California Assembly Bill 1634 good or bad ???

Question

California Assembly Bill 1634, known as the California Healthy Pets Act, has been assigned to the Senate Business, Professions, and Economic Development Committee and the Senate Local Government Committee. The bill seeks to require the mandatory spaying or neutering of dogs or cats over four months of age, unless the owner acquires an intact animal permit.

I signed the petition against it I think it will do the opposite of what it is intended to do.
1st In a sense create a black market of pets.
2nd. Local goverments will be able to regulate the bills as it see's fit and you may be charge what ever rate it asked for breedwers permits and can deny permits based on what critiria it wants this is the seeds to corruption, You could move to a new town and find the only place to buy a puppy is the Mayors Son in law's puppy mill!

Answer 1

Very bad. The problem is, who decides who gets a permit and who doesn't? Without a doubt there will be breed discrimination, in order to "control" or limit certain breeds that people are scared of, like pit bulls. Maybe you don't think that's bad, but insurance companies in CA have already black-listed over 20 breeds--meaning they won't insure homeowners who have those breeds, and there are some really great dogs on that list--banning breeding of these dogs is only a step away now. It also puts an undue burden on hobby breeders, and will encourage importing dogs from puppy mills out of state. It's not about breeding purebreds vs. mutts--if so, the akc would be all for it, and they're not. It's about controlling people's lives, their choices, their property, their pets, and discriminating according to breed.

FYI--for those who don't know, this bill has already PASSED in the legislature, in spite of very vocal opposition, and is headed for the senate. ALL of the major dog organizations are against it. They got plenty of input from the public--so it's not like they didn't think this one through. There is something driving this other than pet lovers.

Answer 2

Few problems with this bill, do they relize at four months old a kitten is too young to be fixed? Most vets will tell you 6 months of age at the youngest. 2. How will they really know if every pet owner obeys the law if it passes
3. For the people who cant afford to get the pet fixed, will there be a fee or discounted service open to them if they qualify
4. Will a system be in place so not everyone will get "intact animal permit"

Who ever thought this one up had a good idea but probally did not think of all the what if situations before letting got to be voted on. I will be shocked if it passed and i dont even live in CA

Answer 3

I would start making some calls to my senators. Signing a petition won't do it. You all need to make calls or send letters or make visits. Your congressmen won't even take the time to look at the petition. How in the world did it get sent back to a committee if it already passed? CA must do things backwards if that is the way it works. Also, isn't your governor a republican? If so, you have a good chance convincing him not to sign any legislation if you scream about government's interference into the private rights of citizens, the cost of neutering all these animals that will be passed on to shelter's programs, or anything else to do with $ and personal rights.

Answer 4

Bad, Bad, Bad!!! It is based on inaccurate financial information (it states Santa Crus County is saving $$ since implementing this. Research shows that they are spending 10 times as much as they were before they implemented this act). It eliminates good, local breeders, encourages illegal breeding and encourages importing pure bred animals from Puppy Mills outside of California.
Not to mention that early spay/neuter (before age 8 months) has serious, long term negative effects on an animals overall health.

Answer 5

It's a terrible law. It will not reduce animals in shelter or animals euthanised in shelters. It will, if enforced, eliminate pets in California. PETA is behind this law and their agenda is to eliminate pets.
I just read today that most dogs in shelters are there because of behavior problems, not over population. Also, that Santa Cruz county who has such a law has spent 93% more on animal control since this law passed. But politicians are saying this law will SAVE money.

Answer 6

It is bad and it should be known as the "pet extinction act" as some groups call it. The exemptions only last til 2009 after all dogs regardless of what they may be needed for will have to be sterilized. I wonder do you people realize that licensed does not equal good?Licensed breeders are usually Commercial breeders or puppymills. How do you think taking responsible breeders out of the picture is a good thing??

I asked for people to sign the petition. If you do not agree with this bill you can sign a petition against it and help fight it. Take a look:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlGJFYeQX46U35JHmA_3BHrsy6IX?qid=20070621222425AAtvAPg

Answer 7

Figures-it's California.

Answer 8

I think it is bad, because the only people who would abide by the law would be the ones who were being responsible to begin with. The irresponsible BYB's would find ways around it.

I think my biggest fear would be that more dogs and cats would be abandoned or not taken to the vet for proper care because the owners weren't in compliance. This would cause so much more damage than good!

Answer 9

thats a great way to wipe out a breed. didnt the world have a similar discussion with hitler about his unwanted as well? just cause they are animals doesnt mean they dont count!

Answer 10

yes and no. I think yes because we have a lot of stray pets that end up dying or getting killed and that is not good and also no because some people want tohave more puppies/kittens but they don't have a lisence or don't know where to find or get one. so I am undecided