New bill in Cali?

Question

this is a link to a new bill that is trying to pass in california regarding spaying and neutering of pets. please read and tell me your thoughts, and if you disagree...why?

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_bill_20070703_amended_sen_v92.html

Answer 1

I hope the bill passes.

Everyone should watch this four minute video !

http:/brightlion.com/InHope/InHope_en.aspx

Answer 2

I disagree for the reasons already given. (By the way, pedigree breeders will have to be registered and then will be exempt from this law.) There are studies that show that young dogs spayed/neutered early grow *more* than if done at maturity. There is some speculation that this is contributing to more cruciate ligament damage, etc. Have a look at this site:-

(http://www.naiaonline.org/library/Appeasing_Animal_Rights_Activists.htm)

The site states:- "The proponents say that AB 1634 is needed to reduce shelter impound and euthanasia rates, but the following chart shows that dog rates have declined
dramatically in recent decades as dog owners have recognized the need to train, confine and properly care for their dogs, and as access to pet owner education and low cost spay/neuter clinics has increased. "...yet the law was still introduced. Also, in the opinion of the author using statistics from other places that have already implemented similar progs... "The fact is, history shows that mandatory spay/neuter laws have never worked. They lead to increased pet abandonment and shelter deaths, as well as other unintended consequences. That's why Peninsula Humane Society, the organization that introduced the nation's first mandatory spay/neuter ordinance in neighboring San Mateo County reports that _PHS won't be supporting AB 1634_
(http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=74620) . Like other jurisdictions, they have, through trial and error, found that other programs simply work better."

I honestly don't see how such a law can be enforced. Irresponsible people will always be irresponsible. People will keep unregistered dogs, and breed from them. Puppy mills will not suddenly disappear, they will just find a way around it. And what about people who breed crosses deliberately? I'm not talking about making a "breed" for the sake of it, such as a Maltipoo or whatever. For example, I have two crosses here (an Aussie/Collie and a NZH/Collie) and both were planned and deliberate matings. Both breeders had the pups sold before they were mated......both are Championship obedience dogs here. (The Aussie cross has superb obedience lines.) These breeders would no longer be able to produce pups that are actually *wanted*, while other irresponsible breeders will carry on producing litter after litter of far too many pups. A crack-down on puppy mills producing litter upon litter would be a start........these are usually pedigree dogs, so I presume they will be exempt from this law, which seems ludicrous to me.

PS. Previous posters point about imported dogs is already a fact in the USA. Something around the 10,000 mark are imported from Mexico just now, so that number is going to increase. It will not cut down on the number of abandoned dogs.

Answer 3

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why this is a bad idea. The mandatory spaying and neutering of ALL dogs and cats .. it won't take long to rid the entire state of pets. Hobby show breeders that would be exempt are not going to be able to fill supply and demand and with rules such as these MANY show breeders would leave the state anyway. So what you have here in a disguise of 'healthy' pets.. is actually a NO PETS ALLOWED bill.
Show breeders will either stop breeding or move. The criteria to keep a show dog intact is ridiculous as well. Did you read it? Dogs must complete their CH by 2 and also there are HIGH fee's to keep intact show dogs. It's all ridiculous and if you read it thoroughly and THINK hard about long term effects you will see that this bill stinks to high heaven of PETA freaks and the HSUS.
When every single dog and cat are spayed and neutered.. where are you supposed to get your next pet? The ONLY people who are for such a bill are either PETA freaks, Those who don't fully understand what it means long and short term or those who don't have any desire to have a pet in their life.
This IS a NO PETS ALLOWED bill in disguise. Don't be fooled to think anything else.
The freaks CLAIM this will save millions in pet euthanization... Seems they forgot to mention how much it will cost to police all these ideas. Are all the animal cops who are going door to door of all the millions of existing pets going to work for free? Are the lawyer and judges who have to hear case after case working for free? This bill will cost tax payers A LOT more then they spend now on animals.

Answer 4

I didn't click on the provided link, but I imagine you're referring to the proposed law about spaying/neutering all pets at 4 months of age, correct?

I don't agree with the bill because I don't believe in spaying or neutering pets that eary. For many breeds, their growth plates are not closed by that age, and I don't believe in spaying or neutering until an animal is fully grown. There are positives and negatives with spaying late, just as there are positives and negatives to spaying early and I think it should be an owners decision as to when is right for their pet to be fixed.

I see what they are trying to accomplish by implementing this new law- they are trying to keep the number of unplanned breedings down thus lowering the number of unwanted pets in shelters/rescues, etc but I don't think that's going to help the siuation. If people dont want to get their pets spayed or neutered, they'll find a loophole to either get out of doing it or they simply won't register their animal with the county.

I agree that there are too many unwanted animals in shelters but I think there's got to be a better way of lowering those numbers than what they're trying to do here.

Answer 5

WOW!
I live in Canada, but that is amazing!
That is like telling humans they can't have babies.

I know there are many unwanted pets, I have tons of them in my home...lol
But that is going to hurt breeders (the real ones). Also people who own farm land allow their cats to get pregnant continuously as 'barn' cats ensure the mice/rodent population is down and they don't usually live that long - those darn country roads.

I don't agree in the sense of those that want to breed their pet with another of the same type.....those that use their boy dog/cat as a stud. Some people own a dog/cat for the reason they want to breed her or him. As long as it is legit, I don't seem the harm in that.

Now I do agree due to the unwanted pets out there. In this case I would put it in Bill that those that purchase pets for the idea of NON breeding, should have them fixed.

I would agree with the BILL if they changed the wording.

Answer 6

I would be calling my congressmen wildly-- everyone of them on a daily basis. I would point out that this will bring an influx of illegal animals across the mexican border in order to fulfill the demand for pets, and that these illegal animals would endanger the health and welfare of the people of the state. I would also be calling the committees that were discussing this bill. It is just a gaia-loving bunch of eco-nuts trying to hurt the people of the state. If the people make a large grass roots effort, they can thwart the effort.

Answer 7

LOL You already know my stand on this one. I was all for it at first, but there's more to it than meets the eye. Pedigree breeders are not exempt. They will only be allowed one breeding pair, and then only ONE litter!!! I just think there are less drastic measures that could be taken rather than let the government make yet another decision for us. :)

Thanks for the blog comment, btw. :)

Answer 8

think they are doing the proper thing. far too many homeless animals that can be prevented. makes owners act more responsibly