TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › California Healthy Pets Act AB 1634
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

California Healthy Pets Act AB 1634

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Has anyone seen this act they're looking to pass?

http://www.cahealthypets.com/

This is from the website:

Quote:
The California Healthy Pets Act (AB 1634) would require the spaying and neutering of most cats and dogs by the time the pet is four months old. It is authored and was introduced by Assemblymember Lloyd Levine.

Pet owners who have not spayed or neutered their pet would be cited and given time to spay or neuter their pets before a fine would be assessed.

Local animal control agencies would be responsible for enforcing the California Healthy Pets Act. A portion of the fines collected would be used to expand the availability of free or low-cost spay or neuter programs and other outreach efforts.

The California Healthy Pets Act exempts:

* Purebred dogs and cats whose owners obtain a permit
* Dogs who work as guide dogs, service dogs, or signal dogs
* Dogs who are used by law enforcement agencies for law enforcement or rescue activities
* Dogs and cats whose veterinarian determines that due to age, poor health, or illness it is unsafe to spay or neuter them
At work, there is a LOT of discussion flying around the mailing lists, with the main opposition saying "but dogs are much more friendly if they're been allowed to have a litter", and "it will affect my dog's growth and long term soundness", and just "that's way too young to do surgery"

And this is one of the FAQ's from the website:

Quote:
Q. \tThe law says that an animal should be spayed/neutered at 4 months, isn't that too early?

A. \tAn animal may be safely altered at almost any age, and animals can start reproducing as early as 6 months of age. (1)

If you feel that your animal is too young for spaying/neutering, the law provides for a delay, if approved in writing by a veterinarian.
There's been 39 messages now about this, and there's only 3 of us who agree that early spay and neuter should be done (whether the bill passes or not!).

What's your opinion?
post #2 of 21
I agree early Spay and Neuter is the way to go. I'm from Calfornia, and I haven't even heard of that bill, but I agree with it, as long as proper breeders aren't forced to spay and neuter. I don't see why Service dogs, Police Dogs and Guide Dogs should be exempt, though. I would think it would make them calmer and more interested in doing their tasks. It would seem to me that an in tact dog, would be more interested in going after another dog either to mate or to fight.
post #3 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
I agree early Spay and Neuter is the way to go. I'm from Calfornia, and I haven't even heard of that bill, but I agree with it, as long as proper breeders aren't forced to spay and neuter. I don't see why Service dogs, Police Dogs and Guide Dogs should be exempt, though. I would think it would make them calmer and more interested in doing their tasks. It would seem to me that an in tact dog, would be more interested in going after another dog either to mate or to fight.
Maybe they just don't force them to spay and neuter by 4 months, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't anyway! It seems strange to exempt them.
post #4 of 21
I think such a law would be terrific, and hope it passes, and that other states follow suit.

I wonder about the exemptions, too. It's not like service dogs are themselves bred, although most seem to be purebreds from reputable breeders, and "lines" may be considered important. I have a friend (dog trainer) with rescue dogs who work all over the world, mainly following major earthquakes, though she was in New Orleans after Katrina, and her dogs are neutered. They get to fly first class at the German government's expense, which I've always found funny, but that's OT.
post #5 of 21
I believe, from what I've learned, they wait to spay/neuter service dogs until they see how they turn out. Some service dogs are outstanding dogs & they plan to breed them to have more excellent service dogs. Usually spay/neuter on service dogs(from what little I know) is like 6-12 months.

I think that would be a wonderful idea! Nobody at the shelter here likes the idea of pediatric spays/neuters, which pisses me off. We wouldn't be so full if a vet around here did pediatric speuters. Who cares if it affects the dogs/cats growth....don't most people want "miniatures" anyways? (Sorry....had to bring that up, didn't I? ) Actually....I know evidence has been provided on how pediatric speuters does NOT affect growth.

Pardon any poor typing...Molly's bum is in front of myc coputer screen.
post #6 of 21
just more laws, that people wont listen to. More rules are always a bad thing,
now, i wonder how many people will not take a animal to a vet becuase they will be forced to spend the money for more stuff. I bet most vets will now at least double there price.

how the state gets more of your money.
post #7 of 21
I want to make it clear that I do not 'know dogs' at all, I am asking a question here!

I was of the understanding that sometimes if you have a fearful or nervous dog, that getting it neutered young could result in fear aggression, whereas if you do it a bit older that is less likely.

Please just let me know whether that is true or urban legend! As I say I have no knowledge about dogs, have never had one, and don't pretend that I am a 'dog person' or give advice about such matters - just wondering if anyone could confirm or correct me on that
post #8 of 21
Epona, a dog came into our rescue, fearful aggressive. If we couldn't find another rescue to take the dog, he'd be euthanized. They took him & neutered him @ 4-5 months(his age at the time). After some work & love, he eventually grew up to be a "normal" dog, not aggressive. I think aggressive tendencies depend on the dog, the extent of the "behavioral issues", & the methods of working with the do moreso than spaying/neutering. IMO, if you neutered the dog right away, then you don't have to worry about dealing with the testosterone & drive to find a lady in addition to behavioral issues. I don't know any facts, though.
post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by white cat lover View Post
Epona, a dog came into our rescue, fearful aggressive. If we couldn't find another rescue to take the dog, he'd be euthanized. They took him & neutered him @ 4-5 months(his age at the time). After some work & love, he eventually grew up to be a "normal" dog, not aggressive. I think aggressive tendencies depend on the dog, the extent of the "behavioral issues", & the methods of working with the do moreso than spaying/neutering. IMO, if you neutered the dog right away, then you don't have to worry about dealing with the testosterone & drive to find a lady in addition to behavioral issues. I don't know any facts, though.
Thank you for that! It's one of those things that I heard but you know you hear lots of things that are rubbish and this seemed like a good opportunity to ask as we don't talk about dogs that often here! Sorry if it's a bit of a derail

I do think that neutering is essential for pets (at least those that reproduce quickly and can tolerate the surgery, it isn't applicable to birds for example as they don't give birth to live young it is very easy to deal with - if you don't want chicks bin any eggs and replace them with sterile ones or fakes until the hen gives up on them). I do wish there was more availability for early neutering here in the UK, maybe we will catch up someday.

While I think it is a great idea in theory, I do not see how it could possibly be enforced. I do think the emphasis should be on educating people.
post #10 of 21
As much as I agree with this law, it strikes me as a "Nanny State". I think that education should be the focus with Spay and Neuter programs, and forcing people into it will just make them resent it. To be honest, I don't think this is going to solve many problems, in fact, I think it will create more. California is a huge state, and I don't think they have the resources to enforce this law.

However, if the law passes I won't be upset. It's good in theory, but while it's in practice it will be a whole different story.
post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarahp View Post
Maybe they just don't force them to spay and neuter by 4 months, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't anyway! It seems strange to exempt them.
I believe, and if I'm wrong some one correct me, that service dogs are in breeding programs. That is why they'd be excempt.
post #12 of 21
I worry about laws like this that provide exemptions for breeders, because often to classify as a legal "breeder" involves rules and regulations that are so tough that most breeders, even those that are what we would recognize as perfectly responsible breeders, would be unable to meet the requirements. This one, though, seems to be okay...though if one of our breeders would comment on it, I'd be grateful.

Otherwise, it sounds like a good law, but as others have said, enforcement and compliancy would be tough. Education is probably the best route, and perhaps more spay/neuter incentives.
post #13 of 21
I understand the thinking, but I don't see anywhere in the bill that takes into consideration the cost. I was lucky to get my Limerick neutered for free. My sister was a senior Vet Tech major and her school needed cats to "practice" assisting surgury, and I nervously agreed to have Limerick be the "practice". But I also remember my sister and my vet not wanting to neuter him until at least 5 months or until he reached 5 pounds or something like that. 4 months he was too young. 6 is most recomended. I question the age. I also question the expertise of the legislature in this matter. Did they confer with vets when drafting this bill, did they seek the advise of professionls? most likely not.
post #14 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by eburgess View Post
I understand the thinking, but I don't see anywhere in the bill that takes into consideration the cost. I was lucky to get my Limerick neutered for free. My sister was a senior Vet Tech major and her school needed cats to "practice" assisting surgery, and I nervously agreed to have Limerick be the "practice". But I also remember my sister and my vet not wanting to neuter him until at least 5 months or until he reached 5 pounds or something like that. 4 months he was too young. 6 is most recommended. I question the age. I also question the expertise of the legislature in this matter. Did they confer with vets when drafting this bill, did they seek the advise of professionals? most likely not.
Quote:
A portion of the fines collected would be used to expand the availability of free or low-cost spay or neuter programs and other outreach efforts.
Early spaying and neutering is actually being recommended by more and more vets, as it's considered an "easier" operation due to factors such as body fat, and the recovery times are quicker. However, vets long out of veterinary school may not have the training to perform early speutering, and stick to the old "6 months" rule.
post #15 of 21
The bill also has provisions in it for animals whose vets recommend not doing the procedure so young, for health issues and weight and such like your Limerick. So that seems okay - if the animal isn't healthy enough for spay/neuter, as long as the vet says so, there would be no penalty for waiting until later.
post #16 of 21
I'd also worry about people trying to find loopholes in the "breeder" exemption.

It's so much easier for the gov't to regulate legitimate shelters, since they're either municipal facilities or tax-exempt not-for-profits that are thus registered. I wish there were a way for breeding to be regulated, too. Although I still personally am not comfortable with it, I wouldn't have such a huge problem with breeding if we ONLY had a handful of small catteries providing EXCELLENT care (as some of our TCS breeders do) and EVERYONE (including ALL animals leaving shelters and breeding programs, regardless of age) else got fixed. But how do you do that efficiently without providing too many loopholes?
post #17 of 21
I agree, Allie. It will be hard not to go either way - too hard for legitimate, responsible breeders to continue, or too easy and let anyone who wants to by. Some of the regulations in this bill include exemptions if your cat has competed in a show within the last two years and such.
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Early spaying and neutering is actually being recommended by more and more vets, as it's considered an "easier" operation due to factors such as body fat, and the recovery times are quicker. However, vets long out of veterinary school may not have the training to perform early speutering, and stick to the old "6 months" rule.
Very true. Will this bill take into account vets we just don't like the idea of spaying/neutering younger animals???
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by eburgess View Post
Very true. Will this bill take into account vets who just don't like the idea of spaying/neutering younger animals???
I imagine those vets will have to take training courses if they want to stay with the times. I see that happening here, where 6 months is the norm, but more and more people are becoming aware of pediatric spays/neuters.
post #20 of 21
I am all for a 4-month spay and neuter.

And believe MOST breeders are not good. I wonder who would set up the guidelines to weed out all the BYP and of course the puppy mills.
post #21 of 21
The bill seems good in concept but seems tough to enforce.

And..also while I am all for spay and neuter, ect I cant help but get my heckles up a little bit about goverment getting a bit to into things.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › California Healthy Pets Act AB 1634