wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Mandatory spay/neuter doesn't work particularly well, so why push it? What has proven to work VERY well indeed is a combination of low-cost voluntary spay/neuter and working to increase accessibility of s/n (such as s/n vans.)

About 90% of cats and 75% of dogs are already s/n - so much for the theory that people won't do the right thing. The main reason people don't s/n is lack of funds - making it mandatory doesn't give people more money.

Instead of mandatory s/n, how about a s/n checkoff on tax returns, with the $ going to low cost s/n clinics? What about Maddie's Fund grants? www.maddiesfund.org What about using the No Kill Advocacy Center to get to no kill of adoptables, like they did in Tompkins County? www.nokillsolutions.com

All of those things work better than mandatory s/n.

There is, in fact, no overall pet overpopulation in the US. There are a few local pockets of overpopulation where enforcement of animal control laws is even worse than everywhere else (it is pretty poor nearly everywhere). Therefore there is no need to even talk about mandating pet neutering. Improving enforcement of existing laws should be the first thing people talk about when trying to improve shelter statistics. Mandatory neutering certainly would not diminish shelter populations, because
1. more than 80 percent of owned dogs and cats are already neutered anyway, and
2. the animals are there NOT because someone bred them but because they unlucky enough to end up with an irresponsible owner who dumped them.

spay and neuter all cats / dogs and then there WON'T be any left . Is this what AR groups wants .

Mandatory S/N will not solve the pet overpopulation problem. You will still have the people who will be in non compliance. The fines that were to be charged against people ( in the case of CA AB 1634 ) would actually increase the numbers in the shelters . People would just turn their animals over rather than pay the fine (s).The amount of money to inforce this law would be over the top. The laws that are in place now are not being inforced. Who will enforce this ??

I lived in Oakland , CA and did pay a very high fee for a rabies tag on my in tact male dog ($150 ). I intend to neuter him, but not until he is mature. S/N at 4 months is criminal. Many animals suffer later in life due to this early procedure. There is no room for documentation here , but it is now known that there are adverse effects from early S/N. There are pros & cons to this procedure. They include bone & joint problems that will not show up until a dog is much older.

How do you propose to control the feral cat problem ? open hunting season on cats ? Madatory S/N will not control the cat problem.

I am opposed to Mandatory spay/neuter.

1. It is a myth that "street" bred dogs/cats are genetically superior to 'purebred' dogs/cats. Where do you think the street animal came from? They didn't just pop into existence. Somewhere some uncaring PERSON dumped a dog/cat because they were tired of their animal. The animal was a pet to someone. Where did he come from? He came from a pet store. Where did the pet store get him? Have you even heard of factory puppy producers? This is NOT the mom and pop breeder who has been in a breed for a life time. This is an operation, with a business plan, etc. This is NOT a breeder.
Maybe the dumped dog came from someone who felt that Fluffy needed to experience the wonder of giving birth; or someone who wanted his kids to experience the wonder of seeing a birth,...... This is NOT a breeder.

2. Breeders do NOT dump their dogs/cats on the street. If you know a "Breeder" who has dumped an animal, then I submit, this person is NOT a BREEDER.
Breeders have a contract with their puppy people which includes a clause that, if for any reason, the family/person can no longer care for their puppy at any time in it's life, they must contact the breeder first and the breeder will take the animal back.
The breeder makes careful decisions as to what animal to breed to another. It is not haphazard. With the addition of DNA testing and disease markers, breeders are making great strides ridding their beloved breeds of genetic diseases.

3. I do rescue and I have met many a depraved HUMAN who is at the bottom of their animal's misery. I have also met more Wonderful pet owners and breeders who truly love their animals. They are the ones to make any decision about their animal - they pay the bills, they are responsible.

4. It is through education about population control that we make strides. There are shelters in New England that are actually importing dogs from southern states and even outside the country because they do not have enough dogs to meet the Demand for pet animals. Now, who is making the money?

5. Neutering or spaying an animal at the age of 4/6/9/12 months can have serious health consequences in the animal's future. Check your facts. There is growing evidence that early neutering/spaying is linked to bone cancer and other developmental cancers.
The owner of the animal is the one to make the decision as to if and when to neuter/spay her/his animal.

6. Now, about those diseases being introduced to the community by the Shelters IMPORTING puppies/dogs/cats from other states/countries without proper vetting....now, THIS activity is wrong and dangerous.

If you want more facts, go to the following web sites -
http://saveourdogs.net/population.html
http://www.naiaonline.org/
http://petpac.net/

Take the dare and read more.

MANY thanks to Brian Lehrer for addressing this topic. I'd like to point out that breeders' associations such as the AKC oppose this sort of legislation in fear of the precedent it may establish, possibly leading eventually to regulation of companion animal (pets are more than just pets) breeding in the form of quotas. Breeders make money by overproduction. And I might add that they're "product" is genetically inferior to that produced by the streets and by more haphazard efforts. Purebred animals suffer from a vast array of congenital disorders. Cat and dog breeding became radically selective in the late 19th century, and inbreeding has been a problem ever since. Anyway, I think we need toask ourselves what the real motives are of the people who oppose such common-sensemeasures as requiring sterilization of companion animals in cities. A city is no place for a cat or dog to raise a family. Urban cats and dogs lead lives of misery and deprivation. I've volunteered in animal shelters, and they can hellish places for these powerless creatures. The least we can do for them is reduce their numbers so that they are more likely to find loving homes.

i'd like to point out that stray cats are not "reducing" the bird population, they are devastating it...maybe that's ok in NYC with all the pidgeons, but the rest of the country likes it's songbirds!

I am in support of mandatory spay and neuter.

Three things that have not been raised - in addition to all other isues in support of spay/neuter:

1. Often neutered animals, usually ale, are more manageable, less aggressive.

2. People often adopt additional animals rather than see them euthanized even if they have no more room for them or financial resources. This is a strain on the environment, including recycling: too much animal waste, animals killed to feed them.-
3. I am not in favor or pure bred breeding, which is artificial and often leads to halth problems within the breeds.

Yes, I think all pet owners should spay and neuter there pets.

But also, owners need to be proactive and get this done.