Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Pasadena mandatory sterilization proposal

 -----Original Message-----
From: Geneva Coats [CFODC] <>
To: bbogaard <>; district1 <>; mlmorales <>; christiancruz <>; jwest <>; nsullivan <>; vdelacuba <>; smadison <>; ttornek <>; cfodc <>
Sent: Wed, Jul 9, 2014 4:16 pm
Subject: [CalFedDogClubs] California Federation of Dog Clubs OPPOSED to mandatory sterilization proposal [1 Attachment]

California Federation of Dog Clubs
PO Box 2341
Lancaster, CA 93539

Pasadena City Council
Pasadena City Hall
100 North Garfield Avenue
Room S249
Pasadena, CA 91101

July 9, 2014
Request to be included in the official record for City Council meeting of July 14, 2014.

Dear Mayor Bogaard, Vice Mayor Robinson, and City Council Members,

The California Federation of Dog Clubs is an association of thousands of dog owners across the State of California. Formed in 1990, the CFoDC works tirelessly to promote animal welfare, educate the public regarding responsible animal ownership, and protect the rights of responsible animal owners. We administer a disaster relief fund, conduct breed ID workshops for shelter personnel, provide educational information on responsible pet ownership. We also man a toll-free assistance line for animal owners who need advice regarding pet training and behavioral issues. We support animal legislation beneficial to society and to animals.
The CFODC is OPPOSED to the mandated sterilization of pets, no matter what exemptions are offered. Some of the reasons for our opposition include:

  • The ASPCA, the American Kennel Club, the No Kill Advocacy Center, Best Friends Animal Society, the American College of Theriogenologists and the American Veterinary Medical Association are all OPPOSED to mandatory sterilization laws because they create more problems and solve none.
  • Coercive sterilization laws result in increased shelter intakes and deaths anywhere they are tried. Fewer people will reclaim their pets due to high costs. Los Angeles has seen a steep rise in shelter intakes since implementing its own mandatory spay/neuter law. So has Memphis, Tennessee.
  • Forced sterilization laws have resulted in increased incidence of RABIES exposure in some areas, as owners who avoid licensing may also fail to vaccinate for rabies. This creates a dire risk to human health. With recent instances of rabid wildlife in southern California, we should not do anything that would jeopardize public cooperation with rabies vaccination programs. Fort Worth TX repealed their spay and neuter law due to increased cases of rabies exposure, which are not just hazardous to health but also extremely expensive to local health departments.
  • Existing leash and confinement laws should be enforced. Sterilization does NOT prevent roaming.
  • The 2013 Annual report published by the Pasadena Humane Society claims an adoption rate of 96% for dogs and 98% for nonferal cats. There is no "overpopulation crisis" and even if there was, there is no evidence to support the assertion that shelter intakes are caused by animals bred locally or that shelter intake numbers are reduced by sterilization mandates.
  • Mandated surgery disproportionately affects the elderly on fixed incomes and low-income families. These are the very groups who derive the most psychosocial benefits from pet ownership. They should be encouraged rather than discouraged from adopting pets.
  • Mandatory sterilization is costly to enforce. Revenues will drop, as owners will increasingly avoid licensing and forced surgery on their pets. There will be even LESS money for the needed enforcement.
  • Dogs are being smuggled in by the thousands now from Mexico and imported from other countries by rescue groups, to meet the demand for pets. Mandatory sterilization creates a black market for dogs and puppies. Imported pets often bring rabies and parasites along with them.
  • Feral cats comprise a significant proportion of shelter intakes, and sterilization mandates do not help to reduce numbers of feral cats. Good Samaritans caring for feral cats are often punished for doing so when sterilization laws are implemented.
  • Many studies show that dogs who are neutered more health and behavioral problems than dogs who are left intact. The latest study published in the journal Applied Animal Behavior Science and conducted by the University of Bristol's School of Veterinary Science, found no difference in aggression between dogs who were intact and dogs who were neutered.
  • In addition, this study found that dogs obtained from shelters and rescues were 1.8-2.6 times more likely to exhibit aggression than dogs obtained directly from breeders.
 We are opposed to mandatory spay and neuter laws that would increase shelter intakes and deaths, increase the risk of rabies exposure cases, and increase the risk of aggression, while simultaneously decreasing local sources of well-bred pets.

We urge you to REJECT any mandatory sterilization ordinances and instead focus on measures proven to work over the past decades….proactive, friendly and non-coercive public education campaigns, trap/neuter and release programs for feral cats, and low-cost, government subsidized voluntary sterilization clinics.

Please contact us if we can be of any further assistance.

Geneva Coats, R.N.
Secretary, California Federation of Dog Clubs

CC: Bill Bogaard, Jaque Robinson, Margaret McAustin, John J. Kennedy, Gene Masuda, Victor Gordo, Steve Madison, Terry Tornek
The Dark Side of Mandatory Legislation:




No comments:

Post a Comment

Palm Springs letter

  Dog Owners of the Golden State "DOGS" PO Box 1033 Chino CA 91710 w...