Error
  • JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 69
Thursday, 20 August 2009 00:26

Supes Reject No Kill Animal Legislation

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)
slide2.pngJackson – John Vail (VALE), Director of Amador County Animal Control, rallied the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday not to support a resolution being considered by the California Legislature that urges local animal service agencies to embrace the philosophy of the “No Kill Movement.” No Kill, as defined in Assembly Resolution Number 74, is a movement “aimed at ending the mass killing of sheltered animals.” Reading line by line, Vail commented on all aspects of the resolution proposed by Assembly Member Anthony Portantino, a Pasadena Democrat. Vail said the document contains “no definition for the mass killing of animals” and “it mandates local government take up care of stray animals for financial reasons.” Vail said local organizations, like A-PAL, along with assistance from government entities like the Board of Supervisors, already follow many of the standards recommended in the resolution, including temperament testing, animal socialization programs and rescue group access to sheltered animals. Contrary to statements in the resolutions, he said it is counter-productive to try and rehabilitate feral cats. He quoted an Audubon Society article on the subject that said 200 million songbirds are killed by feral cats each year. The resolutions states “citizens have a right to have their government spend their tax dollars not on programs and services that kill animals but on those that save and enhance the lives of animals and protect animals from cruelty.” Vail said Amador County has not been spending taxpayer money on local programs after the mandatory holding period. “This (resolution) is insulting and it assumes we have untrained, ignorant employees.” Supervisor Brian Oneto said “there are too many programs and too many laws. This is not a decision the state should be poking their nose into.” Supervisor Richard Forster proposed drafting a letter stating the county’s position and current “proposals that have been working.” The Supervisors unanimously agreed. Story by Alex Lane This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Read 1095 times Last modified on Friday, 04 September 2009 02:06