$500 Fine for Pets not Spayed or Neutered by 4 MONTHS!!!
 

Can you believe this? The new proposed bill in California wants to force pet owner to a mandatory spay neuter by the time the pets are 4 MONTHS OLD!

If you are caught with any pets over 4 months that are not there is a $500 fine!

If you are a breeder, you have to get a permit at $50 to $100 per pet!

Why? to reduce the number of animals being euthanized.
This is outrageous!

First of all the responsible pet owners will do it anyways. The ones who don't care won't. In my opinion it's not going to change anything.

What do you think? What if this bill passes and other states follow suit?

The price of purebred dogs and cats are so much more in California already, if this bill passes, I can't imagine what a new Yorkie puppy would cost, I rarely see a pup for under $1200 and a good breeder is asking for $2500+ for a limited registeration.

for more details go to:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5632446

Ummm... 6 months would be more appropriate in my opinion, but...

I guess I don't see what is outragous about it. Care to elaborate?

It has it's pro's and con's first the

pro's.....

1. This would stop a lot of the puppy mills i think because you think about it they have like 300-500 dogs at $100.00 a pop thats $30,000-50,000.00 that they have to come up with to breed!

2. It would stop a lot of the BYB breeders as well if this law was inforced and kept on top of.

Con's....

1. It would hurt small breeders that care about the breed

2. It would hurt the legitamate kennals that have a lot of dogs as well that is a hefty price for each dog

Well in ALOT of ways I actually think it's GREAT (:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: What Amber said about the Puppy Mills :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:) however, on the other hand, 4 months is QUITE young, especially for these tiny ones like Yorkies. Some are just WAY too small at 4 months still. I know that if I lived in Cali and this law was passed, I'd have a $500 fine slapped on me because there is no way in h3ll I would have had Tatum spayed at 4 months - WAYYYY too little, still is! :rolleyes: :thumbdown

My biggest problem with it is it forced upon us. It's not a choice. I would do it anyways but let say I'm undecided about breeding, and my pup is only 7 months old, if I get caught it's going to cost me $500 fine then I have to decide to pay for neuter, spay or pay the $50-$100 for a permit.

Even if they pass the bill, unresponsible owners are NOT going to spay/neuter and if it looks like they might get caught, they'll take them to the shelter anyways so they don't have to pay.

Vet's will charge more for the procedure because we have to have it done. Breeders will charge more because "they have to get a permit".
People will bring unhealthy dogs accross the border or there will be a "Black Market" on poorly bred dogs to meet the demand depleted inventory from the small breeders and hobby breeders. Puppy mills will blossom since the demand will increase and people will buy from pet stores since they can't find the smaller breeders.

I just don't see this as a good thing.

I just can't see how this is going to reduce the number of animals in the shelters. If anything I think it might increase.

This is what is outrageous to me:

The bill would "address the needless slaughter" of as many as 500,000 animals in California each year, said Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, the author of the bill, AB1634. "There has to be a better way."

While I don't agree with the 4 months idea I do believe we as a society must stop this needless killing. There does have to be a better way.

I 100% agree there is a huge need to reduce the number of shelter dogs, but the way I see it, and maybe it's a Southern California thing... but because So Cal has people from so many different cultures, they don't see pet ownership the same way we do. They don't see that spay/neuter, regular check-ups, good diet, etc. applies to dogs & cats. Also, the "questionable" south of the border immigrant community can not afford the cost of spay neuter and may not know about the low cost clinics or that letting your pets reproduce is a problem at all.

Hmmm.... I wonder if their Catholic beliefs plays any part in them not sterilizing their pets. (I don't mean to offend anyone by this comment - it's just a thought that hit me).

Basically people need to be educated in responsible pet ownership. As far as the shelters go, I check their websites quite a bit and there are far more cats and kittens then there are dogs, especially young dogs. I would guess most of the cats are feral (sp?) and what do you do about that? As for the dogs? Again, they are being given up because of unresponsible pet owners for behavior problems, age or illness. Most dogs I see listed for adoption in our area are pit or pit mixes and smaller dogs are older chi's & chi mixes.

i think its a great idea!

California local news has just begun reporting the dog fancier's side. Letter's to your local congressman need to be sent. Where before you were only getting a one sided view (PETA). I know that the AKC has sent a letter to the California Governor, many of Kennel Clubs have also sent letters opposing this. If it does pass, the dog world as it is today is a thing of the past. I do know that in Palm Springs, in order to be a breeder, you must be an AKC member and actively be participating in showing a dog.

I don't agree with spaying/neutering at 4 months old. I think some modifications need to be made so that responsible pet owners aren't penalized for waiting until safe to s/n their pet. I know it would be an administrative nightmare but something like a refund of the fee/fine once proof animal has been spayed by 1 year of age. Something has to be done to stop the millions of animals euthanized or living their life out in a shelter.

Visit the following to view the letter sent to the Governor from AKC

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/canine_legis...ReBill1634.pdf

i also think its a good idea. However, I think that the age of spay or neuter should depend on the breed and or weight of the dog. A Lab at 4 months is going to be much bigger than a yorkie or chi or maltese. Perhaps you should have to notify someone when you get your puppy of what age he or she is and what breed and weight and then get a time frame from there. Like saying you have a yorkie that is 3 months and 2 lbs it may not be healthy enough to spay by 4 months. So maybe you could be given a grace period of a few months for that particular dog.

Several studies have been conducted, if spay/nuetering ocurrs at too young an age it does affect the bone growth process.

The bill while it does appear to be directed at responsible ownership has much more of an impact on other areas.

I agree with this...it should be a certain age and weight. It isn't as cut and dry as what they want it to be, "4 months of age or a fine." I have a Maltese mix and he is not neutered at a little over 4 months. I want him to be closer to 6 months because I honestly feel that 4 months is too young. Other than the age requirement, I actually like the bill. I am a future breeder and I would have no problem with paying extra for a permit. I really think overall, this would discourage the puppy-millers....which is GREAT!!!

Tammy

Yes, but it will affect your economy....no dog shows in the state of California as it doesn't make allowances for those traveling into the state. No it won't deter the puppy millers, they'll just pay the fees....they are making big bucks......and it won't deter those such as the "Hunt Corporation" Dog wholesaler, who has made millions off of the importation of dogs from other countries and selling them, to millers and pet stores.

So doe sthat mean that if you have a pet that is not spayed you can not bring them to Cali on a vacation? I'm not sure I understand.

I'm really not sure what to think. I know something, somehow, should be done but how are they going to monitor every person who owns a dog when they can't even find criminals? Sounds like Big Brother is getting closer and closer.

I don't guess I understand what you are saying with "doesn't make allowances for those traveling into the state." You really think that most puppy-mills are going to pay $100 per breeding dog that they have??

Exactly what it means.....

visit the akc website, there is more info on the bill

Yes, I do. It will not stop the millers or dog wholesalers...they have the money to pay the fees, they breed to sell dogs for big bucks. The bill will have a major impact on the small hobby breeder/dog fancier, but won't touch the miller or dog wholesellers.

I mean that those coming in from other states will not be able to travel there if there dogs are not altered.....

Forgive me for sounding ignorant here but I dont know much (really nothing) about dog shows. Are all the dogs in the shows not spayed or neutered? Is that a rule that they cant be to be show dogs?

All dogs that are showed at conformation events are intact. The whole purpose of a dog show is to gain approval of your breeding stock.

ok I see. Thanks you.
And here I thought of it as a "my doggy is better looking than yours" type of event. :)

Well when you look it at that way....it's an kind of good way of putting it. But, seriously you're asking the judge to evaluate your dog, against the standard.

:thumbup: :thumbup:

4 months is much too young. Think of all the breeders out there who evalute a pup for up to a year before decided if they are breeding quality. And that is just one scenario. Angel is 5.5 months and I'm not even thinking about spaying yet. I want to wait till more like 7-8 months to make sure we don't need to have another appointment for pulling teeth.

While I agree in principle that something needs to be done to stop puppy mills and needless widespread euthanasia of unwanted animals, I really don't think this will do it. After all, pets are supposed to be licensed as well and how many do you know that don't do that?!!

i believe in highly with spay & neuter i dont see unless your dog is amazing quality it should be breed
but i hope they will allow a letter from the vet saying it cant be done til there older for the smaller ones im sure they will understand
i think the bill is a great idea i hope it comes here !!

I guess there is no clear cut answer. As someone else posted, responsible pet owners will comply. They seem to be the ones complying anyway. I used to live in a neighborhood and there was only one neighbor who allowed her cat to run free. I would see him periodically. Now my Mom's neighborhood is full of cats running free. Most I would assume are not fixed. Real common for that neighborhood. If that bill were passed in her state I can't see all those neighbors suddenly scooping up their cats and going in to be fixed. Goes back to responsible pet ownership. I don't have any of my girls fixed. Just my male Chin to avoid unplanned babies. My Malinois isn't fixed either, he is Schutzhund titled.

Remember there are two sets of organizations One Animal Rights; PETA, HSUS, the ones that have introduced this bill and wanting to do away with all pet ownership....and they will succeed if we don't arm ourselves with knowledge. #2. Animal Welfare groups that are fighting for the welfare and proper care of animals....this is where our donations should be going to.

I will do more research into this, but why would poeple want to stop all pet ownership? I do believe there are certain people that should not be allowed to have pets ( I believe some should not have children as well). BUt why would you stop pet ownership all together?