Ok, I am on the east coast, but have east and west channels on my sattelite. There was a story about a elderly man mauled by 2 dogs some time back , a year ago maybe. They said it was a pit bull and another dog not specified by breed (go figure) There was a court case to mandate all Rottweillers and Pitbulls must be spayed/neutered based from this attack. I guess everyone turned out from pro legislation to people with their pets (rotts and pits) were on hand to exhibit properly trained pets.
This is the part that got me...they decided not to make a ruling today, but now they want to return in April and will make it mandatory for EVERY breed to be spayed and neutered!!!!! How is this right, now they seem to have taken it to extremes, what about the reputable breeders, exhibitors, etc??? Any California people have the scoop on this?
That's the first I've heard of it. I'm not a supporter of it and I do believe it would be nearly impossible to enforce. Kinda like not allowing people to have ferrets and other exotic pets. I've been in cali most of my life and have previously owned a ferret and a sugar gilder here. Both of which were loved and had vet care. I never quite found a vet I really liked so each visit was a new vet and none of them ever turned me in. They're just going to turn honest responsible breeders into criminals. Or start an illegal operation for criminals to start breeding to supply the people who want a purebred dog without shipping or going to the pet shop. Makes me wonder if a lot of pet shop owners aren't helping to push this law through. But for being one of the most laid back states we have some of the dumbest laws in the country when it comes to pet ownership.
Sounds like a bunch of left wing big brothers at it again!Well I guess if only Calf. does it then breeders from the surrounding states will make a killing off boot leg puppies! Do they really think regulating all breeds will stop a mauling. Its news to me if a bitch wont maul because she's spayed. I hope the insanity dont spread here to the East Coast or I'm headed to Mexico!
I live in southern California; I saw that on the news. Actually, I have mixed feelings about it. I do think itís a good idea that, unless you have a breederís license, you should fix your dogs. There are WAY too many irresponsible people out there. Now, if you got your dog micro chipped, registered, and what not but didnít have a breeders license and didnít want to fix your dog, you could probably get a special permit. I think, if they work on this idea, it really would be good. Perhaps not for people, but really, think of the dogs! The kill shelters out there would probably have a decrease in population. This might not be such a bad idea.
I didnt here about it.BUT Im glad it was all breed.Now I do think they should let breeders breed if they are responsible.They should have to pay a certain fine or something.But I am happy for this law for the most part.We dont need extra pets.I think its betetr than killing them all!
i herd about parts of that. You have to regester your dogs if you want to breed them then its ok. I didnt hear about every breed just pitts. All of my family lives in cali and they always tell me stuff like that.
They said soemthing about you have to regester every dog you are going to breed with the state all pups have to be fixed ASAP she said that around her people were trying to puch a law saying pitts were to be fixed at birth. I dont think you can do that but people have gone crazy around her. one lady had her dog put down because she lady said it was a danger to her kids (the dog didnt even like at the kids wrong the lady just had a hissy).
I think it will eather blow over or pass but no one will listen and it will be one of those odd laws that no one does anything about (like only so many sheep can be herded down hollywood BLV at a time)
I find the ferret thing dumb. If you search online you will find web pages on how to sneek them into cali and list of vets who wont turn you in and that do a good job with them. its a lame law
***Edited By: monkeyeatbutt on 2/22/2006 12:07:33 PM*** Reason: add
Yeah in a fairy tale world it sounds like a good idea. But whos says who are responsible breeders? AKC, CKC ,UKC,PKC..PETA...What would be considered a responsble breeder? 1 or 2 litters a year, AKC specified standards,show breedeonly, pet breeders only pure breed only(no more poos allowed.) licenced puppy mills... theres too many options to throw a blanket over the table and say ...Okay all done , its fixed!
No,no dont let our country become communist by letting states take our rights away 1 by 1. Spaying and nutering for pets sound good, ( both mine are) but regulating the pet industry in this manner sounds like a nightmare for responsible breeders and pet buyers.
I agree with Duchess. Not to mention if you take out all of the breeders in CA, everyone who ever wants to buy a puppy in CA would have to ship it in...that would put a strain on the airline industry, which they already charge more to ship a dog than a human in many instances.
I live in california and I never heard about them wanting to castrate every single breed. They talked about doing that to pitbulls and rottweilers though. They said that the people who are breeder's need to have a license for breeding dogs, so it'll exclude them. There have been many attacks in california. The most famous cases are the diane whipple case and the the case which a boy got mauled by 2 pitbulls. Tell you the truth, I really doubt they are going to pass legislation. They talked about it a few years ago with pits and rotts, but they never done it.
***Edited By: finalsphere on 2/22/2006 1:04:25 PM*** Reason: add
You know, if more people did it on their own, this wouldn't be an issue. California also has one of the highest shelter euthaniasia rates(I will try to find where I read that at)
I think that if a responsible person wants to breed, they would be willing to get a breeders liscense......I think it should be pretty spendy. That includes showing dogs too. I think that you should need a special lisence to be able to keep that animal unfixed until it is decided to be a breeder or not. If not, it should be fixed immediately. That would eliminate alot of the little bybs and then I think that there should be a specific amount of dogs that are unneutered or unspayed allowed at a residence. No more commercial breeding, USDA should stop that. I think that with stricter rules, animals will start being less and less in shelters. I do not think this is an issue of taking away our rights but rather helping some of the animals that are being euthanized daily due to the "hobby breeders" and the "Backyard breeders" and the "commercial breeders" and the "show breeders"..........they are all breeders. They are ALL contributing to the pet population.
I agree with serveral members. I do think its a good idea to prevent unwanted pets. Breeders to get their license so they won't have to. It would be good because then hopefully we don't have to kill so many animals each year that can't find homes. There are definate problems with it though.
you are right about that. California has one of the highest euthanasia rates. Do you know why? 3/4s of the shelters here have pitbulls or pitbulls mixes. California also has the largest pitbull population. Since we don't have a ban on pitbulls here. A lot of backyard breeders are breeding pitbulls and selling them for cheap. But a lot of people are not willing to buy pitbulls because of their reputation. So they end up at the shelter.
BlackQueen, In my opinion, someone who shows their dogs should be doing it with the purpose to show that their dog is good enough to breed. (Correct? That is the purpose, right?) So, I think that anyone that is showing their dog, should have to pay a "potential breeders fine" and after 2 years of age, a decision NEEDS to be made. Then the animal is either fixed or the person then pays a "Breeders fee" to be able to breed it. But all the pups from that bitch must go through the same thing. JMO
Speutering is SURGERY, and I don't thing the government should be involved in forced anestesia. I don't want the state making important medical decisions for my dogs. Those decisions should be between me and my vet. By the way, all of my animals are speutered.
Speutering isn't a cut and dry issue. The most obvious benefit is that it prevents unwanted puppies, but it also increases a dog's chances for bone cancer. And the decision when to speuter is complicated. The growth plates close naturally when the dog reaches sexual maturity because of the release of sexual hormones. If a dog is speutered at a younger age, those hormones won't be released, so the dog's growth plates will remain open longer and may contribute to problems like hip displaysia. The effects of speutering vs. not speutering and speutering at various ages are still being studied, so the policy makers can't possibly know what's best for every dog.
Let's leave the science to the scientists and get the state to fix the roads.