BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 147|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 147
Author: Dababneh (D), et al.
Amended: 6/18/15 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-1, 6/17/15
AYES: Liu, Block, Hancock, Leyva, Monning, Pan, Vidak
NOES: Runner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Mendoza
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-1, 4/9/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Postsecondary education: animal research
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill requires a public and independent
postsecondary institution, as defined, that confines dogs or
cats for research purposes, to first offer the dogs or cats to
an animal adoption or rescue organization prior to being
euthanized, if an institution's existing procedures for adopting
the animal have failed and the animal's destruction is not
required, as specified.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
AB 147
Page 2
1)Specifies that public health and welfare depend on the humane
use of animals for scientific advancement in the diagnosis and
treatment of human and animal diseases, for education, for
research in the advancement of veterinary, dental, medical and
biologic sciences, for research in animal and human nutrition,
and improvement and standardization of laboratory procedures
of biologic products, pharmaceuticals, and drugs. (Health and
Safety Code §1650)
2)Declares that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it
can be adopted into a suitable home. Adoptable animals
include only those animals eight weeks of age or older or have
manifested no sign of a behavioral or temperamental defect
that could pose a health or safety risk and have manifested no
sign of disease, injury, or congenital or hereditary condition
that adversely affects the health of the animal, as specified.
(Civil Code § 1834.4)
3)Specifies, that no treatable animal should be euthanized. A
treatable animal includes any animal that is not adoptable but
that could become adoptable with reasonable efforts. (Food
and Agricultural Code § 17005)
4)Specifies that animals that are irremediably suffering from a
serious illness or severe injury shall not be held for owner
redemption or adoption. (FAC § 17006)
This bill:
1)Requires a campus of the University of California (UC),
California State University (CSU) and California Community
Colleges (CCC), an independent institution of higher
education, employee or student that confines dogs or cats for
research purposes, as specified, to offer the dogs or cats to
an animal adoption or rescue organization prior to euthanasia,
provided that the institution assesses the health of the
animal and determines that the animal is suitable for
adoption, the animal's destruction is not required, the animal
AB 147
Page 3
is no longer needed, and the institutions existing procedures
for adoption have failed.
2)Authorizes institutions to enter into agreement with an animal
adoption or rescue organization, as specified.
3)Specifies, that this bill does not apply to animals that are
suffering from serious illness or severe injury and newborn
animals that need maternal care and have been impounded
without their mothers, as specified in Section 17006 of the
Food and Agricultural Code.
4)Defines various terms for the purposes of this bill including:
a) "Animal adoption organization" or "animal rescue
organization" means a not-for-profit entity that is exempt
from taxation pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code established for purposes of rescuing animals
in need and finding permanent, adoptive homes for those
animals and that maintain records pursuant to Section 32003
of the Food and Agricultural Code.
Comments
1)Need for the bill: According to the author current federal and
state law, provide regulations concerning a research animal's,
bedding, food, water access, enrichment devices, and pain
management yet standards regarding how to care for the animal
after research and testing are complete remain unaddressed.
This bill attempts to establish state standards for adopting
research dogs and cats once research is complete by
facilitating relationships between university research
laboratories and nonprofit animal rescue organizations or a
group of individuals with similar experience, as specified.
2)How big is the problem? According to the National Institutes of
Health (NIH), in 2014, California received 7,731 grants, more
grant funding from NIH (for animal research), than any other
state. California was awarded grants totaling more than $3.4
billion. To note, four of the top 15 U.S.-wide NIH awardees
in 2014 were California universities: UC, Stanford
University, University of Southern California, and California
AB 147
Page 4
Institute of Technology. Specifically, at the UC of the 101
dogs utilized in 2014, 28 dogs used in research were
euthanized per the pre-approved research protocol and two dogs
remained in research. Of the remaining dogs, 30 were returned
to the staff or faculty owner and 41 were placed in permanent
adopted homes. According to UC, all of the dogs otherwise
covered under this measure were adopted out. This bill would
permit institutions to continue using internal procedures for
adopting an animal however should those efforts fail the
institutions are subsequently required to offer the dogs or
cats to the specified third party organizations.
3)Existing University Policies. UC's systemwide "Guidance Memo,"
on adoption of research dogs and cats specifies that dogs and
cats used in research or teaching may be adopted as companion
animals, if the animals are in good health, have an
expectation for a normal quality of life, and have suitable
temperaments. Additionally, the memo directs the Campus
Attending Veterinarian to adopt locally appropriate procedures
including the suitability of animal for placement outside the
University, the suitability of the organization or individual
adopting the animal, the entity that will bear the costs
related to the adoption and conformance with applicable state
and federal laws, as specified.
According to CSU, they do not have any research activities
involving dogs and cats on its campuses, but several campuses
have policies. Similarly, CCCs that use animals for teaching
purposes have adoption policies in place.
According to the Association of Independent California
Colleges and Universities all of its institutions covered by
this bill have policies and practices in place regarding
animal care, research, euthanasia and the adoption of health
dogs and cats.
4)Similar Legislation in Other States. Similar to this bill,
Minnesota House File 3172 (Chapter 3123, Statutes of 2014)
which sunsets July 1, 2015, requires a higher education
research facility that receives public money that confines
dogs or cats for science, education, or research purposes and
plans on euthanizing a dog or cat for other than science,
AB 147
Page 5
education, or research purposes must first offer the dog or
cat to a nonprofit organization incorporated for the purpose
of rescuing animals in need and finding permanent, adoptive
homes for the animals. Further, authorizes a facility to enter
into agreement with the animal rescue organization and for the
purposes of protecting the facility specifies that the
facility is immune from any civil liability that otherwise
might result from its actions. Two other states Nevada (SB
261, 2015) and Connecticut (H.B. 5707, 2015) introduced
similar legislation to ensure adoptable research animals find
permanent homes.
5)Federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The federal Animal Welfare Act
(AWA; 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) establishes a regulatory
framework for the use and role of animals in research. AWA was
signed into law in 1966 seeks to ensure the humane treatment
of animals that are intended for research, bred for commercial
sale, exhibited to the public, or commercially transported.
Under the AWA, public and private research facilities using
animals for research, testing, teaching, or experimentation
must be registered with the U.S. Department of Agriculture as
a "research facility," and must adhere to minimum standards of
care. Among other things the act requires each facility to
have an attending veterinarian to provide adequate veterinary
care to the animals. Additionally, these facilities must
submit an annual report identifying the number of regulated
animals used and if any painful experiments were conducted.
All research universities in the state, (public and private),
are accredited by the Association for Assessment and
Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International and are
subject to additional standards that go above the regulatory
requirements.
Prior Legislation
AB 2431 (Dababneh, 2014), similar to this measure, required any
postsecondary educational institution that confines dogs or cats
for research purposes and intends to destroy the dog or cat to
first offer the dog or cat to an animal adoption or animal
rescue organization. AB 2431 did not include language related to
the institutions determining if the animal is no longer needed
AB 147
Page 6
or exhausting its existing procedures. AB 2431 died in Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified6/30/15)
AFSCME
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Animal Human Society of Minnesota
Barks of Love
Best Friends Animal Society
Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association
Molly's Mutts and Meows
Numerous Individuals
Pasadena Humane Society & SPCA
Pine Animal Hospital, Inc.
Priceless Pets
Red Rover
Sacramento SPCA
San Francisco SPCA
Sonoma Humane Society
State Humane Association of California
Tails of the City Animal Rescue
The Amanda Foundation
The Humane Society of the United States
The Rescue Train
OPPOSITION: (Verified6/30/15)
Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities
California Biomedical Research Association
Stanford University
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-1, 4/9/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Campos, Chang, Chau,
AB 147
Page 7
Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly,
Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina
Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez,
Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,
Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Mullin,
Nazarian, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark
Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams,
Wood, Atkins
NOES: Harper
NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Medina, O'Donnell
Prepared by:Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105
7/1/15 14:22:45
**** END ****