Printable View
Tell me this isn't so....
Just heard on the "5" news that Gov. Arnold S...
overturned the law that animal shelters must wait
6 days before euthanizing an animal,
and that shelters are no longer required to scan animals for chips.
This move should save the State approx. 14 million
dollars a year.
I rather pay the extra taxes.
Well, I can't voice my opinion on what I really think here. Hope he can sleep with all the innocent animal's blood on his hands. There's a place in Hell for you, Arnold
Big mistake Arnold.....:mad:
I also saw this covered on an NBC site here in Indy today.
Instead of bringing in people to help allieviate the problems,
his answer is just kill more animals? Don't even give them any
chance to be adopted ? Talk about short sighted & cruel... :mad:
Check it out......
http://www.theindychannel.com/family...42/detail.html
That's just horrible. :mad: Living in CA, I'm disgusted.
He puts saving money in front of saving animal lives.. and that's just.. ugh. :mad:
I'll write him a letter. Like that will do any good.
Wow! What an outrage!
But there's still time: He hasn't done it yet. We have to make our voices heard. Here's the web form to send him a e-mail (preferred):
http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
Here's his mail address:
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: 916-445-4633
Crap!!! If that passes, stupid nevada will copy it soon. I think I'LL write him a letter!!! How narrow minded and short sighted ugh. Its all about $$$$ :mad: :mad: :mad:
I'll be sure to drop my govenor a line....
And he was doing so well.....
:(
I am not really sure what he has done well...just my opinion...he is trying to renig on an already negotiated on state contract, he should know that contracts are binding. Animals and public employees are easy prey.
The whole thing sounds awful, but that's the worst part! So if your beloved, microchipped cat/dog is lost, and ends up in the pound, they can just kill it with out checking for a microchip?! :(Quote:
Originally posted by KYS
...and that shelters are no longer required to scan animals for chips.
I am appalled and upset with your pending ruling in reference to stray animals. It's hard enough on them as it is and with this ruling, a drastic amount will never find the loving homes they deserve. And, the microchips are issued to our furry family members for good reason. Not wanting the shelters to even scan for them is a very sad decision, indeed. I take it you don't have any pets? If you do, how would you feel if they got lost and then ended up being killed because of your decision? Being a county employee, I know for a fact that the powers that be find money for their plans. Are you telling the citizens of California that this is the only money you can save? I find that hard to believe. If you pass this amendment, don't look forward to a second term in office. I'm highly disappointed in your judgement and thanking the good Lord that I don't live in California
How very sad if he can pull this through! :(
A pity all Govenors, Presidents, Prime Ministers etc. can get their positions without taking a psycology and intelligence test! :mad: We should all unite and demand that! After all, they're running our countries!
No kidding Randi!!! I support that!
For the record...
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger WANTS to repeal a state law that requires animal shelters to hold stray dogs and cats for up to six days before killing them.
Wanting and getting are two different things.....
by monday you will hear that he has changed his mind after the outpouring of sentiment from his constituents...
Isn't it funny how no one mentioned Senator Blackburn piggybacking a law that allows the FCC to implement a 3 million dollar fine against broadcasters for obscenities broadcast over the airwaves..
He attached that law to a military budget law that was passed by a 97-0 margin in the Senate.
lololol,
Mr Blackburn got his law passed by underhandedly working into
another bill......You have to hand it to Ahrnold. He come right out and says it.
Thanks for the update, I am sending my e-mail to him.
Keeping fingers crossed that he will change his mind.
Just tried to send my e-mail and could not open the
web site. (he must be getting lots of e-mails from animal lovers and state employees. :)
http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
P.S. caseysmom, I agree about public employees being
easy prey. I am on the fence about Arnold, but dissapointed
that he is trying to break a contract with already low
paid state employees.
Guess what folks ?
SACRAMENTO — The hectoring barks of thousands of animal lovers convinced Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today to reverse himself and keep California's law protecting stray dogs and cats at shelters.
Schwarzenegger's about-face came after opponents flooded the governor's office with faxes and phone calls and staged a small afternoon protest with about a dozen dogs at the state Capitol.
The governor said that the plan to repeal the law prohibiting the destruction of animals for at least six days was a "mistake'' made when he hastily put together his budget after taking office last year.
"That was an oversight of mine in December when we were trying to put the budget together in two seconds,'' said Schwarzenegger, a self-described animal lover and the owner of three dogs: Sarge, Sammy and Spunky.
"And of course I grew up with every animal you can think of," he said. "I'm an animal lover."
Former state Sen. Tom Hayden - who wrote California's law for dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, turtles, potbellied pigs and others - said he was glad the governor changed his mind.
"So I'm going to put my barking dogs on their leashes and I'm going to counsel the owners of potbellied pigs to call off their intended assault," said Hayden.
Pamelyn Ferdin, spokesperson for the Animal Defense League of Los Angeles, spent today organizing the group's 3,000 members and working with other organizations to plan a statewide protest this weekend.
"The entire humane community is organizing," said Ferdin, whose organization describes itself as a "militant, grass-roots, animal rights" group. "Wherever [Schwarzenegger] goes to speak, we'll be outside with photos showing dead animals, animals being dragged to the kill room."
As part of a cash-saving measure, Schwarzenegger had proposed reversing the so-called Hayden Act, which requires shelters to hold animals for a minimum of six days and forces people convicted of animal cruelty to pay for veterinary costs. The 1998 law also broadly requires the state's shelters to look for adoption homes instead of killing animals with haste.
The governor proposed a change in the law to allow birds, hamsters, potbellied pigs, rabbits, snakes, turtles and other animals that are not cats and dogs to be put to death immediately if the shelter favors that approach, animal rights groups said.
Schwarzenegger also would have eliminated a requirement that people convicted of animal cruelty be prohibited from owning a pet for three years and be forced to pay for medical care for the animals they have mistreated.
Shelters no longer would have been required to search for owners who have embedded microchips in their pets that store addresses and phone numbers.
The Schwarzenegger administration said repealing the Hayden Act could have saved local governments up to $14 million. As proposed, shelters would have been allowed to kill dogs and cats after holding them 72 hours, regardless of whether the shelters were open to the public during those three days.
But animal rights activists believed cats and dogs should not be sacrificed in an effort to save money amid the state's budget shortfall.
"It's sad they would put a price tag on the animals," said Kathy Riordan, a member of the Los Angeles Animal Services Commission and daughter of Schwarzenegger advisor and former Mayor Richard Riordan.
There were signs that Schwarzenegger was aware of how volatile the issue of animal protection could be.
Amid complaints from animal rights groups, the Schwarzenegger administration said it had been working to keep portions of the Hayden Act that do not cost local shelters money, such as requiring pets to be offered to nonprofit rescue groups before they are killed.
H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state's Department of Finance, said the administration would like to cut costs for local governments but also fix an unintended consequence that local governments said came because of the Hayden Act: overcrowding because shelters must hold even vicious dogs for up to six days. Subsequently, Palmer said, shelters have been forced to kill animals to make room for new animals than come in every day.
Under the current law, animals at shelters must be held at least four business days before the shelter can consider killing them. A stray animal must be kept at least six days if the shelter is open only Monday through Friday and does not offer evening hours.
The optional evening and weekend hours often give owners time to search for lost pets after work and allow nonprofit rescue workers time to search for dogs and cats to offer for adoption themselves. Nonprofit rescue shelters also pay government-run shelters to take cats and dogs and save them from death.
Some lawmakers have said Schwarzenegger should not repeal part of the law that requires people convicted of animal cruelty to pay the veterinary costs of the injured animal. That item is under discussion this week.
"If we repeal that, guess who has to pay for the cost? The taxpayers," said Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys) on Thursday. "We are overturning a policy I think most people would agree with and we are going to be costing the state money."
The state has been struggling with how to close a $15-billion shortfall, and counties and cities have been complaining that lawmakers continually put spending mandates on them without reimbursement. For counties, the requirement to hold cats and dogs has been a complaint since the Hayden Act passed.
Exactly how much local governments are being forced to spend because of the Hayden Act has been the subject of dispute for years. The Commission on State Mandates said two years ago that local governments are owed $79.2 million, a figure the state auditor later said was inflated.
Who pays for state laws about animal shelters is now the subject of a lawsuit and a bill in the Legislature.