BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2505
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 29, 2016
Counsel: David Billingsley
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
AB
2505 (Quirk) - As Introduced February 19, 2016
SUMMARY: Prohibits the use of carbon dioxide to euthanize an
animal.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Prohibits the killing of any animal by using any of the
following methods:
a) Carbon monoxide gas. (Pen. Code, § 597u, subd. (a)(1).)
b) Intracardiac injection of a euthanasia agent on a
conscious animal, unless the animal is heavily sedated or
anesthetized in a humane manner, or comatose, or unless, in
light of all the relevant circumstances, the procedure is
justifiable. (Pen. Code, § 597u, subd. (a)(2).)
2)With respect to the killing of any dog or cat, no person,
peace officer, officer of a humane society, or officer of a
pound or animal regulation department of a public agency shall
use any of the methods specified in subdivision (a) or any of
the following methods:
a) High-altitude decompression chamber; and (Pen. Code, §
AB 2505
Page 2
597u, subd. (b)(1).)
b) Nitrogen gas. (Pen. Code, § 597u, subd. (b)(2).)
3)States that no person, peace officer, officer of a humane
society or officer of a pound or animal regulation department
of a public agency shall kill any dog or cat by the use of any
high-altitude decompression chamber or nitrogen gas. (Penal
Code Section 597w.)
4)Provides that it is unlawful for any person to sell, attempt
to sell, load or cause to be loaded, transport or attempt to
transport any live horse, mule, burro, or pony that is
disabled if the animal is intended to be sold, loaded, or
transported for commercial slaughter out of California.
(Penal Code Section 597x(a).)
5)Defines "disabled animal" as including, but not limited to,
any animal that has broken limbs, is unable to stand and
balance itself without assistance, cannot walk, or is severely
injured. (Penal Code Section 597x(b).)
6)States that a violation of the prohibitions on methods of
killing is a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Section 597y.)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: According to the author, "The use of
carbon dioxide (CO2) to euthanize dogs and cats is cost
prohibitive, inhumane, dangerous, and unnecessary. However,
due to a loophole in existing law, it is still legal to
continue this practice. AB 2505 will close the loophole in
current law and prohibit the use of CO2 when euthanizing dogs
and cats in California.
"In a CO2 chamber it can take minutes for dogs and cats to lose
consciousness, and sometimes as long as twenty-five minutes
for them to expire. Furthermore, some dogs and cats are
resistant to CO2, particularly the vulnerable ones like the
AB 2505
Page 3
sick and elderly. In these cases it takes longer to kill the
animal using CO2 and sometimes death is not even achieved.
Exposure to CO2 is known to cause animals pain and make them
to feel like they are suffocating. Sometimes dogs and cats
experience organ failure before losing consciousness.
Furthermore, CO2 is hazardous to animal personnel due to the
risk of narcosis and complications from faulty equipment.
"No state agency is tasked with inspecting gas chambers. This
safety measure was eliminated in 1998 when the state assumed
this practice was banned. As such any shelter in operation of
one could be exposing staff and other adoptable animals to
hazardous chemicals.
"The widely accepted humane standard for euthanasia is a method
called "euthanasia by injection." This method typically causes
dogs and cats to lose consciousness within three to five
seconds and die a pain-free death."
2)Euthanasia by Administration of Carbon Dioxide (CO2): CO2
euthanasia occurs by administration of the gas in a sealed
container. The gas produces unconsciousness and then death.
A pressurized cylinder of CO2 is now viewed by a number of
international animal research oversight authorities as the
only acceptable method. CO2 may be administered in a home
cage or in a specialized compartment and may be used to kill
individuals or small groups of animals.
Discussions of CO2 euthanasia with various people working in
laboratory animal medicine and care (e.g. veterinarians,
vivarium directors, technicians) reveal that there are
conflicting CO2 practices and recommendations within the
animal research community. For example, some institutions
require that the euthanasia chamber be prefilled with CO2,
while others prohibit the use of prefilled chambers because
they appear to cause animal distress. Similar discrepancies in
practice have also been noted in regards to concentration,
flow rate and presence of oxygen. (Laboratory Animals, Conlee
et al. (2005), p. 139.)
3)American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for
Euthanasia: The AVMA published their most recent guidelines
AB 2505
Page 4
regarding animal euthanasia in 2013. The AVMA laid out strict
guidelines for the use of CO2, but did not prohibit its use
for euthanasia altogether. According to the AVMA,
"Unfortunately, there are still shelters and animal control
operations that do not have access to controlled substances
and/or the personnel authorized by the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) to administer them. This limits these
facilities' options for euthanizing animals."
( http://atwork.avma.org/2013/02/26/euthanasia-guidelines-the-ga
s-chamber-debate /)
The AVMA Guidelines and Restrictions with respect to use of CO2
for animal euthanasia are as follows and use of CO2 is only
considered acceptable if all the guidelines are met:
a) Personnel must be instructed thoroughly in the gas's use
and must understand its hazards and limitations;
b) The gas source and chamber must be located in a
well-ventilated environment, preferably outdoors;
c) The gas must be supplied in a precisely regulated and
purified form without contaminants or adulterants,
typically from a commercially supplied cylinder or tank;
d) The gas flow rate must allow operators to achieve known
and appropriate gas concentrations within the recommended
time;
e) The chamber must be of the highest-quality construction
and should allow for separation of individual animals. If
animals need to be combined, they should be of the same
species, and, if needed, restrained or separated so that
they will not hurt themselves or others. Chambers should
not be overloaded and need to be kept clean to minimize
odors that might distress animals that are subsequently
euthanized;
f) The chamber must be well lighted and must allow
personnel to directly observe the animals;
g) If the chamber is inside a room, monitors must be placed
AB 2505
Page 5
in the room to warn personnel of hazardous concentrations
of gas; and
h) It is essential that the gas and the chamber be used in
compliance with state and federal occupational health and
safety regulations.
In the 2013 Guidelines, euthanasia by intravenous injection of
an approved euthanasia agent remains the preferred method for
euthanasia of dogs, cats, and other small companion animals.
Gas chambers are not recommended for routine euthanasia of
cats and dogs in shelters and animal control operations.
4)Argument in Support: According to The Humane Society of the
United States, "It goes without saying that the goal of every
reputable animal shelter should be to find alternatives to
euthanasia whenever possible. But when shelters find
themselves in the position of having to euthanize an animal,
it is incumbent upon them to ensure that the death is as
humane as possible. Nearly twenty years ago, California
recognized that death by carbon monoxide gas is inhumane, and
outlawed that practice for dogs and cats. Unfortunately, that
ban did not also prohibit the use of carbon dioxide gas,
creating a loophole. AB 2505 is necessary to close that
loophole and ensure no one in California uses carbon dioxide
to kill dogs and cats.
"Recent evidence suggests that carbon dioxide causes even more
pain and distress than carbon monoxide; humans describe the
effects of carbon dioxide exposure as excruciating. In fact,
carbon dioxide exposure is so painful and distressing that
starving laboratory animals will actually forgo food when it
is offered in a chamber containing the gas. As far back as
2006, at the Newcastle Consensus Meeting on Carbon Dioxide
Euthanasia of Laboratory Animals, the scientific community was
questioning the ethics of using CO2 to kill animals2, and at
the 2014 AVMA Humane Endings Symposium researchers challenged
the use of CO2 even at concentrations approved as
conditionally acceptable in the AVMA's 2013 Guidelines for the
Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition.
"Carbon dioxide is almost certain to cause pain and distress to
AB 2505
Page 6
every dog and cat, regardless of concentration level or method
of introduction. As such, it is one of the most inhumane
methods of euthanasia being practiced today."
5)Argument in Opposition:
6)Prior Legislation:
a) AB 1426 (Liu), Chapter 652, Statutes of 2006, prohibited
the killing any animal by means of an intracardiac
injection of a euthanasia agent on a conscious animal,
unless the animal is heavily sedated or anesthetized in a
humane manner, or comatose, or unless, in light of all the
relevant circumstances, the procedure is justifiable.
b) SB 1659 (Kopp), Chapter 751, Statutes of 1998,
prohibited the use of carbon monoxide to kill any animal.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
ASPCA
Best Friends Animal Society
Humane Society of the United States
Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association
LIUNA Locals 777& 792
San Diego Humane Society
San Francisco SPCA
Stockton Animal Shelter
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared
by: David Billingsley / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
AB 2505
Page 7