one more major city, mandatory spay neuter

New Topic

one more major city, mandatory spay neuter

mrv

Posted : 4/18/2007 6:25:00 AM

[linkhttp://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2842]http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2842[/link]

LA city council just passed this legislation last night. It is not as restrictive as Lousiville's but your dogs must be registered and titled to be eligible for an intact permit. (entered and competing at least once in the calendar year of the permit).

This law would atleast impact millers where as the state legislation actually supports puppy mills based on their USDAA registration.

We need to wake up people, this could easily become more and more restrictive. Lets remember what happens in CA usually travels east. Work with your local governments to address the needs necessary to enforce current dog laws. Work to improve the public perception by obvious responsible dog ownership.

I believe I would like my children's children to have the opportunity to participate in the dog events and ownership that I currently have.

Cita

Posted : 4/18/2007 9:20:22 AM

I don't like this:

A license can be revoked or denied by the department for any of the following; upon receipt of one sworn complaint,

So your neighbor doesn't like your stud dog barking in the back yard and writes in a complaint to make you lose your permit?

It seems like this clause would protect working dogs as well (I'm thinking herding breeds in particular):

The owner is a member of a purebred dog breed club, approved by the county which maintains and enforces a code of ethics that includes restrictions from breeding dogs with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten the breed.

This one doesn't seem as bad as the state-wide one, at least. Still, I'm wondering about exceptions for traveling show dogs from other states - does that mean LA won't host a major show ever again?

brookcove

Posted : 4/24/2007 9:03:33 PM

The ABCA (main registry for working BCs) would never, ever have a code of ethics that included restrictions on breeding dogs with "genetic defects." That is way, way too wide a restriction to put on a working dog gene pool, since it could be construed to mean carriers of recessive mutations, I would assume.

I sympathize with the sentiment behind mandatory spay and neuter but I cannot accept these efforts to micromanage the pet population in this way. Better would be outlawing the sale of puppies and kittens in pet stores and more financial support of local animal control operations, not to mention education.