According to the American Pet Products Association (2024),  approximately $140 billion nationwide is generated from pet related income. California accounts for 36.8% U.S. pet-industry earnings. That's $16 billion annually that California pockets from our pets. However, despite this immense economic value, only $30.35 million a year is budgeted towards animal care/safety in California. That's 0.1% of pet-revenue returned to them. Moreover, we have no set principles for general animal welfare, effectively reducing and wasting that $30 million allocation.   

This year, our Los Angeles community encountered a situation where a small 10-15 pound dog named Hailey was being mistreated in broad daylight. The act was recorded and sent to animal services, and the community was outraged. But to the thousands of viewers' deep dismay, there were no legal repercussions. Why? Under current California animal cruelty laws (California Penal Code § 597), enforcement or proper investigation requires immediate life-endangering acts to pets. Even then, witnesses are not considered without video or photo evidence to accompany their statement. Finally, the courts have not set a fixed standard for “unnecessary suffering”. 

This experience with Hailey is not unique. The U.S. has no general federal duty of care for private ownership of animals. The Federal Animal Welfare Act (1966) only protects animals in commercial and research contexts. On a state level, California laws on animal abuse are minimal, narrowly defined, and messily fragmented between different statutes.  So long as this weak framework remains, pet suffering will continue to fall through the cracks. Our state and national officers will continue to legally turn a blind eye and leave these voiceless creatures vulnerable.

 The UK, on the other hand, via the Animal welfare Act of 2006, explicitly imposes positive and clear legal duties of all vertebrate ownership: 

• Citizens must take “reasonable steps” to meet an animal’s welfare needs. 
• Encourages proactive enforcement before severe harm
• Violations of duty are offenses, enforceable by authorities (e.g. criminal or civil sanctions) 

It's time for a change. The petition is simple, and threefold: 

1. Create a California Animal Welfare act that would establish a principle-based duty of care (new legislation)
2. Amend the Federal Animal Welfare Act (1966) to unify minimum standards of animal care 
3. Increase state budget to allocate at least 1% of pet-related revenue towards animal care and welfare programs. 

• California should advocate for a parallel federal financial commitment to adopt a similar standard nationwide.
• Will establish standards for both the commercial uses of animal and private ownership of pets as well. 
• i.e. codify “Freedoms” (freedom from hunger, discomfort, pain/injury, distress) Not just punish cruelty, but establish a proactive duty to provide for an animal’s welfare.  

If successful, these changes would stop the requirement of severe life threatening harm to ensue action. Instead, our state would have clear and proactive measures to hold private pet owners liable, as well as the resources to do it. Our pets, who contribute enormous emotional and financial benefits to our society, deserve as much.