Spay-neuter law works in Santa Cruz

The Anti AB1634 folks are going to have a hissy fit over this  []

"I can understand the need for a law, but I don't know about making it mandatory. I'm just not sure about that," said Loretta Glazier, who was walking her 4-year-old pug Daisy at Scotts Valley Dog Park on Friday.

 
Do people actually say stuff like that?  We should use  language like "may" instead of "shall" for our laws?  What would be the point?
 
Anyway, that was a good article.  I also saw that Bob Barker (Price is Right) made his plea for everyone to spay/neuter their pets on his final show last week.  Yay Bob!!

You know that I could post just as many articles that take just the opposite view about the proposed law.  It isn't worth it because all I will hear that this is just propaganda.  I do find certain "facts" stated in the article interesting.  I expect to see such a article as this out of the SF newspaper. 

"In fact, dog licenses have stayed the same -- about 7,000 a year -- since Santa Cruz made spaying and neutering mandatory. "

You mean to tell me that in the years since the passage of the law and the increase in population that the population of dogs has remained the same.  Sounds like the license rate had decreased.  In a county of 240,000 people I find it hard to believe that there are only 7,000 dogs.


"Euthanasia has dropped from 30 percent to 17 percent of sheltered dogs "

Why don't they state the current stats.  The Euth rate in 2006 was 23% for dogs.  Why do they pick a arbatrary point in the past.  So we are going thru all of this for a 7% drop in rates.  I would thing the Ca has much larger problems on their plate for the legislator to deal with.

Animal control officers don't go patrolling for unaltered dogs and cats in Santa Cruz.
 
"We don't have enough animal control officers to walk the streets lifting up tails," Geisreiter said.  

So that is how you determine if an animal has been neutered.  [sm=devil.gif]
 

In fact, dog licenses have stayed the same -- about 7,000 a year -- since Santa Cruz made spaying and neutering mandatory. 

Now we know how good AC law enforcement is in Santa Cruz.  Population goes up and dog licenses don't?    [8D]
 

"So the animals aren't disappearing. We aren't having to share cats in Santa Cruz," Geisreiter said.  

Santa Cruz is not on the moon.   [sm=smack.gif]
 
Nobody thinks that a few spay/neuter laws in cities are going to keep people from getting animals.   You just drive to the next city or county. 
 
Santa Cruz is not doing much to enforce their law.  That probably means that
(1)  People who really didn't want to breed anyway were scared into neutering.  Fine!!  Only dedicated folks should breed. 
(2)  Many breeders left town.
 
Advertising the need for spay/neuter and the locations for low cost surgery might have gotten most of (1) above without mandatory laws.
 
Basing the overall effect of wide spread mandatory spay/neuter on the results in one city is as silly as saying
(1)  The number of prostitutes went down to almost zero in Onion Medley, CA, when armed olice were put on every corner.  Arrests are now very rare.  Husbands and wives in this city can now rest easy knowing that the law will keep their spouses away from these eople - who, by the way, moved to a city 30 miles to the north.
(2)  Onion Medley, CA, has managed to chase its last abortion doctor out of town and the 100 fetuses/year that he aborted will now live.  The doctor has set up a new family planning clinic in that same city 30 miles to the north.
 
Note:  My apologies if there is really an Onion Medley, CA.   I took the name off a bottle of Mrs. Dash seasoning. 

It's amazing, that when even confronted with facts, the anti1634 people can manage to try and twist reality into the fantasy they wish existed.   []

No, the anti folks don't believe in legislation based on emotion and half-truths.  They also strongly believe in the consitiution, rivacy and property rights.  They also know the agenda and ultimate goal of the AR movement concerning pets.

ORIGINAL: timsdat

No, the anti folks don't believe in legislation based on emotion and half-truths.  They also strongly believe in the consitiution, rivacy and property rights.  They also know the agenda and ultimate goal of the AR movement concerning pets.

The Anti AR people also show that their main interest is their pocketbooks.  They never address the rights of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year, all they do is complain that their right to do business and make a big profit selling dogs, might cost them a few dollars more.....Money is their God....

The Anti AR people also show that their main interest is their pocketbooks. They never address the rights of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year, all they do is complain that their right to do business and make a big profit selling dogs, might cost them a few dollars more.....

 
Gee I never have made 1 penny selling a dog or puppy and no breeder I know of has never have made a big bucks selling dogs.  Yet this law goes after them.  The commercial breeders are exempt from the law.  Check some of the threads in here about what it has cost people to have a litter.  They certainly aren't doing it for the money. 
 
What do you think should be the ultimate goal of legislation such as this.  Stop all breeding????
 
 
 

ORIGINAL: timsdat

The Anti AR people also show that their main interest is their pocketbooks. They never address the rights of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year, all they do is complain that their right to do business and make a big profit selling dogs, might cost them a few dollars more.....

Gee I never have made 1 penny selling a dog or puppy and no breeder I know of has never have made a big bucks selling dogs.  Yet this law goes after them.  The commercial breeders are exempt from the law.  Check some of the threads in here about what it has cost people to have a litter.  They certainly aren't doing it for the money. 

What do you think should be the ultimate goal of legislation such as this.  Stop all breeding????

On one hand the anti 1634 people say the law won't work.  The next thing they say is that there won't be a dog left in the US in a couple of years if this law goes into effect.  You have to get your stories straight and stop making these arguments that don't make any sense at all. Alot of money is being spent on web sites fighting this AB1634.  In my opinion, this is being done by people that see their income being threatened if this law goes into effect.  They will have to go on the books with their businesses, which they probably do not want to do.   The thing that I find really amazing is that all these breeders folks don't seem to give a hoot about the plight of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year.  It is all about them and their fancy breeds, and all the other dogs, seem to be expendable as far as they are concerned.  Since reading all the rhetoric and the lack of empathy for the dogs that put down every year by the anti group which I feel is mainly composed of breeders, I have decided to actively encourage people never to buy a dog from a breeder, as long as they can get one from a rescue or shelter. 

They will have to go on the books with their businesses, which they probably do not want to do.

 
The breeders I know of in Ca do have a business license if the amount of breeding they do requires them to be classified as a business.
 
What people are saying is that this law won't stop the ill-responsible from breeding poor quality dogs and I sure don't want to get a dog from one of these people,  It will though hinder responsible breeders from breeding quality dogs.  The bill doesn't address puppy millers at all as long as they have a business license.  Also if you want to stop all breeding there will be no dogs left. 
 
You don't think that breeders don't care about dogs in shelters then why is it that every nation breed club and local breed clubs have rescue operations that the breeders run.  They bring these dogs into their house's to care for them and find them proper homes and do it at their own expense.
 
I would still like to get an answer the the question "What do you think should be the ultimate goal of legislation such as this.  Stop all breeding????"
 

 

The thing that I find really amazing is that all these breeders folks don't seem to give a hoot about the plight of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year.  It is all about them and their fancy breeds, and all the other dogs, seem to be expendable as far as they are concerned.

This statement made me SO ANGRY I saw red.  I've been pretty PO'd in my life time, and I've punched inanimate objects to release the pressure, but NEVER have I actually seen red!
 
You like spouting off "facts" that are based entirely on emotion Bob?  Here's some factual emotion for you.
 
That statement is SUCH a load I don't even know where to start!  Many of these 'fancy breeder' bust their butts to create a well bred dog for people who don't want a poor specimen of their chosen breed.  Many of these 'fancy breeder' help with rescue in some capacity.  Many of these 'fancy breeder' OWN RESCUES THEMSELVES!
 
How DARE YOU insult them with rhetoric such as the above.  How DARE YOU speak for ALL breeders and declare them irresponsible when it's not true.  How DARE YOU look down your nose at somebody because they feel that rescue isn't for them (breeder or not).

Since reading all the rhetoric and the lack of empathy for the dogs that put down every year by the anti group which I feel is mainly composed of breeders, I have decided to actively encourage people never to buy a dog from a breeder, as long as they can get one from a rescue or shelter.

Do you have any idea at all how many breeders turn people to rescue?!  Who DO rescue themselves!?  Who have 'foster failures' and keep the animals they were trying to adopt out?
 
The arrival of you and the other AR fanatics (and no, that's not an insult, that's just FACT, because look at what has been posted over and over again) has been enough to make me want to avoid this forum.  A forum I enjoy.  I don't mean certain PARTS of this forum, I mean the entire forum.
 
You state it as fact that all breeders are businesses and make money.  This is not a fact.  It's your assumption, and it's an incorrect one.
 
You state it as fact that all breeders care about is money and don't care a whit about the animals being euthanized (yes, I said euthanized, I won't say executed because it's just more emotional clap trap that you use to sway people).  That is just outright bull pucky.
 
I am a future breeder.  I show my dogs, and one day I'll be breeding CWCs and GSDs.  I still direct people to rescue, because a puppy or dog from a breeder isn't right for everybody.
 
Doesn't mean you should get to decide that NOBODY should be able to have a dog from a reputable breeder because you wear your heart on your sleeve for the shelter animals.

I am not really sure where I stand on this issue. I was for mandatory spay/neuter excluding show dogs. But this weekend a group of us met to talk about the pending breed law. I am the ONLY rescuer involved, the rest are breeders. They show their dogs & breed pups. To be honest I was quite appauled by them.
 
I talked to our local shelter manager (who is pushing this ban) on Saturday. He stated the problem isnt biting, it is overpopulation. So I thought, great, this will be easy, we can just start a pit bull rescue, and that way the shelter manager will look better (which is what he wants) and the ban idea will be dropped.
 
So I suggested to the breeders starting a rescue (if it is between starting a rescue or banning a breed I know which I would pick). I was told "we dont have room". I was also told "it is hard enough to place our BEAUTIFUL show dogs into homes, placing  a rescue would be impossible" to which I respond "I place pit bull rescues". They all ignored my comment. I left the meeting. It kind of makes me mad that it seems like all these people care about are making $ and breeding their dogs. If they have a problem placing their pups then they shouldnt be breeding? Then I started thinking about Jet, my last foster who was an Am Staff and wondering if he was one of their pups??
 
I know you breeders on this site arent like that. Miss Gina has helped us tremendously by finding us a great beagle rescue in our area who we work with to this day. I know Jamie is involved in rescue....
 
I know that is OT but it is kind of where I stand now & why.
 
I dont think it is right for people to tell you you cant breed your dog. But what would be an alternative to mandatory spay/neuter that everyone could agree with?
 
 

ORIGINAL: Xeph

The thing that I find really amazing is that all these breeders folks don't seem to give a hoot about the plight of the millions of dogs that are executed in this country every year.  It is all about them and their fancy breeds, and all the other dogs, seem to be expendable as far as they are concerned.

This statement made me SO ANGRY I saw red.  I've been pretty PO'd in my life time, and I've punched inanimate objects to release the pressure, but NEVER have I actually seen red!

You like spouting off "facts" that are based entirely on emotion Bob?  Here's some factual emotion for you.

That statement is SUCH a load I don't even know where to start!  Many of these 'fancy breeder' bust their butts to create a well bred dog for people who don't want a poor specimen of their chosen breed.  Many of these 'fancy breeder' help with rescue in some capacity.  Many of these 'fancy breeder' OWN RESCUES THEMSELVES!

How DARE YOU insult them with rhetoric such as the above.  How DARE YOU speak for ALL breeders and declare them irresponsible when it's not true.  How DARE YOU look down your nose at somebody because they feel that rescue isn't for them (breeder or not).

Since reading all the rhetoric and the lack of empathy for the dogs that put down every year by the anti group which I feel is mainly composed of breeders, I have decided to actively encourage people never to buy a dog from a breeder, as long as they can get one from a rescue or shelter.

Do you have any idea at all how many breeders turn people to rescue?!  Who DO rescue themselves!?  Who have 'foster failures' and keep the animals they were trying to adopt out?

The arrival of you and the other AR fanatics (and no, that's not an insult, that's just FACT, because look at what has been posted over and over again) has been enough to make me want to avoid this forum.  A forum I enjoy.  I don't mean certain PARTS of this forum, I mean the entire forum.

You state it as fact that all breeders are businesses and make money.  This is not a fact.  It's your assumption, and it's an incorrect one.

You state it as fact that all breeders care about is money and don't care a whit about the animals being euthanized (yes, I said euthanized, I won't say executed because it's just more emotional clap trap that you use to sway people).  That is just outright bull pucky.

I am a future breeder.  I show my dogs, and one day I'll be breeding CWCs and GSDs.  I still direct people to rescue, because a puppy or dog from a breeder isn't right for everybody.

Doesn't mean you should get to decide that NOBODY should be able to have a dog from a reputable breeder because you wear your heart on your sleeve for the shelter animals.

First, you like "Euthanized" because it doesn't sound so bad, but what they are doing is executing the dogs.  We don't Euthanize prisoners in jail, we execute them against their will. The dog doesn't want to be euthanized, so we execute it sometimes in gas chambers.  Is that emotional, no it's reality. Sorry you have a problem dealing with that, but that's your issue not mine.

Then you say I am "spouting off facts"....  Where did I say, what I was stating was a fact?  I said that the "breeder folks don't seem to give a hoot about the millions of dogs executed every year" ...... And they don't, as far as I can see, by reading their comments on  the threads on the AB1634 topic.  All I read is alot of whining about civil rights, put downs of the Humane Society and SPCA,  and any other group that is trying to help animals, and the high cost of having to comply with the law when it goes into effect, which isn't true.  All those arguments are total bunk, as far as I am concerned, and they are repeated over and over again, hoping I guess, that people will start to accept them as fact if they read them a couple of hundred times.

I also get  truly annoyed reading all the Anti1634 claptrap that is posted on the forums on a continual basis. It seems like every couple of days, someone comes up with another way to demonize people that are for making the situation better for these animals that die by the millions each year.  So you aren't the only one that gets upset reading some of the stuff that gets posted.  I have read comments that stated that animal shelters inflate the number of animals they keep, on purpose.  They also have said that there is no pet overpopulation in the US, that we we have to import dogs and cats from other countries in order to keep the shelters busy. This is all despite the fact that I volunteer at 2 shelters and have visited others, and see what it is really like.  Anyone that can minimize the horrible conditions that these dogs find themselves in, is a total creep in my opinion.   Reading these same lies over and over makes me turn red too, but I read it every day from the Anti1634 people. That is how I dare to make the statements that I do, and if you don't like it, so be it.

You state it as fact that all breeders care about is money and don't care a whit about the animals being euthanized (yes, I said euthanized, I won't say executed because it's just more emotional clap trap that you use to sway people). That is just outright bull pucky.

 
Xeph - I don't think negatively about breeders and have the utmost respect for people like Gina or others who care so much about their dogs.  I don't understand the reason that the breeders are so "anti" this bill though.  If there are exclusions for them, then why are they so adamantly against it?  If the whole point was that the bill won't reduce the number of animals euthanized, then just say that.  If it's about the right to breed being more important than the number of animals being euthanized, then it seems a little selfish to me.  I also don't think that being euthanized as the ultimate sadness for these animals.  Many are sick, starving and living their lives in cages. I don't want responsible breeders to stop doing what they do best and I don't think that is the intent of this legislation.  I'm not sure it'll do a think to irresponsible backyard breeders and if it passes, it may merely have the affect of a drop of water in a huge pond, but I think that the dialogue is important and hopefully someday will see positive changes come about that we can all agree are for the best.