California to mandate cat/dog spay/neuter

[asterroc]

If you or anyone you know lives in California, you may be interested in the proposed Healthy Pets Act, AB 1634. This act would require all owners of cats and dogs greater than the age of 4 months to have their pet spayed or neutered. The purpose of the law is to reduce the number of stray and unwanted shelter animals, and to reduce the spread of disease via animals.

One very big con is the impact on service dogs (such as seeing eye dogs and police dogs) - trained working dogs are exempt from being fixed, however (1) the parents of working dogs (other than farm dogs) are rarely working dogs themselves, so special licenses would have to be obtained to breed service dogs despite the apparent exemption for working dogs, and (2) service dogs are not trained until well after 4 months of age, so even should a training school wish to breed a retired service dog, s/he would already be spayed/neutered. If I lived in California I would lobby/vote against this act based upon this fact alone.

Pro
http://www.cahealthypets.com/

Con
http://saveourdogs.net/ab1634.html

Rhode Island already has a similar law.

Comments

[weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com]

I disagree, from the studies I've seen breeding a pair of retired service dogs doesn't increase the chance of getting puppies that are suitable for service dog training. Over 60% of the service dogs I have personally met have actually been from shelters. Also, the site against the bill is using mostly outdated or simply unproven statistics on how neutering affects health.

[rumorofrain.livejournal.com]

While I am a huge, huge proponent of getting animals fixed, requiring ALL cats and dogs to be spayed sounds awfully strict. What about breeders, or people who show their purebred dogs? (AKC shows and agility trials require un-fixed dogs.) I would absolutely support a bill that required spaying and neutering AND required breeders to have permits.

I second what weirdlilfaechild wrote - many service dog training organizations use shelter dogs, a practice which I very much support. I've read (one opinion, anyway) that mutts actually make better guide dogs than purebreds because of their mixed breeding - many of them get the good characteristics of various strains without some of the drawbacks.

Some guide dog organizations certainly do breed their own strains of dogs, e.g. Fidelco in Connecticut, but I'm sure they could apply to get exemptions for their breeding dogs. Regular guide dogs, however, should certainly be spayed and neutered, just like pet dogs.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

The bill does have a provision for buying permits to not fix show and breeder cats/dogs that live within the state, and ones traveling to the state for a show do not require a permit to remain unfixed. I have no problem with charging breeders/showers a fee.

The problem with charging a fee for service animal breeders is that it puts an extra financial burden on a system that should not have that burden. It's already costly enough to train police dogs I'm sure, and the cost will be passed on to the CA taxpayer as I'm sure they won't get nice internal waivers even if police dog breeders were state-run, which they probably aren't. In addition, guide dog groups that breed their own dogs are usually private organiations (I think...), so this would place more of a financial strain on them and I'm under the impression they're already pushed for money. Services for people with disabilities should NOT cost the disabled person any money.

[rumorofrain.livejournal.com]

Agreed! :)