Author Topic: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.  (Read 18819 times)

Offline schelmischekitty

  • Chief "All Knowing"
  • *****
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
    • myspace
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #15 on: April 25, 2007, 02:51:51 pm »
i also don't think it would solve the problem but it would put a dent in it.  it will be interesting to see how this works out.  as for the fees, i know the county over from us does the same program, BUT they only charge a small fee for all pets.  also, if you're from out of state / county, all you have to do is bring proof, which would be your shot records that most people bring anyways.  they won't just take your dog and neuter it just b/c it's in the county, if you're not from there.

Dog and Cat License Fees
$10.00 One year sterilized animal fee
$25.00 Three year sterilized animal fee
$25.00 One year sexually intact animal fee
$60.00 Three year sexually intact animal fee

you also have to pay a permit fee for over 4 dogs, and if you own a pitbull, rotty, or other "potentially dangerous breed" you also have to get a separate permit for them (or a proven dangerous dog, it's not ONLY breed specific).
« Last Edit: April 25, 2007, 03:20:47 pm by schelmischekitty »
steffanie in atlanta

aiden (4), tristan (2), & maya (born sept. 17th)
axle-140ish-lb akita (4)
peanut-5lb, 11 months chihuahua
[img width= height= alt=Image Hosted by ImageShack.us]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3339/alltogethernowme6.jpg[/img]

Offline NoDogNow

  • Grand Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 601
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2007, 04:34:50 pm »
OK, let's start with a PROOF:

Directly from the HSUS website, bottom of the page:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/animal_abuse_and_neglect/reporting_animal_abuse_or_neglect.html

"The Humane Society of the United States does not have animal control capabilities; that is a function of local animal control programs. The HSUS is neither legally nor contractually affiliated with—nor is a parent organization for—local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal care and control agencies. In short, The HSUS does not operate or have direct control over any animal shelter."

You can read the rest of the page for yourself, but whoever's running that Humane Society shelter in San Diego, it's not HSUS, unless they're lying on their website as well.

I'm not familiar with that shelter in specific, but based on my reading, I would bet it's a completely independent humane society that has paid a very pretty penny to have HSUS personnel come in and review/help design/endorse the place. That appears to be their typical 'consulting' role.

They have a budget of over $100 million a year, and in 2002, they spent/gave less than $150,000 for actual hands on shelter or humane societies, according to one analysis of their IRS returns of that year. I haven't found any more recent information than that, but then I haven't spent more than a few minutes at a time digging at this.

Check out activistcash.c om, though.

They're basically a hardline consumer rights advocacy group, dedicated to identifying and tracking the lobbying efforts and cash flow of a variety of "we know better than you, so shut up and we'll tell you how to live" activist groups, so you have to take their statements with a grain of salt--but if you google their facts, you'll come up with verification of the information, whether you agree with their interpretation of it or not.

Did I mention that even AKC says CA AB 1634 is a bad, dangerous law?

And lord knows I'm no fan of the AKC.
Sheryl, Dogless and sad

Offline Mojo1269

  • Big Paw Certified
  • **
  • Posts: 208
  • The Men
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #17 on: April 26, 2007, 02:54:57 am »
Each post you have made comes at this thing form a differnet angle.  I looked at the AKC web page and see where you have pulled a lot of your information from.  I still see this as a good thing.  I am more concerned with the over abundance of unwanted pets and puppy mills than I am with small breeders concerned about forlking over money to breed their animals.  While I agreee this is not ideal, I see more good than harm coming from it.
Duke 5 Year Old Menacing Hound
Butler 1 Year Old Burgeoning Monster

VooDoo the Greatest Dane. 09-14-1995 - 12-31-2007 RIP my sweet

Nicole

  • Guest
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #18 on: April 26, 2007, 12:19:11 pm »
NoDogNow,

I think that you are being super rude, confrontationa l, condescending and just down-right unpalatable.

Sheesh.

What is wrong with people thinking that mandatory spay and neuter is a good idea? You point out all the flaws, but tell me, how do YOU propose we deal with the sick over population problem? And what is so wrong with making breeders accountable? Who CARES if they have to pay to keep their dogs intact? That is the cost of doing business!

You sound like those corporate whiners that complain about how environmental legislation hurts their business. Waaaaaaah. Look at the big picture, will ya? There's lots of dogs out there being put down. We have to start somewhere. If it becomes too expensive to be a breeder, well, that's the case. But, maybe, just MAYBE people will start to THINK about where they are getting their puppies because of this legislation. Maybe it will make puppies a little more precious. Maybe it will make them harder to get and to that I say WHOOP! GOOD JOB!

Offline schelmischekitty

  • Chief "All Knowing"
  • *****
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
    • myspace
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2007, 12:26:29 pm »
nicole, i couldn't have said it better.  while it won't solve the problem completely, there are little to no options available that will.  i would much rather a few small breeders go out of business than see thousands of animals put to sleep for no reason.  good animals. ones that would make the best pets in the world, if only given the chance.  just like nicole said, look at the big picture please (california spends $250 million a year on controlling strays and euthanizes 500,000 cats and dogs annually.).  think of all the lives that will be spared, not the ones that some breeders won't create, and put into this cruel world.  at least someone is making an effort to make a difference to the animals.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2007, 12:33:27 pm by schelmischekitty »
steffanie in atlanta

aiden (4), tristan (2), & maya (born sept. 17th)
axle-140ish-lb akita (4)
peanut-5lb, 11 months chihuahua
[img width= height= alt=Image Hosted by ImageShack.us]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3339/alltogethernowme6.jpg[/img]

bigdogs@5501

  • Guest
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2007, 01:40:11 pm »
This is definitely a hot topic. I am a member of a yahoo group that does rescues and transports. I get about 4000 emails a month that are all about dogs needing homes. I know that there were a lot of members of that group that really pushed for the bill. I stayed neutral. I think that the law could have been written better, but by the time that I knew anything about it- it was way past changing the wording.
 Its like a train wreck with me- I dont want to open that email- but then I do, then you see that poor dog or get the story about how the dog ended up in that particular shelter and then I get depressed. Sometimes I have to get up and walk away from my computer.
Then I work with a person who is a back yard breeder- serious backyard breeder. Has about 20 females that she keeps pregnant all of the time. In order to keep my job or at least peace at the job- I have to shut my mouth. I am a firm beleiver in spay and neuter. All but the baby here are spayed and neutered.
Then there are the ways that the dogs are pts. I really have stressed out incredibly over the horrible ways that this takes place on a daily basis. I am not an emotional person- but this is one of the things that just tears me up.
I cant save as many as I want to, I am doing my part though, and not with just what I have at my house.
I really do love each and every dog here at my house and yes folks I probably have too many dogs, by many peoples standards. But they are loved- they are well taken care of and they are alive and I think that they are happy for the most part.
I want to always be able to own a dog and breeding should be a responsible act.
I dont know if this law is a good thing or a bad thing- but if more shelter dogs find homes, then its a good thing.
One kudo I have to give to California is the law that they passed about not being able to make a dog live on a 6 foot chain, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.So there are some caring animal folks in that State that are trying to do the right thing for dogs.
I can only hope that in the future there wont be a 6 week old puppy facing a gas chamber or worse because of some inconsiderate human being.
Maybe the groups against the law could rally to have some of the wording changed, that would be a lot more productive than to totally rally against it.

Offline Mojo1269

  • Big Paw Certified
  • **
  • Posts: 208
  • The Men
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #21 on: April 26, 2007, 03:32:13 pm »
Well said.
Duke 5 Year Old Menacing Hound
Butler 1 Year Old Burgeoning Monster

VooDoo the Greatest Dane. 09-14-1995 - 12-31-2007 RIP my sweet

Offline Care2Adopt

  • Big Paws-a-holic
  • **
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
    • Carolina Animal Rescue Experts
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #22 on: April 26, 2007, 07:00:51 pm »
I dont want to jump in but I can't help it.

I am a breeder, and I compete in conformation and obedience- all dogs that I have bred were finished Champions or obedience titled, thoroughly health checked, proven in the ring, the vets office and the home. It's also mandatory to me that all my dogs pass a CGC and/or TDI. Why? because a well balanced dog has a title on BOTH ends.

I spend thousands of dollars on entry fees, travel expenses, health scans, food, care, and grooming of my peformance dogs. You don't win money in dog shows (Well.. 99.99999% of dog shows) I spend weeks, months and in some cases YEARS researching pedigrees and lines before selecting and planning a litter. I breed once every few years, and I have finished dogs that have never once been bred. My FULLY VETTED, contracted, and guarenteed pet puppies sell for anywhere between 800-$1000 on a mandatory spay/neuter contract, and my show puppies (Same as above) are either given to good friends to help their breeding/show lines, or I sell for $1000-$2000. Do I make money? HECK NO. Do I break even? Don't make me laugh.

Do I care? NO WAY. I do it because I love my breeds, and I want to improve the breed. I also rescue, and volunteer with breed clubs to go out and educate and inform. I have a personal rule that in my household I will be directly involved in the rescue of 10 dogs for every ONE I breed.

Now, I am not a fan of mandatory spay neuter laws that do not provide exemptions for responsible breeders. Never have been, never will, because it WILL mean that BYBs will take the rise, because they dont care if they abide by the laws. However, this law is NOT one of those. It will require licensing of purebred kennels, including responsible show kennels, and it will attempt to shut down and erradicate BYBs, puppy smugglers and puppy mills. are their holes in the law? Yes, absolutely. There's holes in every law. There isn't anything mentioned about visiting dogs, but as you mentioned each district is responsible for their own laws, and before there is an AKC sanctioned show, you better believe AKC will guarentee the saftey of their members before invitations go out. There are a few other things that need to be reworded or edited to ensure the saftey of private individuals, however, in general, this law is fairly well written.

Here's the thing with the licenses. It may drive the price of a well bred dog up, just like when breeders began doing OFA/PENN hip and CERF/OPTIGEN testing. So what? People who care where their dogs come from aren't going to mind shelling out a few hundred dollars extra. The people who DO mind are going to go out of state to purchase their puppy mill dogs, and end up paying more on vet bills then they would have on a well bred dog, but fine, whatever, it gets rid of the BYBs and mills in CA, and thats the goal- also they will have to come back and abide by the MSN laws and thats going to help so much on the "Bingo here is a pureblooded blue eyed husky out to stud to any pretty lady ready to get it on"


 I know that the point has been brought up that there could be an issue with a responsible breeder who doesnt have the ability to meet the requirements to get a lisence. We may loose a few good breeders over this, but in general, who do you know that wouldn't move to fix that? Who do you know, that is a responsible, show breeder who loves and takes excellent care of their dogs, would not do anything in their power to continue the improvement of the breed they dedicate themselves to?

This isn't a ban on breeding. This is a step in the right direction (However scary, and tense the ground is, since it is government overruling... but hey, unfortunatly the bad breeders outway the good, and we just have to accept that as a fact of life) to give MORE power to responsible breeders, and shelters.

Good breeders wont LET this bill harm their dogs.

Ok.. im off my soapbox.  ::)




Shawn and her
3 Golden paws
2 Kitty-paws
3 Macaws
6 lovebirds
4 ferrets
+ dozens and dozens o' rescues and fosters

Offline Care2Adopt

  • Big Paws-a-holic
  • **
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
    • Carolina Animal Rescue Experts
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #23 on: April 27, 2007, 03:46:39 am »
I wanted to add... at least it isn't breed restricting o.O


Shawn and her
3 Golden paws
2 Kitty-paws
3 Macaws
6 lovebirds
4 ferrets
+ dozens and dozens o' rescues and fosters

Offline Gracie Belle

  • Grand Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 611
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2007, 04:14:38 am »
Whiskeyandsake,

{STANDING OVATION} 

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Misty slave to:
Gracie Belle, 2 year English Mastiff
Rosco, 1 yr Toy German Shettweiler (designer mutt of course)and toy cause he's not Rotti or GSD size AT ALL.  Though they said he was a mix of the two..  Tonka, 3 year Great Dane
And last and most certainly NOT least, Linus 5 year old cat.

Offline Mojo1269

  • Big Paw Certified
  • **
  • Posts: 208
  • The Men
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #25 on: April 27, 2007, 04:20:05 am »
Its beuatifull when people can stand back and see the big picture.  Well Said Whiskey and Saki.  Heres to you...
Duke 5 Year Old Menacing Hound
Butler 1 Year Old Burgeoning Monster

VooDoo the Greatest Dane. 09-14-1995 - 12-31-2007 RIP my sweet

Offline People Whisperer

  • Supreme Drooler
  • ****
  • Posts: 1975
    • View Profile
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #26 on: April 27, 2007, 04:37:32 am »
whiskeyandsake, I am clapping my hands!!!
"To once own a Great Pyrenees is to love and want one always."
Mary W. Crane

I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it :)


Nicole

  • Guest
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #27 on: April 27, 2007, 07:55:27 am »
Whiskeyandsake-

RAISE THE ROOF, GIRL! That was very VERY VEEEEERY well said. You eloquently worded everything I was trying to get across when I spouted off in my last post. Thanks so much. You have particularly keen insight, and I like it.

Offline Care2Adopt

  • Big Paws-a-holic
  • **
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
    • Carolina Animal Rescue Experts
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #28 on: April 27, 2007, 10:43:15 am »
awwww shucks marm(s)... t'werent nuthin  8)


Now, someone gave me back my soapbox, so be careful, hold onto your hats and get a cup of joe, this will be long.


I guess I'm just willing to give up some of my personal freedoms for that of my dogs, the future of the breeds that I love, and the future of the sport of showing. People put too much into breeding, making it a buisness. It is true that it's a living, I live and breath dogs, but it sure isn't a buisness. I really dont mean to sound preachy or know-it-all. These laws DO worry me, because you have to wonder where they are going to stop. I think that clear cut exceptions should be approved by AKC and a panel of excellent breeders. Probably a crap shoot- but it's worth a shot. If everyone fighting this law came together to work with the legislation to improve it, rewrite the parts that come off a little loose, then we'll be ok. They have been really good about some things; for instance, your dog doesnt have to be currently competing, but must be in training or prove that they have competed at some point in their lives. Well thats fair! That gives retired CHs, veterans, puppies and fuglies (Er... thats a term I use to describe akward puppies waiting to mature before they get in the ring) a chance, without having to go under. If we can limit people's choices to good breeders or rescues, we have won 90% of the battle. There will be people that slip through the crack, just like any law, but not as many. And with proper education, campaigning and legislature we can make it possible for people to UNDERSTAND the point of this law- they aren't taking away your rights, they are GIVING rights to animals. I think too many people feel that what they choose to do with their "property" (Dogs) is their buisness and no one elses. Well, sorry folks, it aint the case. You're going to have to meet some standards. It's like breed bans. I am a FIRM believer of punish the deed, not the breed- however, if neighborhood associations want to make it a rule that any dog (NO MATTER THE BREED) has to pass a CGC test to live there? h*ll, I'm all FOR that.

I bet when the first speeding laws came out, people were furious. "How dare you tell me how fast to go! Its my car, my life! It's just going to make it more annoying for those of us who drive safe." Well... if you do drive safe.... it really shouldn't affect you, now should it?

Here are a couple of points that someone (who will remain namless) argued with me in a PM.

#1- we wouldnt be able to attend shows in CA, because they could seize our dogs and spay/neuter them immediatly.

Ok.. lets look at an average three day AKC event, with conformation, obedience and agility trials. Do you know how many THOUSANDS of dogs and people would attend that? Thousands..of people..and dogs.. who need Hotels. Food. Gas. Supplies. (God, we spend money like WATER when we go to shows.) Events that draw tourism, attract people to stadiums and other places. Draw people into cities. Seriously- do you think a local government would allow AKC to pull shows from the entire state of California? I promise, there WILL be exceptions for dogs coming into a state for events, and if not, AKC would pull shows from the state, and I guarentee an amendment would be written reeeeeeal quick.

#2- you say that peoplle should just up and move, what if they cant, what if they cant move say, 25 dogs?

Well, most responsible breeders dont have 25 dogs. I know a few, but most dont. So, fine, lets look at those that do. I have moved with 32 dogs. My home came into new zoning, affecting the shelter that I ran and it required me to move. Immediatly. Instead of wasting my time fighting to stay, I enlisted the help of friends, fellow show people and rescue groups, to take the dogs while I moved, settled, and then took them all back. If you are a breeder, then you belong to a very close knit family- the club of your breed. There WILL be options.

#3 what if they charge a licensing per litter?

What if they do? Say they charge $1000 to register a litter, and you have 2 litters a year. That's $2000. Lets add ANOTHER $1000 for a general breeders permit. So, $3,000.
(These are just random guesses at licensing, I dont think it will be this high, but lets just pretend ;) )

You have 8 puppies per litter. Normally, you would sell 75% of your litter at show cost, which for you is $1800. 25% go to pet homes at $1000 Normally, that would bring in $25,600 (that sounds like a lot, but trust me, when you actually DO it and realize how much you spend on vet bills and health scans and the 5 years of showing it took to get you to a place to breed, its chicken scratch)

To stay at 25,600, you would need to add a mere $200 to each puppy. Is that really too much to ask? I dont think so. Not when people are standing in petstores every day shelling out $3500 for a designer mutt.

And hey, I bet thats going to stop a lot of "I like this dog, but dont know if I want to waste all the money on showing him, let me breed him once and see what he throws" breedings.

#4 What about vacationing dogs?

See number 1. CA would loose a WHOOOOlE lot of dollers, and once that was brought to their attention I think there would be an amendment. I mean c'mon. These aren't aren't the ellusive ferret owners complaining. This is Mr and Mrs DOG owner here.

#5 they will take peoples dogs and kill them when they can't oblige by the law

Seriously. There would be rioting in the STREETS. You can't get your dog altered by 4 months? Then your dog gets taken, ok so what. Guess what, I do that on my pet puppies. I dont get a spay contract by 6 months, that puppy is BACK IN MY HOME immediatly, and you just lost all your rights. Its in my contract. Do I have a problem with a puppy gestepo knocking down doors and clubbing dogs to death because they aren't spayed and neutered? !&@*(! yes! But that wont happen. What will happen is the same enforcment there is for all animal control laws. You'll get a notice. Then a ticket. Then another notice. Then a polite "You really need to handle this" then a fine. Then another notice. Then maybe.. they will take the dog. And guess what, it wont be put to sleep, it will be altered and put up for adoption for those people that want a dog and can't afford to get one from one of the remaining breeders.

Holy smokes thats horrible!!!!!!!  ::) You think shelters won't have the room after all the BYBs and puppy mills get shut down? Please, that will be their main job! It will be hectic for the first few years, but I think the death toll would be substantially LESS then what it is now- and in a decade, if everything went perfect, shelters would be filled with only a few of those situations.

Let me also mention this. Responsible breeders have their own spay/neuter contract. I've already mentioned this. I take back my puppies if they are not altered. So do most breeders I know. Its in the C-O-N-T-R-A-C-T. So, lets say that the law mandates a 6 month alter. Well, breeders, put it as 5.5 months in your contract. Good breeders take any of their dogs back, no matter what. I just took a 14 year old doberman back I bred (yep you guessed it) 14 years ago, because her owner died. You dont get an alter certificate by 5.5 months, take the dog back and alter it yourself. Problem solved, no one goes to doggy jail.

Theres going to be flukes, theres going to be problems. But people, there is with ...every... law. We CANT please everyone. It WILL hurt some responsible breeders, but its gunna hurt the bad breeders a LOT worse, and guess what, sometimes you gotta take one for the team.

Good breeders are going to have to network, stay close, share ideas and leads. Theres going to have to be a panel of educators to step in and take the reins of this and help lead it in the right direction, or there is a good chance that it could slide down, that IS true. However, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

It's time for a change people.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2007, 12:31:34 pm by whiskeyandsake »


Shawn and her
3 Golden paws
2 Kitty-paws
3 Macaws
6 lovebirds
4 ferrets
+ dozens and dozens o' rescues and fosters

Nicole

  • Guest
Re: HORRIBLE BILL HAS PASSED.
« Reply #29 on: April 27, 2007, 12:07:04 pm »
***RIOTOUS APPLAUSE***


***SHRILL WHISTLES***

***MY LIGHTER FLICKERING IN YOUR AWESOMENESS***


hahah, well said. AAAAAAAY-MEN sister.