You can find that here: http://capwiz.com/alleycat/iss.....d=11823076

Bill supporters have constantly denied that AB1634 would have any negative impact on feral cat caregivers, well today someone simply called the Sacramento city and county ACs to see what they have to say and here is what she found out:

“
After getting … perturbed … about AC’s attitude towards friends caring for other friends’ dogs during the daytime, I decided to find out about feral cats. That gal on my AR rescue list was pretty determined that AB 1634 had nothing to do with ferals, Alley Cat Allies’ opposition nonwithstanding. So yes - I called Sacramento City and County Animal Control again, and talked with different staffers.

Sacramento County AC said if feral cat caretakers feed, treat, or care for in any way one, two, ten or a couple hundred feral cats for 30 days: the caretaker OWNS and POSSESSES those ferals, and will be subject to enforcement of AB 1634.

Sacramento City AC said exactly the same thing - and that was coming from a gal who identified herself as the feral cat ‘person’ for the shelter. Didn’t catch her name or title. She at least was kind and a bit apologetic.

After being told this by both Sac City and County, I called all the Senators’ offices again. Some were abrupt and didn’t want to talk - apparently they’re getting LOTS of calls right now, and my impression is that virtually all are OPPOSED to the bill. (yay!). But now they know that Sacramento (and probably AC’s around the state) will treat feral cat colony caretakers exactly the same as someone with too many pets in their home.”

More information that the politicos need to hear, whether they want to listen or not. Off to my fax machine!

Some state Senators won’t even record faxes and calls from people not in their DISTRICT, but still in the state.

Do you think I should do it anyway?