Pet sterilization becomes law in LA

[madmonkeygirl]

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.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by madmonkeygirl

Owning an animal now will only be for the rich whereas those who struggle financially won't be able to afford havig an aimal.

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.

[Sohrshah]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

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.

[madmonkeygirl]

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.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Sohrshah

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.

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.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by madmonkeygirl

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.

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

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

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

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.

[wendybeth]

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.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

(That whole stupid Ellen drama is still fresh in my brain, and I think that shelter was very much in the wrong).

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.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by madmonkeygirl

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.

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.