Politech is the oldest Internet resource devoted to politics and
technology. Launched in 1994 by Declan
McCullagh, the mailing list has chronicled the growing
intersection of culture, technology, politics, and law. Since
2000, so has the Politech web site.
Calif. bill makes it a crime NOT to implant pets with chips
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 10:00:03 -0800
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: FC: Calif. bill makes it a crime NOT to implant pets with chips
- From: Declan McCullagh <email@example.com>
[I'll include some news coverage below. Pet microchips have been around
since the 1980s, as you'll see, but requiring them through force of law
seems to be a new -- and incomprehensibly bizzare -- idea. "First pets,
then humans!" --Declan]
BILL NUMBER: SB 236
INTRODUCED BY Senator O'Connell
FEBRUARY 14, 2001
An act to add Section 32005 to the Food and Agricultural Code,
relating to animals.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 236, as introduced, O'Connell. Dogs and cats: micro-chip:
Existing law regulates the ownership of dogs and cats, as
The bill would make it a crime for any person to own, harbor, or
keep any dog or cat over the age of 4 months, unless that dog or cat
has been micro-chipped and the owner's identification has been
entered into a national registry approved by the Department of Food
and Agriculture. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program upon local governments.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 32005 is added to the Food and Agricultural
Code, to read:
32005. It is unlawful for any person to own, harbor, or keep any
dog or cat over the age of four months, unless that dog or cat has
been micro-chipped and the owner's identification has been entered
into a national registry approved by the Department of Food and
SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the
only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district
will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction,
eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime
or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government
Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of
Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 12, 2001, Monday
MICROCHIPS IN PETS? FOES HOWL
Bill Ainsworth; STAFF WRITER
SACRAMENTO -- To some it seems like a sinister, Orwellian plot: The
government requires pet owners to imbed microchips in their dogs and cats
revealing the owner's name, phone number and address. Those who resist face
But backers insist the proposal isn't some Big Brother nightmare. Instead,
they say, it's a way to use advanced technology to rescue tens of thousands
of animals and save millions of taxpayer dollars on animal shelter
The plan is contained in new legislation, Senate Bill 236, by state Sen.
Jack O'Connell, D-Santa Barbara, a pet owner and longtime legislative
champion of animal rights.
"It will save money and help lost pets be reunited with their loving
owners," O'Connell said. "It's just good public policy."
Some opponents argue that the legislation invades the privacy of millions of
pet owners. Others say a law requiring microchips is too extreme, especially
for cats, which don't even require licenses in most parts of the state.
"It's total overkill," said John Folting, a retired San Diego resident and
member of the Cat Fanciers Association. "How can you criminalize something
The San Diego Union-Tribune
January 5, 1989, Thursday
Marketed by Infonet Identification and Recovery System in Los Angeles, the
new device consists of a small microchip injected just under the skin of cats,
dogs and other pets. Veterinarians say the procedure is painless.
Under the Infonet plan, animal shelters that find stray pets scan them with
an instrument resembling a supermarket barcode reader. If the scanner
a chip, the finder dials ...
... 40, and the annual service fee to be listed with the registry is $11.
According to Infonet, most city and county animal shelters in California will
be using the scanning system by this spring.
Dog Bytes Say More Than Bark
by Julia Scheeres
2:00 a.m. Mar. 15, 2001 PST
Proposed legislation in California would require microchips to be
implanted in cats and dogs to reduce the number of former pets killed
in the state's animal shelters each year.
Under Senate Bill 236, introduced by state Sen. Jack O'Connell
(D-Santa Barbara), dogs and cats would be "chipped" and the owner's
identification entered in a national registry.
The bill is slated for debate in the judiciary committee next month.
"Our position is that anything that helps animals, we support," said
Bob Reder, program coordinator for the HSUS. "We don't have hard
numbers and statistics on things like backyard breeders and puppy
mills. It'll be good to find out who we're targeting."
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact.
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Return to politechbot.com