Mandatory Spay/Neuter bill

[caseysmom]

Thats how I feel too Dr. Goodnow, in theory its a good idea but is it practical?

[DrKym]

Im not sure how practical, I understand the fines are a scare tactic, but that will only work on the honest ethical people.

The BYB and mills won't care. Also even if found and closed and fined, they wont have the funds to pay it.

My concern also is that in this article is a quote of having 25 dogs, because she wants her breed to remain intact. I am sorry I have bred very good dogs for many years, before doing rescue, if you have 25 intact dogs you are a mill. That is my opinion, and I will stick by it. Not all 25 can be such amazing reps of the breed that they need to be left intact.

I also think that without being able to have access to vet records there is no way to verify if the animals are intact. There are serious issues with that on many levels. Also unless you came to my house when one bitch is in heat you cannot prove she ISNT spayed. Dogs can be visually checked.

Again I am still poring over it but those are a few concerns, I think if it was really looked at and some issues addressed, it would be an amazing thing, and that other states and counties should follow.

Kym

[Aspen and Misty]

The only thing I don't like is I don't feel the AKC is a reliable source to say what dogs should breed or not breed. They register almost any old dog on the street. My sister's pom is registered by the AKC and she weighs 15 pounds (she isn't fat, just tall), is very tall for a pom and her knees pop out of joint if she moves them the wrong way (she will need corrective surgery if they get worse). However she is registered, so according to this law if I pay the money I can breed her and have lots of little poms with lots of little health problems.

However, this is what I think they should do:
I think they should create a temporary license that if purchased will allow a pur-bred dog to remain intact till the age of two. During the 2 years that the dog is intact it has to gain some kind of titles and pass all the necessary test (hips, eyes, elbows etc). If they do both of these and the dog's hips, eye, elbow test come out good and the person still want to keep the dog intact then they can buy a license that will allow the dog to remain intact for the rest of it's life. However if they have not done anything with the dog or the dog does not get good ratings on the test then they should not be allowed to purchase the full license and they should have to spay or neuter.

Ashley

[Giselle]

However, this is what I think they should do:
I think they should create a temporary license that if purchased will allow a pur-bred dog to remain intact till the age of two. During the 2 years that the dog is intact it has to gain some kind of titles and pass all the necessary test (hips, eyes, elbows etc). If they do both of these and the dog's hips, eye, elbow test come out good and the person still want to keep the dog intact then they can buy a license that will allow the dog to remain intact for the rest of it's life. However if they have not done anything with the dog or the dog does not get good ratings on the test then they should not be allowed to purchase the full license and they should have to spay or neuter.

Kudos to you because that is a wonderful plan, but the honest truth is that the government lacks the time and money to do any of that. IMO, the bill won't work. It targets the wrong group.

Look at licensing. It may have cut down rabies (but I fully believe that is because of responsible veterinarians), but I know MANY dogs who are not licensed. This honestly sounds like a ploy for money. I don't like it. I think it targets the wrong group entirely. They're also skewed as to what dog qualifies as an exception. I know a grey who has epilepsy and other health problems and, thus, cannot be neutered. Because of his disease, he's required to pay $100-$150 dollars every year? I know all his medications and tests have made a huge dent in his owner's pocket, and, yeah, I'd be mad if I was forced to pay that fee because my dog had a health problem. Heck, I don't even know if he would qualify for the permit because he's not registered with the AKC. He's not even reg'd with the NGA. And, come on, folks, the American Dog Breeders Association? It's going to become puppy mill haven! I don't think this bill is going to do a d@mned thing with pet overpopulation. Licensing tried to cut down on the population as a sort of side-effect. Look where it got us. It didn't work. I honestly don't think this will either.

ETA: Ontariogreys, you're right. It would wipe out the rarer breeds. I also know that there is a large amount of Chart Polski in California (I believe their group is centered around northern CA), and I shudder to think of what will happen to them if this bill passes. I also know that there is a large amount of Silken Windhounds here, as well. Of course, they could probably just register with the "American Dog Breeders Association"... ugh.

[caseysmom]

Thats the main critisims of the bill, it sounds like it might push many of the bad breeders underground. Well I sure wish that there was some good solution or that somebody would think of a good one.

[applesmom]

Im not sure how practical, I understand the fines are a scare tactic, but that will only work on the honest ethical people.

The BYB and mills won't care. Also even if found and closed and fined, they wont have the funds to pay it.

My concern also is that in this article is a quote of having 25 dogs, because she wants her breed to remain intact. I am sorry I have bred very good dogs for many years, before doing rescue, if you have 25 intact dogs you are a mill. That is my opinion, and I will stick by it. Not all 25 can be such amazing reps of the breed that they need to be left intact.

I also think that without being able to have access to vet records there is no way to verify if the animals are intact. There are serious issues with that on many levels. Also unless you came to my house when one bitch is in heat you cannot prove she ISNT spayed. Dogs can be visually checked.

Again I am still poring over it but those are a few concerns, I think if it was really looked at and some issues addressed, it would be an amazing thing, and that other states and counties should follow.

Kym

Darn! You beat me to it and said it better than I could have Kym.

We don't need more laws that can't or won't be enforced. What we do need is consistent enforcement of the existing laws and education, education and more education.

"If you have 25 intact dogs you are a mill." Absolutely!

[DrKym]

Thanks Carole!
I figured you were busy yesterday or you would have posted the same .

The issue isn't about the fines, those are in place in many areas, and are toothless.

The fact is when you get down to it, there is not the manpower needed to enforce a law of this sweeping magnitude. Laws are for the honest, as the dishonest will find a way around them.

It is an issue that will only be fixed with education, determination and the ability of people willing to get involved. If you see 25 dogs in a yard and hear pups all the time make a call. Be willing to get involved, donate to TNR programs even if its only your time or a 10.00 bill.

Transport animals when possible, be willing to actively educate and host seminars, if there aren't any then create them. Knock on vets doors and ask for them to donate time for low cost clinics, for vaccinations and neuterings, don't let one No discourage you from asking others.

If these kinds of grass root measures were taken up, in earnest and with commitment, then we could change a lot, and help shut down many BYBs.

Just my thoughts

Kym

[mike001]

I agree with this bill wholeheartedly. The shelters are brimming with unwanted animals as it is. This could be the beginning of the end to all these poor dogs being euthanized. As for exempting purebreds, I don't approve unless they have been thoroughly tested and proven to be a notable breeding dog. There are just as many purebreds in shelters that have been put there by BYB. I am hoping that this would be the start of a great saving factor for al the street dogs out there.

[CathyBogart]

Even if only law-abiding people abide by this, and even if it's only sporadically enforced, it's SOMETHING. It WILL put a dent in the overpopulation problem, even if it's a small one at first.

[DrKym]

Even if only law-abiding people abide by this, and even if it's only sporadically enforced, it's SOMETHING. It WILL put a dent in the overpopulation problem, even if it's a small one at first.

I agree Cathy, but we also need to supplement it. I fear it doesn't have enough teeth to make it truly viable, and I fear that like many laws of this type , it will be a year or so of diligence, and that back to the same old same old, due to burnout, and just not enough manpower to enforce it

It IS a start though