What happens when you take your dog to the pound

That is so unbelievably sad....  But true.
 
I love my pound puppy!!

........... can't talk ............ uncontrollable crying.
 
I love my pound puppies (past and present) too !

Geez!  I'm glad the shelter I work at isn't like that!!

@ work , , ,  tears are hard to explain

Sounds pretty rough.  I would have thought that "contact a rescue" would have been in there somewhere.

It's eye opening.  Thanks for posting. 

Yes this is sad,,, but a poorly written, likely to be uninforcable piece of legislation will not change the story.  The law of unintended outcomes needs to be considered.

ORIGINAL: Liesje

Geez!  I'm glad the shelter I work at isn't like that!!

Well, it must be a no kill.  But, all that is happening is that the shelter down the street is like that one because yours won't take just anything that walks through the door.  If they did, they'd be euthanizing for a sniffle, too. [&o]

I agree with mrv.  It is not awful to buy a dog from a breeder.  What is awful is if you get a dog from a breeder that is not reputable enough to take the dog back for you and rehome it if you can't care for it.  It isn't bad to get a dog from rescue either, or from a shelter.  What is bad is to get one from a pet store, or get one before you really do all your homework, or get one because your kid wants one even if you hate dogs, or to suddenly abandon your dog because you got a new job, apartment, boyfriend, or pregnant.  The overpopulation would STOP if people just took some time to be educated, committed, and responsible.

ORIGINAL: mrv

Yes this is sad,,, but a poorly written, likely to be uninforcable piece of legislation will not change the story.  The law of unintended outcomes needs to be considered.

As a volunteer in a shelter, I think it is well written and realistic. Go and spend a few weeks helping out in a shelter, and you will agree. 

Actually I spend my time, evaluating, pulling and transporting and financially supporting breed rescues.

You can not legislate morality.  The proposed bill is highly unlikely to address the issues which it was presented to address.  This type of restriction of requiring vets to report owners, requiring high cost licensing,  etc. is likely to lower compliance, not improve it.

Look to the issues of why dogs are released to shelters.  Work to provide low cost spay and neuter programs.  Enforce general licensing, provide dog training through public recreation programs. 

I can not support a proposal that is so clearly against responsible breeding practices.  I just can not support a law that allows commercial breeders to continue on their merry money making way and condemns responsible breeders.
 
BTW  Poorly written refers to AB 1634  not the passage in the link

ORIGINAL: mrv

Actually I spend my time, evaluating, pulling and transporting and financially supporting breed rescues.

You can not legislate morality.  The proposed bill is highly unlikely to address the issues which it was presented to address.  This type of restriction of requiring vets to report owners, requiring high cost licensing,  etc. is likely to lower compliance, not improve it.

Look to the issues of why dogs are released to shelters.  Work to provide low cost spay and neuter programs.  Enforce general licensing, provide dog training through public recreation programs. 

I can not support a proposal that is so clearly against responsible breeding practices.  I just can not support a law that allows commercial breeders to continue on their merry money making way and condemns responsible breeders.

BTW  Poorly written refers to AB 1634  not the passage in the link

The main reason that some people are against this bill was told to me by a breeder some months ago.  She has a nice business which is  mostly "off the books".  That means she doesn't pay any state, or federal taxes on the income she makes from selling dogs.  That would all change if legislation like the proposed bill in California goes into effect.  All sales of dogs that were bred, would have to be reported, and the breeders would have to start paying taxes on their income. That apparently is the main reason that some people are almost hysterical when passing this law is discussed.  It would hit them in the pocketbook. 

That was not the reason, that I posted the description of the what happens in a shelter. It was to show the plight of these dogs that are dumped off on society every day. I couldn't care less about some breeder having to pay income tax, but it breaks my heart to see dogs destroyed by the millions and nothing is being done about it. Everyone wants to keep things just like they are, with some vague suggestions about training "people" to be better dog owners. People aren't interested in spaying and neuterring even when low cost options are available.  I see people all the time with dogs that are not S/N because they think it is cute to have some puppies in their family.  Once the puupies arrive, they quickly find that it was much more than they bargained for. The people that dump their dogs on society don't give a darn about being trained, they just want to get rid of the dog that they got, because it is a bit more work than they bargained for. The millions of unspayed and unneutered dogs running around, makes this problem hundreds of times worse than it would be otherwise.

ORIGINAL: mrv

Look to the issues of why dogs are released to shelters.  Work to provide low cost spay and neuter programs.  Enforce general licensing, provide dog training through public recreation programs. 

 
Just came off of a "Who's to Blame" thread so I am tapped on the subject.  The above quote identifies just a few ideas but there are so many more.  In my opinion it won't happen unless there is a leadership.
 
The passage says there are 9 to 11 million dogs euthanized in shelters every year.  I believe the HSUS plus other sources say it is between 3 and 4 million.  To me, a big problem with the dog world is that statistics are not accurate or even captured.

I responded because of the link to AB 1634.  I am not willing to support poorly written legislation that will negatively impact the health of a breeding population.  I am not willing to support legislation that will be unlikely target irresponsible owners.  I would support leveled licensing and enforcement.  I would support money being allocated to low cost spay neuter clinics.  I do support training for shelter dogs ( which we do every year and cut the cost of training in half for any shelter or rescue dog).

Mandatory spay neuter legislation does not address the problem of owner turn ins.  It will be an unfunded mandate that people who are the primary source of the problem will ignore.

I do not support legislation that allows commercial breeders to continue to produce animals without restriction beyond USDAA requirements.

The main reason folks with whom I correspond are against the bill has to do with the fact the early spay neuter procedures go against any good animal husbandry.  You can not evaluate a puppy that young for fitness for breeding, you can not test for genetic diseases that occur later in development.

I can not support a bill that has considerable backing from organizations that want to see the extinction of companion animals.  Sorry,, not going there.

I have to agree with MRV on this one.