If any of you out there are my friends, I ask you out of the kindness of my heart to repost this. If you're not my friend, I ask you search for the source compassion in your soul and repost this anyway. More importantly, if you're in a position to, DO something about it.
This is about California legislation being passed to exterminate pit bulls. If it passes in California, it could be on it's way to anywhere. Someone has to try to make a difference...what if it were your pet?
It would be great if Myspace could be used for something good other than getting dates. Please pass the word along and post this...so as many people can see this as possible.
The myspace bulletin had lots more pathetically adorable pit bull photos attached.
ETA: That is such a typical bully in that photo! Cutie!
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
I don't think the bill says anything about exterminating pitbulls. AFAIK the law would permit local governments to require certain breeds of dogs to be spayed or neutered unless you meet certain requirements to breed your dogs.
quote: This bill would authorize local governments to enact dog breed-specific ordinances pertaining only to mandatory spay or neuter programs and breeding requirements, provided that no specific dog breed, or mixed dog breed, shall be declared potentially dangerous or vicious under those ordinances. This bill would require those jurisdictions that do implement such programs to provide quarterly statistical reports relating to dog bites to the State Public Health Veterinarian, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes to related provisions.
It doesn't seem too bad to me. Just allows local governments to decide on whether spaying or neutering of certain breeds should be mandatory, seemingly leaving room for registered breeders to keep their animals whole.
Personally, I think that pets (that aren't going to be purposefully breeded) should be spayed or neutered. Heck, the main change I'd like to see to this law is so that it only allows local governments to decide whether spaying or neutering should be mandatory for ALL breeds. That at least would reduce knee-jerk reactions when a high-profile dog bite occurs.
Posts: 28 | From: Louisiana | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a huge munchkin of my best friend, since her exH is friends with people who own pitbulls. She pointed out everything that has been said above--it's already passed, it says nothing specific to pit bulls, etc. The rsponse she got? "The AKC doesn't register pit bulls" with the logic that, since it's not an AKC breed, they could care less what happens to them. Yes, it's correct that the AKC doesn't register pit bulls, but only because the AKC registers pit bulls as American Staffordshire Terriers. There was no response to that.
I agree that spaying and neutering should be mandatory unless your specific intent is to breed the dog, and having it mandatory for all breeds is not a bad idea.
Medium or large breeds that aren't necessarily seen as "dangerous" can still bite and do a lot of damage. Just because you don't hear many instances of a lab biting someone doesn't mean it doesn't happen, it just means it's not as newsworthy because they aren't "attack dogs," so to speak.
Posts: 384 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ica171: I agree that spaying and neutering should be mandatory unless your specific intent is to breed the dog, and having it mandatory for all breeds is not a bad idea.
Can you clarify what you mean by wanting it "mandatory for all breeds"?
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not picking and choosing breeds to spay/neuter based on their history of violence, I guess is the clearest way I can think to say it right now.
Posts: 384 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that that's a load of bullshit. The spay/neuter for all breeds, or any breed.
There's already some stuff like that going around, and breeders are against it.
If something like that passes, then people like me (hobby breeders, who breed and show but don't have a registered kennel) are screwed.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to clarify, I'm not advocating mandatory spay/neutering for every dog/cat/whatever. However, I think if you're not planning on breeding then why not spay/neuter?
AFA not being a registered breeder, I think in my area you have to have a breeder's license to sell puppies or kittens. So around here it would be spaying or neutering unless you're a registered breeder. YMMV.
Posts: 384 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
I don't know about where you live, but Los Angeles County has a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance for all breeds (for unicorporated areas, cities can make their own ordinaces) that has the following exceptions:
quote: 1. Dogs which are unable to be spayed or neutered without a high likelihood of suffering serious bodily harm or death due to age or infirmity. Written confirmation from a licensed veterinarian is required to qualify for this exception. 2. Dogs used by law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes. 3. Service or assistance dogs that assist disabled persons. 4. Competition dogs. A Competition Dog is a dog which is used to show, to compete or to breed, which is of a breed recognized by and registered with the American Kennel Club (AKC), United Kennel Club (UKC), American Dog Breeders Association (ADBA) or other approved breed registries. The dog or owner must also meet ONE of the following requirements: 1. The dog has competed in at least one dog show or sporting competition sanctioned by a national registry or approved by the department within the last 365 days; or 2. The dog has earned a conformation, obedience, agility, carting, herding, protection, rally, sporting, working or other title from a purebred dog registry referenced above or other registry or dog sport association approved by the department; or 3. The owner or custodian of the dog is a member of a department approved purebred dog breed clubs, which maintains and enforces a code of ethics for dog breeding that includes restrictions from breeding dogs with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten the breed.
I don't know how hobby breeding works, but would any of those exceptions help you?
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
posted
I agree with the spaying and neutering, to a degree.
I think that if you act responsibly, you shouldn't have to spay or neuter. Whether or not you're planning on breeding.
I'm also wondering. Those puppy mills-they would be just fine with that bill. Many of them have kennel licences. But that doesn't make them responsible breeders.
What/who makes the decision that a dog is going to be used for breeding? The person who owns the dog? Even if the dog is plainly completely against the breed standard? The kennel club? And if so, which one, because there are breeds that AKC doesn't recognize, such as the 4th (wirehaired) type of Belgian Shepherd. The breed club? The breeder? The government? Who/what makes those decisions?
It's just something that I'm against. (A nation-wide bill that mandates altering animals unless they're breeding stock.)
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rhiandmoi: I don't know about where you live, but Los Angeles County has a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance for all breeds (for unicorporated areas, cities can make their own ordinaces) that has the following exceptions:
quote: 1. Dogs which are unable to be spayed or neutered without a high likelihood of suffering serious bodily harm or death due to age or infirmity. Written confirmation from a licensed veterinarian is required to qualify for this exception. 2. Dogs used by law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes. 3. Service or assistance dogs that assist disabled persons. 4. Competition dogs. A Competition Dog is a dog which is used to show, to compete or to breed, which is of a breed recognized by and registered with the American Kennel Club (AKC), United Kennel Club (UKC), American Dog Breeders Association (ADBA) or other approved breed registries. The dog or owner must also meet ONE of the following requirements: 1. The dog has competed in at least one dog show or sporting competition sanctioned by a national registry or approved by the department within the last 365 days; or 2. The dog has earned a conformation, obedience, agility, carting, herding, protection, rally, sporting, working or other title from a purebred dog registry referenced above or other registry or dog sport association approved by the department; or 3. The owner or custodian of the dog is a member of a department approved purebred dog breed clubs, which maintains and enforces a code of ethics for dog breeding that includes restrictions from breeding dogs with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten the breed.
I don't know how hobby breeding works, but would any of those exceptions help you?
To a degree it would. This part though, I have a problem with: "code of ethics for dog breeding that includes restrictions from breeding dogs with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten the breed."
Every breed has it's problems. A responsible breeder wouldn't breed a dog with those problems, but, as I said before, puppy mills would. What about those?
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I see it, puppy mill breeders would have to belong to a club for that breed which enforces a code of ethics. Whether that particular breeder is enforced upon is, I suppose, up to the individual club. The exception seems to include hobby breeders, as long as you belong to an ethically-bound club for your breed. If you don't, I'd have to be asking "why not?"
I like that law as quoted. I firmly agree with spay/neuter all "pets". If you aren't planning to breed, reproductive organs you don't need.
-------------------- "We don't keep a certified whale-vomit expert on staff." - Larry Penny, Director, Natural Resources Department, Town of East Hampton Posts: 377 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Why not? Because the local sheltie clubs are biased. Very biased. I don't see it worth my time to belong to something that's going to look down on me. So, because I don't belong to a breed club, I should have my dogs spayed/neutered? Even the champions? The specialty dogs? The obedience dogs?
So if you aren't going to have kids, should you get rid of your reproductive organs, then? Because you don't need those.
I make people sign a contract to spay/neuter the pets that I sell. I do it, not so they won't have puppies (which, even if they did, they can't register them anyway), but for the health of the pet. The chance of the dog getting cancer is lower, and the chances of the female getting pyometra is nil. There's also other benefits, but just because the dog doesn't need them? Just one reason isn't good enough.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
Well, Morrigan you could devise another way for a pet owner to prove that they will be responsible with their unaltered pet and if this law comes to your town you can go to the town hall meetings on it.
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wonder why service animals are exempt? I was under the impression that most (if not all) service dogs were altered so as to prevent them becoming distracted while working and in season (or an in season bitch nearby).
I don't see there being very much point at all to enacting spay/neuter legislation. Really, it only hurts the responsible "hobby" level breeders. Face it... the irresponsible ones the legislation is enacted to stop are the same ones who'll most likely ignore it anyway.
Posts: 58 | From: Colorado Springs, CO | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it should be law to spay and neuter your dog unless your dog is show-competing.
Lady Neeva, service animals are exempt because places like Guide Dogs of America breed their own stock. When a litter is born, the most exceptional pups from that litter that display the temperament and form and personality considered ideal for guide dogs are put into a permanant foster home and used as breeding dogs...they do NOT actually perform the service they are bred for (though they do go through training).
Dogs actually given out to work in the field as guide dogs are spayed and neutered.
Therefore, I think the exemptions they're referring to is the breeding stock of the service animals, not the actual service animals themselves, if that makes sense.
(this comes from dating a blind man for over a year, back to your regularly scheduled program).
Posts: 58 | From: Seattle, WA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about obedience dogs? Agility? Flyball champions? Field trials? Exceptional hunting dogs?
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ravynwriter: I think it should be law to spay and neuter your dog unless your dog is show-competing.
Which would lead to massive inbreeding of purebreds with no hybrid vigor - i.e. no mixed breeds.
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I've seen, hybrid vigor is a myth.
A mixed breed can have the best and worst traits of the purebred parent. Some have only the worst. Some have the best.
And purebreds are already inbred! Nearly every sheltie can trace itself back to Ch Halstor's Peter Pumpkin! (Same thing with horses.)
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That does make sense... the wording threw me off (the way it was phrased, I read it as pertaining to animals actually being used by disabled persons, which is why it made no sense lol).
Morrigan, the agility/flyball/etc dogs would be covered under the fourth part of that... competition dogs. Well, assuming they're AKC registered purebreds.
Of course, I have a problem with that also... mixed breed dogs, no matter how well trained, are generally barred from competition in agility and obediance trials because the trials are most commonly held under AKC jurisdiction. You *could* join one of the associations set up specifically to hold agility/obediance trials (using AKC rules) for mixed breed dogs, but those trials are nowhere near as common or accessible as AKC trials are.
Example, taking just a few minutes I found 13 AKC recognized agility events being held in my state over the next three months. To find these, I had to go to one site, and 11 of the events were being held in Denver, Castle Rock (which is about a 30 minute drive from Denver, if that) or Golden (about 10 minutes from Denver). From what I know of the facilities mentioned, they've all got large indoor arenas which would most likely be used.
Then I looked for mixed breed agility events in my state during December, January, and Febuary. I went to 7 different sites, not counting Google which was used to find a site listing all US Dog Agility organizations.
On those seven sites, I found exactly ONE agility event, and it specifically said it was an outdoor venue and may as a result be called in the event of inclement weather. It was also in a pretty out of the way part of the state.
Back on topic, I don't think the solution to the "pit bull" problem will come at the hands of drafting new laws banning that breed, or mandatory breed based altering laws, or anything of that nature thats limited to the "problem" breeds.
It isn't the breed thats the problem, it's the idiots who own most of them for the wrong reasons.
Any breed that looks or can be made to look "scary" will attract a certain mentality of person who honestly aren't even responsible enough to own a pet rock.
The "type" of person attracted to these breeds because they're "big scary attack dogs" could probably train a maltese or shih tzu into a vicious menace... it's not the breed, it's the people who raise them to be status symbols of how "tough" they are thats the problem.
These are the same types of people who gave Dobermans a reputation for being vicious killers in the 70's, German Shepherds in the 80's, and Rottweilers in the 90's. Not entirely sure I have the decades right... judging mostly off of a failing memory lol. I do know that at one time or another all of those breeds were the canine boogymen held up to scare people about vicious dogs.
Posts: 58 | From: Colorado Springs, CO | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting you name those breeds. The development I'm looking at buying a section in expressly prohibits the homeowners from owning a pit bull, rottweiler or doberman pinscher.
-------------------- "We don't keep a certified whale-vomit expert on staff." - Larry Penny, Director, Natural Resources Department, Town of East Hampton Posts: 377 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those are just the breeds I've always heard being referred to as vicious, mean, blood thirsty, crazy, killers, etc etc.
Note that I don't actually *believe* that... they're just the biggest example of breeds who've had scare tactics used on them in the "court of public opinion" so to speak.
Posts: 58 | From: Colorado Springs, CO | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
