euthanasia rates have been generally trending downward in California for more than 30 years,[25] that passage of the bill would harm breeding programs for pets, guide dogs and service dogs, search-and-rescue dogs, police dogs, military working dogs, hunting dogs, and working herding and livestock guardian dogs, and that spay and neuter have adverse health impacts that need to be weighed against the benefits,[26][27] therefore spay and neuter should be decisions made between the owner in consultation with their veterinarian based on the health needs and circumstances of each individual patient, rather than one that is dictated by the state,[28][29][30] and, finally, that a majority of veterinary medical associations in California oppose AB 1634.[31]

References

  1. ^ "AB 1634, as amended July 3, 2007" (PDF). Leginfo.ca.gov. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  2. ^ "AB 1634 Official Site - California Healthy Pets Act". Cahealthypets.com. Retrieved December 13, 2015.
  3. ^ Herdt, Timm. "AB 1634 report in Ventura County Star newspaper". Venturacountystar.com. Archived from the original on July 6, 2008. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ "AB 1634 support page from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals". Blog.peta.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  5. ^ "AB 1634 supportletter from". Save a Bunny. April 3, 2007. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  6. ^ "AB 1634 support from Monterey County SPCA" (PDF). Spaamc.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 9, 2012. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  7. ^ "AB 1634 support letter from Silicon Valley Humane Society". Findarticles.com. July 9, 2007. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  8. ^ "AB 1634 support page with listed animal rescue and humane society groups". Cahealthypets.com. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  9. ^ "American Kennel Club AB 1634 page". Akc.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  10. ^ "Cat Fanciers Association legislative alerts". Cfainc.org. Archived from the original on December 1, 2010. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  11. ^ Levine. "Assembly policy committee Bill Analysis". Leginfo.ca.gov. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  12. ^ "AB 1634 opposition letter from California Rescue Dog Association" (PDF). Carda.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 9, 2012. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  13. ^ "Press Release about AB 1634 from the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs". Cops.cc. Archived from the original on July 6, 2011. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  14. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002400/http://www.doggonecalifornia.org/NAPWDAPosition.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 29, 2007. Retrieved November 4, 2007. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  15. ^ "AB 1634 opposition letter from Assistance Dogs International, Inc" (PDF). Caninecompanions.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  16. ^ "AB 1634 opposition letter from Canine Companions for Independence" (PDF). Caninecompanions.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  17. ^ "Petition list of California veterinarians opposed to AB 1634". Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  18. ^ "California veterinarians against AB 1634". Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  19. ^ "California Department of Health Services report for 2005 showing numbers for impounded and euthanized cats and dogs" (PDF). Theanimalcouncil.com. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  20. ^ Gardner, Michael (April 23, 2007). "AB 1634 report by San Diego Union-Tribune". Signonsandiego.com. Archived from the original on October 8, 2008. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  21. ^ "Microsoft PowerPoint - Big Lie Graphs.ppt" (PDF). Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  22. ^ "Santa Cruz Animal Services Budget before and after mandatory spay/neuter ordinance" (PDF). Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  23. ^ [1][dead link‍]
  24. ^ "AB 1634 report by Alley Cat Allies". Action.alleycat.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  25. ^ "Long-term California shelter statistics for dogs" (PDF). Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  26. ^ "Long-term Health Risk and Benefits of Spay/Neuter in Dogs" (PDF). Naiaonline.org. Retrieved December 16, 2011.
  27. ^ "Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete". Caninesports.com. Archived from the original on January 2, 2012. Retrieved December 16, 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  28. ^ [2] Archived August 25, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  29. ^ [3] Archived November 29, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  30. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20071129002358/http://www.noab1634.com/dox/Vet%20Repro%20Expert%20Against%20AB1634.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 29, 2007. Retrieved November 4, 2007. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  31. ^ "Controversy kills: CVMA withdraws sponsorship of mandated sterilization to placate disgruntled members". Dvmnews.com. Retrieved December 13, 2015.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=California_Assembly_Bill_1634_(2007)&oldid=782206926"