UPDATE 3/27/25: AB 928 has passed through the Agriculture committee. It will now be voted on by the Judiciary Committee on April 8, 2025. It is absolutely imperative that every organization and individual submits a Position Letter in opposition to AB 928 by 5 PM ON TUESDAY, APRIL 1 , to be entered into the legislative analysis that committee members will read before taking up a vote.

California bill AB 928, which will restrict rooster ownership in rural areas where they are currently allowed, is a horrible, anti-rooster piece of proposed legislation that will be heard by the Agriculture Committee on Weds., March 26, 2025. Please send a message to members of the committee asking them to please oppose this regressive bill!

TALKING POINTS:

  • There is a horrible, chronic problem of unwanted pet roosters

  • Most multi-rooster properties belong to rooster rescuers, not cockfighters

  • You should not punish ordinary pet roosters for the misdeeds of cockfighters anymore than you should punish all dogs to address organized dogfighting.

  • Regarding HPAI, avian influenza: There is no known case of HPAI in the U.S. that has been spread by the movement of gamecocks. The main vector of HPAI by far is migrating waterfowl in the spring and fall.
    Among domesticated fowl, factory farms— not private chicken owners (including cockfighters)— are responsible for almost 100% of poultry movement (and potential disease spread).

  • People who want to target cockfighting should focus instead on Calif.’s cockfighting law, which treats most cases as a misdemeanor and is considered one of the weakest in the nation.

  • This bill discriminates against people who cannot afford acreage in California. No one needs a full acre to house 3 roosters. There are plenty of happy, harmonious bachelor flocks of dozens of roosters who live on less than one acre. Acreage is less important that environmental complexity for happy flocks.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear Committee Member, 

As a animal lover who supports rooster rescue efforts, I urge you to OPPOSE AB 928, which would kill far more roosters than those that it might potentially help. By severely restricting the number of roosters allowed on farms and rural properties, AB 928 would decimate placement options for the countless thousands of pet roosters seeking homes every year.

AB 928 claims to target illegal cockfighting operations but it would punish the ordinary people on ordinary farms who — in the overwhelming wave of unwanted pet roosters—are the only feasible placement option for these hundreds of thousands of cast-offs from the backyard chicken industry.

The pet rooster overpopulation issue is mostly ignored (including by most large animal protection organizations), but it dwarves the issue of cockfighing in terms of numbers. That is largely because of the error rate in sexing chicks by hatcheries ensures that for every 5 baby hens sold as future egg layers, there is one baby rooster in the bunch who slipped through the screening process is shipped off to live with people in urban areas where rooster are illegal.

For example, Tractor Supply, the largest retailer of baby chicks to the general public, has stated that during its annual chick sales, its location in Santa Cruz county where roosters are mostly banned will sell an average of 2000 chicks a week — which (over the ten-week period that TSC sells chicks) amounts to 20,000 chicks annually. Given TSC’s own (conservative) estimate of a ten percent error rate in chick-sexing, that amounts to 2,000 unwanted “surprise” roosters per store every year in Santa Cruz county alone. With 91 locations in Calif., Tractor Supply alone (conservatively) accounts for over 180,000 unwanted “surprise” roosters annually in our state. That doesn’t even account for all the unwanted roosters contributed by other feed stores, online hatcheries, and backyard breeders, who collectively likely churn out 5 times that number of baby roosters.

Where are all these unwanted roosters supposed to go? It’s already hard enough to find a rooster-friendly farm in the country who still has room for another rooster. AB 928 would make it exponentially harder. There is no sanctuary on earth that can take in thousands of roosters every year, and it’s not fair to place that burden on the handful of them that are already overwhelmed with unwanted roosters.

If people want to target cockfighting, then they should focus on the state’s weak cockfighitng law, which provides for only misdemeanor penaities in most cases. Just as you wouldn’t punish poodles and golden retrievers because some people in some places use pit bulls in organized dogfighting, neither should you punish all roosters for the sake of going after cockfighters.

Pet roosters are so misunderstood by most people, and there is no reason to make things even harder for them and for the people who love them. For the sake of animal welfare, I urge you to please vote NO on AB 928