Typical bureaucracy. Have a problem? Make a new law. There are plenty of laws on the books now that will take care of the over population problem that are not being enforced. Before wasting time on new laws, just make sure people are following current laws first.
In LA County, you MUST have a breeding license if you want to breed. You can only have one litter per year per household. If you want more then one litter a year, then you need a kennel license which most canít get even if they want to because of zoning laws. This law in theory should be enough to significantly reduce the population of dogs and practically stop bybs, right? Well, it doesnít. Why is that? Because no one is enforcing this law. It is not that hard to enforce either. All they have to do is to look in the classifieds and go after those with no license.
We donít need new laws, just enforce existing ones.
All this law will do is force people to go to petstores and boost petstore's sales since they get their dogs from out of state puppymills.
***Edited By: juno on 2/22/2006 3:05:15 PM*** Reason: sp
Katz- There will always be people to aford the Wizard of Claws, it is the average families that are always hurt by raising taxes, licenses and fees. It is just average families that would be forced to 'rescue', which I believe should be a choice, or more likely they would just get a free mixed puppy from pet owners that didn't follow the law that would be nearly impossible to inforce.
In our town, there is a license law, yet I know of very few that actually tag their dog. If they don't enforce licensing, how are they going to enforce altering?
I really don't care, I know my area is so conservitive that it would be a very long time before a bill like that was in my area, licensing isn't a big deal.
alicat, that is actually more how our town is too. We get our dogs tagged but more for safety then the law. I want them to be able to be traced back to me. Most of the dogs in our town are not liscensed but they are supposed to be. It is not enforced either. I guess in all honesty, I shouldn't say anything as we do not have a town over run with animals and we do not have a problem with strays. That is one nice thing of living in a small town, but if I lived in L.A. and saw all those beautiful animals having max. of 3 days, I know that my views would still stand. Is preserving the purebred dog worth all the lives that breeding is costing?
I agree with protodog. I think that's a decision that the pet owner should make. My father didn't want to neuter our dog, Kofi so we paid more for his tags each time. He was a mixed breed and we had no intention of breeding him, just our preference. We just thought uneccessary surgery was just that, uneccessary. He was however neutered eventually when he was 12yrs old our fence broke (santa ana winds) on our patio area. He was in front of our apartment building (probably waiting for me to come home) and he got picked up by animal control. They said this would prevent him from roaming the neighborhood, but in 12yrs he had never did that. Each time he was out which was probably 5 times all his life(usually because kids let him out to play w/them) he just went to our front door to wait for us or he'd met me on my way home from school. His personality seemed to mellow out too much afterwards and he just seemed to act more like his "age". Had it been my choice he would've never been neutered. Maybe he had a low-horomone count, but he never humped a leg or stuffed animal and seemed to not like dogs regardless of their sex. He wasn't aggressive towards them, but just always seemed uninterested in them.
My original point was also that....this all began over a 'pit bull' mauling. It goes on to court to enforce legislation over Pits and rotts (i dont recall a rott being mentioned as responsible for the mauling that created this issue) The court decision to enforce spay/neuter and your basic BSL BS that has been going on is held over to include ALL breeds.
How can they punish ALL pit bull owners for one mauling , let alone now include all breeds (chi's to danes) for the happenings of one unrelated dog?
The government is starting to go overboard on a power trip............lets focus on protecting our troops, our children, the abused, the homeless......
Katz- What can I say other than we definatly come from different perspectives. I don't think that MY personal breeding boxers is DIRECTLY killing dogs in shelters.
I make sure that MY puppies don't end up there, and any boxers that I hear of in need, I help. That is all I can do. To me it is 'that' important that pure boxers remain a strong breed. I love them and no mix could ever ever ever replace all of the charectoristics that I love in boxers.
To me, I just don't see the relation between irresponsible pet owners creating mixed litters that end up in shelters and responsible breeders that take care of the offspring they create.
It is no longer a breed specific issue, but a pet over- population and a irresponsible pet owner issue. Unless you are a licensed breeder or working at breeding working/therapy dogs or AKC or UKC show dogs or for the betterment of a breed. This will eliminate B.Y.B. It will focus on individual incidents of dog attacks instead of the focus of a specific breed of dog.
Someone interested in having a specific breed or type of dog will find them with a licensed and regulated breeder. Indescriminate, random, and recklous breeding will be sharply reduced.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 861, Speier Animals: dogs: spay, neuter, and breeding programs. Existing law sets forth provisions relating to veterinary public health and safety, as specified. Existing law also provides for or regulates spay, neuter, and breeding programs for animals, as specified. This bill would authorize local governments to enact dog breed-specific ordinances pertaining only to mandatory spay or neuter programs and breeding requirements, provided that no specific dog breed, or mixed dog breed, shall be declared potentially dangerous or vicious under those ordinances. This bill would require those jurisdictions that do implement such programs to provide quarterly statistical reports relating to dog bites to the State Public Health Veterinarian, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes to related provisions.
CHAPTER 7. SPAY/NEUTER AND BREEDING PROGRAMS FOR ANIMALS
122330. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Uncontrolled and irresponsible breeding of animals contributes to pet overpopulation, inhumane treatment of animals, mass euthanasia at local shelters, and escalating costs for animal care and control; this irresponsible breeding also contributes to the production of defective animals that present a public safety risk. (b) Though no specific breed of dog is inherently dangerous or vicious, the growing pet overpopulation and lack of regulation of animal breeding practices necessitates a repeal of the ban on breed-specific solutions and a more immediate alternative to existing laws. (c) It is therefore the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to permit cities and counties to take appropriate action aimed at eliminating uncontrolled and irresponsible breeding of animals 122331. (a) Cities and counties may enact dog breed-specific ordinances pertaining only to mandatory spay or neuter programs and breeding requirements, provided that no specific dog breed, or mixed dog breed, shall be declared potentially dangerous or vicious under those ordinances. (b) Jurisdictions that implement programs described in subdivision (a) shall measure the effect of those programs by compiling statistical information on dog bites. The information shall, at a minimum, identify dog bites by severity, the breed of the dog involved, whether the dog was altered, and whether the breed of dog was subject to a program established pursuant to subdivision (a). These statistics shall be submitted quarterly to the State Public Health Veterinarian.
duchess, unless you are the owner of a targeted breed, or work in A.C. this is the best case scenario. The old saying, You can't fight City Hall" applies, but you can influence them on what laws can be passed with a prospective vote at elelction time.
There are going to be people that the decision of spaying and neutering needs to be made for them whether it being cultural or monitary reasons. There will be funded programs to assist.
In 26 States that have B.S.L. enacted, CA is the first to ammend their SB861 to include ALL breeds of dogs and just not a specific breed.
It targets randomly ill-bred dogs that have the potential of being vicious. Responsible pet owners that spay and neuter shouldn't have any problems with the new ordinance.
I am an owner of a targeted breed and I'm really tired of the brunt of dog attacks being blamed on on a chosen few breeds. The history of dog violence lies with ill-bred dogs from B.Y.Bs.
Oh I get it!So if they went around and handed out free spay/nuter jobs like they did condoms in the 80's aids epidemic then everyone will smarten up and no one will have unwanted litters and the pet population will recede. I'm in a state of euphoria just visioning the future.
***Edited By: duchess on 2/22/2006 9:05:04 PM*** Reason: sp
duchess, in your crude sence of evaluation, YES, hand out free spay and neuter certificates. Would that be a problem? I can't think of any better way to spend tax dollars.
You see, my feeling of euphoria will be when city governments quite blaming BREEDSof dogs and start focusing on people who think it's their right to over- populate the pet population at the expense of the animals and citizens of a city. When a dog attacks, look to to the point of origin, the owner, not the whole breed.
I hear what you're saying, but I hear no alternative suggestions. I just hear someone that has a problem with Authority.
ROFL!!!Take your ear plugs out ..No problem with authority here! I was a military brat my whole life , ROTC member for 4 years and proud of to serve my government.Absolutly NO prob here with authority, just controll freaks! But I do believe in constitutional rights and thats what I'll fight for untill the day I die. If you've witnessed 1st hand when government starts to controll everything and people loose thier god given rights, then negitive things always happen. If the problem was controlling population they should have been handing out free spay /nuter all along and not mandating it. The sorry low life BYB's are just going to revel in a law like this.Can you imagine how much they could sell a unaltered bootleg puppy for? Fighting rings are all ready underground so it wont stop that either.Who's going to police this law?They cant even keep up with animal neglect and abuse ..more less handle 1 more law to police! But its a free country and you support what you think is productive and i'll support what I think is.
***Edited By: duchess on 2/23/2006 11:16:05 AM*** Reason: add
I'm confused. Didn't you say that you have 2 rescue pits? Do you live in CA? Cities in CA were given the authority to enforce Breed Specific Laws. That means the cities of CA. can force you (if you own a targeted breed) a choice of surrendering your dog, or leaving the city limits with your dog. The State came back and ammended that cities still have that right, but can not target a specific breed as being vicious.To curb dog/cat overpopulation and to encourage people to be responsible, they have mandated spay/neuter to pet owners,(not legitimate breeders.)
Sure underground breeders of guard and fighting dogs won't register their dogs. I doubt they do it now. Sure it may drive them further under ground with their breeding but they won't be so blatant in advertising. If a PitBull attacks the mailman, authorities will go to the source to see if the dog is registered spay/neutered.They will target the individual dog/owner.
Breed laws are in 26 States now. (Soon to be more) If they fashion their laws, it would be best to have laws like in S.F. County in CA instead of like Denver County in CO.
I'm disgusted in seeing targeted dogs (Pits, Rotts, Chows, etc) paying the ultimate sacrifice because of people's egos. I have PitBulls and I have no problem with spay/neuter, license. (They are now). I do have a problem with convicting my dogs without a trial (because of their breed)and giving them a death sentence.
"Sure underground breeders of guard and fighting dogs won't register their dogs. I doubt they do it now. Sure it may drive them further under ground with their breeding but they won't be so blatant in advertising. If a PitBull attacks the mailman, authorities will go to the source to see if the dog is registered spay/neutered.They will target the individual dog/owner. "
So say again how this will benefit our pitts?This has gone way over my country bumkin head cause I'm from SC and we dont let left wingers take over local governments here. Will only non-registered dogs attack? I dont see this as a solution to BSL. Its nice of them not to target certain breeds and to blanket the whole dog race but i dont see how it helps either. Just one more waste of legistrative powers.Police the laws already in effect and prove to me that they can handle another insane law that violates our constitutional rights then I may see the logic in it. Pipe dreams baby, this is a ban-aide thats sure to stick to the wound!