neuter/spay - spinoff of shelter dogs discussion

cameragirl21 wrote: ok, so while i'm pretty liberal, i lean all the way to the other direction in this case--i strongly feel that people should need a permit to breed (purebreds only) and everyone else should be required to neuter/spay in order to get rid of the huge overpopulation of homeless and unwanted animals that are out there.
shelters are overflowing and so are the streets. i found my Persian on the street as a 3 week (or so, i can't be sure obviously) kitten and i got her fixed even though i was approached by several people with male Persians who wanted to breed.
i also feed a stray who is clearly a purebred Siamese.
i've heard that at least 25% of shelter dogs are purebreds too.
i think it's very wrong to have an animal that goes outside unattended and is not fixed...one cat turns into 36 in just one year if it's not fixed.
so no raving debates, just curious if anyone else agrees with me--if you're not going to breed then neuter or spay for the benefit of everyone.
btw, the reason i say permit to breed is because many people breed dogs with health problems...IMO only healthy dogs should be bred or they'll pass down their unhealthy genes. my cat has had so many health problems that i'm sure i've spent well over 10 grand over the years on her vet bills and while i love her to death and wouldn't trade her for the healthiest cat on earth, i don't think anyone should be selling sick animals or animals that have the potential to become sick or die young and leave the family who adopts them heartbroken.

luvmykids replied: I'm with you. I've taken in too many strays and had to turn down far too many others. It breaks my heart and it really is a simple fix. The place I used to live even had free spay and neuter clinics a few times a year, people still didn't do it.

Our shelters automatically spay and neuter their animals. And the city just passed legislation that breeder permits are required. Enforcing it may be another subject but it's a start.

jcc64 replied: In the shelter at which my mom works, no animal leaves the premises w/o being spayed/neutered first. I think breeders should absolutely be licensed. I didn't realize they weren't.

cameragirl21 replied:
Jeanne, anyone can breed...if i didn't fix my cat i could have bred her and sold her kittens even though i don't have papers for her because i found her BUT i could have sold the kittens anyway, not for as much as papered kittens but still.
i think only purebred animals should be bred, period...there is just not enough demand for mutts.
and anyone who breeds should be required to get a permit just so we can all be sure that their animals are healthy.

Celestrina replied: I agree with most of what you are saying. Far too many people adopt animals without knowing how to take care of them. This leads to overpopulation and puppy mills. However, many purebreds have inherent health problems regardless of how well they were bred. I believe that licensed breeders should not be restricted to purebreds. Mutts or mixed breeds in general have healthier, longer lives.

Calimama replied: Yes, it's ridiculous how people breed solely to make huge money. There is a lady here who breeds poodles and some other small dog together, calls them "designer dogs", and sells them to ANYONE who has the $2500 she's asking.

~Roo'sMama~ replied: I don't know, while I believe that the responsible thing to do if you have a pet and aren't going to breed it would be to get it fixed, I don't really want a law telling me I have to. Our dog is neutered - he gets out sometimes and runs around town and we didn't want him getting some poor female dog in trouble. Plus our friends have a female dog who isn't spayed and the two dogs see each other a lot. We're also planning on getting our cat spayed in the very near future, but mainly because she has had three heat cycles in the last few weeks and it's driving me (and probably her) nuts. She's a strictly indoors cat.

But I think if I wanted my cat to have kittens, that isn't the governments business. I know that there is an over population of animals but for there to be a law telling me that I have to have a license just to have a litter of kittens doesn't seem right to me. I grew up on a farm and we had tons of kittens every year... we had so many cats running around that place but they were all fed and cared for.

My3LilMonkeys replied: While I do believe 100% that people should take the responsibility and spay/neuter their animals, I don't think that it should be a law. I also don't think that allowing only purebreds is a good idea - the inbreeding causes lots of health problems and while purebreds are great dogs, mutts in general live longer and are just as good - even better in some cases.

lisar replied: I said No. Mainly cause here where I am at it cost me $175.00 to have Spud fixed. Thats alot of money. I had to have him done it was required by the place I adopted him from. No problem. I have no problem with people who do it or people who dont do it. My dogs stay in the yard. I have a big fenced in yard and I dont see the need to have my other one fixed. No other dogs can get in my yard and my 2 can not get out. I wouldnt want anyone to force it on me.

That is just my opinion.

holley79 replied: There are way too many strays out there who need a home. The only problem with limiting it to purbreds only is then you lose your "muts" and I'm pretty darn fond of them.

mom21kid2dogs replied: A city within a 30 mile radius of us has that law on the books. It's the only one I know of. You must get a breeding permit or fix your dog by one year. Permits are not limited to purebreds, however. Personally, I don't support this kind of legislation because responsible people will do it anyway the rest will just blow it off as it's fairly difficult to enforce. I believe in the county I'm speaking of they "require" vets to "turn in" anyone who doesn't have a permit. Not a real good plan as this might cause an owner not seek immediate treatment for ill animals and also limit people who would otherwise vaccinate, seek routine care, etc. That county is twice as large as ours with 1 full time dog warden and one assistant (same as out county) so he's far more consumed with dealing with neglect and abuse complaints that chasing down people who don't fix their dogs. Interestingly, the dogs that have been confiscated because of this ordinance have been largely unclaimed in the pound, costing the county money in the long run. I know the local vets did not support it and a large number of informed citizen didn't as well. I think some saw it as a way to cut down on backyard breeders but that only works if backyard breeders care about thir animals~which they don't.

It likely is well intentioned like seat belt laws for adults and motorcycle helmet laws, but, like those, not a great solution to the real problem.

mom21kid2dogs replied:
Sorry to dispute this, Jennifer, but the notion is largely unfounded. One third to one half of shelter dogs are purebreds, per the American Humane Society numbers. This doesn't even touch the dogs who end up in breed rescue programs which grows alarmingly every day.

Jackie012007 replied:
Ditto^. I worked in an animal shelter all through high school until I left home, but I still volunteer there now (well, I did until the baby came). It's not the pure breeds who are most appealing - it's the small breeds, mixed or otherwise. Those are the ones who go fast and appeal to most. We always get beautiful purebred German Shepherds or Rottweilers or Boxers in that are perfectly healthy, but they always end up going down because there is NO funding and no room. Meanwhile, a small dog who has 5 different breeds in it has 5 people begging to take it home!

There is such an emphasis on purebreeding but really it in no way makes a dog better or healthier than a mix. On the contrary, purebred dogs tend to be less healthy and live shorter lives than mixes. When a dog is bred along pure lines, it also is bred with specific health or musculature problems that are specific to that breed. Every breed has them. No matter how well a dog is bred, these health issues and the chance of them flaring up gets magnified by a small percent every time a new generation is formed. Meanwhile, mised breeds tend to keep those traits dormant, and also tend to have higher immunity. When Upper Repiratory or Kennel Cough (highly contagious) hits the shelter, the purebred dogs are ALWAYS the first to get sick or die

I'm on the fence with this - I've dealt with the heartbreak of euthanizing perfecly healthy animals just because local government doesn't want to fund the shelter and people don't want to be responsible health owners, it makes you want to run right out and do everything you can to get something done about it. But I agree with the previous poster - how do you enforce it? Counties have hard enough times just getting people to vaccinate their dogs for rabies regularly - How do you make people be good, responsible pet owners? It's just not possible - well-intentioned, but not possible.

cameragirl21 replied: well, as for enforcing it, i think puppies and kittens should be fixed prior to the new owner taking them home, just like at a shelter...they won't give you an animal that's not already fixed.
and i think there should be free or low cost neuter/spay clinics so no one can complain it's too expensive.
bottom line is permits should be applied for based on the health of the sire and dam from whom the litter came. for instance, if i'm buying a german shepherd that i want to breed then i select the breeder i buy it from and choose which gender i want and then apply for the permit before taking the puppy home and if i get the permit then i take the puppy home intact and if not then i the puppy has to be fixed before i can take it home from the breeder.
i think giving people up to one year is too long, they should get a pre-fixed animal and that would solve the problem.
and if it's strictly indoor, like my cat it really doesn't matter because my cat went into heat every week till i got her fixed and let me tell you, it was h*ll for both her AND me and if she were a boy he'd start spraying and it creates an awful smell.
i think if people aren't going to be responsible they shouldn't have dogs and by requiring permits and neuter/spay laws you reduce the number of animals out there and thereby the number of people who can have them.
my vet has a sign up in is office that says, "owning a dog or a cat is not a matter of life and death...it is MUCH more important than that."
if people aren't willing to pay to neuter or spay then they shouldn't have animals because animals can get sick and that costs much more so before getting one you should ask yourself if you're willing to pay high vet bills.
just a couple weeks ago my parents' Siamese whom i've been caring for while they travel and move got really sick and i dropped over $400 on her and then i took my own cat to the vet and there went another $400. getting them both fixed cost less than $400 for the two of them.
and as for the government telling you that you can't have a litter of kittens, well, the thing is that kittens are cute but they grow up fast and by the age of six months they can be pregnant with their own litters so people have to be responsible and not just decide they want a litter of kittens, if you're going to have a litter then you have to be willing to take responsibility for each kitten and that is precisely why i got my cat fixed.

~Roo'sMama~ replied:

I know that wasn't a very good example, I was just saying I don't like the government telling me whether or not my cat can have kittens. IMO it's just plain none of their business. If my cat did have kittens we would find good homes for all of them and keep any that we couldn't give away. And then of course the ones we kept would be fixed because we wouldn't want a houseful of kittens, or inbreds either. Kittens are cute and yes they do grow up fast, but I love them just as much when they're full grown cats and they definitely wouldn't be turned out of the house!

cameragirl21 replied:
well, if you got your dog from a friend the way i see it your friend would need a permit and according to that permit your friend would have to get the animal fixed before giving it to you in order to be in line with the law.
in all fairness, if it were carried out properly then this would defnitely work...it would without question lower the number of animals available for adoption but it would bring the supply and demand to where they are equal and now they are way off.
also, if you want a mutt you could still get one...if i have a purebred lab and you have a purebred poodle there is nothing that says we can't breed them, but there would have to be demand because the way i envision the law, the breeder would have to take responsibility for the puppies and/or kittens if they're not adopted.
same goes for your litter of kittens, i wasn't trying to pick on you but the way i see it, if you're willing to take responsibility for the kittens and make sure they're all fixed before giving them away and agreeing to keep, fix, and care for any you can't find homes for then you'd get a permit.
see, if done properly it would work very well.
there are too many animals and not enough homes and IMO something has to be done about that pronto.