How do you feel about the government dictating "Mandatory Spay and Neuter" for your pets?

Question

The AB1634 will go to vote in the CA Senate 7/11/2007. Many people have organized grassroots campaigns to work to stop this bill.

Please note I'm not asking if you feel spaying and neutering is good or appropriate. We all know it is. I'm asking if you want the government further into your life and require that you to spay and neuter under penalty of law.

Answer 1

I feel that this law is a bad call.
Sure, it lets licensed breeders, show dogs, rescue, etc. do their own thing, but it'll do more harm than good.
People don't want to spay/neuter? Well, then they won't go to the Vet. Not to mention, is the veterinarian going to call the police whenever someone doesn't want to get their pet fixed? There are already issues with law enforcement numbers, and this puts a greater strain on them. And, as a veterinarian, I would not want to call the police on an owner who cares for their pet, does everything correct (except fixing), all to follow this law. What about breeding for behavior, or for personality? You can't tell too much about a dog's personality or capability until at least a year of age.
Last time I checked, the people that this law is targeting (puppy mills, hoarders, etc.) are already able to be arrested. The other day there were several dachshunds that came in for exam that were recently liberated from a 'hoarder,' who had already been through this before with chinchillas.
You've also got to realize that all one need to do is to cross the border into Nevada, or Oregon, and have the ability to produce the pets there if they don't have a license. So... cross border traffic.
Maybe this law will stop the stupid people from breeding their pets. Those people who want their children to see the 'wonder of birth,' or those who want their pet to have a litter before fixing because they feel it's good for the pet. But it won't stop the puppy mills, because they'll just go further underground. They're already doing something wrong, and now, if people want a certain breed, maybe pet prices will increase because there is no glut on the market, and if prices go up, so will the desire to make a crime out of it.

Answer 2

Very good-phrased. : ) In my ideal international, every body who owns a puppy or cat could have a 'shock' consult with from Responsible Pet company, who could withdraw a few blood and decode the DNA from that animal. Then DNA checks could be administered to all different puppies and cats filling the shelters, picked up by way of the pound, in any other case discovered wandering, and notice if those animals might be traced again to these persons. If the man or woman who initially held the founding animal is a liable man or woman and will turn out that they well being experiment and paintings and/or exhibit their puppies (no less than exhibit the cats, what paintings does a cat do? : ) ) and are liable for the animals in THEIR care, then the usual methods of monitoring - AKC registration, different forms, microchips and tattoos - could be administered and the brand new proprietor could be tracked down and fined (except, of direction, it might be tested that they had been actively watching for his or her misplaced puppy). For the BYBs and dog generators, this could imply that each one in their deficient, genetically in poor health animals might be traced again to them they usually could be slapped with a heavy first-class and investigated and optimistically close down, as soon as it's noticeable that just about ALL animals in shelters and rescues are THEIR fault. How can it now not be, whilst well breeders preserve in contact with their dog/kitten house owners for the life of that animal? Perhaps there can also be amendments for well breeders - similar to, you probably have evidence of CERT and OFA/PennHip and exhibit and/or paintings your puppies, then of direction you're a shrewd individual and do not require tracking or costs. Everyone else must be, nevertheless, and must be punished for doing it irresponsibly, without a regard to the lives they're growing. I'm beautiful worn out proper now - up too early this morning - so I do not consider my argument makes a lot feel, and I have not but touched on what it could do to well breeders, however I consider it could be first-rate to have such an institution. Sign me up! EDIT: And for this reason I'm now not a attorney - I do not make a cohesive argument! lol At the identical time, I are not able to stand executive have an impact on, so might be it might be a personal institution who oversaw whatever of this value.

Answer 3

not familiar with the bill, but am aware of the tremendous
problem with unwanted strays throughout the country. I'm
not into seeing so many animals put down because they're
unwanted. Therefore, if pet owners will not take care to see
that their pets are taken can of, i'm 100% behind any
spay/neuter law unless the owner can show a reason why not.

Answer 4

What if a PitBull.Rottweiler,Doberman breeder produces too many Pitbulls and can't sell them all. So, he gives them away to people for free.
Then, some 14 year old kid is walking the streets with a Pitbull and the PitBull starts chasing a jogger,small child,a pedestrian and attacks them ?
Those kinds of laws are finally being passed inorder to stop the build up of extra stray dogs and cats which can become infected with fleas (fleas can spread diseases like the Bubonic Palgue),rabbies from contact with wild animals like Racoons,skunks,foxes etc. and then bite and infect innoscent people and their pets. Traking,euthenizing & vaccinating the victims cost tax dollars which everyone has to pay. Including non-pet owners. Then,there's less money for more important things like National Security or Natural Disaster relief personel,training & equipment.

Answer 5

This is a perfect example of why we need government to work for us. After all, we are the government. People refuse to take responsibility for the uncontrolled over population of so-called pets, and so in order to fix what has become an overwhelming problem for communities, the government steps up to the plate to hit the ball out of the park.

Regulation is not a bad word. The people who try to convince you it is are bad.

Answer 6

Ask any animal shelter or humane society the problem with
overpopulation or abandoned pets. Responsible owners or
breeders of purebred animals don' t contribute to the problem.

Answer 7

We should give pet sex education, abstinence training, and free condoms to pets a chance without undo governmental interference.

Answer 8

most people who own domesticated animals have no responsibility whatsoever to keep their dogs/cats from not reproducing. i say if you don't plan on breeding pure-bred animals with a permit to do so and instead go mincing around breeding a crap load of cross-breeds, you need to get your animal spayed/nuetered.

Answer 9

I am alll for it. Doesn't it bother you to see puppies and kittens unable to find a good home?
This is part of the responsibility of owning a pet. Oh, did i say a dirty word, "responsibility."

Answer 10

I think it is necessary because there are far too many irresponsible pet owners in the US who don't care if unwanted puppies or kittens are euthanized.