Skip to comments.Pet Sterilization Becomes Law in LA
Posted on 02/26/2008 7:15:03 PM PST by Awestruck
LOS ANGELES - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Tuesday signed one of the nation's toughest laws on pet sterilization, requiring most dogs and cats to be spayed or neutered by the time they are 4 months old.
The ordinance is aimed at reducing and eventually eliminating the thousands of euthanizations conducted in Los Angeles' animal shelters every year.
"We will, sooner rather than later, become a no-kill city and this is the greatest step in that direction," Councilman Tony Cardenas said as he held a kitten at a City Hall news conference.
The ordinance does exempt some animals, including those that have competed in shows or sporting competitions, guide dogs, animals used by police agencies and those belonging to professional breeders.
The average pet owner, however, must have their dog or cat spayed or neutered by the time it reaches 4 months of age (as late as 6 months with a letter from a veterinarian).
First-time offenders will receive information on subsidized sterilization services and be given an additional 60 days. If they still fail to comply they could be fined $100 and ordered to serve eight hours of community service. A subsequent offense could result in a $500 fine or 40 hours of community service.
Many states require animals adopted from shelters to be sterilized, and New York City requires the same for animals bought from pet shops, but restrictions such as Los Angeles' are rare. A 2006 Rhode Island law requires most cats to be sterilized.
A measure similar to Los Angeles' passed the California Assembly last year but did not gain state Senate support.
Los Angeles animal shelters took in 50,000 cats and dogs last year and euthanized approximately 15,000 at a cost of $2 million, according to city officials.
Bob Barker, the retired game-show host who famously ended every "Price is Right" show with a call for sterilizing pets, pushed for the law's adoption and was among those at Tuesday's news conference.
"The next time that you hear me say, 'Help control the pet population, have your pet spayed or neutered,' I can add, 'It's the law in Los Angeles,'" a jubilant Barker said.
As the puppies go, so too go the babies.
how i miss thee, America.
That's a dumb statement.
Are you allowed to dump your trash under your neighbors home in the name of freedom?
Why do you think it should be alright to let your cats and dogs breed there?
Typical multi-culti, Third World, boot-heel-in-the-neck oppression from The Land Of Fruits And Nuts, although out there, it's self-propagating. Those rectal sluices on the Left Coast aren't able to exist on their own without legislative fiat to subsidize their existence, much less take responsibility for the stewardship of a domseticated animal. The friggin' stray dogs they're trying to eliminate have a greater sense of independence and self-preservation than those hippy-dippy lemmings.
Interesting, since that isn't old enough to have competed in shows. Conformation or Obedience (AKC) entrants must be 6 months old to compete.
You are implying that if your dog goes to the veterinarian it knows the difference between a shot for rabies and a shot to sedate it for sterilization?
That's a dumb statement.
So you don't think forced human sterilization is on the horizon?
Will illegal aliens have to obey this law?
>Why do you think it should be alright to let your cats and dogs breed there?<
If someone has a purebred dog or cat, and wants to breed a litter, chances are they will be sold to people who want them for pets. In other words, they will not end up in a shelter.
IF Los Angeles simply enforced their leash laws, they would reduce unwanted litters by a significant percentage. If they wanted a further reduction, they could simply open free spay/neuter clinics.
They don’t want to “help” pets, they want power.
Will you be mad if birds from my trees land on your trees?
No I don’t.
I will if you OWN the birds.
Aren’t liberals pets? -Wb
Henceforth, owners of cats with balls shall be deballed upon detection!!
It takes at least a year to 18 months to determine if a working hunting dog has breeding potential. This is more nanny state BS.
A lot of people are going to support this law because they are concerned about unwanted pets, stray animals, etc. And they are right to be concerned. It’s obviously something that people need to care more about.
But I don’t.
It’s another bald-faced intrusion by the government into the privacy of the family home. Another way for the government to insert a measure of control in a place where they have no business being. Another nail in the coffin of American freedoms.
We are being nibbled to death by ducks.
Sorry but I’m having a hard time picturing any responsible “working hunting dog” breeders in urban LA.
This ordinance applies to dog owners I believe. I can assure you that there are many owners of working dogs in LA who may want to send their talented dogs out to stud for profit and for the improvement of the breed.
It exempts “professional breeders” so you can relax.
Although I suspect the legal definition of “professional breeder” will be way to liberal for my taste.
Might want to look at this.
Back in the ‘70s I lived in Hermosa Beach. It was a low rent hippie town back then. There were lots of dogs running loose and if you haven’t seen what your cute little lap dog will do when he goes out and gets into a pack of dogs you would be quite surprised that they immediately revert. These dogs would get together and attack people, especially small children. So, much as I like dogs they simply have to be controlled.
Many cities do similar things to control dogs. In the city where I live the cost for getting a dog back if it’s picked up by animal control is $25 if it’s fixed and $100 if not. The second time an unfixed dog is picked up it’s $250. The 3rd time it’s destroyed. The yearly license fees are $5 if fixed and $75 if not. I agree with the policy wholeheartedly. It’s called ‘responsibility’.
My dog knows he doesn't want his joystick and fuel tanks to be targeted by anything that didn't walk by him with it's tail in the air first. We go though this every time he goes to the vet clinic. They know him by reputation.
I posit that I have an uncannily intuitive, intelligent canine, and I have helped nurture those cognitive abilities. If you care to raise the stakes with your digit, we'll call the hand. Or, your hand. Your call.
It strikes me that the mayor needs to be neutered more than the pets do.
Nope. I’d say killing a lot of people is on the horizon. Sterilization ain’t what I’m worried about.
The average pet owner, however, must have their dog or cat spayed or neutered by the time it reaches 4 months of age.
First-time offenders will receive information on subsidized sterilization services and be given an additional 60 days. If they still fail to comply they could be fined $100 and ordered to serve eight hours of community service. A subsequent offense could result in a $500 fine or 40 hours of community service."
no. it, from my perspective, has more to do with the creation of additional ridiculous laws that the gubmint has no duty being involved with.
keep your laws off of my pet.
did you actually read the article?
perhaps you would be in favor of my dog having its vocal chords surgically removed because my dog barks at an intruder -and neighbors take offense at that?
perhaps you think i am so moronic as a dog owner that i am not capable of making decisions for my pet?
perhaps i should look to you, peta, and the gubmint about how and when to walk my dog, what to feed it, and how much vitamin c to feed it at what time of day. of course, only as directed by an uncle gubmint agent and law.
I try to never make wagers with men who think they have taught their dogs to be Einstein and believe themselves to be vikings. But thanks for the offer.
Not technically. But if we could get them declared so, maybe we could mandate that they be fixed, too.
It would be a community service to go door-to-door campaigning to get these jokers out of office.
But hey, it is only LA. I'm not worried until some fed bureaucrat gets the idea that this sort of nanny-state BS is "necessary and proper".
I think a special show should be organized for all of these dogs to compete.
A show of force, in front of City Hall.
They will therefore all be exempt, as having competed in a show, and the mayor might get the message that his gulag might be liberated if he doesn’t back off or resign.
thank you so much.
This government intrusion.........will it ever end?!
1) Pad pockets of vetrenarians.
2) Put breeders out of business.
3) Sorry if you’re pet is in the 1% that dies from complications.
4) F your constitutional right to property.
So, how long til they order sterilization of those genetically predisposed to birthing less-than-perfect children?
Because, in your opinion, they are somehow equal?
Because in mine, they are not and I get no pleasure paying taxes to feed and care for animals that no one wants. And since animals are most assuredly not people, it is not the same thing when we sterilize them. We have dominion over the animals, we are their keepers.
There are many working dogs used in public service that are deliberately not pure bred. This will be very bad for those types.
Owning a dog is not prima facae evidence that the animal is breeding out of control, your global assumption notwithstanding. This is a taking of private property.
I own a dog that is not pure bred, simply because this type is not a recognized breed, nor do its fans want it to be. Dutch Shepherds are very rare, highly prized, very expensive, and not pure-bred. My dog would face this law.
This law precludes developing such breeds. It rewards the Tijuana puppy mills at the expense of the smaller, high quality breeder (which is what this is really about IMO). It is physically harmful to the skeletal development of male dogs. Sure there are people who are irresponsible, but the city already has leash laws it doesn't enforce. If the dog is loose the city has every right to capture and euthanize it because that IS prima facae evidence of an irresponsible owner.
There is also some controversy about the proper time to spay or neuter a pet. Male cats' musculoskeletal development, as another poster has pointed out, will be different when they are intact versus neutered. There is also some question of whether a male cat will be more prone to urinary tract problems later on if he is neutered so young.
A lot of cat breeders will have the kitten spayed or neutered by four months, if the animal is being sold as a pet.
Be careful what you wish for... a lot of times, the "answer" is not so simple as passing another law. This might make some people feel good about themselves because the law passed, but it might backfire and result in more dumpings of pets.