Homesteading Forum banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts
L

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Recently a controversial bill — Assembly Bill 1634 — was withdrawn from a committee of the California State Senate by its sponsor, Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, a Democrat from Van Nuys. The bill would have required the mandatory spaying or neutering of all cats and dogs, applying statewide the kind of regulations that have already been enacted in some cities across the country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30mon4.html?th&emc=th
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,374 Posts
1634 was a very flawed idea that needed to be shot down. But to the original question... no. Way too much of a slippery slope for my liking. I think an incentive for doing so would be wonderful, and most breeders make sure their buyers sign a contract stating that any pup or kitten sold as a "pet" must be neutered by X months of age. It's just the backyard breeders and those who let intact animals roam or otherwise freely mingle with other intact animals that are the problem.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,595 Posts
Any dog and cat that are not used for breeding should be spayed and neutered and the ones used for breeding should be kept under control.

I have 2 female and one male "stock dogs" and they are all "fixed". My Jack Russell isn't because I may want to breed him some day. But he is a house dog and with me 24/7. He doesn't leave the yard.

There are so many unwanted and stray animals out there that I think it is irresponsible to allow your animals to breed and produce litters year after year.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,244 Posts
No, it should NOT be a law. That doesn't mean I encourage indescrimate breeding. That doesn't mean most of mine aren't fixed. But a law?? Absolutely not. :nono:
 

·
Ex-homesteader
Joined
·
1,508 Posts
I believe pet owners should be encouraged to spay/neuter, but the incentive should come from breeders and private organizations, not through legislation. Like someone already pointed out, mandatory pet sterilization is a slippery slope to breeding oblivion.
 

·
Married, not dead!
Joined
·
2,703 Posts
I think the bill may have had good intentions, but it required all animals to be spayed or neutered by 4 months of age, and did not make exceptions for pups destined to be working animals (guide dogs, police, SAR, etc). I do believe all *pet* animals should be spayed and neutered, but to have a law that requires it may create as many problems as it solves.

I would like to see pressure placed on breeders to spay and neuter all pet animals BEFORE they are placed. Yes, this means pediatric spay/neuter, but it is already done by most reputable breeders of show cats. I got my registered Ocicat at 4 months of age already neutered. For a breeder to sell you an intact kitten, they have to know you very well and know what your intentions are. I wish all breeders would do the same, but unfortunately you can't legislate personal ethics.

For example... I browse the local paper and Craigslist and see ad after ad trying to hawk pitbull puppies... some of them going for $600-800 or more. Then, in the same places, people trying to give away their pitbulls at around 7-9 months of age, when they aren't cute anymore, too big, too active, too inconvenient, etc. I walk through our local shelter and see row upon row of pitbulls and pitbull crosses. It breaks my heart.

It's not just pitbulls, but that is the most glaring example here. There is such a glut of pet animals that sometimes people are pressured into taking a dog or cat when they aren't really ready. Then, in a few months, they get tired of it and try to get rid of it, and the cycle starts all over again.

We need to educate and change attitudes about pet animals. People breed them because they paid hundreds of dollars for their purebred (or, now, "designer-bred") puppy or kitten and think they can turn around, breed this animal, and make money. Everyone who wants to breed their pet dog should volunteer at an animal shelter for a couple of months so they can see the fallout of indiscriminate breeding. But they don't.

I agree with the proponents of AB1634 that something needs to be done. I just don't think that bill was the answer, and fortunately that was realized and the bill was pulled. I hope that we can come up with something--education, incentives, something. I'm not even necessarily opposed to legislation if it is written fairly, but there needs to be exceptions for REPUTABLE breeders to continue producing healthy, mentally sound animals.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,158 Posts
We have enough laws to shed off without adding more. I don't mind being encouraged to spay/neuter with discounted licensing fees and registration fees, or even encouraged through education, just don't try and pass yet another law. These petty autocratic laws are smothering us, my wife recently had to surrender her cheque writing purple glitter pen to a new law mandating plain blue or black ink be used!!!! God save us all from the do gooders!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,923 Posts
No! It is my choice that all of my dogs and cats get spayed or nuetered. I am afraid if that law is passed as is that breeding licenses will be given out by status not for the right reasons. If I had a dog with a great background and sound temperment I should have a right to breed that animal if I choose too.

I think they already have enough laws that infringe on our rights on what we do in our own backyards. I don't think we need another one!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,576 Posts
I agree with what Ross said.
I don't believe a law should be made to force reproductive sterilization of animals in the scope that the california legistation was flawed in trying to do.
 

·
Hello, hello....is there anybody in there.....?
Joined
·
78,655 Posts
"Yes, this means pediatric spay/neuter, but it is already done by most reputable breeders of show cats"

I dont think they do it because they are "reputable" I believe they do it to keep down competition and keep prices high. If they are breeding high quality animals, then even if one doesnt "look right" or have the "correct markings" to show, it STILL has the genetics to PRODUCE the "perfect" cat.

If more people were able to breed the animals, the "reputable" show folks couldnt demand outrageous prices for their culls

There are far too many laws already . Instead of making more they should concentrate on repealing most of them
 

·
Married, not dead!
Joined
·
2,703 Posts
Bearfootfarm said:
I dont think they do it because they are "reputable" I believe they do it to keep down competition and keep prices high. If they are breeding high quality animals, then even if one doesnt "look right" or have the "correct markings" to show, it STILL has the genetics to PRODUCE the "perfect" cat.

If more people were able to breed the animals, the "reputable" show folks couldnt demand outrageous prices for their culls
That attitude contributes to the problem of pet overpopulation.

Reputable breeders spay/neuter before placing their pet kittens because they don't want their breed ruined by amateur/backyard breeders. They do it because they don't want to contribute to pet overpopulation. Spayed and neutered cats can still be shown, so it doesn't eliminate competition in the ring. They are not in it for the money, believe me. They spend so much money on their cats, whatever they get back in kitten sales still amounts to a loss.

My cat did not have an "outrageous" price. He was the pick of the litter, but was a cryptorchid, so he was neutered and placed with me for a nominal fee.

Remember, I'm talking about a reputable breeder here. There are many who are not.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,280 Posts
.
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO,

It's not the governments business what I bread, and how many times ... next they will want to neuter me or my wife.

Don't think so ... look at China ...
only one child per family or you get a big fine and prison.

The US.A. is becoming more and more like a dictator ship.

They need to mind the business of the whole country not just a few nut heads.

Again I say ... NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, ... Never ! ! !

bumpus
.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,837 Posts
Wouldn't that mean that all the 'show dog' owners and those 'important' working breeding dogs (IE, police dogs etc) would stay intact, but all the breeders that raise working farm dogs (pyrs, collies) or family hunting dogs would be required to spay/neuter. Sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,124 Posts
I think this is the right idea, but the wrong way of going about it.

If I had my druthers, it would be mandatory dog/cat birth control in the dog/cat foods, especially the cat foods. The only exceptions would be prescription (special diet) foods or higher priced brands for breeders. What this would do is to make the production of kittens and puppies a conscious choice, rather than the rampant and thoughtless proliferation that abounds today.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,244 Posts
chamoisee said:
I think this is the right idea, but the wrong way of going about it.

If I had my druthers, it would be mandatory dog/cat birth control in the dog/cat foods, especially the cat foods. The only exceptions would be prescription (special diet) foods or higher priced brands for breeders. What this would do is to make the production of kittens and puppies a conscious choice, rather than the rampant and thoughtless proliferation that abounds today.
LOL. That would be a sure way to turn me from the partial raw I feed now to total raw. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,124 Posts
Yes, but you would be *choosing* to do so. IMHO most of the people who propagate puppies and kittens do so not intentionally, but out of irresponsibility. If the non-birth control food cost 3-4X as much as the cheaper treated stuff, that would eliminate the hapless breeding as well as the get rich quick by producing buku puppies, people.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top