CA Manditory Spay/Neuter Bill

[Red_ACD_for_me]

They have a law for pitbulls around Boston that they have to be S/N, muzzled in public, signs posted on your door to beware of dog, and only two dogs to a household. It doesn't work There is nobody around 24/7 to keep track of these things. They started this law after all the attacks that happened one summer about 4 years ago. Putting these laws into place never works IMO. Good luck to them........ain't no one going to tell me when to chop off my dogs testicles

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

Yes, unfortunatly these bills don't seem to work. I really wish there were a way to have a law that did work. That made all the responsible breeders happy and took care of the rest of the idiots.

*IF* something like this could work I would be all for it. That is why I said we need to start thinking of ways to stop these puppymills and BYB'ers from producing tens of thousands of dogs each year.

I guess it comes down to not having the money to properly enforce the laws.

It is just like our dangerous dog act we have here in Saskatchewn. We have the most strict laws in the country. For some reason or another though they are almost never enforced.

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

I know this really has nothing to do with the OP post but here is the Saskatchewan Dangerous Dog Legislation in a nutshell. Its a pretty straighforward legislation and they still have problems enforcing it. So I completely understand where you guys are all coming from. I still think that if done correctly and enforced properly, that it wouldn't be a horrible thing.

The following situations are offences under the legislation and may result in a fine and/or imprisonment:

*Owning an animal that attacks, bites, injures or kills a person or domestic animal without provocation.

*Not complying with a court order specifying conditions for keeping a dangerous animal;

*Owning an animal for purposes of animal fighting or training and encouraging an animal to make unprovoked attacks on people or domestic animal.

A person found guilty of any of these offences may be liable to a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for up to six months, and an order for destruction of the animal.

Exceptions:

An animal will not be declared dangerous if the actions occured while the animal was:

*Performing police work, or

*Working as a guard animal on commercial property, securely enclosed by a fence to prevent the animal's escape and children from entering.


Unfortunatly, even with this legislation in place, because it is not enforced communities have still gone ahead with BSL type laws. I completely don't understand it because ANY dog that bites is considered dangerous so why need the BSL?

 

[Bahamutt99]

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

But pet dogs come from every litter, even the most well-planned working or show litters. People shouldn't be breeding their pets. My concern is giving the local AC guys sole discretion to enforce these laws. I'm sure there'd be a problem with me breeding APBTs, where there might not be a problem with someone else breeding Cockerdoodlepoos. There is too much grey area. Too much "as long as we approve." That's like saying, "...well, we may let you continue to breed your unregistered working stock dogs... or we may not. Depends on how we feel."

 

[joce]

The problem with it is the millers and byb who have a ton of dogs a year will more than be able to pay for the licenses. It would hurt the good breeder more since they don't make out on the litters.

Not only that but has anyone looked into what you need for the kennel licenses-I'd never buy form someone who met all those qualifications-the pup would have no socialization.

 

[Laurelin]

If you want to read the full Louisville ordincance, it's here- http://www.louisvilleky.gov/MetroCouncil/animal_ordinance.htm

 

[Aussie Red]

Ok as I have stated government running things does not work. It costs tax payers more money and that is the long and short of it. We have allowed politicians to slowly take away our rights in this country and that has to stop.
This brings to mind the proposed law having to have your daughters vaccinated for Human patholoma virus. I will not support that either I would go to jail first. It is a new drug and what are the side effects ?? Talk to the poor girls that are forced to do this and find out they can't have children or are dying from something else now. Ok call me a radical if you want to but I have seen to many things where the government has stepped in and taken over it is not right. California is the leader in these types of things. You may think they are good but when I am told I have to change to suit others it never sits well with me. I have to wear a seat belt. I have to have Insurance.
These may be all good but again because some want them it does not make it right for all. A reasonably intelligent person already did it. Did not need a law to make you do it. As far as it costing taxpayers for their health care that could be fixed too and I would rather support a persons health care then pay thousands of dollars for research on some of the ignorant things the government gives grants for. You all know I am for fixing animals but this is just way to intrusive and open for those who are byb. The only ones this will effect are those who are going to fix the animals anyway not those who breed for profit. I do not support a ban on anything and I do mean ANYTHING !!! I may not like what some choose to do that may be true and I may speak out on it being the wrong thing to do but this is the U.S.A. and we were founded on freedom. Freedom of choice does not mean your choice is the right choice for all !!!!

 

[whatszmatter]

Ok as I have stated government running things does not work. It costs tax payers more money and that is the long and short of it. We have allowed politicians to slowly take away our rights in this country and that has to stop.
This brings to mind the proposed law having to have your daughters vaccinated for Human patholoma virus. I will not support that either I would go to jail first. It is a new drug and what are the side effects ??

Freedom of choice does not mean your choice is the right choice for all !!!!

A little off topic, but you started it Just a few facts about the HPV vaccine.

1- Half of all people get HPV at some point, you or your spouse will most likely have had it or get it in your lifetime. It's been this way for a long long time.

2-around 90% or better will clear that virus within months with ZERO intervention from doctors or medication.

3-Cervical cancer usually occurs in a womans 40's and 50's

4- they studied 9-26 year old's, in which you'd normally expect to see 1 case per 100,000 people in the general population in that age range with cancer cells in their cervix

5- they only studied about 26 thousand girls, women and boys (where they expected to find cervical cancer I have no idea on them)

6- They studied it for only 4 years, if someone in that age range were to develope cervical cancer it most likely wouldn't happen for another decade and a half

7- at the end of the study not one single case of cervical cancer was reported so they had 100% effectiveness, sounds great right? remember only 1 case per 100,000 people is expected anyway, so they didn't even have a large enough population to study

8- the vaccine will not limit your exposure to the virus, you are very likely to come in contact with it at some point in your life

9-the vaccine stimulates your body to mount an immune response against the virus, which your body does naturally and has been doing it for as long as the virus has been around. WHere exactly the need for the vaccine is I have no idea

10- actually I do have an idea where the need comes from, at over 120 bucks a shot, needing three per girl/woman, you do the math and see how much it adds to the bottom line of MERK if its mandated

11- only one state has mandated it so far, and that is TX. Coincidently the former right hand man of the governor there is now the chief lobbyist for MERK, the maker of gardasil. The governor bypassed the law making process in that state and made it an executive order bypassing all chances to block it. Coincidence?? I think not.

12- Merk is the same company that brought us Vioxx, the drug that traded ulcers for heart attacks, and they knew it long before it hit the public, and yet the continued to sell it and market it as safe. I prefer to trust the body and defenses I have over the "expertise" of MERK anyday

13- I defineatly don't want the gov't mandating me to line the pockets of their monkey boys in washington, and FYI, its on the agenda in, last I checked, almost 40 states to become mandated, so be aware.

now back to your regular programming

 

[Picklepaige]

I'm sure the dogs sitting on death row right now are begging for this law to be passed. To me, dogs are individuals. Sadly, not many people think the way I do. Anything to stop the murder of these poor guys.

 

[Aussie Red]

EDUCATION NOT LEGISLATION !!!!

 

[LexTalionis]

Assuming this law can be enforced across the board, it will be a good thing. People are not going to s/n and stop breeding out of the goodness of their hearts unless something drastic happens.

This bill does provide for serious reputable breeders the option to breed. Not all will be able to qualify, but as long as the dog is registered with approved registries, and they are shown once a year, they will qualify. They don’t actually have to win anything, just compete. The average BYB would not bother with it, but the reputable ones would make the effort and set aside one or two days a year. As far as many other registries not approved, that can be changed. Since this bill is very similar to the LA conty bill which is already in existence, I am pretty sure that any non for profit registry can apply for and qualify to be added to the approved registry list as it is in LA county. So that would not be an issue. The reason it say non profit is to keep the APRI, AKA, APR and the likes out of the equation which I believe most here would agree that they are far from reputable. However, reputable registries should have no problem getting added to the list.

Those breeders who have more dogs then they will be allowed to under this bill, have the option to obtain a kennel/business license. Not many will be able to qualify for one due to zoning regulations, but those who do not live in the appropriate zone, probably should not be having that many dogs in the first place. I hear many complain about how there is no one to regulate the large scale millers that are not USDA inspected. Well this bill will take care of them.

Will this bill hurt some responsible breeder? No doubt. But that is a small price to pay to control the over population and the uncontrolled bybs out there. It will actually benefit many breeders who follow the laws, and are licensed and inspected. It will ensure that they are the only ones who can legally breed. With no competition from bybs and no more poor quality sick dogs flooding the market, those remaining breeders will be able to charge more and in turn will be able to afford to invest more back in to there dogs in testing, maintenance and showing expanses. Although it will reduce the available dogs, it will increase their quality. Which is what I am sure many want to see.

Those who oppose this bill will have a much better chance to lobby for modifying it to amend the objectionable parts such as age of sterilization and the approved registries, but trying to kill it all together is futile. If you are too lazy to go to the shelter to see the end result, just open up your classified. 90% of the ads there are by people who have no business breeding. This is what the lawmakers see, the end results and the numbers.

I will most likely be exempt from this bill with my business kennel license, so I will be one of those who will actually benefit from it. If you were in my shoes, you too would see the logic behind it as I do. It makes perfect sense to. It will reduce shelter population, will virtually eliminate accidentally and mutt breeding, decrease my competition and help raise my prices. Win win situation anyway I look at it.

 

[Laurelin]

How do you start showing a dog if you have to have it neutered by 4 months and you can't show a dog until it is 6 months old? You'd have to break the law to even begin showing. What do you do when you wish to retire a show dog from showing yet you still wish to use it for breeding? what happens lets say in the case of my dog's grandfather who had an accident and knocked out a tooth and therefore could not show, but was still breeding quality?

Nope, still a bad idea in my opinion.

 

[LexTalionis]

As I said, the age is a point that needs to be addressed. as it is now, it is a catch 22. As far a retired dogs, In LA county, a titled dog does not need to be fixed. Most likely that will be the case with this one as well.

No one is saying it is perfect, but it is better then nothing.

 

[ChRotties]

For starters, AC doesn't/can't enforce current laws on the books both in state and locally. This is the case across the board in all states! START ENFORCING THE LAWS ALREADY IN PLACE!

This is nothing more than AR backed propaganda that leads to their ultimate goal: end pet ownership. Little by little, that's what it's leading to.

If the gov't would really like to do something, how about redoing the zoning laws, making it difficult for the freakin pet shops to open their doors? Nope that won't happen! Why? Too much money involved!

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

I am not a fan of pet shops either but how is closing them going to stop anything. Those pet shops get their animals for idiot breeders. Irresponsible breeders are the big problem.

How is wanting to stop these people from breeding thousands and thousands of dogs every year "AR backed propoganda" to "end pet ownership". I am not a crazy animal rights activist, but if the law could work I would be all for it.

Unfortunately there is not much that can be done. Everyone keeps talking about how we should educate. Well people have been educating about this for a LONG time and it still doesnt make a difference.

Bottom line....something needs to be done to stop back yard breeders and puppy mills.

 

[Aussie Red]

If this passes it will only effect those of us who do do the right thing. It will not stop the puppy mills. It will open the doors wide for BSL and further legislation on not owning pets period. A good case in point is that California is one of only a couple states where Ferret ownership is illegal and you will be fined for having one and get the pleasure in knowing your loved pet will be put to death if found. Nevada 24 Karat ferret rescue goes and gets them and brings them here if the officer who was called out to get yours calls them. Many do not an just kill them. You really think this is good for the future of dogs or any other animal ?

 

[savethebulliedbreeds]

Like I said its hard to know what to do because what is being done right now is NOT working at all.

Someone really needs to come up with a GOOD solution to the problem.

 

[ChRotties]

Hmm. Let's see..puppy mills/brokers sell their thousands of puppies every year to PET SHOPS. Make it difficult or impossible for new pet shops to open / or stay in business. It's supply and demand. Thru education and putting the pressure on the COMMERCIAL industry is a start!

Yes, these s/n and bsl laws are AR propaganda. Do you realize what the TRUE idealogigy is behind peta and hsus? Peta's (and other AR ogs) belief system is that NO ANIMAL (including dogs and cats) has the RIGHT to be owned/kept in slavery by man. Every animal, according to them, has the right to live free and die free. It wouldn't get them very far or tens of thousands of dollars if they preached it that bluntly. They go about it by laws like this one that is being proposed and like the one that was passed in Louisville....they start by making it **** difficult for most folks to OWN ANIMALS. Of course, they know already that these laws don't work. So in a few years, they will introduce MORE BRILLIANT IDEAS.......BULLCRAP!

If you don't believe that mandatory s/n or bsl is backed by ARs, then read this: HSUS WAS INSTRUMENTAL WITH THE GARBAGE IN LOUISVILLE!

Letter from HSUS TO L'VILLE OFFICIALS:

July 5, 2006


Dear Louisville Metro Council and Animal Ordinance Advisory Group Members:


After a number of high profile dog attacks late last year, proposed changes in the city’s animal ordinance have been discussed at great length over the last few months. Experts in various animal professions have all contributed to the effort. As the time approaches to decide on an ordinance, I hope that you will consider the following points from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS):

Dangerous dogs – The most effective way to control dangerous dogs within a community is to give local animal control the authority and financing to easily identify and regulate both dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. Dogs that repeatedly run loose, attack other animals, and menace or attack people should all be considered a threat to the community. Good dangerous dog legislation is strictly enforced and punishes irresponsible dog owners. I have attached The HSUS Model Dangerous Dog Legislation for your review.

Pit bulls – There is no doubt that pit bulls are in bad shape in America right now. They are likely the most popular dog in the country, but unfortunately, they are also the dogs of choice for drug dealers, gang members, and anyone else who is looking for a dog to be a status symbol. Legislation banning pit bulls or requiring strict regulation will not solve the problems created by dangerous dogs. However, because pit bulls currently flood animal shelters in Louisville and across the country, legislation requiring their mandatory sterilization could be a benefit to the breed and to all dogs in the community. Additionally, the mandatory sterilization of pit bulls would negatively impact those individuals who use pit bulls for fighting, guarding locations used for illegal activities, and the backyard breeders who so recklessly add to the dog overpopulation. Requiring the sterilization of pit bulls does not have the same problems as traditional breed-specific legislation. This does not punish responsible pet owners, as truly responsible owners already have their animals sterilized.

Dog chaining and tethering – The long term chaining or tethering of dogs is a two-pronged issue: the practice is inhumane to the animals and creates a safety risk to the community. Dogs are social animals and the isolation created by long-term tethering goes against their nature. Without social contact, life on a chain leads dogs to become, lonely, bored, territorial, and aggressive. In fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), chained dogs are 2.8 times more likely to attack than unchained dogs and chained dogs are 5.4 times more likely to attack children than unchained dogs. By restricting the hours that dogs can be tethered and regulating the set up (chain vs. cable trolley), such legislation could protect letter carriers, meter readers, and other professionals who work door-to-door, while also negatively impacting dog fighters who keep dozens of dogs chained in their yards.

Outdoor dog shelters – While The HSUS always encourages pet owners to keep their dogs indoors with the family, dogs that live or spend much time outdoors must have adequate shelter. Certain structures like rabbit hutches or plastic barrels are not acceptable. Regulations should be enacted that outline the specific requirements for outdoor dog shelters. Such structures must have a roof, a floor, and four side walls, with one wall having a doorway; the size of the structure and doorway must allow the dog to easily enter and exit, lay down, stand up, and turn around; the structure must provide shade and protect the interior from wind, rain, snow, other forms of precipitation, and extreme weather. Regulations like these will ensure the safety of dogs outdoors.

Pet auctions & flea market sales - Animal auctions place pets without regard for their future or the pressures that a new pet puts on a family. Whether such auctions are done for profit or for charity fundraisers, they are irresponsible and unethical. Pet auctions fly in the face of the efforts of animal shelters and rescue groups, not only philosophically, but also in very real terms as animals obtained from auctions may easily be surrendered to such groups. Flea markets provide nothing but an unregulated venue for impulse animal purchases. This lack of regulation allows disreputable animal sellers to add animals of questionable health and temperament to a pet overpopulation that is already overextending both animal services offices and the taxpayers who fund them. Companion animal and human relationships are more successful when they’re carefully considered along with the understanding of commitment and responsibility that a pet brings.

Spay/Neuter and adoption groups – Pet overpopulation is a problem everywhere. There are millions of animals euthanized every year in the United States simply because they lack a home. It is imperative that animal shelters and adoption groups are required to have all animals sterilized before adoption. Dogs can begin reproducing as early as six months of age, and cats as early as four months of age. Giving out vouchers and having adopters sign contracts promising to have their new pets altered by a certain age is not effective. Too often new adopters forget, don’t care, or even want their animal intact. While some people may have concerns about juvenile (or pediatric) spay/neuter, the surgeries are perfectly safe when performed by experienced veterinarians.

Breeders & differential licensing – Differential licensing is a system where owners of intact animals pay a much higher licensing fee than owners of altered animals. The extra funds can be used to provide subsidized spay/neuter services to low income pet owners. Not only does this system encourage pet sterilization, it also helps facilitate it. While this system costs breeders more money, this is fair because they make money adding to the pet population. An additional measure requiring breeders to list their license number in newspaper ads would be beneficial to the community. It would make sure that only licensed (legal) breeders advertise and would make them easier to identify for consumers and animal control officers, in case of problems.

The attempted re-draft of the Louisville metro animal ordinance has taken many forms. Despite some minor problems, most versions contain a number of excellent, progressive provisions that will benefit the community. Many groups have suggested weakening these provisions, but to do so would only hurt the animals and the community as a whole. It is not clear whether these people are motivated by financial gain or simply set in their ways. They may benefit from nixing certain points, but the rest of the community would not.

As a complement to a new ordinance, The HSUS would be pleased to send specialists to Louisville to train law enforcement officials in investigating and prosecuting dog fighters. Increased enforcement of the state’s felony prohibition on dog fighting would advance any effort to reign in problematic individuals who use dogs in illegal and harmful ways.

As always, The HSUS is available to answer questions or help in any way that we can.

Sincerely,

Kentucky Legislative Coordinator
The Humane Society of the United States
291 N. Hubbbards Lane, #280
Louisville, KY 40207
502-893-9796
[email protected]

I will give the ARs credit....they are master spin doctors. They are masters at public relations.

 

[ChRotties]

The Ar Agenda

Permission to cross post / distribute in any form necessary to educate:
******************************************************

From “Politics of Animal Liberation”
by Kim Bartlett,
published in ANIMAL AGENDA, November 1987

Abolish by law all animal research

Outlaw the use of animals for cosmetic and product testing, classroom demonstration and in weapons development

Vegetarian meals should be made available at all public institutions, including schools

Eliminate all animal agriculture

No herbicides, pesticides or other agricultural chemicals. Outlaw predator control.

Transfer enforcement of animal welfare legislation away from the Department of Agriculture

Eliminate fur ranching and the use of furs.

Prohibit hunting, trapping and fishing.

End the international trade in wildlife goods

Stop any further breeding of companion animals, including purebred dogs and cats. Spaying and neutering should be subsidized by stte and municipal governments. Abolish commerce in animals for the pet trade.

End the use of animals in entertainment and sports.

Prohibit the genetic manipulation of species.
NOTE: This was written in 1987, long before genetic engineering and cloning. In this context, “genetic manipulation” means selective breeding”

 

[GipsyQueen]

Well I hope the law is not passed. Personally I think that 4 months is to young to spay/neuter a puppy, which might also result in problems if the dog is to be shown.
I also think it is everyone's choice whether to spay/neuter their dog. There are people out there that believe a dog is fine not neutered, which I find alright. People can be responsible, but unfortunately there are irresponsible people out there. I don't think it will reduce the amount of puppy mills either, there will always be people who break the law, why should there be people who don't brake this one either?