California AB1634 Mandatory Spay/Neuter (MSN)

**SemaviLady** · 07-12-2007, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by mugsy

You can take statistics and skew them anyway you want them skewed, so I don't buy into that.

The new statistics say that what is posted isn't right, so, there you have it...

There were definite problems here. State law requires the shelters to report their statistics.

There were apparently two sets of data. Stats that were reported to the state as required and NEW stats that weren't reported and used in promotion of the bill.

Originally Posted by mugsy

I am totally in favor of mandatory spay/neuter. I also think the AKC needs to pull itself out of the Dark Ages and not require the show dogs to be unaltered.

I do have problems with the AKC but there are no organizations without fault. Some of their most recent mistakes have alienated some of their former faithful.

Originally Posted by mugsy

They do enough to further puppy mills, they don't need to make more pups!

They recently granted some interesting exemptions to commercial producers, in order to get them to register with AKC again. Yes, that's a problem.

Originally Posted by mugsy

I know the old story of "better the breed" but, that's just ridiculous...they don't bother to look at the millions of dogs and cats that are killed each year because no one wants them...most times their response is, "they're just mixed breeds, why are you worried, we're furthering the good of the breed." OY!

Actually people can have any opinion they want and it may not be right. There are actually studies of why pets are in shelters, and it does have to do with issues of convenience.

If a pet isn't working out, or the people are moving, I think the pet may have additionally presented challenges (behavioral?) that their human caretakers have grown a little tired of, so the pet becomes disposable.

This is not an overpopulation problem any more than the one where human mothers refuse to care for their kids and the kids are put into limbo.

**crow_noir** · 07-12-2007, 09:26 PM

I'd want that to be mandated. Anyone in charge of scanning (must be at least two per shelter) would personally be fined if it was found that they were not scanning EVERY pet coming into the shelter.

and i agree... it would save shelters so much money if they actually made an effort to reunite pets with their owners.

I've actually see a number of tagged pets at my pound that were just never claimed. (Owners give up too soon and don't continue to look for their pet. The shelter seems to assume the worst about the owner.) The pound doesn't make the calls. And people assume if their pet is tagged that the pound will call them. *sigh*

Well we already have a problem here. Animals going into shelters are not routinely scanned for chips.

**Giselle** · 07-13-2007, 01:27 AM

You know what? Every dog in the my city is required to be licensed and microchipped (can't get the license without a chip).

You know what else? Nobody cares. Very few owners comply.

Licensing is easy. Get your rabies shot. Send in a small amount of money for an altered dog or a large amount of money for an intact dog, and you have your license.

Forcing people to fix their dogs is much harder. So if licensing failed, why shouldn't mandatory s/n?

**crow_noir** · 07-13-2007, 02:09 AM

True.

Sometimes I'm surprised at how many people in my city avoid registering their dogs even though they have the shots for the dog. ...and as I'm finding out we're fairly reasonable compared to most other jurisdictions. I know the price raised but but it was something like $6/yr. for "unsexed" dogs and $15 for intact dogs. The prices are even lower for cats. I really don't see what the big deal is. (Even when my parents were on welfare they got the dog its shots and license.) It's like HELLO! if it's registered that's legal proof it's your dog. UGGG... but some people just don't care.

Forcing people to do anything is going to fail. Responsible will comply while everyone else just ignores it.

I was just trying to look at things positively. It is a downer though thinking of how hard it is to implement rules.

Originally Posted by Giselle

You know what? Every dog in the my city is required to be licensed and microchipped (can't get the license without a chip).

You know what else? Nobody cares. Very few owners comply.

Licensing is easy. Get your rabies shot. Send in a small amount of money for an altered dog or a large amount of money for an intact dog, and you have your license.

Forcing people to fix their dogs is much harder. So if licensing failed, why shouldn't mandatory s/n?