California Spay/Neuter legislation and the AKC?

Question

How many of you out there have heard about the Spay/Neuter legislation running around the California legislature? It would require any dog or cat over four months old to be neutered. Only exceptions would be licensed breeders, police dogs and service dogs. What do you think?
I read in the paper that the AKC has come out against it. It said the AKC, for the first time in its history, is forming a Political Action Group to fight this legislation. They have said they may pull their second largest dog show out of Long Beach. This could cost the LA area as much as 30 million dollars in lost revenue.
Do you think they have the clout to pull this off?

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

I hope not we have so many abused dogs because people don't spade. I can't believe akc would not want controlled breeding.

Source(s):

my opinion

Answer 2

There are good things and bad things to this bill. AKC has some clout, but AKC is largely responsible for it's own fate. AKC has seemed more interested in taking money from registering puppies, than trying to educate and police breeders to keep things under control. Too many dogs being bred and not enough homes.

So somebody felt a law was needed. If AKC had taken a firmer role, maybe tried to police puppy mills, or backyard breeders for instance, perhaps there wouldn't have been so many dogs and someone wouldn't have felt the need for yet another law.

At any rate, 4 months is too young for spaying/neutering.

Answer 3

AKC can certainly get the show pulled from California, however peopel seem to think that AKC is responsible for "everything" bad about breeding..this is simply nOT true..they are a registering body only..plain and simple..The clubs with the clout and pull to do something about mills, BYB, irresponsible breeding are the parent clubs, the breed/kennel clubs, the obedience clubs, the animal welfare departments in each state, the human societies and rescues and individual people themselves...AKC as a business doesn't come close to having enough manpower or enough eyes to see or stop the problems..the above mentioned groups/people do..they are in every single state.
AKC is trying to promote responsible dog ownership but they can only do so much..it is because of their efforts that so many people now "register" with scam registries instead of a legit registry.

As for spay/neuter by 4 months..not really a good idea..while ALL pet quality dogs should be spay/neutered not only for unplanned pregnancy but also for health not all should be done this young.

As for the "cancer" study in Rottweilers (also done with Golden Retreivers) it is an extremely flawed study and shouldn't even be considered in decision making ..Rottweilers and Goldens are breeds that are VERY prone to the type of cancer the study claimed was caused by s/n..kind of ridiculous since the rate of this cancer is just as high in intact as it is in altered...in order to have an acurate study it would have to be conducted on many breeds and mixes and over a long term not short term and not using breeds already prone to the issue they are studying.

Source(s):

vet tech for 34 years, years of expereince in purebred dogs and registration

Answer 4

I would say they should move it up to a year or two when the dogs are fully mature. Either way something needs done because unfortunately there are just far too many stray dogs and it's a major problem. If AKC really cares about the well being of dogs and not making bucks off puppy mills they should be supporting this legislation.

Answer 5

A large/giant breed dog does not finish growing until 1-2 years of age. Neutering before the growth plates close results in longer bones/changed angulation. This results in a totally changed pattern of stresses in the joints. We also do not know enough about hormone interactions with other systems to say whether it is in the best interests of the individual dog.

While there are definately some pluses (ie reduced incidence of mammary tumours) there are also some negatives (a study in rottweillers showed an increased incidence of bone cancer - the study hasn't been repeated in other breeds to the best of my knowlege, but how do you balance an increase in a frequently fatal cancer with a decrease in a frequently treatable cancer without comparative figures?). I don't oppose spay/neuter, but I don't believe there's enough information to say it's in the best interest of my dog.

Spay/Neuter has a place in reducing unwanted pregnancies, particularly where owners are not prepared to take responsibility for making sure their dog doesn't breed, but deciding not to spay/neuter does not equal "irresponsible".

Even with this legislation, will there be any less dogs in shelters? The dogs in the pet shops will still be sold to any impulse buyer with a credit card. Back yard breeders will still be out there with their un-registered, un-vacinated dogs, and pure-bred dogs bred without knowlege of the dogs in the pedigree will continue to come from the puppy mills.

Much greater impact could be gained by banning "farming" of companion animals. How many Hunte Corp trucks full of puppies will this legislation stop arriving?

Sorry for the rant, but I hate knee jerk legislation that gets through when the necessary changes keep getting defeated by lobby groups with money. (compare the AKC budget with Hunte Corps).

Answer 6

I would have to agree. I don't think I would like someone telling me to do something to my dog that I don't want to do. Personally I have all of my pets fixed, just because its easier and cuts back on certain bad behavior. It would be good to cut back on the amount of strays and abused dogs that don't have loving families but in the long run I don't think that its such a good idea.

Source(s):

my opinion

Answer 7

Cause for PawsS
Laws that are or would be effective:
1. free or very low cost license fees for spayed/neutered pets. High fees for animals that are not sterilized (and have no age or medical issues)
2. Banning backyard breeders who don't have proper zoning/facitilies to be breeding and selling animals.
3. Require a permit and inspections for commercial breeders. Require them to pay state, local and federal taxes on their sales and be subject to routine inspection.
4. Free government sponsored spay/neuter to anyone who wants it (This is cheaper than the costs of animal control enforcement in handling/euthanizing unwanted animals.
5. State funded educational programs/ public service announcements on responsible pet ownership.
6. Ban "no kill" shelters from advertising themselves as "no kill" unless they prove they can take and and properly care for (not just warehouse) every unwanted animal in their communities. Promoting the "no kill" slogan just allows irresponsible people to justify irresponsible breeding and dumping of their animals. They say they are no kill and the government shelters are kill shelters but they don't mention that the government shelters have to take in every animal they have refused to take. "No kill" is just a fund raising strategy.
7. Governments should work with feral cat colony owners to assist them in TNR programs to keep cat colony populations healthy and under control instead of trap and kill.
8. Prohibit apartments and condominiums from banning pets owned by responsible pet owners and from seeking excessive deposits, etc.
9. Give tax credits to those who have sterilized animals or adopt from a legitimate shelter.

The fact that we are spending millions to kill unwanted animals in our advanced society is shameful and there is no excuse. If all non profits, government shelters, legislators and everyday citizens cooperated on this issue, it would be solved.

Answer 8

I asked this question yesterday check out some excellent answers from informed people.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…

Answer 9

The exemptions are all ready a "reading test to vote" (you know the ones in the south that a black with a PhD couldn't pass). 4 month old Police dogs & sevice dogs don't exist. It gets worse- after 2009 ALL of the exemptions are removed- pray you don't need a service dog after then.
Sana Cruzes "hugely sussesful" spay /neuter bill doubled the cost of dog enforcement and the pound surrender went way UP...

Answer 10

Nope...there are-quite simply-more MORONS in the world than SENSIBLE people!
The know-nothing,do-gooder,BUTTINSKI IMBECILE bunny-hugger types will ALWAYS take the easy & USELESS "solutions" & the polititians will ALWAYS jump to "show they care" w/just the same amount of MORONIC fervor.