SB 917 - California. Signed to law.

[Skiploder]

Hmmm.

Doesn't look like it was on USARK's radar...........

http://www.usark.org/statelaws.php

[anatess]

Hmmm.

Doesn't look like it was on USARK's radar...........

http://www.usark.org/statelaws.php

Probably because it was made to look like a dog and cat bill...

Okay, about JLC's comment on curbside puppy sellers. They're already covered by other state laws. For example - you are required to have a permit to sell domestic animals. Public vending is covered by local ordinance - so, unless you got a city sales permit, you can't even sell girl scout cookies on public property, let alone a dog. Some cities even disallows selling on your own private driveway if your house is on a busy street.

So yeah, what this does is putting the act of selling an animal on the same animal cruelty category as dog fighting. The venue of the sale is a concession to the dog and cat lovers and private enterprise.

This is what you would consider a giant slick slippery slope. And yes, HSUS knew exactly that the first thing that comes to people's heads regarding this bill is "those hideous puppy mills!". They got you there! Hook, line, and sinker.

[Skiploder]

Probably because it was made to look like a dog and cat bill...

Don't think so.

It used to be AB 112.

USARK was aware of it. They were very aware of it. They even mentioned it on their forum.

We discussed it for awhile on this forum. There was no excuse for us not getting an exemption. No excuse at all.

For what it's worth, PIJAC supported the bill.

[anatess]

For what it's worth, PIJAC supported the bill.

Yeah, which is kinda screwy. PIJAC's position is about supporting rehoming efforts instead of sale. But, PIJAC never supported any ban on animal sales so... their position is confusing on this one.