Arizona Mandatory Spay/neuter Bill!!

[MyFairLacy]

Originally Posted by Yorkieluv

Wow I did not realize that 75% of vet students are women. That's great!

LOL Yeah...unless you're single Seriously, I always get asked if there are any guys in my class I'm interested in dating...I just laugh and tell them that there aren't many guys in my class and most of them are married

[Yorkieluv]

Haha!! That's pretty funny!!

[tjdmom]

I also agree that this bill should be voted down. After all, how many small show breeders wind up putting their puppies in shelters? In my area, the shelter rarely has any puppies but only adult dogs. The biggest problem seems to actually be with the cats and even those are usually adults. I think we would be better off spending the money screening people or educating people on how to be good owners instead of limiting people. Maybe provide some free spay/neuter clinics and give a little incentive to them. But there will always be irresponsible people out there and I don't see how this law is going to somehow make those irresponsible or downright dishonest people obey the law. Puppymillers will still breed their dogs like always, and for them it's much more cost effective when you are having the same female and breeding her on every cycle. I think it's only going to affect those that already do the right thing and most of them already spay and neuter their pets or breed responsibly. Yes, there are always exceptions to the rule but I think the law will wind up forcing prices up on the sale of dogs and the end result will be that people will be forced to go to puppymills or pet stores in order to be able to afford one at all. Is that what we really want?

[yorkiekist]

Good point TJDMom!!! I was thinking about that earlier today. Also, if there is a mandatory spay/neuter, I can just see the prices of spay/neuter going up because the pet buyers will have no choice and have to get it done. I would think the vets would be against this bill also as they make the most money on breeder clients. Also, Petsmart, Petco, and the mailorder companies bank on mostly breeders to buy their products. I would think that they would want to protest this as well. And who will do the "critique" to decide if you are a show kennel and which dogs will be required to be spayed/neutered? It probably wont be the AKC or an AKC judge, it will be some fool that doesnt know zip about the breed he/she is looking at. The only ones that will be laughing all the way to the bank are the pet stores. Everyone will be forced to buy from them and they can jack those prices up even further.
Well, hopefully all the kennel clubs and breeders will get together and fight this. If it can pass in LA, and then pass here, this fire will just keep on spreading.

[Alison Mc]

You are right -I'm here in AZ and will help fight it any way I can.

[yorkiekist]

Ok, Arizonans: go to Az Bill 2516 on the computer. The AKC website has a sample letter and the names, addresses, e-mails of all the Az state representatives. PLEASE lets write to them!!!!!! Get together with all your friends, kennel clubs, breed groups and bombard them with e-mails and letters!!!! This same bill is being introduced in new Mexico and Texas as well as other states. Lets stop this wild fire!!!!!!!!!

[Ellie May]

These bills usually get voted down, so there is hope for all of you in AZ.

Every other week it seems like one state or another is trying to pass these laws. Don't they have anything better to do? There are people committing crimes and running free. Why don't they spend their time worrying about that instead?

And guess who will pay from these "free" spay/neuter clinics...tax payers. Surgery isn't cheap.

Surgery is a medical decision between you and your dog's vet, not the government. What if the government told you that your child had to have a surgery that you didn't want them to have? I think just about everyone here would have an ever living fit. There is absolutely no difference between the two.

[Bravo916]

I am totally against this as well. I few weeks back I posted a thread on the California mandatory spay/neuter bill that they are trying to pass.

While this is intended for the California legislation, I have a feeling that most of the points will remain applicable. Here is my argument against this law and the reasons why I am against it.

Originally Posted by Bravo916

Here is the website for AB 1634, what they are calling the California Healthy Pets Act. AB 1634 Official Site - California Healthy Pets Act There is actually a link on that site where you can read the actual bill they are trying to pass.

In theory it sounds really good--like it would actually put a dent in pet overpopulation, stop byb'ing, close puppymills when it really only hurts the people who are in it for the betterment of dog breeds and the actual dog breeds themselves.

They claim to have provisions for working, show, police, and dog/cats unheatlhy enough to undergo the procedure but these provisions put a huge financial strain on the people who are doing right by animals.

Let me explain, here are two different examples of the provisions they allow for unaltered permits: titled dogs (or dogs under 3yrs who are working on their titles) and any individual with a business and resale license relating to the selling of animals. These people need to pay an annual fee (which I will discuss later) for an intact animal permit on each unaltered dog they have.

"(1) The owner demonstrates, by providing a copy of his or her
business license and , federal
and state tax number tax identification number,
California seller's permit, as required by Section 6066 of the
Revenue and Taxation Code , or by other proof, as required by
the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency,
that he or she is doing business and , if licensing is
required, is licensed as a breeder at a location for which the
local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency has
issued a breeder license."

2) The owner's cat or dog is a valid breed that is
recognized by an approved belongs to a recognized
registry or association, and complies with at least one of the
following:
(A) His or her The cat or dog is
used to show or compete and has competed in at least one legitimate
show or sporting competition hosted by, or under the approval of, a
recognized registry or association within the last two years, or by
whatever proof is required by the local jurisdiction or its
authorized local animal control agency demonstrating that
the cat or dog is being trained to show or compete and is too young
to have yet competed.
(B) The cat or dog has earned, or if under three years old, is in
the process of earning, a conformation, obedience, agility, carting,
herding, protection, rally, sporting, working, or other title from
an approved a recognized registry or association.

The only people I know with business licenses and California sellers permits when it comes to selling dogs are puppymills. One lady came up to me at a show with my Yorkie and asked me if it was customary for breeders to charge her tax on a puppy--I advised her to run.

The intact permits they mention are clearly stated in the bill that the price will be determined by each county. In some areas with mandatory spay/neuter laws in effect, these can be as much as $500 a dog per year.

It seems highly unfair that people that are breeding for the betterment of the breed and people who own titled dogs who dont breed but arent in the position to make such an important decision to neuter, should be decreasing the California budget deficit.

If you have ever met a small time show breeder--they carefully plan each litter--the are meticulous with the health tests, cross all of their "T's" and dot all of their "i's"--they dont jump until all is perfect. Breeding is definitely not a source of income but more of a passion with the goal of creating a dog that will go Best In Show. We need more of these people in the world. Imposing these huge annual penalties only puts an even larger financial strain on them.

From my perspective, I own a titled Doberman and have never bred him nor do I plan on it in the future--however I am not ready to neuter him just yet. I also have a Yorkie, who's sire and dam are from impeccable bloodlines, who is working on his championship. I havent bred either of my dogs and I dont have plans to as of yet. However, in order for me to remain a law abiding citizen I must purchase 2 of these permits annually which turns my passion into a financial constraint.

Puppymills on the other hand, have that kind of revenue to purchase these permits. They mass produce with no regard to what ill effects it has on the breed. Their only concern is the bottom line. In reality, theses permits are actually a tax write-off because they are a business expense. And YES puppymills do pay taxes--just ask the IRS!

BYB's will just hide their dogs, who probably arent licensed to begin with, and it will be business as usual.

I know my argument isnt air-tight but I hope you get the general gist. Believe me I am all for getting rid of BYB's and puppymills--there is nothing in the world that urkes me more. I just think this isnt the right solution--it attacks the responsible pet owners not the people whom it was intended.

By saying no to this law we are asking them to sit back down and redraft it so that it sends its message to its intended target audience: puppymills and byb's that overpopulate shelters.

Sorry for the novel. (and I didnt even touch on LA's ludicrous issue of fixing dogs and cats at 4months of age...)

Best regards,

[KimMee's Mom]

Many cities in Texas have been fighting these same issues- this is sweeping the US and I believe actually was passed last year in some Kentucky cities. I think there is more to this than we realize, a bigger agenda on some organization's part?

below are links to info about these type bills

http://www.responsiblepetowners.org/


http://www.responsiblepetowners.org/...on_alerts.html

[KimMee's Mom]

I know parts of this bill did get passed in Texas also- I just haven't found the revision version of the bill