CA Manditory Spay/Neuter Bill

[savethebulliedbreeds]

The one thing I don't get is how everyone can sit there and say that something needs to be done about puppy mills and BYB's and then when something is going to get done about it some people are against it.

I do not think that spay/neuter bills are ALL driven by Animal Rights Extremists, although I cannot say much on this one because I really have no knowledge as to where it came from. I think bills like this done properly are a good thing. The government just has to make sure that they find a way to leave responsible breeders out of it.

 

[Laurelin]

They can't leave responsible breeders out of it. How do you determine who is and who isn't responsible? It's just basically a tax (at least the Louisville one is) and everyone is forced to pay. Under Louisville, I'd have to get an 'animal dealer's license' because I have more than 2 intact animals regardless of species.

Plus, I believe it's $50 a year to keep an animal intact. It's not going to stop puppymills. It may stop a few BYB and responsible breeders. Everyone else will just pay the money.

All of the bills I've seen like this are driven by AR extremists. Don't take things for face value, look into them yourselves. They're pretty ridiculous when you look at them and begin thinking of how it will actually work.

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

Like I said I don't know how your bills are down there and obviously they have gone about them wrong. Something needs to be done to prevent puppy mills and BYB's from even starting and finishing the ones that already exist.

I am sure there are better ways to go about it but I don't think a properly done bill to make pet owners spay and neuter their animals is a bad thing.

I know of a organization that would like to push for something along that line here in Canada and I know from experience that they are not Animal Rights Extremists. Please don't lump all that want a bill to prevent idiots from breeding their dogs all together.

 

[whatszmatter]

Please don't lump all that want a bill to prevent idiots from breeding their dogs all together.

But you see, laws like this do very little, and realistically they do nothing. The same idiots that don't keep their dogs from barking all day and night, the same idiots that leave their dogs chained day and night, the same idiots that don't leash their dogs when they have no training, will be the same idiots that dont' s/n their pets and will still have the "oops" litters that we have now.

The people that pick up their animal waste, already properly confine their dogs, already use leashes and train their dogs, already keep their dogs from bothering the neighbors, will be the same ones that already have their pets S/N or else are responsible enough to keep an intact animal. Enough Gov't internevtion

 

[Laurelin]

It works the same as BSL. The ones that comply are the ones that could responsibly own the dogs in question.

 

[whatszmatter]

It works the same as BSL. The ones that comply are the ones that could responsibly own the dogs in question.

Exactly how I feel. THey already have tons of laws that do nothing. There was a case around here a few years ago, the people lived in such filth with so many dogs, the house was condemned and the dogs were taken, and returned (some of them) and it happened again a few years later. The same family, more dogs and another condemed house and the animals were confiscated this time, but I wouldn't be surpised to hear abou them again in a few years.

ANother case involved a former police officer and drugs and fighting pitbulls, This man committed more abuses against animals and humans than I care to live next to and yet he again was able to own dogs and do it all again. Then after the 2nd time of being convicted they actually were going to return some of the dogs back to him again. These were from a group that most had to be put down because of temperment, some were missing parts of ears and lots of scars that replaced chewed off flesh, and after the 2nd time this person was going to recieve some of the dogs back again???? WTF??? how can that happen??? in the end the humane society actually paid 9 Grand to the criminals to keep the dogs in their custody, and that was after keeping and caring for 40 some dogs (some put to sleep) for the past year. That's what is seriously screwed up.

There are other cases of mills and such that have dogs living in feces and with chains growing into their necks, enough cruelty violations to shut them down, but they don't. Instead, people that love and care for their animals have to jump thru more hoops.

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

Yes, I understand what you are saying to a point. What needs to be done is have a bill that is written properly and the appropriate people to enforce it. Unfortunately with the other laws that were mentioned there is not the people to enforce them. I still think it would be a good thing it done properly and enforced properly.

 

[coteyr]

Umm, I don't know this bill stirs mixed feelings. I like my counties laws. A licence (all dogs must have one) costs 10 bucks if s/n 100 if not. It seems simple enough. Enforcing really doesn't happen though. If your dog is "caught" without a licence then it will be s/n before you can get it back. You will also have to pay for the s/n and theres a pretty big fine for it as well. As a side effect you don't see many stray dogs running around.

 

[ravennr]

Just like every other law trying to go over top of current animal welfare acts, this will not work, for reasons already stated.

It's already too much for officers and the government to handle, adding another law that they cannot enforce isn't going to do anything.

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

I think it is up to us (responsible dog owners who want to see people stop breeding their animals for money etc.) to figure out something that will work. Im sorry but sitting around complaining about the problem and then complaining about the government trying to do something about it, just isn't doing any good.

Does anyone have any ideas that would help fix the problem? Other than education of course. We have been trying to do that forever and it doesn't seem to be working.

 

[Laurelin]

To me it works like this.

We have this problem- irresponsible people with intact dogs. Let's ban intact dogs.

Sounds a lot like this:

We have this problem- irresponsible people with pit bulls. Let's ban pit bulls.

Neither one addresses the actual problem nor will the people breaking the law care.

But wait, you can get a license to have an intact dog- pay a fee no other pet owners have to pay. (For me in Louisville, I think it's about $400 + a year) What if in order to keep a certain breed, you had to have a license and pay a lot more for it than other dog owners do? Do you think that would work? Not likely.

That and I don't like the government telling me what invasive surgeries my animals have to have done on them. I want to decide that for myself along with deciding what else is best for my animals.

Here's some interesting sites bringing up good points:
http://www.pet-law.com/euth7_MSN.html
http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3105 AKC article on Louisville
http://www.nopitbullbans.com/?p=66
http://www.louisville-pets.com/legislation.html
http://www.louisvillekennelclub.com/community/
http://www.napbta.com/bsl.html
http://www.saveourdogs.net/ab1634.html

 

[very_vizsla]

a ban like that would make pet dogs extinct in california. is that what the politicians want?

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

So no one has any ideas then.

This is my point. Obviously what is currently being done is NOT working. Something needs to be figured out.

In my town you HAVE to register your dogs. It costs more to register them if they aren't s/n'erd and/or they don't have vaccinations.

Guess what. Even though it is law there are people that do not register their animals.

So I understand where you are coming from that it may not help because the people that don't care aren't going to do it anyways.

My problem is still that I am sick and tired of hearing people complain about this problem yet do not do a darn thing to try and fix it and when the government does what they think is right to help the problem, people complain about that too.

If you don't like what the government is doing then maybe we should think of ways to help out. Thats all. Not whine and cry and then not address the problem.

In all honesty I would like something to be brought in saying that every dog owner must take a course on proper animal care BEFORE they are even allowed to own a dog. I would love to see this in my city. I would also like to see manditory spay/neuter policy here. Our SPCA here just finally implemented spay and neuter policy at the shelter. Before it was a "if you want to you get a discount" type of thing.

I just really think that you need to take lessons for operating a car etc, why should you not need it to own a dog. They can be just as dangerous in the wrong hands.

 

[RD]

I'd rather deal with the overpopulation issue than see the breeds I love go downhill because a law makes it difficult for the responsible breeders to produce good dogs. This law will NOT affect scum and mills. They will either dodge the law altogether or just shell out the small amount of money and rake in their huge amount of profit. This is the root of the problem - shifty, high-volume BYBs and full-blown puppy mills are not there for new owners at all during the life of their dogs, and many of these dogs DO wind up in shelters. I would say that most of the purebred dogs that end up in shelters are from high-volume breeders and not clueless BYBs with good, but misguided intentions. But no, this law will not affect the people who are in it for the money. It'll affect those who are in it for the breed, but have limited funds.

I also would like to point out that the govt will allow certain dogs to remain intact, but only if they have earned a title. Your sheepdog is in the top 10 at the national finals? Too bad, he doesn't have the title to show for it; neuter him. A poor quality dog has an AKC CD? Sure, breed him.

Mandatory spay/neuter for shelter dogs is an absolute must. The shelter I volunteer at does not relinquish dogs until they have been s/n. Very young puppies, while they are allowed to go to their new homes as a foster, are microchipped and tagged as property of the shelter until proof of spay/neuter has been provided. The dog must be spayed/neutered by 6 months of age. I would like to see something similar to this done in all shelters.

 

[Laurelin]

Actually one I read you had to have competed with your dog in a sanctioned show in the past two years. What happens when you retire your dog?

 

[OutlineACDs]

This is the root of the problem - shifty, high-volume BYBs and full-blown puppy mills are not there for new owners at all during the life of their dogs, and many of these dogs DO wind up in shelters. I would say that most of the purebred dogs that end up in shelters are from high-volume breeders and not clueless BYBs with good, but misguided intentions. But no, this law will not affect the people who are in it for the money. It'll affect those who are in it for the breed, but have limited funds.

I read somwhere that the statistics AKC has are that less than 10% of registered dogs come from "reputable breeders". 70% of their registration numbers are from BYB's. The rest are puppy mills/high volume BYB's and ILP numbers. So, I beg to differ that the BYB isn't contributing more than their fair share.

 

[OutlineACDs]

Actually one I read you had to have competed with your dog in a sanctioned show in the past two years. What happens when you retire your dog?

You could always have semen collected and stored?

 

[DryCreek]

My solution....

Take all the money they are spending on writing up these bills, laws, legislations, press releases etc.... and the money that will be required to enact and enforce them, and give it to the people who are supposed to enforce the laws already in place.

Could you imagine how the millions spent on the BSL Law issue in Ontario could have been used for the enforcement of the existing laws that already regulate aggressive animals?

What the system lacks is regulation and enforcement. Pay them to go door to door to see who has their dogs registered or not. Pay a slightly higher fee to keep intact animals. High fines for unregistered dogs. Use the money to keep records of those who have intact animals and how many they have. A hobby breeder of quality animals does not have 30 or 40 intact animals.

The only reason the existing laws don't work is due to lack of money for enforcement.

The majority of the dogs in the shelters were dropped there by owners for usually extremely lame reasons. It's more of an irresponsible owner problem than a breeder one. As long as people keep buying pups, people will keep breeding them for money. Supply and demand issues. The people buying dogs need to be educated, and until that happens BYB and puppy mills will thrive.

 

[~Jessie~]

That's all we need, just more government telling us what to do. When are people going to learn that more regulation doesn't help anything, all the while we slowly give our rights away...

Awful idea in my opinion!!!

I completely agree =/ Also, I think it's awful to require neutering at 4 months of age.

 

[Laurelin]

You could always have semen collected and stored?

Not for a bitch.