The Mandatory Spay and Neuter Debate
I recently received an email announcing the website created by President-Elect Barack Obama's staff: http://www. Change.org. It is a social action network which allows folks the chance to give suggestions for the new administration when Mr. Obama takes office on January 20, 2009. It is an inviting site where people can get involved, take action and also connect with folks with similar interests and issues. It is free and very easy to join.
Coincidentally, a gal with whom I am acquainted on the Internet, who’s passion for animals is unrivaled, sent me a copy of a suggestion she made to Change.org, that neutering and spaying all cats should be mandatory to reduce the number of unwanted cats languishing in shelters to be adopted, or worse yet, are homeless, roaming neighborhoods in search of food and shelter. So of course my interest was piqued. The information I found while researching the issue was very interesting.
Chicago's Aldermen Ed Burke and Ginger Rugai working with with PAWS Chicago (http://www.pawschicago.org/) and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) have already forwarded a proposed mandate spay/neuter program in Chicago. According to their proposal, all dogs and cats over the age of six-months must be altered unless they meet the criteria for exemption.
Mandatory spay and neuter laws may keep more animals out of shelters, but could also hurt some reputable breeders.
Those include a valid veterinarian certificate that for medical reasons the animal cannot be neutered, and valid dog and cat breeders, whose breeds meet the standards of the commission and are registered with a registry or association committed to the health and safety of the breed who are kept for breeding or showing purposes, service dogs as defined by Illinois state law, law enforcement dogs and dogs owned by guard dog companies. But Illinois is not the only state with pending bills to mandate neutering.
If the new ordinance passes, it may effectively put small reputable breeders out of commission, as the proposed mandate would end the present exemption which permits residents who occasionally have a litter for sale, to be deemed an "animal care facility" and have to pay $330.00 for a license. In order to qualify for a "breeding license" the breeder would also have to submit to a criminal background check and home inspection. Cat breeders would have to pay $100.00 per cat, annually. The transfer of a retired breeding or show cat or dog, to another person, even a relative would necessitate providing personal information to the commission and a personal and criminal background check.
The American Kennel club strongly opposes this proposed mandate because of the impact it will have on those reputable breeders and individuals who are current or prospective dog owners.
In its place they suggest enforceable laws that protect purebred dogs, and a strong educational program which is designed to promote the safety and welfare for all dogs. You can read more their response to the proposed mandate and read what other states are doing by visiting: http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3502. The Cat Fancier's Association has also responded negatively to the proposed mandate. Read their response at: http://www.cfainc.org/exhibitors/alert-IL-Chicago7-12.html.
While my friend’s suggestion is well intentioned, and I appreciate her concern, at the same time I fear that mandating neutering and spaying of all dogs and cats may open a can of worms. After reading the AKC and CFA responses to the proposed mandate which seems unenforceable and cumbersome, it seems to me that a mandate may prevent many dogs and cats from finding good homes. Additionally, the impact upon reputable breeders of purebred dogs and cats may make it very difficult for a prospective cat or dog owner to find the pet of their choice without jumping through many hoops.
What are your thoughts on mandatory spaying and neutering? You can join the conversation already in progress on President-Elect Obama’s website, by visiting both http://www.change.org/ideas/view/re_make_spayingneutering_of_cats_mandatory and http://www/change.org/.
You may also share in the debate at: http://www.helium.com/debates/135690-mandatory-spaying-neutering-enforceable/side_by_side
Recent Posts
Celebrating St. Patrick's Day with your Pets
WEEKLY CUDDLE CHAMPIONS: Monroe and Buckeye
Introducing Caplin: The World's Largest Rodent
Loyal Canine Rescues Drowning Kitty
Shakti: The Cat that Lived Up to her Name
"You're Fat": Vet Hits Me With Hard Truth
The Cat who Owns an R.V.: Luxurious Travel
Lazy Dog Owner Arrested for Walking His Dog
Petside: Get Started
-
- 2010 NCAA Mascot Tournament
Vote for your favorite pet mascots to determine the ultimate NCAA mascot champion!
-
- Find a Breed
Browse dog and cat breeds to find your perfect pal.
-
- Diagnose a Condition
Use PetVet to research what's ailing your pet.
-
- Locate a Hospital
- Find the nearest accredited animal hospital.
Specials
Check out these deals picked by petside.com just for you!
Comments (5)
Diana Bauer December 12, 2008 8:41 AM
I have always spayed or neutered my dogs and cats, but I would not support a governmental edict forcing people to do so. The government has way too much power over our daily lives as it is.
I do agree with shelters that spay or neuter all animals before they are adopted. But, that is a decision they have made as an organization, and it has not been mandated by the government.
I want less governmental interference in my life, not more.
Di
J.A. Morrison December 12, 2008 9:25 AM
I am not in favor of this idea at all. What are our lawmakers thinking these days? They mandate laws or propose laws that they THINK would be ideal and many of these hairbrained ideas have not been fully thought out. It is not only this idea but so many others. Seems that the long arm of Big Brother rears it's head more than I care to think about. Taxes on cows, taxes on trees? Now mandating who can and cannot be a breeder of animals. I think that some kind of neuter and spay ruling would be great but this one sounds WAY to strict and an invasion of privacy to boot.
Vicki December 12, 2008 9:42 AM
Actually, I agree with the author. I think it would be impossible to enforce such a law. And there are reputable breeders that do not need such intervention. Maybe such a law would be ok for people who adopt from shelters, but not for people that make regular income, and responsible breeders.
Mary Haight December 12, 2008 1:30 PM
Hey, wait--there's a LOT more to this subject.
Veterinarians are against it, and once you get a look at the results of cities and towns that have legislated it, you'll be shocked. Please take a look at the summary of results here www.dancingdogblog.com and don't be lulled into making a snap decision on this important topic. Thanks.
Margie December 12, 2008 2:22 PM
While the idea sounds great in theory, and it's intent to reduce numbers of stray and feral dogs and cats is wonderful, I dont see how this is actually going to work out in a positive way. I would much rather see a fine for an unaltered animal running loose. 1st time offense $100, 2nd time $200m 3rd time mandatory altering. That way it would penalize careless owners and encourage them to get their pets altered as it would be cheaper in the long run to do so.
add your comment