Debate over pet ‘ownership’ unleashed in council chambers
If animal activists have their way, there may never again be a pet owner in Santa Monica.
Animal rights proponents asked the City Council early Wednesday morning to officially change the way it refers to people with pets. Rather than call them pet “owners” the group wants them to be called pet “guardians.”
Activists say the difference would change the way people treat animals and perhaps fewer pets would be abused.
Bill Dyer, a representative of “In Defense of Animals,” a non-profit animal rights group, said the change would also bring prestige to Santa Monica and benefit the way children think of pets. He said the wording is endorsed by more than 200 animal groups nationwide.
Dyer read a letter from Santa Monica resident and animal rights proponent Brendan O’Brien who could not attend the meeting that said, “Language is no trivial matter. How we use it effects how we think and therefore how we act.”
Dr. Elliot Katz, a veterinarian and founder of IDA, which has more than 80,000 members, said there are two tragedies in contemporary society. The first is that millions of animals die each year in shelters, and the other is abuse of women and children, he said.
But after his one-minute time allotment, a muzzle was put on Katz’ presentation and he was unable to read a letter he prepared for the meeting. City Councilman Michael Feinstein promised Katz would have more time to speak this fall when the matter returns to the council.
Seven cities and the state of Rhode Island have either made the change or added the word “guardian” so the language reads “owner/guardian,” Dyer said. Those seven cities are San Francisco, West Hollywood, Berkeley, Boulder, Colo., Amherst, Mass., Sherwood, Ark., and a city in Wisconsin.
City Council members agreed to consider the change and instructed city staff to write two ordinances — one would include “guardian” and the other would have “owner/guardian.” The council will decide then which one to adopt.
“This is a good, feel-good (effort) and I understand the ultimate end to it, but people have to take responsibility for their animals,” said City Councilwoman Pam O’Connor. “People own animals in our society and I want to be sure that they take that responsibility.”
“This is a good, feel-good (effort) and I understand the ultimate end to it, but people have to take responsibility for their animals.” — — PAM O’CONNOR City Councilwoman
Dyer said changing the wording would not have any adverse legal effects on the community. People with pets would have the same rights and responsibilities under the new arrangement that they have now, he said.
The ordinance would only be an addition to the city’s code and wouldn’t result in any criminal penalties if a person called themselves a “pet owner.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 11, 2003. Read the original PDF.