Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to ban nontherapeutic cat declawing in California
Summary
AB 867, authored by Assemblymember Lee, would prohibit declawing (amputation of a cat’s distal phalanx) except for medically necessary procedures; the Senate committee voted to refer the bill to Appropriations after extended testimony from veterinarians, advocacy groups and veterinary associations.
The Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee on June 23 voted to send AB 867, Assemblymember Lee’s measure to prohibit nontherapeutic cat declawing statewide, to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Assemblymember Lee described declawing as a surgery equivalent to amputating the last phalanx of a human finger and said the bill would make that procedure unlawful unless it is performed for a medical purpose to protect the cat’s health. Veterinarians and animal-welfare groups testified in support, describing the procedure’s effects and urging the committee to pass the bill. Dr. Jennifer Conrad, a licensed veterinarian, called the operation “deknuckling” and said it causes predictable, significant pain; Dr. Barbara Hodges of the Humane Veterinary Medical Association urged an I vote and cited states that have already enacted similar bans.
Supporters included the Paw Project, San Diego Humane Society, Animal Legal Defense Fund and cities such as West Hollywood and Burbank. Gary Cooper of the Paw Project identified the organization as a sponsor.
Opposition and technical concerns were raised by the California Veterinary Medical Association and the California Veterinary Medical Board. Christina DeCaro, representing the CVMA, said the profession should set practice standards and warned of a “slippery slope” in legislative regulation of surgical practices. Jessica Seiferman, executive officer of the Veterinary Medical Board, told the committee that the board opposes the bill on the principle that decisions about specific veterinary procedures should remain with veterinarians and animal owners and that the existing practice act requires humane, competent care.
Committee members examined frequency and scope of the procedure in California. Dr. Grant Miller (CVMA) said neither California veterinary school teaches declawing now and that membership surveys indicate most veterinarians no longer perform the surgery; he reported that of those who do, it is typically only one or two procedures per year. Senators raised concerns about the bill’s language and potential unintended impacts — for example, whether certain noninvasive alternatives such as nail caps would be affected; the author and witnesses agreed to clarify language as the bill proceeds.
The committee moved AB 867 forward. The clerk recorded the motion as passing; the item was placed on call for final clerical confirmation. The committee’s referral places the bill on a path to Senate Appropriations.
