# Mandatory Spaying and Neutering: A Breakdown



## SouthernThistle (Nov 16, 2005)

I have heard so many different subjective explanations of proposed Mandatory Spaying and Neutering Laws that are attempting to get passed. Is there a legitimate website or a person that can help the rest of us understand EXACTLY what the Mandatory Spaying and Neutering Laws state/affect?

I have heard some people say that ALL dogs are to be spayed and neutered.

I heard another person say that ALL dogs from reputable breeders are to be spayed and neutered.

Yet another aspect was that all owners are required to have pets spayed and neutered.

Another person said, "I think it's ridiculous. I won't be able to get a show quality intact dog to show because of mandatory spaying and neutering."

What, exactly, does it/will it outline for breeders? owners? I'm just curious. There seems to be mass confusion.

(And while I understand that each city, county, state, etc. may have different laws, I'm just trying to get one basic outline of how different persons are affected).


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: SouthernThistle
> 
> (And while I understand that each city, county, state, etc. may have different laws, I'm just trying to get one basic outline of how different persons are affected).


That's the problem. It all depends on the wording of the individual laws.

The MAIN problem I have with mandatory s/n is that it is a law that tries to fix a problem by legislating those already being responsible.

Irresponsible owners will NOT follow the laws. If they were RESPONSIBLE the would have already had their pet altered. Or they would contain them properly.

I have an intact female dog. I plan to keep her that way, maybe breed her.

My boy Riggs was intact until he was about 7 years old. He never once caused any unwanted litters.

I am ALREADY a responsible owner - why should I have to pay to prove it?


----------



## pupresq (Dec 2, 2005)

> Quote:The MAIN problem I have with mandatory s/n is that it is a law that tries to fix a problem by legislating those already being responsible.


This is my exact problem with BSL. I tried on a previous thread on this topic to elicit input about what other kinds of policies, provisions, or legislation we could put forth as an alternative, since I don't think any of us wants to see so many dogs dying in shelters, but I didn't get much. Some of the few suggestions were things that shelters could do which had already been tried and resulted in more animal suffering.









I'm not trying to threadjack and going back to the original question - as Lauri says, it varies. Has anyone ever seen clauses or parts of proposed legislation that they think might help or work?


----------



## SouthernThistle (Nov 16, 2005)

> Originally Posted By: Lauri & The Gang
> The MAIN problem I have with mandatory s/n is that it is a law that tries to fix a problem by legislating those already being responsible.


But how? Is there some exact wording out there that says, "all dogs must be spayed or neutered"?

There have been debates back and forth on Craigslist (I know, not necessarily the greatest location for intelligent debates), and one woman keeps saying, "how am I to get a show quality dog to show and breed if there's mandatory spaying and neutering?"

I can't imagine that some legislature would demand ALL dogs and cats and ALL puppies and kittens be spayed and neutered including those that are shown/bred, etc.


----------



## SouthernThistle (Nov 16, 2005)

> Originally Posted By: pupresq Has anyone ever seen clauses or parts of proposed legislation that they think might help or work?


That's what I'm looking for.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

http://saveourdogs.net/experience.html

If you google some of the laws listed here, you may find more info.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Most of the laws have some ways to get around the speuter. If you pay enough and go to shows, you can keep your dog intact. However, some of them are worded such that the dogs must be speutered by three, four or six months. Some of these say the dog must have been shown in two shows to be considered a show-dog. Those of us who know about shows, know that a dog may not be entered in a show until it is six months old. So how does this work with speuter that is mandatory at six months or prior to six months. 

They want this to be early because technically a dog can reproduce as early as this. 

I am 100% against any mandatory spay neuter. I think that dog sheters and pounds that adopt animals out can require speuter or can speuter as a term in the adoption. 

But I do not believe the government should require individuals to have a potentially fatal and unnecessary procedure performed on a puppy. Not only will I be against it, but I will NOT abide by it. I will take the fine or whatever. No way will I speuter a dog for no reason. 

Mandatory spay neuter is taking away an individual right to manage their property or pet or whatever you want to call it as they see fit.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

I remember reading in one of the proposed legislations (don't remember which one) language about showing dogs as a way to get out of the mandatory speutering that Selzer mentioned, and thinking that while a pain in the butt, at least it would give the show people an out. But what about those who participate in performance activities: agility, obedience, SchH, etc...? Dogs of 3, 4, 6, even 12 months of age are just getting started training in those activities. They're no where near close to trialing. 

So what out is there for those people?

I guess you could say that if the owner can prove participation in those events, they could have their out. But frankly, what hobbies people have is none of the government's business! Talk about a whole other can of worms, especially for those of us who participate in activities with protection components. We're worried enough about some ignorant governmental agency deciding we can't train our "vicious attack dogs" any more. Last thing I need is my uber-liberal, PETA loving municipality knowing I'm doing protection work with dogs. It's none of their business, and nothing good can come of them having any knowledge of it, much less getting involved in it.

I'm against mandatory spay/neuter just from a principle standpoint. It is none of the government's business what I do with my dogs, and they should have absolutely no say in the matter. Especially since the reality is that such legislation would be put in place and enforced by people who may be well meaning, but have no qualifications to be making decisions about it. And we must face the harsh reality that much of the support for this sort of thing is coming from the AR lobbyists, who would love a chance to start slowly picking away at the rights of pet owners and dog enthusiasts.

But beyond the fact that I think it's just plain wrong, I really see no way to make spay/neuter legislation work. As with anything else, the crooks and irresponsible owners will ignore it and continue about business as usual. The honest, responsible people will try to abide by it, incurring significant inconvenience and cost. And depending on the wording, the legislation may end up putting such demands on those who are dedicated to dogs, involved in dog activities, and breeding good dogs that they can no longer do those things... essentially putting the good dog breeders and good dog owners out of business.

I think everyone would be better served if the money and energy put into this type of legislation would be put into educating the general dog owning public. Most shelters and legitimate rescues already have spay/neuter requirements. Good breeders also have methods in place to prevent poor breeding practices and unwanted litters out of the dogs they sell. Educate the public about responsible ownership, properly selecting the right breed for their lifestyle, the advantages of shelters and rescues (and dispelling the myths that these dogs are defective), the importance of finding a good breeder if they are going to purchase from a breeder. Public service announcements on TV and radio. Publications available at vet offices, shelters and training centers. Many areas offer workshops through various organizations to help prepare people thinking about having kids... why not offer the same for pet owners? If cheap and accessible, people would take them. Educate and the problems will largely go away on their own.


----------



## lesslis (Sep 23, 2007)

Very well put Chris!!!!! Sounds real close to Gun owner rights. "Don't enforce current laws just add more" mentality.


----------

