California drops controversial dog boarding ruling

CA does not require businesses to allow a pet in boarding rooms

California state agency appears to have quietly dropped a controversial ruling on dogs boarding.

A spokesman for the California department of Fish and Wildlife said the C.D.C.E. ruling issued in December does not require businesses to allow a pet in boarding rooms.

Following several animal groups petitioning a series of lawsuits against California state agencies, the Fish and Wildlife department issued a news release noting that the December ruling, which required hotels and dog boarding facilities to allow pet interconnections, had been rescinded.

The agency cited “new legislative direction” that allows state agencies “to study new initiatives to help keep Californians safe.”

Since the department finalized its ruling, a number of animal rights activists have reached out to read the now-reversed language, asking that the plaintiffs withdraw their pending lawsuits.

C.D.C.E spokeswoman Mary Anne Jones told the local press that “we stand by what we said a year ago that none of the relevant sections are part of the new law,” and that “we’re looking at what the legislature is considering” in dealing with the matter.

The plaintiffs’ attorney, Claremont attorney Dan Biscuzzo, disputed the agency’s assertions that a 2018 update to the legislature’s Animal Welfare and Rescue Act and a 2018 state lawsuit “do not affect our claims.” He added that the Fish and Wildlife department refused to contact him with the issue, and that “all communications between us and Fish and Wildlife have been completely confidential.”

“California needs more protections for the millions of dogs and cats that face daily physical abuse and abuse at the hands of airline and other pet owners,” Doug O’Neill, senior vice president of advocacy for Humane Society International, said in a press release following the news. “Given the clearly harmful effects of dog violence, dog butts in planes, and dogs dying in airport kennels, the state’s lawmakers should not have repealed this crucial requirement without legal justification.”

This article originally appeared on In These Times.

Leave a Comment