Mandatory dog and cat spay/neuter in Palm Beach

[RoachGirlRen]

Don't even touch on the animal rights groups like PETA. Their entire agenda is based on ERADICATING animal ownership. PETA killed over 14,000 adoptable pets that they pulled out of shelters last year, after giving said shelters the impression they had homes for those animals.

That's why I specifically mentioned PETA as one of the programs that would be all for this If they're really so into all animals being spayed/neutered and eliminating pet ownership, why the hell don't they pick up the tab for laws like this, instead of forcing overtaxed state and local governments to? They seem to have no problem eliminating animals allready, but it'd probably be better PR for them if they just helped fund spay/neuter projects. If they were smart, that'd be the direction they'd take. But, they're PETA, so obviously they're... y'know... not smart.

 

[mindlessvw]

I have heard of some programs at shelters where vets who are still in training get experience by spaying or neutering strays. This could be a possible saving grace in cost if it was used to teach as well as help the animal...just a thought...

 

[Galadriel]

Similar ordinance passed in L.A.

NEWS from RICHARD ALARCON
Councilmember, 7th District


<http://www.lacity.org/council/cd7/pressreleases/cd7pressreleases275850695_02122008.pdf>


Tuesday, February 12, 2008

LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL PASSES LARGEST
SPAY & NEUTER ORDINANCE IN THE NATION

Los Angeles, CA – Today the Los Angeles City Council voted in support of what will be the largest spay & neuter ordinance in the nation. This ordinance, which was introduced by Councilmember Richard Alarcón and unanimously approved by the Public Safety Committee, will require all cats and dogs in the City of Los Angeles to be spayed or neutered if they are over the age of 4 months unless they fall under one of the seven categories for exemption. The ordinance passed with a vote of 14 to 1 and will go into effect approximately 45 days after the Mayor signs it.

“The problem in our city is not the animals but the human owners and this ordinance will allow the Department of Animal services to target resources towards the worst offenders whose irresponsibility threatens public safety and fills our shelters with unwanted dogs and cats,” said Councilmember Alarcón.

“This spay and neuter ordinance can serve as a model for the nation, as it will reduce the number of animals that need to be killed every year but also balances this with reasonable exemptions, an educational component and ample opportunity for low-cost and free spay and neuter services.”

Mayor Antonio Villaraigsoa said, “Thanks to the leadership of Councilman Alarcón, the City of Los Angeles is taking a crucial step towards increasing the practice of spaying and neutering our pets and reducing our homeless pet population.”

Each year, almost 50,000 unwanted cats and dogs are born in the City of Los Angeles. Left unspayed and un-neutered, these animals reproduce far beyond the capacity of our local shelters and overwhelm animal rescue groups and the community who often find it difficult to accommodate them. Shelters are often forced to euthanize young and healthy animals to make room for an ever increasing number, with puppies and kittens euthanized at the highest rate. In 2007, the City of Los Angeles spent over $2 million on euthanization of animals, killing 8,960 cats and 6,049 dogs.

This ordinance also establishes an advisory committee composed of 15 members who will find ways to educate the general public about services that exist to help with outreach on the importance of spaying and neutering animals. The City currently provides vouchers for free and reduced cost spay & neuter services for senior citizens and low-income residents. Specific exemptions from required spaying and neutering in this ordinance include dogs and cats approved by a registry or association approved by the Department of Animal Services, dogs being trained for work, service dogs including guide and signal dogs, law enforcement, military or rescue dogs, animals for whom the owner can produce a letter from a registered veterinarian stating there is a medical reason to exempt the animal and animals that have a valid city breeding permit.

The ordinance does not create any new requirements for breeders and also does not criminalize pet owners who are found to have unaltered pets. With the first violation an owner has 60 days to have his or her animal spayed or neutered. After 60 days and upon subsequent citations the owner is fined or given community service hours and the animal still must be spayed or neutered. It is only upon the fourth violation and after six months from the first violation that an owner can be prosecuted for a misdemeanor.
__________________

 

[RoachGirlRen]

What, California restricting people's rights? Unheard of! ::laughs:: This comes as no surprise to me, seeing as in some cities you can't even have fricken bottled water any more. Big government FTW!

Honestly though, it sounds like Los Angeles did a much better job of thinking this out. The exceptions are appropriate, it doesn't limit breeders or people with pets registered in showing organizations who could be bred and need to be intact to show, and it doesn't crimminalize owners. I doubt it will be very effective, but at least it isn't quite as demanding as the law in Florida.

 

[Galapoheros]

I think it would be interesting to see the impact of a law where, if your intact dog or cat is picked up straying, it is spayed/neutered, vaccinated, and held. And you are legally required to pay the cost of the vetting and the boarding fee for the time your dog/cat was in the shelter. No punishing or restricting responsible pet owners, ..

This was my idea too when I started reading this thread. I like that idea the best. Maybe have authorities knock on the pet owners door and charge a $200 fine, or else have it neutered, something like that. And it's already been said but I think a lot of people are going to see the $75 tag as a license to breed, rather than a commitment not to breed. Well if all this keeps rolling along, all pets will be sold at a much higher price. Ha, maybe I've listened to Alex Jones one too many times but if you follow the money... Maybe big breeders are really helping to push this. Too much government, taxing and fees are getting a little crazy if you ask me. I thought I heard on the news they are giving tax "rebates" to people that didn't even pay taxes! Did I hear that right? I was in gov for over 14 years. Most people do become wasteful when put in a gov position. It's not necessarily the nature of gov more than it is the nature of people put in that environment. Anyway, got a little off topic there. Paying a yearly fee to have a whole animal really rubs me the wrong way though. It's hard for me to say that it "might" help but I don't like that idea. And look at the word they use.... "fixed". They try to make it sound like your animal is broken, a psych play. Then you take your animal in for them to break. There are a lot more stray cats than dogs. It's just that cats in general are less dependant and don't wind up in the shelters as much as dogs do. I don't know, but it is a problem. I don't have any good answers, just a few comments.

 

[CID143ti]

And look at the word they use.... "fixed". They try to make it sound like your animal is broken, a psych play.

Nice point. A psych play, that is exactly what is meant by that. Very subtle and it is an easy (quick and non descriptive) way to refer to what we are actually doing to the dog. Don't get me wrong, I support spaying and neutering of dogs and cats that are not going to or need to be bred. Just trying to say that it is easier for us to do it if we use different terminology to describe the process.

I totally agree cats are way worse on the environment than dogs and many people believe that cats should be allowed to roam as they please since it is part of their nature.

I wish there was more owners that were intrinsically motivated to be responsible so additional ordinances don't have to added. I'm not a fan of additional gov. regulations…we have enough. Soon, we are going to be forced to nice to each other. I can't wait for that one..."renedification"...lol. I think I'm so funny!!!

W. Smith

 

[Mushroom Spore]

And look at the word they use.... "fixed". They try to make it sound like your animal is broken, a psych play. Then you take your animal in for them to break.

I don't think that's the intended definition of "fix" - there are quite a few meanings.

For instance: To put into a stable or unalterable form, to become stable, a solution. If you fix something, you make it the way you want it (british).

 

[CID143ti]

As a native Texan, I am well versed in using the word and its conjugates. We be fixin' to do everything around these parts. I'm so funny...Anyway, the vast majority of people often find ways of saying things that make them sound better or easier to hear than they actually are...people often say that some one has "passed away" instead of is dead.

W. Smith

 

[Galapoheros]

Haha, yeah Will, doo doo is "fertilizer", raising taxes is an "economic stimulus package", and according to advertisers, I save money if I buy stuff I don't want. But I understand your point Mushroomspore, esp. the def of it being a "solution to a problem". Yeah, that's a good point, but I think it's people, not the animals that need to be fixed. It's the fact that it might take money instead of understanding to "fix" people is disappointing to me. It's like someone else said in so many words, "..some people just don't get it..". I think the word "idiots" was used. It isn't accidents. It comes from people that don't care, don't get it. Accidental breeding of dogs is a rare case these days. It's a diff story with cats, people just let them go wild. I live in a semi-country neighborhood in the city limits. I NEVER see roaming dogs. It's irresponsible people causing the problem. It's people that buy and decide they don't want them anymore. I think the problem is there. I don't think a $75 annual fee is not going to solve the prob, it's just going to give the gov more money. It's like trying to shoot down an elephant with a BB gun.