State Senate says 'nuts' to spay/neuter supporters

A law to require the spaying and neutering of unlicensed strays -- a reaction by a Van Nuys legislator to the 500,000 unwanted dogs and cats killed in California's animal shelters each year -- was vigorously rejected by the Senate today in a 5-27 vote.

The vote on the bill, considered one of the most controversial in this year's legislative session, reveals a divide between the state's densely populated cities and its rural areas. Patrick McGreevy has the details:

"On behalf of my dog, he’d like to remain intact,’’ said state Sen. Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga), voicing the sentiment of many of his colleagues who represent rural areas.  "He hasn’t caused any problems."

The bill, proposed by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys) was watered down to apply only to unlicensed pets. But lawmakers, particularly those from rural areas, were having none of it.

"What works for Mr. Levine in Los Angeles County won’t necessarily work in Alpine or Modoc County," said state Sen. Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks).

His colleague, state Sen. George Runner (R-Lancaster), was more direct.  "This a myopic view from those who come from the big city."

The bill would have required that the owner pay a $50 fine for the first offense. The second offense would result in a $100 fine and a requirement that a microchip be implanted so the dog could be traced. On the third offense, the dog would be spayed or neutered. Spaying and neutering of cats, however, would be required on the second offense.

I do my best to stay neutral in this blog, but I can't help wondering whether spending a week in the euthanasia room of a shelter might change a few senators' minds.

--Veronique de Turenne

Photo credit: Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times

 

Comments

[Alan]

My guess is that rural areas do not have the same euthanasia rooms as dense urban areas--which is why many of the opposition Senators made arguments for local control.

[BobR]

Shame on the legislators who caved on this. So much needless suffering and death could have been avoided with this bill. Unwanted dogs and cats will endure starvation, disease, and miserable brief lives on the streets. I'd like to neuter those guys who said no to this bill.

[mary]

I am a dedicated volunteer at a city animal shelter in LA where the euthanasia rate is staggering. Watching even only a tiny fraction of that euthanasia might change the "I am a responsible pet owner/it's not my problem" attitude of those myopic senators voting against the bill.

[Janet]

Mandatory spay/neuter does not decrease euthanasia. This has been proven all over the nation, including in counties where it has been enacted. Education and low cost spay neuter works. See www.nokilladvocacycenter.org for a solution.

[Tstrong]

Thank You Thank You Thank You to all of the normal thinking and real animal loving folks that live in this State. Tell LLoyd, his mistress - Bob Barker and the rest of the peta packing idiots to pack their bags and move on.

[Bill Hemby]

Speaking for PetPAC and 42,000 pet owners I am thrilled that this misguided bill was defeated soundly by our state senate. Mandatory spay and neuter has been shown to not work. Every place that tried it has resulted in more dogs and cats surrendered to shelters because their owners either won't or can't pay the fees and fines. The kill rate in our shelters escalates. Licensing plummets, shelter costs raise and pet owners avoid vets because of fear. L.A. S/N law has already failed. The solution is more No Kill animal shelters. We can save over 90% of the animals, reduce shelter costs, and build more public support.
MSN is not the answer, never has been the answer. Lawmakers came to realize that. Lets all work together for a No Kill shelter system.

[Diane]

THE REAL SOLUTION IS NO-KILL. It's been proven cost & life effective!

Mandatory Spay/neuters has ALWAYS caused shelter kill rates to soar. EDUCATE YOURSELF TO THE TRUTH not political rhettoric. The Hayden Act has rewarded shelters that have high kill rates rather than reward those that are successful at saving animals. Ask yourself WHO wrote that law & why anyone would want to reward the KILLING of shelter pets. THEY ARE MAKING $$$$ killing.

[mickey]

The more the Senators LEARNED about the reality of pets in California, the FEWER were in favor of mandatory spay/neuter. These are intelligent people who know how to research the issues and how to interpret the facts. Today they proved that they are (mostly) not as susceptible to animal rights PROPAGANDA as the AR people would wish.

And if there are actually SURPLUS animals being euthanized in our shelters, WHY DO OUR SHELTERS IMPORT SO MANY DOGS FROM OTHER AREAS?? sometimes even from foreign countries! THAT practice is what needs to be outlawed... unless, of course, we actually have a shortage of *adoptable* pets??

The truth is that most euthanasias are NOT adoptable pets. Over 70% are feral cats.

The truth is that euthanasia rates go UP everywhere that mandatory spay/neuter is enacted, including right here in Los Angeles.

The truth is that "animal rights" is not about saving animals; it is about taking away YOUR right to own and enjoy your pets.

The truth came through today as our Senate did the right thing.

[Animal Lover]

Hey - Here's an idea! Work IN a shelter - and find out WHY they insist on killing so many! Maybe YOU'll have a different idea afterward! Read Nathan Winograd's "Redemption"! While you're at it - read Rod and Patti Strand's "The Hijacking of the Humane Movement" and find out the TRUTH behind these dimwits! Don't make judgements when YOU don't know the facts!!!

[Beth Anne]

Mandatory spay/neuter doesn't work. Voluntary low cost spay/neuter does work coupled with better run shelters with personnel who WANT to see the animals that are brought in adopted. My thanks to the Senators who saw through Lloyd Levine's many amendments to AB1634 as the beginning of mandatory spay/neuter in California and put a stop to it.

[Sacramento Mom]

Thank GOD most of the California Senate recognized that local problems should not have mandated statewide solutions. AB1634 was always about mandating spay/neuter across the board, whether it was needed or not - that was the only constant in its' 11 revisions. It was pure PUNISHMENT looking for a crime.

Winograd's No Kill shelter program is proven to save 90% of ALL the animals in shelters - only the very sick, very old and too aggressive are killed. Who wouldn't like to save every animal that CAN be saved? Can't wait to see this policy implemented across the state!

Feral cats (70% of all shelter kills) are SAVED - back to their wild homes they go. AB1634 never once addressed them! Feral cat caretakers; how can anyone support a bill that makes EVERY person who feeds stray cats a CRIMINAL??? Alley Cat Allies has been opposed to AB1634 for a while now. They're the #1 feral cat advocacy group in the nation. If THEY say cats would be screwed by AB1634 - well, I tend to believe them.

Oh, and about the mandatory microchipping Levine slipped into the bill in its' last revision? The USDA's agriculture NAIS program - National Animal Identification System - which chips all farm animals from cows to chickens, was SUSPENDED in June. Suit has been filed stating mandated chipping violates two US Constitutional amendments, a federal animal welfare Act and a federal religious persecution Act. If it's ILLEGAL federally, mandatory microchips are ILLEGAL locally. And frankly... these same objections pertain to mandated spay/neuter.

Go, No Kill Sheltering Solution! Common sense to stop shelter animal killing: wow, what a concept.

[janet`]

what all these "do gooders" don't seem to get is that enforced sterilization is not going to solve the problem. Responsible owners are already altering their pets and irresponsible owners are not going to comply. They don't license and take care of their pets to begin with so why will they care what the law is? Also, how is forcing mandatory sterilization going to decrease the stray population? The strays are not altered. They have no owners to enforce laws upon. If you want to decrease the stray population the states money would be better served spending it to round up the strays not enforced sterilization of pets with responsible owners.

[crickette]

Feral cats DON't belong in animal shelters in the first place. They are wild. Few can be tamed, so the majority are unable to become a pet. Then why do so many shelters have so many feral cats? Feral cats have a job to do keeping the rodent population in check, so should be left alone. 'Do-gooders' who trap and bring feral cats to shelters should be educated, and perhaps some shelters need to be, too. If there are too many feral cats in an area, Trap-Neuter-Release programs are proven to be effective at controling their numbers. Without feral cats taking up space in animal shelters, numbers of shelter animals would be just a fraction of what we are seeing now and shelters with strained budgets would be far better off. But then, the animal rights fanatics wouldn't have the numbers to point to -- and misplace the blame on people who own or breed dogs.

[Walt Hutchens]

The problem that LA (and some other California cities) have is twofold: Incompetent management of the animal control function and underfunding. Streets must be kept clear of at-large animals for reasons of public health and safety AND BECAUSE ANIMALS ON THE STREET BREED THERE. If unowned animals and those that are owned but allowed to roam aren't removed, how will ANY law be enforced against the people who are creating the problem? All that mandatory spay/neuter laws like LA's accomplish is to drive away RESPONSIBLE breeding.

Education is a big part of it; general availability of low cost spay/neuter services is essential, and enforcement of leash laws: those are the basics. Add effective marketing of the smaller number of could-be-a-great-pet shelter animals and over a period of a few years, euthanasia can be dramatically reduced.

Read Nathan Winograd's 'Redemption' for the details. Propagating an amazingly bad idea statewide (as Ms. de Turenne would like to see) would simply compound the problems: No locality that has done so has even equalled the average reduction of shelter euthanasia achieved in places that have not done so.

[Mollie Murphy]

Thank you to the 27 Senators who spoke for the pet lovers of California and voted against this capricious and ill-conceived legislation. The facts don't lie- Mandatory Spay/Neuter is expenisve to implement and has yet to be proven successful. LA adopted their ordinance and has no means or intent to enforce it. Education of responsible pet ownership, low cost voluntary spay/neuter programs and promotion of shelter adoptions are the answers to California's un-wanted pets- not mean spirited legislation meant to increase shelter animal euthansia rates and strip responsible pet owners of their rights!

[Jill H]

How does anyone in their right mind expect people who are having trouble buying food and gas to pay extra fines and vet bills? We need more low/no cost mobile spay/neuter clinics for VOLUNTARY sterilization. To make it to expensive for lower income families to have pets is discriminatory.

Watch what happens in LA the next few months - they have manditory castration and already their kill rates are soaring. Too bad the shelters are funded based on the number of animals they KILL. That will not encourage them to do anything but kill more.

No Kill works! But the city workers would have to embrace rescues and actually work with the public..... And they've never been open to that.

[PeggyR]

it isn't rural/city. Plenty of city folk helped defeat 1634. And it isn't that people don't care about shelter dogs, either, as the "spend a week in the euthansia room" implies. It's that the opponents of 1634 recognized that this bill would do NOTHING about shelter numbers, just as LA's mandatory spay /neuter law has -- well it has done something. it has INCREASED shelter numbers. Passing a law that punishes the innnocent, destroys due process, destroys the principal of innocent until proven guilty and destroys the right to privacy and property is NOT the way. Passing MSN in LA with promises of "exceptions" that are then NOT granted to ANYONE is Not the way. Those who want to reduce shelter numbers would do far better to concentrate on providing EDUCATION to those whose dogs are a problem. HELP in terms of assistance/ guidance in putting up a dog yard or kennel. HELP in terms of finding PET FRIENDLY housing (instead of making the idea of animal ownership something to be ashamed of). Assistance in training and management of problem dogs. Even help in providing more free/ low cost VOLUNTARY spay/neuter clinics. THESE, rather than bills or laws forcing castration and spay of one's pet would reduce those shelter # and death rates.

[Rikki7]

AB 1634 would have done nothing positive to address the problems in California's animal shelters. That's why the State Humane Association of California withdrew their support for AB 1634. The State Humane Association of California represent nearly 140 of California's humane societies, SPCAs, public animal shelters, and private animal shelters. That's also why Alley Cat Allies -- the nation's main advocate for feral cats -- opposes AB 1634. That's why No Kill shelter movement advocate Nathan Winograd opposes AB 1634.

California's humane movement doesn't want AB 1634.

Like every other mandatory spay/neuter law that's been passed, AB 1634 would have ended up killing more dogs and cats, not saving them. In the 6 months since Los Angeles passed their mandatory spay/neuter ordinance, shelter euthanasias have increased by 28%

While testifying on behalf of AB 1634 at the recent Senate committee hearing, LAAS general manager Ed Boks said "No Senator, this is not about saving dogs and cats."

AB 1634 has nothing to do with saving dogs and cats. It was a naked attempt to find some excuse to package forced sterilization for dogs and cats, even though every argument made by its proponents has been thoroughly discredited. At the end, AB 1634 became nothing more than an attempt to hand dis-elected Assembly member Lloyd Levine a gold watch retirement gift. Thank goodness the state senate saw the truth.

[pork chop]

NOW is the chance for Bob Barker to say COME ON DOWN.. NOW is his chance to FUND 25 spay/castrate vans for the state.. or 50. or 100. NOW is the time for him and his celebrity friends to offer FREE services to pet owners in the cities, towns and villages of California NOW is the time to put your MONEY where your mouth is Bob.. One first class ticket to Chicago to pander to the govenment there could have paid for many surgeries... Let's get going BOB..NOW is your chance to REALLY make a differencefor the animals in this state... NOW is your chance to save lives.. It will even give you that applause that you said you live for..I willeven clap for that one...

[Gen]

Educate yourself, Veronique. Punitive legislation results in INCREASES in shelter intakes and deaths. Since The People's Republic of Los Angeles implemented its own local version of 1634, shelter intakes and deaths have risen 20% this past year...the first increase in over a decade. Check their website, all the figures are there.
"Save a Sato", "Compassion Without Borders", "Save a Mexican Mutt" and similar groups import over 300,000 dogs into the US every year. Pet stores do a brisk business. There are homes for the shelter pets. The shelters are FAILING to place the animals and CHOOSE to kill them instead.
The failed shelter policies of the past 100 years are in sad need of reform. The shelters need to stop placing blame and do what they are paid to do.....SAVE LIVES....otherwise we should simply close all shelters. The animals have a better chance of survival on the streets.
The overall intake and euthanasia rates inLos Angeles County shelters have plummeted over 80% since the 1970's, even in the face of a burgeoning population, because local government funds what WORKS...low-cost or free spay-neuter clinics; offsite adoptions, foster care and cooperation with breed rescues; expanded operations hours, removing limit laws and lowering license fees.

[Geraldine Clarke]

It is so good to see the comments here which are radically different from the comments that would have been posted a year or two ago. Levine, Mancuso, et al. have woken up the sleeping giant of Californians who love and care for their animals and want the best for them and all animals in this state. The California public has become educated on what we need to do to make sure that no adoptable animal dies in a shelter. READ WINOGRAD!

We defeated AB1634 when few people thought we could do that. We now must turn California into a No Kill state. That will be much harder to do but we CAN do it! We must take back control of our animal shelter system from the vested interests who gain power by killing animals.

(I would have celebrated yesterday's victory by adopting a dog from a shelter but my local limit laws make that impossible.)

[Russ]

What more needs to be said? It was a bad law pushed through under the premise of helping curb the tide of animals being killed. Dont call it euthanizing, dont call it putting them to sleep, they are killing them. The Senetaors who stepped up and openly opposed this bill are to be commended and RE-ELECTED. They looked at what was the right thing to do for their communities and realized passing AB1634 wasn't it. But this fight for the right to own a non sterilized animal is far from over. PETA, AR groups and Bob " Have you cut your pets balls off " Barker will still try all sorts of underhanded tactics to push THEIR agenda on the rest of the populace. don't allow it to happen.

[Luke Thomas]

No wonder California needs to borrow money from the Federal reserves-they spend tons of it just from killing unwanted animals. They already have low cost spay/neuter programs-yet homeless animals are EVERYWHERE. Low cost spay/neuter programs are only PART of the solution. Don't you know people get away with what they are legally allowed to get away with? At least with a LAW people can REPORT others who keep on feeding homeless cats-which breed like rabbits. I myself know a lot of people who feed homeless cats and do NOT spay/neuter them and the female cats are constantly preggies.

To give you an idea how fast cats multiply, one single female unspayed cat will produce 420,000 kittens in just seven years. Over 95% of them will die brutally–dog pounds that gas them, stab them in the heart with needles;
die of neglect, abuse, torture, run over by cars, disease, etc etc. I guess California also has very little regard for ENDANGERED SPECIES. Keep in mind trap-spay/neuter-release programs DO NOT WORK.

UF Study Finds Feral Cat Colonies Threaten Endangered Species Nationwide
Filed under Research on Thursday, May 1, 2003
http://news.ufl.edu/2003/05/01/feralcat/

Cat predation also is a serious problem in California and Hawaii, where, like Florida, the climate is ideal for cats to survive outside and breed year-round. As a result, endangered animals, such as the Hawaiian goose,
California brown pelican and blunt nosed leopard lizard also face additional threats.

“There are some 15 million cats in Florida which spend all or part of their time outside preying on wildlife,” Hatley said. “It is estimated that cats kill as many as 271 million small mammals and 68 million birds each year in Florida, many of these members of threatened and endangered species.

Read that article. A lot of research was done.
ANOTHER ARTICLE:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat
"As a consequence of their (CATS) exceptional hunting ability, cats can be quite destructive to ecosystems in which they are not native, where local species have not had time to adapt to feline introduction. In some cases, cats have contributed to or caused extinctions — for example, see the case of the Stephens Island Wren. Due to their hunting behavior, in many countries feral cats are considered pests. Domestic cats are occasionally also required to have contained cat runs or to be kept inside entirely, as they can be hazardous to locally endangered bird species."

MANDATORY SPAY/NEUTER LAWS ARE GOOD FOR THE CATS!-SPAY/NEUTERING IS GOOD FOR THEIR HEALTH AND WELL BEING!
MANDATORY SPAY/NEUTER LAWS ARE GOOD FOR ENDANGERED SPECIES!
MANDATORY SPAY/NEUTER LAWS ARE GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY-DOG POUNDS COST EACH COUNTY INTO THE MILLIONS EACH YEAR!

A SPAY/NEUTER A DAY KEEPS THE EUTHANASIA AWAY!
Also people who do not spay/neuter their pets are HARDLY LIKELY to take their pets to the vet for yearly innoculations-spay/neutering is the bare minimum of requirement for care. Even with low cost (even free to social assistance people), individuals refuse to get their animal spay/neutered. Because they don't have to.

And I don't see how it is possible to get FERAL cats to the vet every year too. They spread diseases to other cats such as FIV, and eat rodants which are high risk for rabies.