November 30th, 2010 by Editor

Editor’s note: Animal Control may maintain that there are issues with dogs in Cypress, but so-called “dog issues” are always resultant of people issues.  Since there has been no elaboration on what those issues are, we are left to surmise that they could be anything from free-roaming dogs to gangs or drugs.  Whatever the real problems in Cypress are, you can bet they aren’t as the result of a breed of dog and so a breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter law isn’t going to fix whatever is really wrong.  [And while, according to the article excerpted below, San Bernardino County may consider the impounding of 1,700  "pit bulls" (80% of which were killed) a success story, other animal advocates, including us, do not consider the deaths of so many innocent animals a success by any stretch of the imagination.]

Ironically, even the person pushing for the mandatory spay/neuter ordinance in Cypress admits it won’t work telling The OC Register,

“I’m in favor of it, but people like that don’t abide by it,” she said of the spay-and-neuter proposal. “Once the dogs are taken from them, (owners) just get another one. It takes (authorities) forever to declare a dog as vicious.”

While she doesn’t know it, she also just made a wonderful case against breed-specific legislation of any kind because the same people who initially broke the law by allowing their dogs to free-roam, etc., typically won’t abide by additional legislation.

And though it’s unclear which breeds may be named in the possible mandatory spay/neuter ordinance, you can bet it’s going to include “pit bulls” (though again, “pit bull” is not a breed).  Please write the Cypress Mayor and City Council here and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation in any form is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.

From The Orange County Register:

Responding to citizen complaints about pit bulls in one Cypress neighborhood, the city is considering a first-of-its-kind law, mandating spaying and neutering for specific dog breeds. If passed, the law would be the first of its kind in the county, according to OC Animal Control officials.  Read the rest of this entry »

September 23rd, 2010 by Editor

Editor’s note: Please contact the Ypsilanti Township Board of Trustees here and politely inform them that since almost any medium- and large-breed dog (and I guess even Chihuahuas!) can be called a “pit bull,” though “pit bull” is not a breed, that perhaps the Humane Society of Huron Valley’s stats on “pit bulls” might be grossly skewed.  Please also kindly inform them that breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter is just as unconstitutional as regular ol’ breed bans.  It is also well known now that mandatory spay/neuter is failed legislation bringing compliance down for other things like rabies vaccines and licensure.  And as with most punitive legislation, the same irresponsible people who bring it about won’t comply.  Irresponsible dog owners either ignore the law, or simply switch to irresponsibly owning other breeds.

From The Ypsilanti Courier:

Ypsilanti Township is considering a change to their code of ordinances that would require all pit bulls to be spayed or neutered by Jan. 1, 2011.

According to the language of the new law, pit bull owners found in violation of the ordinance would be guilty of a criminal misdemeanor punishable by not more than a $500 fine and/or imprisonment for not more than 90 days. Read the rest of this entry »

August 26th, 2010 by Editor

From the Victorville Daily Press:

A consultant working with Barstow to update its vicious-dog ordinance recommends that the city consider a mandatory spay-and-neuter law. But whether that law would require all dog owners to fix their animals or only to pit bull owners is up to city officials, he says. Read the rest of this entry »

August 25th, 2010 by Editor

Heavens to murgatroid, what is becoming of this country?  On the one hand we have very power-drunk nanny-staters who push overly-bureaucratic legislation like breed bans, and on the other hand we have racist podunkers who pass the same breed-specific legislation only with a racist bent.  The former, the nanny-staters, we lobby against every day because they are so busy pushing impotent breed-specific legislation it’s enough to keep a body quite busy.  But in a disturbing recent trend, we’re starting to see a lot more blatantly racist legislation involving pets too.  Read the rest of this entry »

April 8th, 2009 by Editor

From the Indianapolis Star:

…Councilman Mike Speedy has crafted a proposal on “dangerous dogs” that he expects to submit to the full council sometime this month — and one that almost certainly will face stiff opposition.

His proposal not only would require that all pit bulls in the county be spayed or neutered but also would empower animal control officials to require dog owners to purchase liability insurance if they mistreat their dog or fail to keep it confined…

Read this article in its entirety here.

Breed-specific legislation (BSL) — no matter what form it takes, whether a full ban or restrictions like mandatory spay/neuter — is still unenforceable and therefore ineffective.  Please contact the Indianapolis City-County Council here and politely inform them that breed-specific and mandatory spay/neuter laws are failed policies that force responsible dog owners to needlessly give up their beloved pets.

March 10th, 2009 by Editor

From the AKC:

Monday, March 09, 2009

The Chicago City Council Joint Committee on Finance and License & Consumer Protection will hear a proposed mandatory spay/neuter ordinance at their meeting this Thursday, March 12th, 2009. It is vital that responsible dog owners and breeders attend the hearing to oppose this measure. Read the rest of this entry »

January 24th, 2009 by Editor

From Kansas.com:

Wichita’s animal control officials say they’re still struggling with aggressive and stray pit bulls despite a “dangerous dogs” law approved in 2007.

A year’s worth of experience with the law has led officials to return to the City Council next Tuesday with options that include a pit bull ban, new breed-specific restrictions or the status quo. Read the rest of this entry »

December 15th, 2008 by Editor

From The Northwestern:

“Discussions are in the works over the possibility of requiring owners of pit bulls, and other breeds, to meet specific guidelines. Read the rest of this entry »

December 15th, 2008 by Editor

Cat Fanciers’ Association Legislative ALERT
Forwarding encouraged

List and Riverside fanciers – sorry this is so long and so sudden. We just received word about TOMORROW’S [Dec. 16, 2008] meeting of the Riverside County CA Board of Supervisors – thanks to Concerned Dog Owners of California. An ordinance will beintroduced, based on previous proposals but revised. In checking the County Board of Supervisors’ Agenda it seems this ordinance will be introduced tomorrow with a hearing scheduled for January 13th Please double with the clerk, Nancy Romero,PHONE
951-955-1060.

3.16 COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY/ANIMAL SERVICES: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 630.12,
an Ordinance of the County of Riverside Amending Ordinance No. 630 relating the Dogs and Cats (to include provisions of mandatory microchipping and mandatory spaying/neutering). (Hrg. set 1/13/09 @ 9:30 a.m. – Clerk to advertise) Read the rest of this entry »

September 13th, 2008 by Editor

From Fox 5 News in Las Vegas:

“Clark County [Las Vegas] Animal Control officials want the animal population regulated, and they will be seeking a law to ensure pets are spayed and neutered.

At 6:30 p.m. Thursday, the Clark County Animal Control Advisory Board will hold a meeting at the Desert Breeze Community Center to discuss a mandatory spay and neuter bill. Read the rest of this entry »