| 翻訳と辞書 |
AB 1634
AB 1634 was a controversial bill〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634, as amended July 3, 2007 )〕 (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 provides 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,〔(AB 1634 bill history )〕 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.〔(AB 1634 report in Sacramento Bee newspaper )〕 Levine has stated his intention to reintroduce the bill in 2008.〔(Report in Sacramento Bee )〕
The sponsor of the bill, Social Compassion in Legislation, has introduced a new spay/neuter bill, Senate Bill SB 250.〔() CA healthy pets website〕
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.
==Support and opposition==
AB 1634 was generally supported by animal shelter directors and workers,〔(AB 1634 support letter from CACDA )〕〔(AB 1634 support letter from Ed Boks )〕 animal rights groups,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 support page from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals )〕 animal rescue groups, Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 support from Monterey County SPCA )〕 humane societies,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 support page with listed animal rescue and humane society groups )〕〔(AB 1634 support page of HSUS )〕 and the Los Angeles city government.〔(Meeting minutes of Board of Animal Services Commissioners, City of Los Angeles, 5/14/2007 )〕 The bill has received an enormous amount of media attention.
The bill was generally opposed by pet owners,〔(AB 1634 article from Los Angeles Times )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from American Dog Owners Association )〕 breed clubs,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=American Kennel Club AB 1634 page )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Cat Fanciers Association legislative alerts )〕 breeders of working dogs,〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from United Schutzhund Clubs of America )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from LV/DVG America )〕 search-and-rescue dog associations,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 opposition letter from California Rescue Dog Association )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from Canine Specialized Search Team )〕 K9 law enforcement associations,〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from United States Police Canine Association )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Press Release about AB 1634 from the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from Western States Police Canine Association )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from North American Police Work Dog Association )〕 organizations that provide guide dogs for the blind and service dogs for the disabled,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Assistance Dogs International, Inc )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from the International Association of Assistance Dog Partners )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 opposition letter from Canine Companions for Independence )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from Paws'itive Teams )〕 California's agriculture industry,〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from the California Farm Bureau Federation, California Cattlemen's Association, and California Outdoor Heritage Alliance )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from American Working Farmcollie Association )〕 animal rescue groups,〔(AB 1634 opposition letter by National English Shepherd Rescue )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter by Bay Area Rescue Keeshonden )〕 leaders in the No Kill movement,〔(AB 1634 opposition statement from Nathan Winograd )〕 and many veterinarians.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Petition list of California veterinarians opposed to AB 1634 )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=California veterinarians against AB 1634 )〕
Supporters of the bill claim that legislative action is needed, because about 400,000 animals are euthanized (killed) in California's shelters each year,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=California Department of Health Services report for 2005 showing numbers for impounded and euthanized cats and dogs )〕 that animal shelter services cost California taxpayers $250 million a year, that a dog born in California currently has nearly a 1 in 4 chance of being ultimately euthanized in a shelter,〔(AB 1634 support one in four analysis )〕 that similar laws in individual communities in California have been successful, proving the validity of the mandatory spay/neuter concept,〔(AB 1634 supporters claim about Santa Cruz County )〕 and that spay and neuter improve animal health.〔(AB 1634 support claims about medical benefits )〕
Opponents of the bill claim that erroneous shelter statistics are being used to support the bill,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Microsoft PowerPoint - Big Lie Graphs.ppt )〕 and that the experiences where mandatory spay/neuter laws have been implemented show that they increase costs to the taxpayers,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Santa Cruz Animal Services Budget before and after mandatory spay/neuter ordinance )〕 and increase shelter impound and euthanasia rates,〔(Study of mandatory spay/neuter laws by Animal Law Coalition )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=AB 1634 report by Alley Cat Allies )〕 that non-punitive No Kill programs have proven to be more effective solutions,〔(The Dark Side of Mandatory Licensing and Neutering Laws by the No Kill Advocacy Center )〕〔(No Kill by Nathan Winograd )〕〔(the No Kill Equation )〕〔(How San Francisco became No Kill )〕 and that official state shelter statistics indicate that impound and euthanasia rates have been generally trending downward in California for more than 30 years,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Long-term California shelter statistics for dogs )〕 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,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Long-term Health Risk and Benefits of Spay/Neuter in Dogs )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete )〕 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,〔(AB 1634 opposition points )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter by Dr. John Hamil, DVM, past president of the California Veterinary Medical Association )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter by Dr. Sharon Vanderlip, DVM )〕〔(AB 1634 opposition letter from American Dog Owners Association )〕 and, finally, that a majority of veterinary medical associations in California oppose AB 1634.〔http://www.dvmnews.com/dvm/News/Controversy-kills/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/451756〕
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「AB 1634」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|