Is this bill different than Mancuso's AB 1634 "CA Healthy Pets Act?" Currently SB 250 requires an "owner or custodian" to provide a certificate of sterility, unless written confirmation is obtained from a licensed veterinarian that serious bodily harm, or death would result from spaying, or neutering the animal. California animal owners are wary of a change in the legal status of animals as a result of the use of a term other than owner. Custodian does not have a legal definition and is not legally equivalent to the term guardian. Still, the use of the word custodian will cause reticence for some to support SB 250. I currently hold a watch position for this bill.