California Says: "We're Nut FREE!"

[EVPohovich]

Well, as long as Hollywood is still within the state limits of California that will never happen. BUT...



LINK

If you’re a resident of California and you own a dog, chances are you may be a lil’ ticked at the fact that shortly, it may be against the law to own a dog or cat in California that hasn’t been spayed or neutered by 4 months of age.

The “California Healthy Pets Act” has already been approved by the lower house of the state legislature and is due to go before the Senate shortly. It would be illegal to own a cat or dog older than 4 months of age, that has not been spayed/neutered. And guess what? Violators of this law would be fined $500.

Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule, and there are some exceptions to this rule. Professional Breeders, Owners of Genuine Show Dogs, those that breed dogs for the purpose of training as service dogs, and those whose life would be in danger as a result of a spay/neuter procedure are the exceptions here.

The measure has widespread support from Animal Rights Groups, the State Veterinarian Association, and many State politicians. It is estimated that in California, 500,000 animals are destroyed each year at a cost of close to 300 million dollars.

Its opponents argue that the irresponsible dog owners who abandon their dogs in the first place would ignore the law. They also worry that owners from different states would stop attending shows in California out of fear that they may be in violation of the law. There is no mention in the bill about the consideration of dogs from other states.

“I was born and raised here, but I will move if this law passes,” said Kathryn Blink of San Carlos, whose dalmatian was deemed the best in the nation in 2004. “I don’t want to be a law-breaker. And I’m tired of being told what I can do with my property.”

“This crazy measure will end up costing families heartache and taxpayers billions,” Bill Hemby, the chairman of PetPac, a pet owners’ rights group, said. “California will be the poster child for an invasive and overreaching government mandate that is inhumane and impossible to fund, administer or enforce.”

So, if this passes I'll have to go out of state to find a new puppy or kitten? These people are retarded. I need to move to Italy.

[gerbick]

Bob Barker's retirement really hit you guys hard in Cali, eh?

[Natsia]

You do realize that they have the wrong species on that list?
Breeding program for people all the way!

[Genesis F5]

Goodbye Everybody!

Edit: Looks like Gerbick beat me to the Barker reference.

[EVPohovich]

Bob Barker's retirement really hit you guys hard in Cali, eh?

[FlashLackey]

Bob Barker's retirement really hit you guys hard in Cali, eh?

SO happy to have left that state.

[Ghostgirl705]

Well, I agree in essence to this Act.
First problem is that there are SO many irresponsible breeders that are constantly producing live animals for monetary purposes only. The conditions that some of these animals are forced to live and breed in is appalling. There is no concern for health testing and many genetic disorders are passed from parent to puppies and left for the new owner to be responsible for. Thousands of dollars in vet bills is not something that many new owners want to sign up for. I could link hundreds of photos of puppy mill conditions, but if you are really interested look them up yourself. It sickens me.

The second is these breeders are selling these animals to irresponsible owners who have no idea the care and time it takes to owning a pet. And when they realize that they don’t really want a dog/cat/bunny/lizard/parrot/rat/guinea pig it gets dumped into a shelter.

The third is that the cost of taking care of or euthanizing these animals is over 1 billion US dollars a year.

Kern county is one of the largest counties in CA and the shelter there has a 90% euth rate, that means if 26,000 animals are impounded 21,000 are killed.

One unspayed dog can lead to 60,000 puppies in 6 years! Do the Math

Requiring people to actually be knowledgeable about the animals they are caring for is not a bad idea IMHO. What is measure would require you to do is go to a responsible licensed breeder to get your animals, this equals less genetic diseases and healthier pets, because the breeders would be required to do health checks on the parents and take back the puppies if the family does not work out.

I have 3 big problems with this bill, first the issues cited in the article regarding out of state pets, there is no clarity on what the requirements for visiting pets are or how long a “visit” consists of. The bill is not detailed enough with the nuances of pet ownership and traveling pets.
I also have a big problem with the age that the animals are cut. 4 months is much too young to neuter your pet. Most vet will not even consider neutering until 6 months of age.

I think the bill is a good idea with an unclear execution. Besides, I really don’t think the irresponsible owners are going to pay attention to the bill any ways.

more reading here (pdf)

[cancerinform]

So when all cats and dogs are neutral, where in the future can get an animal, from outer state?

Have you ever had a male or female cat not being neutralized? They teach you.

[Ghostgirl705]

Yes you would have to go out of state to get a "cheap pet" Or You could purchase a pet from a Professial breeder in CA, which will run you a couple of thousand about, or go to a shelter.

[argonauta]

So, in few words, the next bill will be: there's so much child abuse, we're going to kill all children so the stupid people that abuse them can't do that anymore.

[EVPohovich]

Well, I agree in essence to this Act...

Wait. I paid for a purebred Golden Retriever with the full intention of her having pups. If this law goes into affect I can no longer do that. And now I have to buy an animal from a "professional breeder" (read SNOB) who will, undoubtably, triple the price upon enactment of this idiotic law.

This only affects those of us that DO care. It is also just another way for the state to try and control the individual. Down with big government!!

[Ghostgirl705]

So, in few words, the next bill will be: there's so much child abuse, we're going to kill all children so the stupid people that abuse them can't do that anymore.

Child abuse is very different to animal abuse and over population. Children are capable of being educated and the cycle of abuse can be broken.

100% of the responablity of a pet is to the owner. Children grow up and have to learn how to be take care of themselves, pets are dependent on people to take care of them for thier whole lives.

Wait. I paid for a purebred Golden Retriever with the full intention of her having pups. If this law goes into affect I can no longer do that. And now I have to buy an animal from a "professional breeder" (read SNOB) who will, undoubtably, triple the price upon enactment of this idiotic law.

This only affects those of us that DO care. It is also just another way for the state to try and control the individual. Down with big government!!

ok so you have the intention of breeding? Do you care what are going to happen to the puppies? And the puppies puppies? Are you going to provide vet care and vaccinations and contracts to all the new owners, if they do chance their minds will you take the re homing of the dog as your responsibility? What if a hereditary disease does show up and one of the puppies has hip dysplasia(**photo warning - very sad, but this dog is lucky**) Are you ready to care for a pup like this? This means 24 hour care for the rest of it's life (12-15 years)

What if it turns out that one of the puppies are being used for a puppy mill operation? Are you going to take responsibility for all homes for the puppies that are bred from that? What about the vet bill for the puppies that might have parvo or kennel cough?

Having puppies is just as much responsibility as having a family, if not more because they get re-homed. And yes I do believe that you SHOULD be licensed to breed dogs, just like you need to be licensed to be a vet of vet tech, there is health requirements, for the sire and dam, there is the pregnancy care, there is the birth itself. There is many many complications that can risk the health of your dog and pups.

As a responsible breeder , will you keeping mind the health of the breed?
Is your Dam:
1. show quality
2. a champion
3. have both parents and grand parents that are champions
4. free from hereditary disease
5. parents and grand parents tested and free from hip dysplasia
6. mature enough to breed
7. tested today as free from brucellosis

If it turns out you dog is not suitable breed material will you breed her anyways because “She is pretty and would have such cute pups”? Or , “because I could sell them for $800 each”?
http://www.learntobreed.com/

Like I said I agree in essence, I think there should be a minimal requirement for breeding, because as of now, it is “She’s in heat, he’s got nuts, let’s go!”

I also don't want you to think I doubt you ablity as a pet owner, because I do not, but I do have many rasons why I agree with breeding restrictions. I also feel if you DO care you would be willing to have regulations in place that will protect you as a breeder and the the animals as a breed.

[cancerinform]

So, in few words, the next bill will be: there's so much child abuse, we're going to kill all children so the stupid people that abuse them can't do that anymore.

That would be too expensive.

In case of people they can multiply and can have kids who they don't feed and don't give an education. If you want to prevent that (abortion, pills etc) then you are a murderer. I love animals but why do we care about animals so they don't suffer (where I fully agree) and give a **** about what happens to children once they are put into this world,

[FlashLackey]

The state has no business deciding whether or not a person should be required to physically alter their pet.

If someone has a problem with stray animals, they should look at laws that punish people for turning animals loose. After all, the animals that already are loose are not likely to check themselves in to be fixed.

If someone has a problem with bad breeding techniques, they should not buy puppies from pet stores or puppy mills. After all, one persons idea of bad breeding is not the same as anothers. Look at the Labradoodle.

[EVPohovich]

ok so you have the intention of breeding? Do you care...

Actually no, I am a sick bastard that had filthy dogs that crap in my house and I don't clean it up for days on end. Why bother with having the ***** fixed either? I actually love the fact that she drips blood all over my hardwood floors twice yearly...

Are you kidding me Double G? You must think this is my first go around with breeding pups. I have never let a dog go with anyony (or any couple, for that matter) that I haven't met a few times.

Both my cat and my male dog are both missing their brass danglies. So, it's not like I am totally against the process. I am against anyone telling me what I can and can't do.....this is America afterall.

And while Raini is of a champion jumper line and a beautiful dog, she is the most stubborn dog I have ever known. And she even looks like she might have a weak backend.....that is, until you see her hit 12 feet horizontally into the lake.

I see your point dear, I just don't agree that this law will do a damn thing for the real problem. There is just no cure for idiocy.

...well, there's licensed childbirth, but that is another discussion.

[gerbick]

I'm not entirely picking sides; however perhaps this addresses the fact that breeders might have to finally meet a certain standard and this will stop the sales of certain breeds from going on without punishment (read: pitbulls).

This might force the AKC to re-organize or buckle under the pressure. The ASPCA will be working overtime and ol' ladies that harbor like 120 cats will now be felons.

It's not looking too pretty. Perhaps there's a truly deeper reason behind this.

[Frets]

EVP your beside yourself. How is it not the same thing?