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