TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › New law that should be made for cat/dog owners.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New law that should be made for cat/dog owners.

post #1 of 36
Thread Starter 
I've been thinking really hard about this, and I sort of thought of a new law they should make for cat/dog owners.

When it's time for my cats to have there yearly checkup, their vet will send a notice in the mail one month before the checkup. If they do not go to their checkup, another notice will be sent out a month after the checkup was supposed to be. If they still dont go, the vet stops sending notices and you dont hear from them again, not even a phonecall to ask why the cats havent been in.

I know of a family who has a cat, it must be over 10 years old. I know for a fact that cat has not been to a vet in at least 8 years, has a history of bad UTI, has matts on it's body from never being groomed, and has had very bad flea infestations, so im not surprised if it's full of internal parasites. It has had contact with many stray cats, so it could even have aids or leukemia.

This cat did at one point see a vet to be neutered and vaccinated, because he was adopted from a shelter. But I HATE the fact after that the vet has no idea what happened to the cat after, since they arent required to "check up' on the pet if it hasnt seen a vet in a long time. If they know how the cat is now, surely they would say get your cat in now ASAP no excuses!

My idea is, if they made a law that lets say every 1-2 years your pet MUST see a vet or someone will come to your house and "check up" on your pet. So if you dont take your pet to the vet in a given time, they have a right to take neglected pets like this and get them the care they need, and be re-homed if adoptable, and the neglectful owners could be banned from owning any more pets. That would save ALOT of pets being neglected or abused.

Also, make it mandatory (and cheaper) that ALL pets MUST be microchipped.
Heck, I think pets should be "registered" for each household, just like we are, the government knows each and every person in each house. So why not keep track of the pets too? If a pet is abandoned, that person will have broken the law and be fined.

Offcourse, I can think of some flaws.

#1- If you take in a stray from outside, how will they know you have the new animal if you dont bring it to the vet?

#2- Puppies or kittens, again unless the vet sees your dog/cat pregnant, they'll never know of the new additions.

#3- Moving, you could move away and not tell your vet where you moved.
Offcourse if you must "register" your pets in a household, this wont be a problem.

Mabye my idea sounds crazy, but it's the reason behind it that makes me wish is existed. I see alot of good having strict laws like that for the animals well being.
post #2 of 36
NO thank you... the animals in my home should not be of concern to anyone but me....

They get reg check ups, twice a year for Zoey ... Gigi got I believe 40 checks last yr due to being sick...

A better rule might be vets making house call s to the well for a check up and the very very ill so that neither group gets exposed to other animals...
post #3 of 36
Thread Starter 
BUT if you NEVER make an appointment because you dont care about the animal and they suffer, is that really fair to the animal? Not everyone knows to be kind.

It's that attitude that makes millions of animals homeless and suffering. People say its there animal and there business, yet not all people are in the interest of the animal.

So suffering pets go unnoticed until it's too late..

That needs to change!

And some vets already make house calls, thats not new.
post #4 of 36
I understand your point and agree with the reason behind why you were prompted to make it. Everyone should be held responsible for the health and welfare of the pets that they take into their lives.

But I've heard people in rescue argue against your point. If I had to conform to registering them, most of mine would probably be taken away from me because I am officially over the legal limit. There are a tremendous number of people who live in "2 pet limit" areas (much of the U.S.) and look at the number of folks on the site with more than 2 cats. Most of us are living illegally with them!

And while I agree that regular vet visits are important, I think of the number of people who con't to take themselves or their children to a doctor. Are kids who don't get annual exams mistreated?

We just don't live in that perfect of a world.
post #5 of 36
I know you're intentions are meant to be good, but it's too "Big Brother". Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think there's even a law that requires your children to go to the doctor (since I don't have any at this point I haven't really researched it).

Also its all in good judgement. For example B grew up on a farm. His family basically did the traditional farming and lived off the land and took care of their own animals. He always preferred cats, but since his experience with animals is different from yours or mine, all he knew is that as long as they continue to get their shots for the first couple of years, they're fine afterwards. Since Patches and Beauty are up in age (13 & 14) we've been taking them to the vet on an annual basis for the last year.

They've both been healthy happy cats for 10 years, without a visit to the vet. Of course too...they're indoor cats as well.

I personally think that it should be every animal lover's responsibility to make sure that the thing they love is treated well. If not, call the police, animal control or the local shelter. Unfortunately not everything can be made into law.
post #6 of 36
I have a problem with some of your ideas. Sounds good, but its now been found out that cats and probably the dogs too, don't need YEARLY shots - they should be given every 2-3 yrs.

And I highly disagree on the microchip stuff. I will not have my pets done (for reasons I don't care to get into right now). And I'm experienced enough to know when a cat is sick and will take them in then.

I've had good luck; rarely are any of my cats sick. They probably could go for a few years without being "checked" or someone bugging me to get them checked.

I can see when you first adopt a cat for a follow up for maybe 2 yrs for that cat, but after that I don't like someone telling me when to go and when not to go.
post #7 of 36
Your intentions are good, no one likes to see someones pet suffer or not being cared for properly. But, this would be just another case of the governmet having way to much control. Laws are already in place to protect your pets, there is no need for more laws or the need for the goverment to come to your home and inspect you.
post #8 of 36
I don't think that idea could work.
First of all, human doctors in US don't make home calls.
No one is going to make home calls to check on someone's pets.
Second of all, there are no mandatory doctor visits for humans, why should there be for pets?
Vet visits aren't cheap.
At least humans have health insurance, a lot of pets don't.
post #9 of 36
If people were good owners, they would generally take in their pet when they -need- to. My pets never go out, except for two of them (and even then, only one of them goes out often), and they are always with me when they are out, so I know what they are exposed to, for the most part. We get only kitten shots and one yearly booster, then usually, we're done with the vet, unless someone's sick.

And what if people suddenly ran out of money (some emergency happened), but the pet was healthy; then the people would be in trouble for simply having hard times. I hardly think that's mistreatment.

Good intentions, but...that just wouldn't fly with many owners at all.

Lol about the "2 pet" areas...I'm in a "3 pet" area, and we have seven cats, three birds, and some fish. =3 Of course, management doesn't know about it, because they never see our cats, nor do the cats make any noise to disurb the neighbors. And the birds and fish don't really matter in this case, since management doesn't count those in the count. =)
post #10 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberThe Bobcat View Post
Your intentions are good, no one likes to see someones pet suffer or not being cared for properly. But, this would be just another case of the governmet having way to much control. Laws are already in place to protect your pets, there is no need for more laws or the need for the goverment to come to your home and inspect you.
True. Perhaps you could anonymously ask the Humane Society to check up on the cat that you are worried about.
It is so sad for the animals, sometimes! For the children, too. I am glad that there are young people like you, Keith P, who are willing to go the distance to look out for them
post #11 of 36
Thread Starter 
A neighbor reported a case of dog abuse on my block, the dog was being starved and had no water, it had heat exhaustion, it was easy to see right from looking at the dog.

The ASPCA was called twice, they NEVER showed up to even investigate the abuse.

The people moved soon after.

So that kinda made me fly off the handle because even the laws we have today arent always working.

And as far as "big brother" we already have that here, dont think for one second when your outside that nobody can be watching you without you knowing. (mostly for wanted people though)

I see most of you disagree with my idea, which is ok because it's your opinion.

But is there a way you can "fine tune" my idea into something you think COULD work based on my idea, something that doesnt exist as of now. I'm sure you have good ideas


Also speaking of weird laws did you hear about the one that may/may not exist (not sure) that limits when your dog is allowed to bark and for how long, talk about weird laws!
post #12 of 36
I think they should be more adamant about enforcing existing abuse laws, rather than create new ones.

If they did enforce the laws that exist now, that neighbor would have been investigated. All reports of animal abuse would be investigated, negating the need for a new law. If the animal is in that poor of shape due to lack of vet care, the abuse laws would cover that.

That's my opinion.
post #13 of 36
IMO the only thing that might work is that before you adopt, the shelter/breeder would be required that you bring in 2-3 references from non-relatives on how you care for animals.

And then contact those people and see if its a good home. If one of the references says that you've neglected pets in the past, then you could not have an animal.

However, even that approach has flaws as there are so many byb's or "free" animals in papers that you still could not control.


Case in point. We had neighbors that were neglecting their cats (not spayed/neutered, poor food, one litter pan for 4 cats, etc.- in fact one male died from UTI because they didn't know he could not pee. I would NEVER recommend them to anyone to get a pet - however, there were plenty of free kittens available that they could just go get another one.

They lost their home, were in a shelter place and their remaining cats were taken to a farm and neutered. When they tried to reclaim them (with no where to really live), they were told NO. We are not sure where they are now, but willing to bet they have a collection of unneutered/spayed cats again.
post #14 of 36
No amount of laws are going to give people a conscious. Only education will do that.


I've gotten those reminders in the mail too. Annoying things, especially when they're coming from a vet's office when I told them(while getting my cat Sho's records) that I would not be bringing him back there due to their poor care. Did I do something horribly wrong here for not taking him back there?

Case #2 for me, I was getting them from another vet for Tomas. Yet he had been to the vet just 2 weeks before that "scheduled" bi-annual check up. Why did he need to go back in on her schedule?

I could see such a law being potentially abused. Vets increasing the number of visits needed for animals and putting them on a set schedule that if you didn't meet they could threaten to report you - more money for them in you cave in and do as they wish. (And yes, I know not all people are like this, but greed is a basic flaw in lots of people.)

And what about people that don't take their cats in for boosters due to bad reactions? or simply because the cat is a senior and they don't want to risk it? If one wants to interpret the law strictly that animal will end up in a shelter (which are crowded enough) where is may end up getting sick before adopted or just pts.

And third, where are state/counties going to get the money for this? I don't know about where most of you live, but in this state most towns do not even have an animal control officer. No one wants the job and there's not enough money to pay for one in the first place.
post #15 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberThe Bobcat View Post
Your intentions are good, no one likes to see someones pet suffer or not being cared for properly. But, this would be just another case of the governmet having way to much control. Laws are already in place to protect your pets, there is no need for more laws or the need for the goverment to come to your home and inspect you.
I agree..

The only thing is, people like us who care for our animals would have no problems. I wouldn't mind the government inspecting abusive pet households at all.

I see the point on a larger scale though.
post #16 of 36
There is actually something a bit similar to this in effect in Iceland.

To begin with pet dogs are illegal in cities (gasp, shock!) but you can register your dog and pay for getting an excemption for the dog. The cost is around 200$ per dog per year. I think registered dog breeders can get an extra exemption from having to pay for all their dogs.

Anyway because of that multi dog homes are quite rare since having 5 dogs for example would mean basically paying an extra 1000$ a year in dog tax.

It is required now to microchip all pets over there but enforcing it is hard so the law being there doesn't really make a difference.

There is no 'cat tax' so cats are a lot more popular pets back home than dogs.
post #17 of 36
I have to say No Thanks to that proposal. We already have the vets here sending the city our rabies vax info.
Then you get a nastigram in the mail to license your cat or face a fine/ticket and possibly court. What really ticks me off about it? If I never took my cat to the vet, I wouldn't get the nastigram and threats from the city. Oh, and my cats are indoor only so exactly why does the city need $10 per cat in fees from my non-roaming cats?

I also just lost a cat to Fibrosarcoma, most likely related to over-vaccination when he was younger. You can BET my cats are not getting over- vaccinated just because the vet doesn't want to follow the new guidelines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
I have a problem with some of your ideas. Sounds good, but its now been found out that cats and probably the dogs too, don't need YEARLY shots - they should be given every 2-3 yrs.

And I highly disagree on the microchip stuff. I will not have my pets done (for reasons I don't care to get into right now). And I'm experienced enough to know when a cat is sick and will take them in then.
post #18 of 36
Thread Starter 
Each state has different laws, mabye i'm used to having stricter laws than some other states?

What I meant to say in general, was that if your pet needed to see a vet every 2 years or so (if it was mandatory), I wasnt particularly saying for vaccines. Just a routine checkup to see if your cat is healthy and not being neglected, thats all. Overall body check,weight,heart,lungs, mabye fecal just in case. A vet can tell if your pet is neglected to a certain degree so that visit could potentially save a neglected/abused pets life. And I dont mean small matts in a dog/cat with a long coat,lol or 2 pounds overweight, vets know an animal wont always be "perfect"

If your cat has a medical history and cant come in as often, or you cant afford it, there are always payment plans for that or you would discuss it with the vet to think of a plan, and a vet would have written down about your cat/dogs medical condition if that affects it coming in every so often.


I agree you shouldnt be forced to have them vaccinated every year, as you see I never mentioned vaccines in my original post for that reason. But I do think they should be vaccinated every so often if they go outside or are NOT fixed, because thats how diseases can be transmitted easily.

So really seeing a vet every 2 years isnt so bad really if you think about it. Afterall unlike us, pets cant shop for themselves or take medication on their own or tell us if they dont always feel good. Internal problems are sometimes hard for an owner to even notice.

I know most of you will gasp at this, but it sounds like where Siggav lives people are forced to be more responsible for their pets, and as unfair as it seems to the people with all those laws, knowing you could get a fine or something scares the people so most of them are afraid to break the law. But at least the pets probably are cared for better.
post #19 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by keith p View Post
I know most of you will gasp at this, but it sounds like where Siggav lives people are forced to be more responsible for their pets, and as unfair as it seems to the people with all those laws, knowing you could get a fine or something scares the people so most of them are afraid to break the law. But at least the pets probably are cared for better.
The law covers dogs more than cats, it is routine to take your cat in once a year to be vaccinated. There is a cat overpopulation problem though and a lot of people don't take proper care of their cats. Like I said these sort of laws are really hard to enforce and the police is busy enough. Stray dogs are incredibly rare though and most people don't get a dog on a whim since you have to apply for the permit and be prepared to pay the extra money every year.
post #20 of 36
Keith, we do not need any more laws that force you into doing something. As was quoted
Quote:
No amount of laws are going to give people a conscious. Only education will do that.
More laws will not do anything, except make life more miserable for people who are already responsible. We need to better enforce laws that are already in place. People need to be educated on proper animal husbandry and welfare. But, it is good to see you are so concerned for the welfare of animals. However, don't let the animal rights extremists get to you. The best thing you can do to, is report any case of animal cruelty. Laws are in place to protect pets from such abuse.
Quote:
I see most of you disagree with my idea, which is ok because it's your opinion.
Most people here agree with you, about giving our pets the proper care they need and deserve, but dislike more government intruding into our lives.
post #21 of 36
My question is, if I register my animals, can I claim them as dependents on my income tax? If so, I will get a HUGE return!

As it is, in West Virginia, we have to actually pay taxes on the dogs. They are considered live stock I guess. The cats, we can ignore.

Seriously, though, I do understand what you are saying, but that would be hard. I can see having mandatory vet visits for a check up for the first couple years, especially if someone just adopted a pet.

But, my DH and MIL lived on a farm for years. They know how to take care of animals, and we can actually get medicine from the vet for certain aliments because the vet knows that MIL knows what she is doing. If we had to take each animal in (including the barn cats) every year, we would be broke.

It would be great if vets had the time to travel from house to house to check on the pets, but how many of them have the extra time to do it? And, if that becomes a law, how will the federal government pay for it?? Can we say higher taxes? Because if it becomes a law, there will be a new federal agency created which means existing vets will probably be put on federal payrolll, plus new vets would have to be hired quickly (and probably won't be qualified to BE vets) and everyone would be out on the road checking every house that has registered and animal, and no one will be in the office if the is an emergency. Your vet bills will go up (unless you have pet insurance that will only cover part of the bills) because now all the vets are checking on every animal except yours that needs attention now. So then Vet care becomes the same as health care for humans.

Ok...I'll shut up now. But it is a good dream.
post #22 of 36
Yeah another nay sayer here.

NONE of my pets go to the vet unless sick or injured, however, they are given a yearly once over my by MIL (a vet tech and vet. surgical nurse).
I feel this greatly reduces their risk of contracting something.
She gives shots when needed and does a yearly blood draw for blood panels.
She will take them into the clinic if she feels they need it.

If your flawed law were passed, my animals would be removed from me, which would be unfair to me and completely unfair to them as they would not understand.
post #23 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222 View Post
It would be great if vets had the time to travel from house to house to check on the pets, but how many of them have the extra time to do it?
Actually a lot of them do that here, but it's not for pets. It's kind of hard to pack up a bunch of livestock and take them to a clinic for their shots. I do think some older "country" vets will do that for pets though. Depends the area and the vet.


About education - anyone can do this if you want to make a change. All the animal shows on Animal Planet alone have actually opened some peoples eyes to animal welfare and the amount of cruelty - and that it is a punishable offense (felony here). In your community you can get like minded individuals together to do pet parades, pet events, speakers, taking animals to schools and speaking about pet care there, etc. It's already happened in my community where too many people still mostly believe that pets are disposable.
post #24 of 36
As far as enforced laws on pet veterinarian visits, this is ridiculous. People are not forced to have their children vaccinated or regular physicals other then school and that differs. Indoor cats need a semi-annual checkup or vaccinations why? Some people are guilty of criminal mistreatment of animals, but this isn't going to define those from not. The only way to reinforce negligence and abuse of animals is to support and respect the state laws against these crimes. The more they are supported, the closer we come to national laws.
post #25 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_wings View Post
Actually a lot of them do that here, but it's not for pets. It's kind of hard to pack up a bunch of livestock and take them to a clinic for their shots. I do think some older "country" vets will do that for pets though. Depends the area and the vet.
Oh yeah, I can see my MIL taking her donkey into the vets waiting room! That would NOT be a pretty sight (would it would make a great video on YouTube)! Most of the regular vets here don't know what to do with livestock, so you have to get the few livestock vets and yes they do make house calls.
post #26 of 36
Sadly, the government considers animals property. You can't make someone take their car to the shop because it sounds bad. It sucks but it's reality. The majority of pet owners do not take responsibility. This is a law that will never pass.
post #27 of 36
The intentions are good but you can't force someone to do the responsible thing if they aren't inclined to do so- laws or no laws. You could argue that some people shouldn't have kids, much less a pet.

All of my cats are checked a few times a year. This is because I'm fortunate to have a vet who makes house calls. She says it's easier for the owners and less stressful on the animal if she comes to them. She uses the office mainly for procedures/surgeries, etc. Shadow has a hyperthyroid so he's seen every few months (doing fab by the way) as a result the other two get looked over as well.
post #28 of 36
IT would be nice to have something for neglected/mistreated pets, and I do disagree that there are laws in place for that, there may be, but whether they are effective is a different matter. I don't think another law is the answer, it would never get passed, and who would enforce it and pay for it?
post #29 of 36
Meeko got sick because she went to a Vet She ended up with a very high fever with a infection and runny eyes and Cough. She had gone to get Blood Tests and a Check Up and Shot.
post #30 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by zao_cat View Post
Sadly, the government considers animals property.
Actually, this is a very very good thing, that the government considers animals/pets property. Your right to own pets is protected under this classification. If this were to change, the animal rights extremists would have a field day and you would lose your rights to pet/animal ownership. Also, the government can and does tell you how to care for your property.
Quote:
It would be great if vets had the time to travel from house to house to check on the pets, but how many of them have the extra time to do it?
Our vet does this for the big cats, unless they need surgery or anything like that. We can't just bring a cougar into the vets office for a regular check up We did when he was a cub, but not as an adult.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › New law that should be made for cat/dog owners.