ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide. Founded in 1992, ANIMAL PEOPLE has no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. |
This site built and maintained by: GREANVILLE ASSOCIATESand CRESCENT COMMUNICATIONS •Rev. 12.1.05 Copyright ANIMAL PEOPLE, INC. 1992--2006
 |
 |
ESSENTIAL DESTINATIONS
|
MONTH: October 2007
Legal path clear for California communities to ban declawing
SAN FRANCISCO--California
cities and counties may ban declawing cats, the California Supreme Court
affirmed on October 10, 2007, refusing to hear an appeal filed by the
California Veterinary Medical Association against a West Hollywood ordinance
adopted in 2003. The West Hollywood ordinance is the only local anti-declawing
law in California, but other communities are expected to adopt similar
legislation now that the legal path is clear.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors,
for instance, passed a non-binding anti-declawing resolution in 2003,
and filed a brief in support of West Hollywood when the CVMA case reached
the appellate level. Matt Dorsey, spokesperson for San Francisco city
attorney Dennis Herrera, told San Francisco Chronicle staff writer Bob
Egalko that the state Supreme Court "preserved the right of San Francisco
to enact an ordinance like this if it chose to in the future."
The West Hollywood ordinance was challenged
by the CVMA soon after passage. Relying on precedents involving local
attempts to ban abortion clinics, a Los Angeles judge agreed with the
CVMA that communities may not supersede the authority of state boards
governing professional practices.
However, writing for the majority in a
2-1 verdict reached in June 2007 by the California Second District Court
of Appeal in Los Angeles, Justice Dennis Perluss concluded that cities
and counties have the authority to "set minimum standards for the
humane treatment of animals" within their territorial limits.
Legal researchers will find the case archived
as California Veterinary Medical Association vs. West Hollywood, S154899.
As the West Hollywood case moved through
the court system, the California legislature in September 2004 prohibited
declawing lions and tigers, largely to discourage private citizens from
keeping them as pets. The bill was introduced by Assemblyman Paul Koretz
(D-West Hollywood).
In September 2006, the USDA reinterpreted
the U.S. federal Animal Welfare Act to hold that declawing and defanging
captive carnivores and primates is "no longer considered to be acceptable
when performed solely for handling or husbandry purposes," because
these procedures "can cause considerable pain and discomfort to the
animal and may result in chronic health problems."
The USDA banned de-clawing carnivores
and primates four years after Paw Project founder Jennifer Conrad, DVM
presented findings against declawing to the 2002 annual conference of
the American Association of Zoo Veterinarians.
The American Veterinary Medical Association,
in contrast to the usual veterinary position on declawing pet cats, opposed
declawing other carnivores and primates in a 2004 position statement authored
by then-Toledo Zoo veterinarian Timothy Reichard.
On July 11, 2007 the U.S. House of Representatives
by unanimous voice vote passed a resolution by Representative Marcy Kaptur
(D-Ohio) which directed employees of the federal Department of Housing
& Urban Development to quit telling residents and would-be residents
of public housing that they must have their cats declawed.
Summarized Humane Society of the U.S.
spokesperson Heather Sullivan, "Over the years, distraught citizens
have reported that forced mutilation of their cats was required for them
to live in housing subsidized by HUD. Official HUD rules require no such
thing, but some agency authorities took it upon themselves to order that
cats must be declawed--an extremely painful and wholly unnecessary procedure."