Need Help with Spay/Neuter Law

http://www.cahealthypets.com/home.htm

Read info on this link

How about a realistic and USEFUL law like one that increases funding for spay/neuter clinics and enforcement of licensing? 

Just my [sm=2cents.gif] but I think  it would be easier to get people behind these laws if they were written by vets, breeders, etc. instead of legislators who don't really have a clue. An example of that would be the one in CA calling for mandatory S/N by 4 months.  Not too many knowledgeable people would support that.
 
Joyce

ORIGINAL: fuzzy_dogs_mom

Just my [sm=2cents.gif] but I think  it would be easier to get people behind these laws if they were written by vets, breeders, etc. instead of legislators who don't really have a clue. An example of that would be the one in CA calling for mandatory S/N by 4 months.  Not too many knowledgeable people would support that.
 
Joyce

i second that motion.
and come up with reasonable ways to enforce it. i'm afraid you're going to find more pets being thrown into shelters because their owners dont want to get fined for not being able to afford the opperation. and most people dont keep up with the fine details of new laws. they read the big bold print "Mandatory Spay and Neuter" and think "well sorry Fido.... nice knowing ya"

and would this law blanket the whole county or just the towns and cities?
i dont like it and never will like it because again i dont want any government telling me what i can do or what i can have.  if I am not hurting anyone, or damaging anything then i dont think i need to be punished and slapped around like those that ARE hurting and damaging.
If i want my dog to have puppies so i can KEEP those puppies for myself then that should be my business on MY property. you cant just assume that someone is going to ditch their pets just because they have a litter. you're mucking around with the constitutional rights and all that "mumbo jumbo"
i have a lot more to say on the issue and how to possibly resolve it, but i'll spare you.

ORIGINAL: fuzzy_dogs_mom

Just my [sm=2cents.gif] but I think  it would be easier to get people behind these laws if they were written by vets, breeders, etc. instead of legislators who don't really have a clue. An example of that would be the one in CA calling for mandatory S/N by 4 months.  Not too many knowledgeable people would support that.
 
Joyce

If they were written by breeders, the status quo is what you would get in all probablility.   As far as enforcement, the millions and millions of dollars that each state saved, could be used to hire hundreds and hundreds of enforcement people. 

Mandatory is never the right way, IMO. I wouldn't give an inch on that.
 
Litter permits, breeder licensing with reasonable fees and realistic criteria, incentives to neuter/spay, edcucation, enforcement of exsistant husbandry and licensing, enforcement of at large animal laws, heavier regulation of sales of dogs and cats from pet stores, are all things I'd get behind with varying amounts of vigor.

most people into dogs are dead-set against any kind of mandatory neuter law. Not because they breed willy-nilly but they have very good reasons for not neutering, or not neutering until the dog is several years old.

why not lobby for more funding for spay/neuter education and low cost or no cost spay/neuter clinics? i would rather see laws targeting puppy mills and pet store puppy sales.

ORIGINAL: rwbeagles

Mandatory is never the right way, IMO. I wouldn't give an inch on that.
 
Litter permits, breeder licensing with reasonable fees and realistic criteria, incentives to neuter/spay, edcucation, enforcement of exsistant husbandry and licensing, enforcement of at large animal laws, heavier regulation of sales of dogs and cats from pet stores, are all things I'd get behind with varying amounts of vigor.

People with a sense of responsibilty will be guided by incentives. The type of people that won't S/N their pets, wouldn't give two hoots about incentives.   That is what we do now, and it doesn't work, causing millions of innocent animals to be executed every year in shelters thoughtout the US.

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

why not lobby for more funding for spay/neuter education and low cost or no cost spay/neuter clinics? i would rather see laws targeting puppy mills and pet store puppy sales.

We have clinics in Atlanta that charge as little as $50 to S/N pets.  People still wouldn't be bothered having it done. 

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

most people into dogs are dead-set against any kind of mandatory neuter law. Not because they breed willy-nilly but they have very good reasons for not neutering, or not neutering until the dog is several years old.

That is simply not true.  There are millions of dog owners that are "into dogs" that S/N their pets....

We have clinics in Atlanta that charge as little as $50 to S/N pets. People still wouldn't be bothered having it done.

that is where the education part comes in ... duh!

We've got low cost s/n in this county, which is an extremely rural community. The shelters have an amazingly low kill rate and very active adoption programs. The difference IS education, I believe. There's billboards all over the place, literature in the pet stores, vet offices, and even the teeny post office in Semora (where many people have PO boxes). It's a mobile clinic and has scheduled stops at central locations in the larger communities in this area. It costs $15 to get all your dogs immunizations up to date plus $35 for a medium sized neuter and $50 for same spay. It's a good deal when it costs about that to bail out an intact, unregistered dog from the pound.

As with most intrusive laws like this, it hurts no one but those who are responsible. There's a deliberate exclusion for "commercial breeders" the bane of the pet world. There's another for those who participate in kennel club activities but none for those whose activities with dogs lie outside the kennel club world - service dogs, protection dogs, public safety dogs, and hunting and livestock working dogs.

A more sensible approach would be to put limits on the industrial farming of pet animals (limit breeding animals to as many dogs as the residents can attend to personally - say X number per person - and limits on the use of bitches in such programs). Many breed clubs already have Code of Ethics - these are carefully researched and address the particular needs of their breeds. COEs are nowhere near the status quo - trust me, we're hashing one out now for the working BC club.

The working BC community is throwing their full force behind the effort to stop this bill - if it's enforced, the working dog in CA as we know it will become extinct. And as CA, so goes the nation, it's just a matter of time, so the rest of us are backing them up.

But we are a teeny sliver of the dog community there and apparently the dog community as a whole is rather fragmented on this issue. The proponents of the bill were pretty clever in constantly holding out carrots to those who brought up valid concerns, then ignoring them when the time came to vote. The different factions of opposition have thereby been kept running on different tracks until very recently - and it's almost too late now.[]

That is simply not true.  There are millions of dog owners that are "into dogs" that S/N their pets....

At least someone is agreeing with me!

I am sick to death of people being against spay/neuter because "It's my dog and I'll do whatever I want" Maybe you are responsible enough to not breed, but look how many others are not. What reason do you really have for not altering your pet unless there is a legitimate medical exemption?

If i want my dog to have puppies so i can KEEP those puppies for myself then that should be my business on MY property.

Sorry, I don't agree with this. Risks aside, you aren't going to know how many will be in the litter until it happens, but if you want that many dogs, fine- you will still have to get them spayed/neutered if you want to prevent inbreeding..

I wish education was enough, but it's not.