Have you ever even read the U.S. Constitution?

Exactly Deano . . . we need to outlaw cars as well. They just hurt the environment and have you seen how many people cars kill every year. Talk about legislation long overdue.

Sorry – but you are drinking too much “kool aid” from the H$U$. Nope – there are VERY few if any pure-breds in the shelters. AND – get this – IF there are, we are charged with getting them out by our association with the AKC. Furthermore – IF all the dogs and cats are hysterectomied or castrated – please explain where the NEXT generation will come from??? By the way – that question was posed to me by a 9-year-old boy. Funny how HE understands what many of your mature adults have overlooked.

The number is less than 3.4 million and the majority of them are cats. So get your facts strait not off the animal rights agenda. Did you know that there is in every state a wild species of dog that has a DNA similar to the Australian Dingo. We are causing their extinction by not identifying them and setting aside their terroritory. These are not pets and will be extremely fearful if cornered. Studies show that spay and neuter as mandatory does not work and in fact costs the city 257% more to implement. Voluntary spay and neuter, free spay and neuter for the poor is the only thing that is shown to work. Also if you want people to license their pets you need to give them a service such as returning their pet should it get loose rather than killing it. Those cities successful in lowering the shelter rates and keep loose dogs home are those cities that enact laws that offer a service to the public. Any law that is ignored is a bad law and the people are telling you they don’t like nor do they feel its fair.To the knowledge of the ASPCA, the only method of population control that has demonstrated long-term efficacy in significantly reducing the number of animals entering animal shelters is the voluntary sterilization of owned pets (Clancy & Rowan 2003; FIREPAW, 2004; Secovich, 2003).There is also evidence that sterilizing very specific, at-risk sub-populations of companion animals, such as feral cats and animals in shelters, can also contribute to reductions in overpopulation (Zawistowski et al., 1998; Clancy & Rowan 2003; Levy et al., 2003; Lord et al., 2006; Natoli et al., 2006). However, the ASPCA is not aware of any credible evidence demonstrating a statistically significant enhancement in the reduction of shelter intake or euthanasia as a result of the implementation of a mandatory spay/neuter law.
Caution must therefore be applied when interpreting existing claims regarding the effects of local mandatory spay/neuter (MSN) laws. First, because per capita shelter intake and euthanasia are in decline due to voluntary spaying and neutering, it is impossible to determine the effect of an MSN law without comparing a community’s trends in shelter intake and euthanasia for several years before and after the law was enacted to trends in adjacent, similar communities without MSN legislation. Furthermore, to determine with confidence the effects of any spay/neuter program on the animal population, which naturally fluctuates somewhat from year to year, population trends must be examined over a period sufficiently long to absorb those natural fluctuations. Claims based on one or two years of data can be misleading.
In addition, it is imprudent to generalize about the effects of MSN laws. One reason is that the definition of “mandatory” varies greatly across communities. In some localities, a citation may be issued for any animal over the age of four months seen unaltered, while in other communities, a citation results only when another animal control offence has been committed or if more than one unspayed female lives in the household. Another complication is that it can be extremely difficult for even a veterinary professional to visually determine if an animal, particularly a female, has been sterilized; it would be virtually impossible for an animal control officer to make those determinations in the field. For these reasons, and due to variation across communities in law enforcement funding and personnel support, actual enforcement of MSN laws varies widely, making comparisons between MSN laws or predictions about their impact very difficult.
Another reason for caution when interpreting the effects of MSN legislation is that shelter intake and euthanasia statistics are often presented as a total number of dogs and cats. In some communities, the number of dogs entering and being euthanized in shelters is dropping significantly while the number of cats is declining more slowly or even increasing. Therefore it is critical to examine population and shelter statistics for dogs and cats separately, so that reductions in dog intake and euthanasia do not mask increases in cat intake and euthanasia. This issue is particularly critical in the analysis of the effect of MSN laws, since feral and unowned stray cats continue to represent a substantial proportion of the shelter population and euthanasia. This major contributing factor is not addressed by MSN laws that, by nature, target owned animals.
Even when an MSN law seems to have a positive effect on one aspect of animal welfare, it may have a negative effect on another. For instance, in at least one community that enacted an MSN law, fewer pets were subsequently licensed, likely due to owners’ reluctance to pay either the high fee for keeping an unaltered animal or the fee to have the pet altered (Office of Legislative Oversight, 1997).
The ASPCA is also concerned that some communities may rely primarily or exclusively on MSN legislation to reduce shelter intake and euthanasia even though the animal shelter population is actually very heterogeneous with no single cause or source (National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy, 2001). Many social, cultural and economic factors as well as animal health and behavioral issues contribute to shelter intake; therefore, no single program or law can be relied on to solve the problem.
Furthermore, one of the main barriers to spaying and neutering of pets is accessibility of services, which is not addressed simply by making spaying and neutering mandatory. Cost is one of the primary barriers to spay/neuter surgery in many communities (Patronek et al., 1997; Ralston Purina, 2000; Frank, 2001). In fact, low household income and poverty are statistically associated with having a sexually intact cat (Patronek et al, 1997; Chu et al., 2009), with relinquishment of pets to shelters (Patronek et al., 1996), and with shelter intake (Frank, 2003). As a result, the proportion of pets from poor communities who are being euthanized in shelters remains high; shelter euthanasia rates in the poorest counties in states such as California and New Jersey are several times higher than those in the most affluent counties (Handy, 2002; Marsh, 2008).

God, Betsy, shut up!

If you took the time Betsy to watch your dog over writing this book of a comment maybe things would be better.

when someone has to make a point to point out they are Republican, while supporting a big government non-conservative liberal progressive idea.. i highly doubt they’re Republican

You are way out in left field – H$U$ and ASPCA are the same as PETA with the same agenda – and that is to eradicate the bond between humans and the rest of the animal world.

Have you ever read your idol’s meanderings??? Darling Wayne has NEVER owned a dog, a cat, a pet. He has STATED that he’s never had an attachment or affiliation with an animal. His agenda is the same as PETA! Seriously – do you believe we should be vegans? PETA does – so does Wayne and his minions. Do some research before you attack others.

Why not spay and neuter illegal immigrants???

the same…….,although others have said it much more eloquently than I.

I call it http://www.NewNation.org

No one is going to pay for their care because we’re going to put them down aka “deal with them”. We’re wasting our resources and time keeping unsocialized strays alive only to force them to live in metal cages inside some converted warehouse now called a “shelter”. Euthanize them and put the money towards funding low cost spay and neuter programs.

I agree with you Lisa. But the fact is that the animals lovers have stopped many cities from euthanizing animals. The cities have no room to put additional animals and stop picking up strays. Spay and neuter programs do not work. They do not work even where they are free.

Glassectomy is the removal of the tongue.

He sobered up just long enough to realize his last name was “Kennedy,” and therefore is entitled to a public office of some kind.

you can get a permit to keep your dog unaltered. did you read the article?

this is already the law in california- its not a big deal.

OMG, seriously, that is your argument?? As a human, I am not at risk for being KILLED because there is no where for me to go. MILLIONS of cats and dogs are having that happening to them every year.

As was pointed out, if you want to breed, you can, but you must get a permit.

Perhaps, you should visit your local shelter and SEE all the animals that may be killed unless they are adopted. I have volunteered at my shelter. There are so many great animals that are killed everyday because there are not enough homes.

In a perfect world, people would be responsible, but that is not the case. The animals suffer. I find that really sad, since it is sooo preventable.

That is about as stupid a comment in the midst of very stupid comments. Yee Gads the people of St. Louis are about a sharp as a marble

Simple, because for so long we have allowed the government to come into our homes and tell us what we can and cannot eat, drink, smoke, etc. (They even tell us that our houses belong to them, and we must pay rent – in the form of property tax – to them or they will kick us out.)
We have allowed them into our schools where they tell us what we can say, think, or teach.
We have allowed them into our churches where they tell us about what we can speak or pray.
We have allowed them onto our streets where they tell us what we can display.
Why would they stop at telling us how we can handle our animals?
You are right on one point however:
If you want to come poking your nose that deeply into my affairs, come early, come armed, and bring lots of grub.

So go already eh….

Can you take me with you. Every Canadian I’ve ever met is more freindy and out-going than almost any Northerner; Yankee; I’ve seen move to NC in the last 20 years. I’ love to fix them, oo.