On November 15, 2013, Best Friends Animal Society published its response to a California stakeholder group’s report on sheltering law and practice. The post, written by Gregory Castle, said the organization had submitted comments on all 23 recommendations before the feedback deadline. Best Friends backed much of the report’s direction, including appointment-based owner surrender, better shelter care standards, trap/neuter/return programs, and easier access for rescue groups. It did not endorse everything, and it raised three objections: the rules proposed for unidentified stray animals, the risk that aggressive licensing could increase shelter intake and killing, and the question of whether recommendations labeled voluntary best practices should carry legal force.
What Best Friends said about the report
Castle described the stakeholder group’s work as a potentially positive shift for California and for other states. The post argued that responsibility for sheltering animals had to be shared by public agencies and private organizations, and that the report’s recommendations pointed in that direction. The organization’s endorsement was qualified from the start. Castle wrote:
“Overall, we support the work of the group, and we’re happy to see a largely sensible set of recommendations put forward to realize the vision of the Hayden Act, while mitigating the seemingly routine suspension of certain elements of the law.”
That sentence is the clearest summary of the post’s stance: approval of the process and most of the proposals, with a specific concern about how the law had been run in practice.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems#1 Best Overall
The Hayden Act context
The report was written to examine California’s Hayden Act and recommend changes to policy and shelter practice. Best Friends’ account says that parts of the law had been suspended repeatedly because its reimbursable requirements added costs for local governments, in a state where reimbursement funding was limited. The organization’s goal in its commentary was to evaluate the law’s first 15 years and move shelter policy away from recurring budget suspensions.
An earlier Best Friends overview, published in September 2013, said the stakeholder group was formed after a proposal to repeal unfunded mandates that included Hayden provisions. That overview described the law’s central objectives as preventing the euthanasia of adoptable animals when suitable homes were available, and preventing the euthanasia of treatable animals.
These are Best Friends’ descriptions of the policy background. They are not an independent legal history of the statute.
What Best Friends supported
The organization welcomed four categories of recommendation. Each is described below as Best Friends framed it in 2013.
Recommended Free Tools
Appointment-based owner surrender
The practical argument was that an appointment system gives shelter staff time to discuss alternatives with owners and lets them plan intake against the space actually available. Walk-in surrenders at full capacity are hard to manage; scheduled ones are easier to handle.
Shelter care standards
Best Friends supported improved care standards for animals in shelters, presented as part of the report’s effort to make the law’s objectives achievable in practice rather than only on paper.
Rank #3
Trap/neuter/return
The organization backed trap/neuter/return programs, which fit its broader position on community cats, covered below.
Access for rescue organizations
Best Friends welcomed streamlined access for rescue groups, which could move animals out of shelters faster when those groups were ready to take them.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Three reservations
Unidentified stray animals
The report’s proposed rules for unidentified strays set faster adoption or rescue placement against an owner’s chance to reclaim a lost pet. Best Friends argued that immediate placement could be unfair to an owner whose animal had no identification. The organization’s earlier post also noted that shorter holding periods could help lifesaving and shelter capacity, so this is a policy conflict rather than a settled question. Best Friends did not present a single answer to it.
Rank #4
Licensing and intake
Best Friends warned that a licensing program implemented aggressively could increase the number of animals entering shelters and, with it, the number killed. The concern was about implementation. The post did not reject licensing as a goal.
Voluntary best practices
Some recommendations were labeled voluntary best practices. Best Friends argued that those recommendations should have legal force. Without it, the organization suggested, practices with clear public benefit could depend on individual agencies choosing to follow them.
The figures Best Friends cited
Best Friends’ 2013 posts quoted several numbers from the report or from its own commentary. They describe the conditions the group was reacting to in 2013, and they should be read with the attribution shown in the table.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Best Value
| Figure | What it describes | Attribution in the Best Friends post | Date of the post |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30% | Share of the California shelter population made up of owner surrenders | Stated in Best Friends’ summary of the stakeholder report | October 23, 2013 |
| 25% to 30% | Share of owner-surrender reasons described as minor problems that support might resolve | Experience-based commentary by Best Friends, not a named study statistic | October 23, 2013 |
| 71% | Share of cats taken into California shelters that were killed | Attributed to the report analysis as quoted by Best Friends | September 17, 2013 |
| 2% | Share of shelter cats returned to their owners | Attributed to the report by Best Friends | November 15, 2013 |
These figures are not independently verified in the posts, and the underlying report was not reviewed directly for this article. Treat them as the organization’s reading of 2013 data.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Community cats and the case for returning them outdoors
The September 2013 overview argued that community cats should be sterilized and returned outdoors rather than taken through ordinary shelter intake. The argument rested on the cat outcomes cited above: a large share of cats taken in were killed, and very few were returned to owners. Best Friends’ position was that trap/neuter/return was a better path for these animals than routine shelter processing. The report’s broader recommendations on cats were, in the organization’s view, one of its more useful contributions.
Policy trade-offs the posts leave open
Taken together, Best Friends’ posts identify the competing considerations that any reform of the law has to weigh. They do not resolve them.
| Proposal | Case for it | Concern Best Friends raised |
|---|---|---|
| Appointment-based owner surrender | Staff can discuss alternatives and match intake to available space | Not stated in the 2013 posts; welcomed as proposed |
| Rules for unidentified strays | Faster adoption or rescue placement; shorter holds may help lifesaving and capacity | Immediate placement may be unfair to owners whose animals lack identification |
| Licensing | Can support identification and accountability | Aggressive implementation could increase shelter intake and killing |
| Voluntary best practices | Allows flexibility for agencies | Recommendations labeled voluntary should have legal force |
Any evaluation of these options has to account for animal welfare and lifesaving outcomes, owner rights and reclaim opportunity, public safety and shelter responsibility, shelter capacity and operating costs, the risk of unintended effects on intake, and whether a recommendation is enforceable at all.
Reading the 2013 posts alongside current data
The figures above describe the report period. To find current California shelter numbers, start with Best Friends’ California dashboard rather than the 2013 posts. According to the dashboard, its 2025 national dataset combined data from the Shelter Pet Data Alliance, shelter websites, direct information from shelters, state records, and public-records requests. Where shelter data is missing, the dashboard estimates some of it using historical and community information. Individual shelter data is updated monthly when possible.
Best Friends also publishes a national report on its data reporting approach, most recently covering 2024. That report explains how the organization gathers information. It does not replace the 2013 stakeholder report, and it should not be used to infer current California rates. For those, check the dashboard alongside state and local shelter records.
Quick Recap
- Use the 2013 posts to understand how Best Friends reacted to the report and why.
- Use the California dashboard for present-day estimates, noting that some values are estimated and updated monthly when possible.
- Check local shelter and state records before drawing conclusions about a specific county or shelter.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
