Save Our Dogs: Oppose AB 702
March 27, 2021 11:50 pm Published by

AB 702 — Animal Breeding: permits


AB 702 (Santiago) Animal breeding: permits would prohibit any individual or business from maintaining a dog kennel, or other place, for breeding purposes without first obtaining a breeder permit. A permit is needed if a citizen has or plans to have even one litter. The numerous proposed state-mandated permit requirements could be expanded further by local jurisdictions/animal control agencies and would be subject to a “reasonable” fee, but no maximum dollar amount is specified! 

This bill is eligible to be heard in the Assembly Business and Professions Committee sometime in April.  The exact date has yet to be determined. 

AB 702 Fact Sheet

  • Judie Mancuso, AB 702’s sponsor, wants her bill to end overbreeding and shelter euthanasia. But if overbreeding and pet overpopulation in California were still big problems, California rescues and shelters would not be importing dogs from out-of-the-state and out-of-the-country to maintain a supply of dogs.
  • With 80 – 90 million dogs in US households, it takes at least 8 million dogs a year just to replace the household dogs that die each year.
  • AB 702 is aimed at eliminating the small, in-home hobby, performance, and hunting dog breeders leaving shelters and rescues to be the only source of pets available.
  • A 2019 CDC report estimates that over a million dogs are being imported into the US annually. This indicates that the supply of dogs being produced in the United States can no longer keep up with demand.
  • AB 702 outsources dog breeding to foreign countries where diseases and parasites are widespread that are rarely found in the US.
  • AB 702 is misdirected and unneeded: All credible data shows that shelter dog euthanasia in the US has dropped by 90% since it peaked in the 1970s. Best Friends just announced that all the LA city shelters have reached no-kill status, meaning that they no longer euthanize adoptable dogs.
  • if AB702 is passed, it will harm the very consumers and pets it claims to protect. 
  • If passed it will set up a near-monopoly for rescues and shelters and limit the public’s ability to find a puppy or breed of their choice. 
  • AB702 targets the small in-home breeders, including hobby breeders, who are widely regarded as providing the healthiest and best-socialized dogs available.
  • AB 702 will not reduce the demand for dogs, so overregulating the best source of dogs only ensures that consumers will have poorer choices available to them in the future.
  • When Mancuso’s bill to ban California pet stores was on the docket, she argued that pets from small breeders, rescues, and shelters would still be able to fill the demand. Now that pet stores are banned, she has introduced a bill that will eliminate many small breeders.
  • AB702 will degrade the dog marketplace by reducing the types and quality of dogs available to the public, replacing them with older dogs, in many cases dogs from other states and from distant countries.
  • AB 702 will reduce the supply of locally bred dogs by eliminating local breeders, replacing their dogs with dogs from distant states and countries.
  • AB 702 would create an unfunded mandate, forcing local jurisdictions to change their program and funding priorities.
  • AB 702 is modeled after the Long Beach municipal code that was passed more than a decade ago and has no permit holders.
  • If AB 702 is passed, many California breeders will quit breeding, go underground, or relocate.
  • The euthanasia statistics at the Long Beach shelter are no better than other shelters in the surrounding area, showing that it did not have a positive effect.
  • The Long Beach breeding permit on which AB 702 is based (which is required for even one litter), allows animal control officers to enter and inspect the property of permit holders without notice during reasonable hours.
  • In order to qualify for a breeder’s permit, AB 702 requires breeders to acquire a business license, something that will be impossible to acquire for many citizens because businesses are prohibited by law in many neighborhoods.
  • Once AB 702 is passed, local animal control agencies will set up their own enforcement regulations.
  • The Polanco-Lockyer Pet Breeder Warranty Act provides consumer protection by imposing numerous requirements on people who sell 20 or more dogs a year or 3 litters or more per year.
  • If AB 702 is passed, it will be the only state law in the United States to regulate the small-scale in-home breeders, including hobby breeders that AB 702 targets.
  • AB 702 is a direct assault on hobby and show breeders!
  • AB 702 is an unfunded mandate that places the cost of enforcement on local municipalities, expecting that those costs will be passed on to permit holders.
  • The relationship between dogs and humans is the closest and longest-lasting relationship between two species in all of human history – at least 16,000 years. It is a partnership that has taken many forms over many millennia – hunting, herding, guarding, mushing, and companion to name just a few. Selective breeding and husbandry have always played a role in that role. AB 702 attempts to turn that relationship into a business.
  • AB 702 does not distinguish between breeding that is done for commercial purposes and breeding that is part of a chosen lifestyle or avocation, breeding that is done to improve the health and wellbeing of a particular breed.

Go here to find your assembly member and let them know you strongly oppose AB 702.

If your assembly member is on the Assembly Business and Professions Committee below please let them know you oppose AB 702. Do not call them if they do not represent you.

You can contact the bill’s author AB 702 (below) to tell him of your opposition:

Santiago, Miguel53 6027 916 319 2053 916 319 2153 
Low, Evan (Chair)28 4126 916 319 2028 916 319 2128 
Flora, Heath (Vice-Chair)12 3098 916 319 2012 916 319 2112 
Arambula, Joaquin31 5155 916 319 2031 916 319 2131 
Berman, Marc24 3123 916 319 2024 916 319 2124 
Bloom, Richard50 2003 916 319 2050 916 319 2150 
Chen, Phillip55 4177 916 319 2055 916 319 2155 
Chiu, David17 4112 916 319 2017 916 319 2117 
Cunningham, Jordan35 4102 916 319 2035 916 319 2135 
Dahle, Megan4116 916 319 2001 916 319 2101 
Fong, Vince34 2002 916 319 2034 916 319 2134 
Gipson, Mike64 3173 916 319 2064 916 319 2164 
Grayson, Timothy14 6031 916 319 2014 916 319 2114 
Holden, Chris41 5132 916 319 2041 916 319 2141 
Irwin, Jacqui44 5119 916 319 2044 916 319 2144 
McCarty, Kevin2136 916 319 2007 916 319 2107 
Medina, Jose61 2141 916 319 2061 916 319 2161 
Mullin, Kevin22 3160 916 319 2022 916 319 2122 
Salas, Rudy32 4016 916 319 2032 916 319 2132 
Ting, Philip19 6026 916 319 2019 916 319 2119 

You can also find social media options for contacting the committee here.

You may read our letter to the committee and to the authorhere

Guidance: As you write your opposition letter, help your representative understand who you are and how much your dogs mean to you. Tell your story.  The sponsor’s press release paints a pretty dim picture of breeders. So, in addition to explaining why this bill is misdirected and should be defeated, please take a few extra minutes to let them know all the good things that in-home hobby breeders do to assure the wellbeing of their dogs and the preservation of their breeds. If you choose to use some facts above in your letter, use your own words.  

If you haven’t signed up to receive our alerts yet, do so now!  If you’re not signed up, you will not get timely updates.

Categorised in:

This post was written by Patti Strand

Comments are closed here.