Pet sterilization becomes law in LA
 

Good. There are to many unwanted animals and pets in shelters as it is :(

I'm too lazy to look into it. What is the enforcement? Most people never register their dogs and, particularly, cats in the first place.

I'm torn about this new law. Yes, in the short run, it will keep many creatures from meeting horrible, untimely deaths. In the long run, it could create a scarcity of animals for people who want to own pets. Bred animals - particularly cats- are already very expensive. If drastically fewer animals are being born, them I do have some fear that having pets will become a luxury, and my heart breaks at that thought.

I have thought about this in the past. I believe that there will be enough non compliance with this law that there will not be a shortage of animals. And if this law is successful, I am sure it would be relaxed at some point in the future if there really was a shortage.

Here you go: First-time offenders will receive information on subsidized sterilization services and be given an additional 60 days. If they still fail to comply they could be fined $100 and ordered to serve eight hours of community service. A subsequent offense could result in a $500 fine or 40 hours of community service

Pet sterilization becomes law in LA
 

That is my biggest fear too. Right now the agency who hold dog adoptions on Sundays at the store the adoption fee is has increased to the point of not being able to afford adopting unless you have the $$$ to do so. With this new law the breeders will have the advantage of getting $$$$. Owning an animal now will only be for the rich whereas those who struggle financially won't be able to afford havig an aimal.

cirquelover, but what is the method for finding offenders?

You know Alex they fail to explain how exactly they are going to find offenders. It does make you wonder though. I'm sure animal control has better things to do than go looking at all animals privates.

My guess would be if animal control finds your dog and it is not fixed you get fined. How they would deal with cats is another question. Our animal control won't even bother with a cat!

Surely you mean buying an animal now will only be for the rich. Owning one has always only been for the rich. It's very, very expensive to own and properly care for a pet.

Millions of Americans don't have health insurance and therefore cannot see a doctor. If its too good for humans, then it's hard to say that animals not brought to a vet regularly are being improperly cared for.

That said, I have only had health insurance for about a year of my adult working life. My pets have gone more regularly to vets than I have to doctors.

It was once considered kindness to feed and love a pet. Now you're a "bad" owner if you don't also provide it with expensive care way beyond what many PEOPLE get.

Sounds like another law that will impact the law abiding far more than those who the law is really meant for.

I expect it will primarily be citizen reports from neighbours.

Or a way of double fining owners when animals get into trouble?

By eliminating the home breeder, you're just providing financial encouragement to the puppy mills, who will breed their dogs in counties where it is legal, and transport them in for sale at high dollar amounts. I don't like these laws at all.

It's one thing to encourage spaying and neutering, or perhaps making it nearly free. It's another thing entirely to legislate what amounts to an increase in profits for puppy mills.

What about shelters? Aren't there all kinds of animals in shelters that need a loving home?

I don't mean to imply that pets should be given a higher standard of living than humans. And it's a sad fact that many pets live better than some people.

But it's not asking too much for animals not to be abused. And if you are going to take responsibility for them, then seeing to their general health, nutrition and well-being are part of the obligatory territory.

It is the fact that 60,000* animals per year were being euthanized at the shelter that drove this new regulation. There are more than enough healthy animals that are being destroyed that it shouldn't have an impact on the greedy breeders.

The law is geared towards your average mutt. If someone is a breeder, they do not have to have their animals sterilized.





*I use this number from memory of hearing a news story this morning on the way to work. The number may be different.

Pet sterilization becomes law in LA
 

Yes there are is a shelter right down the street from us but with this new law all the puppies except those by breeder will be sterile thus i foresee no more shelters with animals but then again maybe i'm wrong in my assumption. Since down the road the only way to get a dog is thru a breeder once all the dogs will be fixed.

But however especially with cats in my neighborhood and many others there are "strays" no one claims them and they are free to "roam" and when i walk the doggies everyday and at work i hear customers say there are so many strays out there. How can they pinpoint their owners when no one will claim them (they have no collars etc)? This will be the interesting thing in all of this plus this is LA only statewide only.

I wonder if they will require vets to report on animals who are not 'fixed'. I'm very back and forth on this issue- I think there ought to be some serious subsidies to help out people who are on very limited incomes. It's ridiculous that only people who are well off can adopt animals from so many of these shelters- anyone who can love and care for one should be able to do so. (That whole stupid Ellen drama is still fresh in my brain, and I think that shelter was very much in the wrong). Still, maybe this will cut down on hoarding- I've been watching Animal Planet a lot lately, and it seems that the ASPCA gets a lot of calls regarding compulsive hoarders. These are not NA (or Wendybeth, for that matter) hoarders, but really over the top nutjobs that allow the animals to take over the home. The last one had over 150 cats, and was forced to flee his (formerly nice) middle-class suburban home due to being literally overrun with domesticated and feral kittehs.

The shelters have their procedures in place for a reason. They don't want the animals to just go to any home because in the past, that just meant the animal would more than likely end up back in the street, in worse condition, and then back in the shelter. It costs a lot more for an animal to bounce back and forth, get taken in again, healed up from whatever mistreatment again. It's in their best interest, and the animals' best interest to be sure that they have some control over where these animals are going. Ellen broke the rules, pure and simple.

Animals in shelters cost a nominal amount of money. It helps weed out those who want the animals as bait [a whole other topic that infuriates me].

I seriously doubt we'll see a day when the only way to get an animal is through a breeder. There is a serious overpopulation of cats and dogs, from owners who can't be bothered (or can't afford) to get them fixed. When I adopted the kittens a few years ago it cost me a lot of money I didn't have to get them fixed. I had no idea how much it would cost and I didn't know about low-cost options at the time either.

Not all shelters have giant hoops and fees attached to the adoption of animals.

Here's the other stupid thing about that law: it says sterilize by 4 months, unless they've been shown.

News flash: You don't show a dog until it's 6 months old!

Emmy cost us $29.50 to have her spayed. I think pet owners can spare that to do the responsible thing.

We have all our animals fixed the last one, a girl, cost us $156! A few years ago when a bunch of cats were dropped at our house we had to call in the Feral Cat Coalition for help. They kindly helped us trap and fix and give shots to everyone for about $25 a head. Which we were happy to pay and a little extra to help with the costs of others.

Cats...Male 8-10 months - Female 6-8 months

The little organs have to mature first.

What about the little pianos?











Sorry, it's been one of THOSE days

Your response matches your avatar....gotta love ya!

Rescue groups are privately funded (usually by the members of the group) and their adoption fee barely (if ever) covers the cost of getting the animal ready for adoption. If there ever comes a day when there is no NEED to rescue groups, then I think we need to celebrate.

State, city or county funded shelters are OVERFLOWING with animals who need to be adopted. Calliope cost me $98 to adopt and she was already sterilized. Most shelter will kill an animal after so many days of not being adopted. Last year LA County euthanized approximately 15,000 at a cost of $2 million. If we EVER get to a point where there are homes for every animal and the shelters are empty, then we can celebrate.

There will NEVER be a time when there are no pets to adopt - even with the sterilization law in effect..


How this will be enforced is a mystery to me. "Breaking the law" certainly doesn't have the stigma it once had, so there will always be unsteralized dogs and cats to adopt. However, if this cuts down on the numbers of cats and dogs that are able to breed, then I'm all for it.


As for affording a pet - if you don't have the money to care for a pet (average cost is about $1,500 per year) then you shouldn't have a pet. Veterinary care is expensive. Beyond initial cost of sterilization, there is cost for flea control, vaccinations, heartworm prevention, dental care, grooming, and illness and injury care in addition to food. This all adds up (believe me, I know).

The next step would be to address the issue of back yard breeders. In Long Beach, a breeder must have a permit to breed. Agai, I'm not sure how this is enforced, but it's a good step.

OMG...$15,000.00 a year for my cats, thanks NA!

When I was a kid, we were pretty broke- single mom, seven kids, etc. My animals brightened up my otherwise fairly dismal childhood. Money may have been tight, but we were always allowed to have pets. We didn't take them to the vet as often as we do now, yet somehow most of them lived long and happy lives. I know of people now who have very, very limited incomes but they have animals and take exceptional care of them. Maybe they value them even more because they haven't nothing else- I don't know. All I do know is that animals don't give a **** how much money someone has; they just want a home and love.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how they enforce the new law. For the record, I believe in spaying, neutering and keeping your animals indoors, except for walkies and such. (Even our big dog is an indoor dog).

I haven't added up what we spend on average, but we get a whammy every few months or so (averaging between $700 and $1500. Dental alone is $230 per pet per year. Revolution is $150 per pet, per year. Add regular vaccinations and the cost of food, letter, treats and accessories and it adds up.

At that price, you should be able to claim them as dependents on your tax return! :eek:

I think that both dogs and cats should be indoor animals. My cats don't go outside, period. Thurston is never outside without a leash (unless the area is fenced) and he is completely covered for fleas and the VERY dangerous Heartwoom as well as the standard vaccinations. He also gets regular fecals because he is around so many other dogs.

Regarding enforcement, I'd equate it to building codes. When my parents bought their home, the official data said it was a certain square footage, but the house was obviously much bigger than this. It also claimed there was a carport, but instead there was a garage (which we later discovered, was built right on top of the old carport beams). The previous owners, probably many owners ago, had done renovations without applying for permits, so the official documents were all wrong. They broke the law, but who would catch them? Unless there were somthing like an insurance claim, or you had nosy tattletale neighbors, there'd be no reason for the gov't to know. This isn't proof that building codes are bunk - they're actually there for good reason - but it's not like there's a building codes police that goes around busting people.

Just because there isn't much in the way of enforcement doesn't make it a pointless law. I wouldn't worry at all about running out of strays. Not everyone is going to race out and get this done to their pets. Not everyone is going to register their dog or cat. There are going to be thousands and thousands who don't. Even so, this will get a lot more people to do the right thing. And as NA said, if pet homelessness and neglect vanishes, it's time to celebrate.

Yup.

We spend $100 per month on electricity alone for our dragons. I don't want to know the total for pet care.

We live a bit too close to savage nature in all it's glory: in our hood alone, we have gangs of coyotes, a wildcat, hawks and a bunch of owls. Outdoor animals don't last long, particularly smallish ones. One interesting thing- we've never had a flea problem, with any of our animals. Ever. You'd think they'd pick up one just romping about the yard, but so far nada. Maybe it's our climate, not that I'm complaining.:D

In our neighborhood, we have coyotes, skunks, raccoons, opossums, falcons, hawks and careless drivers.;)

And her neighborhood has this really mean looking Pitbull with the head the size of a prize-winning pumpkin.
:eek:

It does?

Is it the silver/blue one?

The one we saw the last time I was there and we were walking Thurston and the dogs next door. The woman walking it had him on heavy-duty Queen Mary sized anchor chain.
:eek:

Oh, we has the skunks, raccoons and careless drivers as well. Last week, our neighbor across the street had a moose in his yard! (That doesn't happen too often- lots of deer and elk, but never moose).

I think I'm used to my neighborhood dogs.

MOOSE! There's nothing better than seeing a moose.

Sure there is! Two mooses.:D

The way I grew up skunks, racoons, possums, dogs, careless drivers, were just the acceptable risks of having a cat that wasn't locked indoors for its entire life.

Yes it was sad if/when a cat fell to one of those things and they were mourned. And then we got a new cat. And all of our cats went to vets for the following:

1. When old enough, to get spayed/neutered.
2. When they were dying.

Somehow they almost all lived happy healthy lives. If it were up to me that's probably how I would still approach it (though since it isn't a major expense within our budget I'd still do annual vet visits like I do now); but then I'm ok with kids riding bicycles without helmets.


As for the law, I just don't see it actually doing anything to achieve the goal of reducing unwanted and feral pets. In fact, just as a thought experiment it seems to me that it would tend to result in more unwanted pets just being abandoned rather than taken to a shelter for fear that fines would result. I certainly endorse the idea of everybody getting their animals sterilized, this just doesn't seem a law that has any value considering how few people put any stock at all into the other pet regulations around tagging and registration.

I see deer at work all the time- people think the deer crossing signs on our property are some kind of prop, but there is wildlife on the hillside.

We have mountain lion signs at my work, but I've yet to see them - oh and immigrant family crossing too

T's neighborhood has a sign that says "Blind Person Area".

To prevent second hand sight?

There have been times that I've wished there was an enforced anti-breeding law for humans.

Meese?

I remember the first time I saw the immigrant family sign going to San Diego. I had to ask Gary why it was there?!


You can say that again. I live in a small hick town and I'm afraid half the population shouldn't breed. Sadly we also seem to have the highest rate of said children walking out in front of cars:eek: It's amazing to me, they're just like their parents!

I'm pretty much nuetral on the whole pet thing, but this is a law I could get behind!

I had to sign a document stating that I was informed that there was wildlife in the areas around where I live and all pets must be kept indoors unless they were on a leash being walked. There are coyotes in the hills by my place and once in awhile make their way to the Spectrum vicinity. There are also coyotes in the area by my office.

We've got "Slow Children Playing" signs in our neighborhood

Yeah, those signs used to make me feel sad. Then I saw signs that said "Slow Men Working" and I cheered up realizing that they were able to get jobs.

Actually, I'm pretty sure the plural of moose is moose. Just like the plural of sheep is sheep.

You are correct. A herd of moose is comprised entirely of moose:)

Everyone knows the singular of sheep is Shep and a single one of moose is a Mose.


Pfft.

I don't see this as an either/or issue. Yes, all people should be able to get proper medical care. That really has nothing to do with pet ownership.

Owning a pet is a choice and along with that choice comes the responsibility to properly take care of your pet. If this means that by owning a pet, you can't afford healthcare, then you shouldn't be owning a pet.

Too many people think it is "nice" to have a pet, but it's a not just nice, it's a 10 - 20 year commitment with financial impacts. If a person is not prepared to make that kind of commitment, then they shouldn't have the pet in the first place.

If a person really feels like they are missing out not having a pet in their life, then there are PLENTY of rescue organizations and shelters who would LOVE to have these people as volunteers.

Hey NA... stop interrupting our conversation on the plurality of moose and sheep.

lol/ Sorry! I just was thinking about that today and had to go back.


Continue with your discussion. Plural of Opossum anyone?

Opossi, of course.

I looked it up. Its boring: opossums.

A group of Opossums is referred to as Spice Girls

I misspoke. It would be opossa.

so there.

If you want to be all correct and everything. I still like "meese" better. And I want one for a pet.

Can we talk about Moose and Squirrel instead? :)

My main issue with this law is that they are requiring everyone to snip parts off their dogs before doggy puberty, which, some people will prefer for behavioral reasons, but, really isn't natural.
Those organs are producing hormones which are important in the dog's development and cutting them out at 4 months will interfere with the natural development of the dog (The human equivalent would be eunuchs). I have no problem with the laws being more strict on the spay/neuter issue, but this law is ridiculous. :mad:

How is the law ridiculous? We have always had our cats fixed at a fairly young age - in particular, we like to have the females spayed right around their first heat (although I honestly cannot remember if it is before or after said heat).

Maybe the issue is that the age is too young (I have to admit that I do not know what the ideal age for the snip is). So maybe the argument is that the AGE aspect of the law is wrong.

I think the law is a step in the right direction. It may not be perfect, but it is better than not having it! The way I look at it, if it makes for even one less dog or cat being euthanized, than I say the law is a good one. No, it is not going to wipe out the problem, but I believe it is a good start.

Females can be spayed fairly early, Calliope was 3 months old. Males usually have to wait until at least 5 months old and usually 6. Thurston was neutered at 6. However, Aleister came neutered and we got him a 3 months old.

Samwise started to mature early- I knew it was time to visit his doc when he started growling in his sleep. My sis still hasn't gotten her kitty fixed; Onyx is well over a year old, but I suspect Bobbi is afraid she'll get hurt and so is holding off until she absolutely has to do it. Her kitty is an indoor cat, so no worries about mini-kitties, but I'm surprised the yowling, etc, hasn't changed Bobbi's mind. She adores that kitty, which I just love because I was always the one with cats in the past. She had a super-cool snow dog (Kera) for years that liked nothing better than to eat kitties, so this is the first kitty she's had in a looong while. Onyx is a handful, but super-smart and totally adorable.