No-Kill Movement

“Six years ago, then California State Senator Tom Hayden introduced legislation to move California’s animal shelter system further in the direction of saving, rather than taking, animals’ lives.”

So begins “The Uncertain Present and Future of the Hayden Shelter Reform Legislation of 1998” by UCLA Law Professor, Taimie Bryant.

Welcomed by some, castigated by others, the Hayden legislation has gone down a rocky road over the past six years.

The law has been ignored, misapplied and brought before the Commission on State Mandates through a “test claim” filed by the County of Los Angeles. It’s also been responsible for saving thousands of lives.

As a result of the Commission’s findings, the Legislature has suspended the “holding period” portion of the law for the current fiscal year. Legislative provisions that have not been suspended include:

• the requirement that shelters give owner-relinquished animals who aren’t suffering irremediably an opportunity for adoption or redemption instead of killing them immediately
  
• the requirement that shelters release animals to Internal Revenue Code sec. 501(c)(3) animal rescue and adoption groups that have requested an animal prior to his/her euthanasia
  
• the statewide policy preference for adoption and owner-redemption
  
• the explicit provision that shelters, including public shelters, are “depositaries of living animals” responsible for treating those animals “kindly”
  
• the requirement of pre or post-seizure (of one’s animal) hearings if an owner requests one.
  
• the requirement that shelters use all reasonable means of checking for owner-identification
  

In the meantime, California’s Department of Finance has filed a lawsuit contesting the Commission on State Mandates decision and the Bureau on State Audits is questioning some of the Commission’s findings as well.

To read the full story that has as many twists and turns as an epic, click here.