Save our Dogs! Vote NO to AB 1634
By Shadrach on Apr 5, 2007 in Pet Laws, Rescue & Welfare
Grrrrr. When is this STUPID poop going to stop?? Do you humans realize this is about ending pets altogether? Yep bepaws spaying and neutering at this age is an early death sentence for us. Do you realize it’s the equivalent of neutering a human child well BEFORE puberty ruh? If the AR is so concerned about OUR rights then what about OUR right to exist???? Insanity reigns as I’ve barked here before, rrrrufff! Here is a grassroots effort to at least end this insanity in CA where HSUS and PETA are pushing for this stupid poop:
Californians Against AB 1634
http://saveourdogs. net/ab1634. html…a grassroots effort to save working dogs from AB 1634, mandatory spay/neuter
Opening from the site:
AB 1634 mandates spay/neuter of all dogs (and cats) over four months of age with some exceptions. We oppose AB 1634, or any mandatory spay neuter law, because:
*It doesn’t address the real problem.
*It hurts working dogs.
*PETA will use it as a stepping stone to eliminate all pets.
Additionally, AB 1634 mandates spay/neuter at four months which is bad for dogs’ health, and puts control of breeding in the hands of registries that aren’t appropriate for the job. ADBA and AKC don’t want the job and oppose AB 1634.
Dog and Cat Owners Say NO to AB 1634 - Sign the Petition
Now, stop this and vote NO to AB 1634 for our sake, please, thank you!
Additional articles to PAWnder:
The Negative Aspects of Neutering Your Pet
Castrating Dogs
The Spay/Neuter Issue
Have a pawsitively tail waggin’, intact till we’re of proper age day, WOOF!
Bark ‘N’ Blog is brought to you by Aspenbloom Natural Pet Care
RSS feed
5 Comment(s)
By Anonymous on Apr 14, 2007 | Reply
If this stupid thing is passed, dogs WILL be extinct by the year 3000!!
By Shadrach on Apr 15, 2007 | Reply
Yep it is indeed insanity but that is also the goal of the animal rights movement - to end ALL domesticated animals and their ownership. In their way of thinking, animals don’t want to live with or be owned by us so ending them altogether is supposedly humane. LOL, has anyone bothered asking the animals if they would rather be dead than owned? This is so ludicrous and the politicians just blindly go where the money leads.
Our dogs (and ALL domestic animals) are going to suffer greatly because of these very laws that propose to protect them. Yep, just castrate them all when they’re so young that they don’t have the proper hormones in their bodies to develop correctly. That is inhumane and unethical. It is also VERY cruel. The animals WILL suffer before they eventually die of some disease because they weren’t allowed to grow up and develop. They will have structural problems, diseases, etc. until humans think it’s just not worth dealing with having pets. Then the AR will have won. Don’t say I didn’t tell you so when it happens. Sigh.
By Yvette Adams on Apr 18, 2007 | Reply
The people who don’t care about the law and don’t want to follow it will avoid spaying/neutering by not get their animals licensed. About the only way to keep from licensing your animal is to not get a rabies shot. That is a great way to have a healthy dog, isn’t it?
These are the folks who don’t care about breeding healthy, purebred animals and the animals they breed are the ones that fill up the shelters; not the animals the good breeders produce.
By Fred on Jun 7, 2007 | Reply
This Bill if it later becomes Law dogs will NOT be extinct by the year 3000.
If you read the latest copy of the Bill you will see that Breeders can easily obtain Intact Permits, have a read here:-
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_bill_20070531_amended_asm_v94.html
Then I had a look around to see how much these Intact Permits might cost, and so far it looks like that maybe decided later by each jurisdictions after the state law is passed, and that’s if it does. BUT I did spot that Los Angeles Animal Services has already on record stated that an Intact Permit in LA will cost exactly $0.00, LA is planning on just using the current “Intact Dog License” as the permit, at no extra charge. Maybe we can expect other jurisdictions might follow suit, or to set low-cost intact permit fees. At Santa Cruz (the functioning model for this Bill) they charge right now $15 for their Intact Permits (Unaltered Animal Certificates), and maybe some other jurisdictions might follow this suit, see for yourself $15 on that form via this link address:-
http://www.scanimalservices.us/uac.pdf
American breeders will do as breeders have always done, and that is pass the costs of these Intact Permits on to those who buy their puppies, and over a litter of pups the cost each puppy purchaser pays maybe less than a cup of coffee, and the breeder gets their money back from each puppy purchaser.
In many places pet owners who do have spay neutered dogs can obtain cheaper yearly dog licenses, and this over the lifetime of a dog plus combined with low cost spay neutering it can be cost effective to spay neuter.
Some breeders already do spay neuter their pets and for various reasons, and this even to stop Puppy Millers, Backyard Breeders and Designer Breeders from getting their hands on their sexually entire dogs even if they are pets, and some breeders certainly do impose contract mandatory laws on pet owners who want to buy their pets. Keep in mind that there are means in this Bill where spay neutering can be delayed and done later on. Some Pet Owners who have no intention of breeding don’t mind if their pets are spay neutered, such as it may help address things like marking issues or in-season blood stains on floors or lounges, and there are health issues to consider like the increased possibility of pyometra, prostrate cancer, etc.
This Bill if it later becomes Law dogs will NOT be extinct by the year 3000.
As to ill thought out and unenforceable, well that probably might also apply to the model of this Bill which is Santa Cruz County, and their ill thought out and unenforceable mandatory spay neuter ordinance that is still in effect today, has decreased shelter intakes by 64%. Those who support this Bill would love to see such a significant decrease in all shelters across California. Are you and others willing to give this a try, for if not enough are then the shelters will keep on going on as they have for many years and the heaps of killings will continue.
By Shadrach on Jun 7, 2007 | Reply
Fred,
You haven’t done your deep homework nor have you thoroughly read this blog or you’d know that most of what you’re saying here isn’t factual. It is rhetoric. Spaying and neutering any animal at that young of an age will NOT help their health at all. What you’re sharing here is more AR rhetoric that has been spewed for so long people are actually believing it without knowing the facts. It sounds as if you just want to get your Pet Extinction bill passed rather than true care and concern for the long-term health and wellbeing of the animals.
You say it’s easy for a breeder to get a permit? Well what about for example the New Zealand heading dogs or huntaways that are not registered with any registry and so
cannot qualify? What is a breeder of those valuable working dogs to do? No, this sounds like you’re pushing for a law you KNOW will put them out of work and business. More AR junk as usual.
Many of the animals in shelters today are NOT puppies and kittens but feral (wild) cats and elderly and sick, diseased animals -many of which are already spayed/neutered. Puppies and kittens are shipped in from other countries. Spaying and neutering a puppy or kitten at 4 months of age deprives them of growth hormones for structure, temperament, etc. Reproductive organs aren’t merely for reproduction and if you knew anything about the anatomy, physiology and health of these animals you’d know that. So since you don’t, I’ll provide some links for the readers so they can at least be educated since you apparently don’t desire to be:
http://saveourdogs.net/ab1634.html
http://petoftheday.com/talk/showthread.php?postid=1802199#poststop
http://www.petpac.net/
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/opposeAB1634.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/John_Hamil,_DVM_letter_to_CVMA.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/Dr._Vanderlip_to_Assembly.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/Osmond_opposing_ab1634.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/Letter_to_CVMA_from_Art_Spencer,_DVM.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/Activist_vs_California_Vet.htm
http://www.naiaonline.org/issues/CalVetsNO1634.htm
http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070410/OPINION01/704100333
http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html
The article is written by Chris Zink, DVM who specializes in canine sports and canine sports injuries.
http://rawfed.com/vax/vax.html#other
More info:
Spayed Females:
- Increased aggression in altered females. (recent study)
- Increased occurrence of urinary calculi.
- Increased difficulty passing urinary calculi.
- Increased likelihood of vulvar pyoderma (urine scald)
- Increased likelihood of urinary incontinence.
- Increased likelihood of adverse reaction to vaccinations (27-38%).
- Notable decrease of activity/drive. (this is important to those whose
animals aren’t just pets but are trained to do work too)
- Increased chance of “perpetual puppy syndrome” undesirable urination.
- Inhibited social adjustment if spayed prior to complete cognitive
development (usually a good time AFTER sexual maturity).
- Substantial likelihood of appreciable demeanor change after spay
(menopausal women know about hormone drop.. it’s not fun)
- Increased likelihood of cognitive disorders if spayed before sexual
maturity.
- Increased likelihood of, or speeded progress of, degenerative osteological
disorders.
- Notable decrease in muscle mass (again, not all dogs are lawn ornaments or
carpet speedbumps)
- Generally live 2 (or greater) years shorter than unaltered littermates in
controlled studies.
Castrated males:
- Increased occurrence of urinary calculi.
- Increased difficulty passing urinary calculi.
- Increased chance of urinary obstruction.
- Increased likelihood of urinary incontinence.
- Increased likelihood of adverse reaction to vaccinations (27-38%).
- Notable decrease in activity/drive. (same as above in female list)
- Increased chance of “perpetual puppy syndrome” undesirable urination.
- Inhibited social adjustment if castrated prior to sexual maturity.
- Substantial likelihood of appreciable demeanor change after castration
(same concept as above in female list… reproductive hormones affect more than
just reproduction).
- Increased likelihood of cognitive disorders if castrated before complete
cognitive development (usually a good time AFTER sexual maturity).
- Notable decrease in muscle mass (yep, same as above)
- Generally live 2 (or greater) years shorter than unaltered littermates in
controlled studies