I was flipping through channels and saw a puppy so I stopped and watched and they were talking about a county/town in ohio that everyone has to spay and neuter there dogs. I didn't catch the begining of it but I though it was interesting. They said the local petland was trying to sue but petland isn't a place breeding dogs should come from so I hope they lose! I didn't hear if there is some way for a real breeder to get around it or not. Does anyone know more about this? I know there are more ohio people on here. I just can't remember where it was.
I just read an article in my paper on it and it is in athens ohio. Not sure where that is though.
I guess what everyone is mad about is that the breeders are the ones responcible if the dogs are fixed or not, not the buyer. I think they should be responcible for that anyway.
but then it also says local residents whos dogs have litters do not face the samerequirements. So if you are a back yard breeder you get off? I don't think I understand this. To read the article,go to this site http://www.chronicletelegram.com/
click on digital ct and then local(the page in the middle) adn the article is at the bottom.
I could not find the article you were mentioning...I know some one who bought a dog in Athens Ohio though./..so i'm curious...I do agree I dont want more Governmant involvment telling me what i can and can not do in my home. I think we have more then enough of that now...
Actaully, the right spay/neuter legislation is something that any responsible breeder would be for- not to mention the rescue community (and non-pet owners).
IMHO, petstores SHOULD be responsible for spaying and neutering animals that come from them- NONE are of breeding quality, and VERY FEW go to people who would have anywhere near enough breeding wisdom to go about it properly (as they've just bought a dog from the worst source possible).
I also see nothing wrong with requiring breeders to pay for a spay/neuter of each animal they sell to pet homes. If they want to add that charge into the price of the pet- so be it. It's just one more way to help keep their lines in the responsible hands- rather than have pet buyers pumping more inferior puppies and kittens into the overpopulated world.
I can't imagine ANYONE but people who are simply out to make a buck on pet sales thinking that pet overpopulation isn't something worth fighting for. Government and legislation SHOULDN'T be neccesary- but obviously, too many people are too ignorant to "fix" their pets.
Longdogs- I don't like this legislation, and here's why- I DO want my pet buyers to spay and neuter, and don't mind including it into the price of the dog- but if they sign a contract with me saying they will do it, then they DON'T, why do I have to pay a fine??? THEY should have to pay the fine, not ME! I asked them to spay/neuter in the first place, and I get fined when they don't? Yikes!
Call me irresponsible then. I feel that it is every persons responsibility to take care fo their dogs reproductive tract, wether they alter them, or just take care. I don't belive people will automaticly have accidents if the animals are not altered. I wish we'd focuse more on the problem, with is the irresponsible owner, then the easy fix, which is forcing people to alter. Not everyone wants to, not everyone agrees with it, and I don't belive it is an automatic sign of irresponsibility not to alter an animal, even if one is not breeding.
It needs to stay a personal decision. I refuse to support legislation that invades my home in such a menner, and once again, people need to be responsible, not plug the problem with leeky corks.
If there was a law that required all dogs to be spayed or nurtured, then in 15 years, we wouldn’t have any dogs left in this country. Is that what you all want?
It is not up to the government to decide which dogs are suitable for breeding and which are not. The market could and should regulate it self. If people would be pickier with what they buy and where they buy from, we wouldn’t have a problem with over population, BYBs, and PMs.
It's just sad that many people don't come to messageboards like this and will never know the truth about backyard breeders and the like. If there was just one hourlong special on a major network about backyard breeders and improper dog care it might change the outlooks of many Americans about breeding.
The breeder that I bought my Doberman pup from issues restricted registrations and will not issue a full registration until the pup is 6 months old and she sees it and that is only if you will show you dog. Her contracts of sale state if the dog is not of show quality and that is at her discression the purchaser agrees to have the dog fixed.
Can anyone tell me if this is how most responsible breeders handle this.
Icy, I actually like what I've read about you as a breeder. I would not call you irresponsible. I said the RIGHT legislation- and I don't know enough about this one to say it's RIGHT.
Petstores- SHOULD have to pay for spay/neuters- as like you said, a good breeder wouldn't mind. Once the breeder has paid for the spay/neuter- I don't think that they should be fined (and I don't think that that's what this is saying- I think that's the ones who DON'T pay for it are fined). Petstores make SOOO much on those mills dogs and kittens- I have absolutely NO problem with them HAVING to pay. I'd LOVE for them to be out of business, of course. :)
Our government ALREADY pays for pet overpopulation. I would much rather have my taxes pay to have people who are NOT responsible with their pets be fined (and actually- many people will NOT be educated without this "slap") then to pay to have the products of their ignorance euthanized and kept in kennels for the rest of their sad life.
NOWHERE does it say that BREEDERS would be fined for having intact dogs (they'd be fined for not paying for the spaying/neutering of the puppies they sell)- but I don't know how they decide who a breeder is or isn't- which is one reason I can't say that I'd personally support THIS legislation. It also leaves out pets with medical reasons for remaining intact.
To not neuter or spay a PET (not a responsible breeding dog, not a show/performance dog- but a PET) IS irresponsible. I've never heard a reasonable excuse NOT to. Not mentioning the health problems that are dissolved when an intact pet undergoes a speuter- the majority of pets that are dumped for behavior reasons are INTACT.
I believe that education is extremely important- but that some people will NEVER learn. The rescue I volunteer with just got an application last week asking for an intact female because she wanted her "kids to enjoy the birth of a batch [ugh!] of puppies". She was politely declined with a nice response that included the reasons that this was NOT a good idea, of course- but everyone just wanted to bang their heads into the floor.
There's a LOT of education to do- and there's no doubt that people DO tend to pay attention when fines come into the picture. Car childseats? Now that people with unrestrained kids face FINES- it happens less and less. Seatbelts? Since FL law now allows people to be ticketed for not wearing one- more people DO.
I, like MOST people- despise when laws appear to intrude into my life. But pet overpopulation ALREADY DOES. It intrudes into ALL our lives- and there MUST be a fair legislation that can help.
***Edited By: longdogs4me on 3/31/2005 4:44:46 PM*** Reason: .
I see their reasoning for doing it and won't argue with it but I definately see why people would. They said they had a huge stray problem on the news last night and a high kill rate at the shelters. I just want to know the specifics to it. Like if why were they saying in city limits it doesn't apply? Are they trying to go after puppy mills and their products? Because people outside city limits may be small good breeders, they don't need to live in town.
One thing that I've heard about these new laws is that you may keep your dog in tact if you possess or apply for a breeders license. Many people who are BYB or just want to make a quick buck will spay or neuter as the license will take away some or all of their profits.
I do think that pet stores should make it manditory for spaying and neutering-but it would be so hard for them to verify that it was done-but not a bad concept. My reasoning is, that puppies that are sold through pet stores-are pets. If someone is looking for a breeding dog, they should work direct with a breeder to get the history and be able to continue their relationship. Most staff at a petstore (i hope I don't offend anyone) are not experts and couldn't tell you what a good example of the breed is, yet alone the pedigree and history. Don't mean to sound like I'm on my high horse here, just my opinion.
On another note, we place our puppies on spay and neuter agreements and advertise it that way also. If any of you could just listen to some of the phone calls I get about wanting full rights and the spay and neuter to be optional, you would see why I have chosen this route. Occasionally, there will be a person that I check into that would be ideal, but most of them have no clue what a heat cycle is, they would just like to be able to have puppies to sell to recoop the cost. I"ve had the oddest questions before, like I am to train them to be a breeder. A mentor is one thing, but when someone comes to you and expects you to tell them start to finish the facts of life on breeding, it's pretty scary.
agh!! all PETS should be spayed or neutered. yes that's my personal opinion and maybe not the most pc. breeding dogs of any breed requires a lot on knowledge, time, love and resources (read MONEY). too many are only in it for the money they hope to make, but in the case of breeding, it takes money to breed dogs. you have to do it for the love of the breed. too many people assume because they have a purebred dog, that they should breed them. i don't know how many times i've been asked if i plan to breed my sibes. NO! they will be spayed next month when they are six month old. i tell everyone "i don't know enough about sibes to breed them. just having a good looking bitch is not enough. what about genetics? confirmation? the cost of caring for mama and innoculation of the pups? Some people just don't think. more power and thanks to those of you who do breed. you care about the breed. about maintaining it and improving where possible.
sorry, didn't mean to get on my high horse, but the mentality of "i want my children to see the miracle of birth" or "she's a purebred, why shouldn't i make a little money off her pups" just rankles me.
***Edited By: wolf256wolf on 3/31/2005 5:28:59 PM*** Reason: spelling
AMEN Wolf! I have a 4 year old that helps me with our dogs everyday and I will say, just like everything else-a childs interest in something will come and go. If someone thinks that their children will be "oh so much help and take care of them" they are just plain in denial! My son will play with them everyday, but his interest comes and goes and he's an animal nut. So, yes, that is a poor excuse!
Well, yes, all PET quality dogs should be spayed or neutered BUT- Who decides what PET quality means? The government? Are we going to let the government rule that one dog is suitable for breeding and another is not?
That is the problem here; distinguish between those in a serious breeding program vs those that are BYB's- it is impossible to write a law that really works, without some genuine good breeders being destroyed and some backyard breeders and millers allowed to continue.
My dogs belong to ME and I have the right as their owner to make these decisions. Not Big Brother.
And LongDogs, read the first full paragraph in the center column of the newspaper article (first link posted)- it says the breeders that cannot prove the pet dogs were spayed or neutered at 6 months face a $100 fine. So the breeders are fined if the pet owners don't get it done, even though the breeders no longer own or control the animal. I can try all I want but I cannot force someone at gunpoint to take Fifi to the vet (that would also be illegal)...though at times one might wish one could do this.