New Law Limits Authority of Humane Officers : Legislation: Governor signs bill to restrict their powers and to boost screening requirements for those who wish to carry firearms.

Gov. Pete Wilson has signed a bill increasing training requirements and limiting the powers of state humane officers, little-known quasi-police who have been criticized as operating without training or supervision.

The law was written by Assemblyman Louis Caldera (D-Los Angeles), who said he took action after reading a Times series on problems with humane officers, who are sometimes unpaid or low-paid volunteers who enforce animal-abuse laws.

Under a little-known civil code, hundreds of humane officers have been credentialed under the sponsorship of private animal welfare groups. After securing the approval of a local judge--usually routinely granted--they were authorized to carry guns, wear badges and uniforms, execute search warrants, make arrests and confiscate and destroy private property. They were under no state supervision and there is no central registry of who they are or how many have been commissioned.

“Humane officers . . . are permitted to carry out duties normally performed by local law enforcement personnel with little screening and training and without any sort of public oversight,” Caldera said Monday.

“This 80-year-old statute must be updated to prevent fringe groups from abusing this law and to ensure that humane officers are properly trained to carry firearms.”

Caldera introduced the legislation, signed Thursday by the governor, shortly after The Times reported that the Mercy Crusade of Van Nuys was the subject of state and federal investigations into reports the animal welfare group bought as much as $100,000 worth of assault-style guns.

Caldera’s bill, which takes effect Jan. 1, creates two classes of humane officers--armed and unarmed. Those who want to carry firearms will have to meet the same screening and training requirements as other California law enforcement officers, a requirement that currently does not apply to them.

Current humane officers will have six months to complete the training or stop carrying guns. Those commissioned in the future will have to supply the court that appoints them with proof of training.

The legislation also limits humane officers’ authority to the county in which they are commissioned, unless they secure permission from the local sheriff to take action in another county. Currently, officers have statewide powers.

In addition, the law requires humane societies to maintain a liability insurance policy to cover damage awards against them “for bodily injury or property damage,” and to be incorporated for at least six months before appointing humane officers.

“These requirements create assurances that only legitimate organizations dedicated to animal welfare will be authorized to appoint humane officers in California,” Caldera said.

Another condition, which takes effect immediately, requires humane associations who appoint officers to keep records of their training and authorizes the state’s courts, attorney general and the Humane Assn. of California to review the records, said Dan Reeves, a senior consultant for Caldera.

The legislation also empowers local law enforcement officers and the animal-rights groups that nominate humane officers to revoke their status for any illegal conduct.

The law drew mixed reactions from humane officer associations, especially in response to the one-county limit on their authority.

“We’re certainly not delighted with it,” said Eric Sakach, director of the West Coast regional office of the Humane Society of the United States. “Previously the state law required that a humane officer was empowered as a peace officer throughout the state to intervene in animal cruelty cases,” Sakach said.

“But now a humane officer must first obtain the permission of a sheriff before they go into another county, and that can become a problem in these sorts of situations when moments, minutes, and hours can mean the difference between animals continuing to suffer or dying.”

Sakach, who supports the portion of the bill that calls for increased training, said that investigations into cockfighting and dogfights frequently extend into other jurisdictions, as do surveillance operations of the transportation of livestock. As a result, Sakach predicted the new law will create problems down the road for some agencies.

“At this point we’re going to adopt a wait-and-see attitude,” he said.

Other groups are more optimistic.

“We’re pleased with the signing of the bill,” said Rick Johnson, president of the Humane Assn. of California, which represents local humane societies and their officers. “It allows for more accountability and it strengthens the need and requirements of training.”

Johnson said he has no concern over the one-county limit.

“It puts us in line with all other law enforcement agencies in California, which I think is reasonable,” he said.