Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Victory in Whittier!

After a lengthy public hearing, the Whittier City Council this evening unanimously rejected the mandatory spay/neuter (“MSN”) provisions of its proposed animal-control ordinance by adopting an amendment drafted by California Federation of Dog Clubs (“CFODC”).  The second reading of the amended ordinance will occur at the council’s meeting on September 8.
 
Like many other cities in Los Angeles County, Whittier contracts with the county’s Department of Animal Care and Control for animal-control services. The city also adopted the county’s animal-control ordinance nearly a decade ago, but chose to exclude the MSN provisions of the L. A. County code – provisions that would require all dogs in the city to be sterilized with few exceptions. Under the proposed update to the city’s animal-control ordinance considered this evening, the city would have adopted the MSN provisions of the county.
 
At the hearing, representatives from CFODC, members of the fancy, and several veterinary healthcare professionals countered the proposal by offering fact-based evidence that MSN laws fail to keep dogs out of shelters, drive people away from licensing their dogs, require harsh enforcement, increase the risk of rabies to the public, can hurt our dogs' health, and specifically in Whittier, would drop annual licensing revenue by over $80K -- and possibly much more if non-compliance matched other jurisdictions' rates.  Following the presentations, the council unanimously stated that the decision to sterilize a pet should be made by its owner in consultation a veterinarian, and not by government fiat.
 
This was truly a team effort.  CFODC would like to thank all of you who testified at the public hearing or contacted the members of the council.
 
Chuck Bridges
President
California Federation of Dog Clubs
 
 

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

CFODC Newsletter

CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF DOG CLUBS
Newsletter
July 22, 2015

Wildfires

The North Fire in San Bernardino County hit the headlines when it crossed I-15 and destroyed twenty vehicles – thankfully without serious injuries. CFODC contacted San Bernardino Animal Control to offer support for evacuated pets and is standing by.

For more information about CFODC’s disaster assistance activities, please read the following article.

25th Anniversary Annual Meeting

California Federation of Dog Clubs held its annual meeting on July 3, 2015 in conjunction with the El Camino Real Summerfest cluster in Ventura, CA. We would like to thank Channel City K. C. and Santa Maria K. C., both CFODC members, for providing the venue.

Prior to meeting, the members of the Board recognized outgoing President Judy Coffman for her long service to CFODC and the fancy. Judy isn’t retiring, she’s simply changing roles and will continue as CFODC’s Vice President.

Judy reported on the activities for the past year:

  • Judy and Board Member Carol Hamilton put on Breed ID Workshops at shelters in Agoura, Riverside, San Jacinto and Kern County. The Breed ID Workshop, a seminar and MS PowerPoint presentation developed by CFODC, gives shelter and rescue organization workers, and the general public, information to correctly identify the breed lineage of dogs they encounter – one of the first steps to returning lost dogs to their owners or finding new homes for unowned dogs. Board Member Jan Dykema and incoming President Chuck Bridges are being trained to give the Breed ID Workshop and rollout the seminar to organizations in Northern California.

  • CFODC has provided support for pets evacuated from their homes as a result of natural disasters for over a decade. CFODC can immediately dispatch a trailer stocked with needed supplies (such as crates, pet bedding, cat litter boxes, feeding supplies and food) to emergency sites. CFODC’s current disaster assistance trailer is stored in Southern California.

Judy identified a similar trailer used by a specialty club that’s for sale. This potential new addition to CFODC could be stocked and positioned in Northern California to reduce response times to disasters in that part of the state. The CFODC will approach the AKC for funds to stock the new trailer and restock the Southern California trailer. The Northern California disaster assistance trailer should be fully provisioned and on station by late summer.

  • The animal-related legislation docket at the state level has been thankfully light this year. Here are some of the bills that CFODC is following:

SB 716 bans the use of the elephant goad (commonly known as a bullhook or ankus) in the State of California beginning in 2018. It would apply not only to circuses, but to zoos and all other elephant exhibitors and facilities in California. The bullhook is a benign tool used by animal trainers for thousands of years to control elephants – much like dog fanciers use dog collars to control their pets. With few true humane issues associated with the use of bullhooks, we believe that the motivation behind the bill is to eliminate elephants in captivity – eliminate the ability to control elephants in captivity and you eliminate the ability to maintain elephants in captivity. Similarly, we’ve seen Animal Rights activists attempting to further their view of no human “exploitation” of animals by claiming that dog collars are a form of cruelty and animal oppression. CFODC is OPPOSED.

AB 147 requires research animals to be adopted by rescue organizations. CFODC has requested the bill be amended to allow anyone to adopt such animals. CFODC SUPPORTS the bill as amended.

AB 794 provides for restitution for dogs or horses injured or killed while engaged in law enforcement. CFODC SUPPORTS.

AB 1543 provides for a fine of $5,000 to compensate the owners of animals subjected to abuse by others. The bill has been amended to direct local animal control agencies to administer this “animal victims of crime” program, rather than the state Veterinary Medical Board. CFODC is NEUTRAL.

Please feel free to contact us concerning these bills at any time.

  • Mandatory spay/neuter proponents were active at the local level. Despite strong opposition by CFODC and groups of local fanciers, mandatory spay/neuter ordinances were passed in Pasadena and Long Beach. Sadly, a fancier – President of Long Beach K. C. and Great Western Terrier Association and interestingly not a resident of Long Beach or the surrounding counties – spoke in favor of the ordinance in Long Beach.

  • Whittier, CA is renewing its animal control contract with the County of Los Angeles and is considering adopting the County’s animal control ordinance, which includes mandatory spay/neuter provisions. CFODC, assisted by the AKC, has organized local fanciers to oppose the measure, and CFODC representatives appeared at the initial Whittier City Council hearing. Consideration of the measure was postponed until early August. CFODC will post additional alerts to its members.

  • CFODC and the AKC hosted a “Safety Around Dogs Workshop” in Dublin, CA on June 20 as a community outreach event for Assemblymember Catherine Baker (R-16). CFODC will host a similar workshop for Assemblymember Tom Lackey (R-36) October or November and possibly for Assemblymember Shannon Grove (R-34). These workshops give CFODC the opportunity to show the public that dog fanciers and breeders are responsible dog owners and provide important access to interested politicians.

  • CFODC will hold a seminar by No Kill shelter expert Nathan Winograd in Bakersfield sometime later in 2015.

  • In 2009, CFODC hosted a summit meeting at Harris Ranch of organizations interested in protecting animal ownership in the state. This year, Judy and Board Members Janice Anderson and Chuck Bridges attended a meeting of the Kern County Cattlemen’s Association. The CFODC delegation to presented “Numbers, they add up!: Political Power on the Hoof and in the Home,” a description of the potential for an alliance of animal agriculture and pet owners in the state.

With the numerous common concerns of farmers, ranchers, and pet owners, should CFODC host another summit in 2015-2016?
With no nominations received from the floor, the following were declared elected as officers and directors of CFODC:

Chuck Bridges – President
Judy Coffman – Vice President
Geneva Coats – Secretary
Jamie Rudolph – Treasurer
Janice Anderson, Jan Dykema, Carol Hamilton, Teri Kahn, and Carole Raschella – Directors

Incoming President Chuck Bridges again thanked Judy Coffman for her service to CFODC and her willingness to continue to serve as Vice President. Chuck then outlined what he viewed as priorities for the coming year:
  • Increasing membership is always a goal, but beyond that, CFODC needs to increase the number of individuals actively working on the organization's programs – CFODC needs more “boots on the ground.” Perhaps it’s time once again to visit dog club meetings across the state to enlist new member clubs and individual volunteers.



  • State Federations were in existence before the formation of the AKC Government Relations Department. As a result, the various federations, while “recognized” by the AKC and working collaboratively with the AKC on government relations and disaster assistance, do not have formal relationships with the AKC. In 2015-16, CFODC should work with the AKC to develop a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) clarifying the relationship. One goal, which may not be obtainable, would be to have the CFODC formally represent the AKC in local governmental matters.

Monday, June 29, 2015

Notice of Annual Meeting

 
The annual meeting for the California Federation of Dog Clubs will be held at 7 pm on July 3, 2015 after Best in Show at the Channel City Kennel Club show. We will be located in the McBride Building on the Ventura County Fairgrounds, near the barbeque being hosted by Santa Maria KC.

Come on out to CFODC's annual meeting! Learn what your State Federation is doing to help promote the welfare of purebred dogs and protect your ownership rights. Officers and Board Members for 2015 will be installed at the meeting. We look forward to meeting you!

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Long Beach, CA City Council to DEFER vote on Mandatory Spay/Neuter Ordinance






 
UPDATE:  The proposed mandatory spay/neuter ordinance has been removed from today's agenda and tentatively rescheduled for March 10th. AKC will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates. If you have not yet written a letter or email, please do so.
 
February 24, 2015
On Tuesday, March 3rd, the Long Beach City Council will hear and vote on a proposed mandatory spay/neuter ordinance.
There are no provisions in this ordinance to exempt hunting or sporting dogs, those who compete in companion events such as agility or rally, and even for exempted dogs the Director of the Animal Care Services Bureau has the power to disallow an intact license. It is also important to consider that in the neighboring City of Los Angeles, a similar, ordinance was passed with exemptions for dogs that participate in hunting, agility, obedience and other events, but those exemptions were later removed because it was too time consuming for staff to administer them. It is not unreasonable to think that Long Beach could also further restrict the rights of responsible owners to own intact animals.
It is vital that responsible dog owners and breeders oppose this burdensome ordinance.  
Long Beach City Council Meeting
Date: Tuesday, March 3rd, 2015
Time: 6 PM
Location: Council Chamber, 333 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802
Please scroll down for additional contact information.
What the Proposal Does
The ordinance will require that all dogs or cats over the age of eight months be spayed or neutered unless they qualify for one of the following exemptions:
  • A licensed veterinarian certifies that sterilization would likely cause the animal's death or substantially aggravate a physical condition of the animal. The veterinarian must state the medical basis for the exemption and whether the unsuitability is temporary or permanent. If temporary, the certificate shall indicate how long the period of unsuitability will last.
  • The dog is undergoing or has received training and certification by a recognized agency, if such certification is available, and will be or is utilized or is retired from use:
  • By a law enforcement agency for law enforcement activities
  • By a search and rescue agency for search and rescue activities (it should be noted that most search and rescue dogs are privately owned and trained)
  • As a guide animal, hearing animal, assistance animal, seizure alert animal or social/therapy animal approved by the Animal Care Services Bureau.
  • The animal is breeding stock for dogs described above by a recognized agency or organization approved by the Director. (This places a lot of power in the hands of the agency to determine which organizations are acceptable. There is no requirement in federal law that recognized assistance dogs be trained by specific agencies or organizations.)
  • For each of the above, the owner shall provide proof to the satisfaction of the Director with each application for a new or renewal license. (It is not clear what criteria the Director will use and standards could change as staff changes.)
  • A dog or cat harbored by a public shelter, humane society, or similar organization, whether public or private, the principal purpose of which is securing the adoption of dogs or cats, provided that such organization requires the spaying or neutering of all dogs and cats placed for adoption by such organization.
  • A dog or cat that is a breed approved by and registered with a national or international breed registry or association which, at a minimum, requires identification of breed, date or birth, names of registered sire and dam, the name of the breeder and recordkeeping relating to breeding, transfer of ownership. The owner shall provide verified proof to the satisfaction of the Director with each application for a new or renewal license.
  • A dog which is undergoing training or currently is trained to compete or be used for herding of other animals, or as a livestock guardian dog, or a dog designated as breeding stock for these purposes by a recognized agency or organization approved by the Director. The owner shall provide proof to the satisfaction of the Director with each application for a new or renewal license.
The American Kennel Club opposes mandatory spay/neuter as ineffective because it fails to address the underlying issue of irresponsible ownership. California state law already provides for the sterilization of animals adopted from shelters and mandates that the license fee for intact animals be at least double that of sterilized animals. Mandatory sterilization requirements will merely punish those who are responsible owners and breeders; irresponsible owners who are not complying with current laws are unlikely to continue their behavior under new laws. 
The report from Long Beach Animal Care Services shows that the department is making great strides in improving shelter intakes and euthanasia rates and in providing low-cost sterilization services. These good works should continue to be supported. Because mandatory spay/neuter policies are known to be ineffective in reducing shelter intakes and euthanasia, none of the major national animal welfare organizations support mandatory spay/neuter. The AKC, AVMA, ASPCA, No Kill Advocacy Center, and the American College of Theriogenologists are just a few of the groups that oppose mandatory spay/neuter policies because they do not benefit dogs or the community.
The proposed ordinance will also prohibit the sale, barter, giving away or transferring of dogs, cats or rabbits unless the person or shop is in compliance with the following:
  • Possess a breeding permit issued in accordance with city code 6.16.190
  • A dog, cat, or rabbit is obtained from a publically operated animal shelter
  • A dog, cat, or rabbit is obtained from a private humane society or duly incorporated organization devoted to the rescue, care, and adoption of stray, abandoned or surrendered dogs, cats and/or rabbits
What You Can Do
  • Attend the Long Beach City Council meeting at 6pm on March 3rd.
  • Contact the members of the Long Beach City Council and ask them to oppose this ordinance.
AKC Resources:
Long Beach City Council
Robert Garcia, Mayor
Tel: (562) 570-6801
Fax: (562) 570-6538
Dr. Suja Lowenthal, Vice-Mayor, Second District
Tel: (562) 570-6684
Fax Number: (562) 570-6882
Lena Gonzales, First District
Tel: (562) 570-6919
district1@longbeach.gov
Suzie Price, Third District
Tel: (562) 570-6300
district3@longbeach.gov
Stacy Mungo, Fifth District
(562) 570-5555
Dee Andrews, Sixth District
Tel: (562) 570-6816
Roberto Uranga, Seventh District
Tel: (562) 570-7777
district7@longbeach.gov
Al Austin, Eighth District
Tel: (562) 570-1326
Rex Richardson, Ninth District
Tel: (562) 570-6137
district9@longbeach.gov
If you have any additional questions, please contact the AKC Government Relations department at doglaw@akc.org or 919-816-3720.
 
 
 
 

 
 

Monday, December 8, 2014

Long Beach Spay-Neuter Proposal

    
Long Beach City Council
333 W. Ocean Blvd
Long Beach, CA
November 18, 2014
FOR OFFICIAL RECORD

Dear Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Lowenthal 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 with positive benefits to society.

We are concerned regarding the proposal on tonight's agenda which would require mandatory spay-neuter for the vast majority of pets in your city, and prohibit the retail sales of pets. Long Beach already has such a draconian process for breeder permits that it is doubtful that there is even ONE licensed breeder in your city, and now, this?

The CFODC is OPPOSED to the mandated sterilization of pets, regardless of exemptions. We are opposed to high fees and excessive restrictions for licensing and breeding permits. Some of the reasons for our opposition include:

  • The ASPCA, the No Kill Advocacy Center, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Kennel Club and many other animal welfare groups are OPPOSED to mandatory sterilization because it creates more problems than it solves.
  • Coercive sterilization laws and excessive animal-related fees 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.
  • 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.
  • Oppressive forced sterilization laws have resulted in increased incidence of RABIES in some areas, as owners who avoid licensing may also fail to vaccinate for rabies. This creates a dire risk to human health. Fort Worth TX repealed their mandatory spay-neuter law due to increased cases of rabies exposure.
  • Dogs are being smuggled in by the thousands now, from Mexico and other countries, to meet the demand for pets. Mandatory sterilization creates a black market for dogs and puppies. Black market pets bring rabies and parasites along with them.
  • Feral cats comprise the majority of shelter intakes, and sterilization mandates do not help feral cats. The only result is that Good Samaritans who care for feral cats are punished. Existing leash and confinement laws should be enforced. Sterilization does NOT prevent roaming.
  • There is no evidence to support the assertion that shelter intakes are caused by animals bred locally. Most puppies are sold outside of the local area where they are born.
  • Mandated surgery disproportionately punishes low-income families.
 
We urge you to REJECT any mandatory sterilization ordinances and instead focus on measures proven to work over the past thirty years….aggressive public education campaigns, trap/neuter and release programs for feral cats, and low-cost voluntary sterilization clinics.

The CFoDC is also OPPOSED to bans on retail sales of pets, regardless of exemptions. Pet sales bans encourage the growth of a totally unregulated underground market. This ordinance would, in effect, trade a heavily regulated business for a largely unregulated industry, the pet rescue industry. A sales ban would only hurt legitimate businesses and responsible, regulated breeders and do nothing to improve animal welfare. If implemented, this sales ban will not directly provide a home for even ONE shelter animal.

Sales bans create a shortage of desirable pets, a black market for dogs and cats, and a rise in imports from other countries. Many "rescue" groups are already importing dogs from overseas to meet the demand for pets. This is happening right now in southern California. A rescue group in LA imports dogs and sells them for hundreds of dollars each. Per the "Dogs Without Borders" website: "We currently rescue most dogs from local shelters and strays, but sometimes we rescue dogs from as far away as Taiwan!....Some of the dogs you see on our site are not here in the States."

There is ample evidence collected by the LA County Veterinary Public Health Dept, the US Customs and Border Patrol, and the Centers for Disease Control proving that a high and rising number of dogs
in the marketplace are being imported into the US for the rescue-shelter enterprise. More than 10,000 dogs enter the US from Mexico each and every year. Some dogs are imported for the rescue trade from as far away as Asia, Europe and the Middle East.

The practice of so-called "humane relocation" is not only outrageous, but is also very irresponsible on the part of the shelters/rescues that participate. There are diseases and parasites in other countries which are transmitted from dog-to-dog or from dogs to humans which put the safety of our citizens and our dog population at great risk. In late 2004, the first case of canine rabies in Los Angeles County in 30 years was confirmed. The dog had recently come in from Mexico. Rabies is a fatal disease that still claims over 50,000 human lives annually worldwide.

The demand for shelter dogs drives the importation of dogs for the rescue market niche. Helen Woodward Humane Society imports dogs on a regular basis from other states and even from other countries as far away as Romania into San Diego County. Bans on animal sales exempting "rescues" would exacerbate the spread of disease.

Claims of high incidence of illness in pet store puppies are totally unsubstantiated. Pets bred under USDA rules and regulations receive regular veterinary care. There is evidence that the pet industry provides more veterinary care for puppies than the public at large. DVM/VPI Insurance Group, the largest provider of animal health insurance, testified during a hearing in California that "preconceived notions" concerning pet store puppies "could not have been more wrong." After insuring more than 89,000 pet store puppies and kittens and handling health claims from a pool of more than 500,000 insured animals, the insurance company reduced its premiums for pet store puppies and kittens substantially by as much as 22 percent compared to premiums charged for animals from other sources. Why? Pet store puppies receive more veterinary attention during the first 12 weeks of age than any other puppies and, as a result, have fewer claims.

California law provides consumer protection for pets purchased in pet stores; however, shelter and rescue animals are exempt from health, safety and disclosure requirements and from the consumer protection laws which are required of traditional pet stores and breeders under the Lockyer-Polanco-Farr Pet Protection Act and the Polanco-Lockyer Pet Breeder Warranty Act. This proposed ordinance would eliminate consumer protection and would encourage the proliferation of unhealthy pets.

While many rescue groups do good work, none of them are regulated. Some animal rescue groups raise the animals that they sell under poor conditions, the very conditions this ordinance seeks to eliminate. Just last January, dogs purchased from a Simi Valley rescue/shelter operation came down with parvo within days of purchase. This operation, like most of its counterparts, offers no warranty nor is it required to by law. Veterinary bills for the purchasers of these rescued pets ran into the thousands of dollars. Consumers have no recourse when they purchase a rescued pet with health problems and resultant big veterinary bills.

A recent study revealed that less than 5% of dogs sourced from pet shops end up in an animal shelter. Commercial breeders are a legitimate source for healthy, well-bred animals. Shelter and rescued animals are a different matter, with unknown health, temperament, parasites and infectious diseases.

We urge you to reject these proposals that would institute counterproductive mandatory sterilization, oppressive animal-related fees, and the prohibition of the retail sale of pets by replacing them with unregulated "rescue" animals.

Sincerely yours,


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

CC: Robert Garcia, Suja Lowenthal, Lena Gonzales, Suzie Price, Patrtick O'Donnell, Stacy Mungo, Dee Andrews, Roberto Uranga, Al Austin, Rex Richardson


 
 
    
                                                         
  
   

.

__,_._,___
Trending—Despite Poor Record, Mandatory Spay/Neuter Proposals on the Rise
What do Pasadena, California; Augusta, Georgia; Madison, Wisconsin; New York City and the state of Rhode Island have in common?
Each of these places has recently advanced legislation to require that all dogs or certain classes of dogs within their jurisdictions be sterilized.
After what appeared to be several years of declining interest in mandatory spay neuter (MSN) policy by animal activists, AKC has observed resurgence in MSN proposals in the last several months, mostly at the local level.
MSN laws can take a variety of forms. They're regularly offered by activists as a quick fix for a myriad of canine issues ranging from dangerous dogs, to shelter intakes, to roaming pets, and even concerns about substandard kennels in other communities. Still, cities that have established MSN have not only found it to be ineffective; it has also created a host of new problems. For example, after Dallas, Texas, implemented MSN in 2008, the city experienced a 22% increase in animal control costs and an overall decrease in pet licensing compliance.  AKC Government Relation's Issue Analysis on Mandatory Spay Neuter presents more information on why MSN is ineffective.
Tragically, some activists push for mandatory sterilization laws even as mounting scientific evidence demonstrates that spay/neuter surgery (ovariohysterectomy and castration)— especially when performed on a young puppy—can have serious long-term negative health consequences. Recent scientific studies reveal that juvenile sterilization may lead to increased incidences of cancer (including osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, lymphosarcoma and mast cell tumors), hip dysplasia, ligament disorders, chronic incontinence and even shortened lifespans. 1,2,3,4   These and other emerging studies contradict commonly-held beliefs about the effects of spay/neuter.
Ironically, many animal rights activists who push for government-mandated sterilization for all dogs also adamantly seek to outlaw minor procedures such as tail docking or dew claw removal. It's not clear why some find it logical to ban these minor procedures, but don't question passing  laws to require major spay/neuter—in some cases only a few weeks after a pup has opened its eyes and learned to walk.
According to the American Pet Products Association, 83 percent of U.S. pet dogs are already spayed/neutered. In many communities, local rescues and shelters have so few adoptable dogs available that they are importing puppies and dogs from other communities and states to offer in their facilities. Ironically, many of these communities are the same ones that are considering MSN.
Examples of recent legislation include:
The Pasadena, California City Council passed a law in November 2014 that would require the sterilization of all dogs and cats within city limits, with intact dog licenses for some exceptions. However, any dog impounded for any reason would be sterilized before release, even if the dog's owners had a valid intact dog license.
The New York City Council is currently considering removing exemptions for the health of young dogs from current MSN requirements for dogs purchased at pet stores or from breeders who sell more than 25 dogs a year. This essentially establishes mandatory juvenile spay/neuter for dogs sold at pet shops and takes away the rights of owners and future owners to make the best possible healthcare decisions for their dogs.
A proposed law in Augusta, Georgia, would require surgical sterilization of dogs six months and older unless the owner holds an unaltered animal permit. Certain dogs would be exempt, including "actively competitive" show or hunting dogs, and dogs with serious health conditions. However, the proposal states that advanced age would not be considered an exempted health condition. Intact dogs no longer actively competing would not be exempt from permitting. The permit could be revoked without due process of law upon receipt of information of any violation of the animal control ordinance—no conviction needed, just a complaint.
A proposal in Madison, Wisconsin, would allow the city's board of health to order a dog spayed or neutered for a variety of reasons if the dog is found running at large three times in its lifetime, or if a dog causes any injury to a person on while its owners property, with no exceptions for an animal that has been provoked.
And cities aren't the only ones considering such laws. A 2014 Rhode lsland House measure (HB 8205) would have limited all Rhode Island residents, with a few exceptions, from harboring any dog over the age of 6 months that have not been spayed or neutered.
The AKC recognizes the value of spaying and neutering mature dogs when the dog will not be participating in a breeding program or competing in events like AKC dog shows that require that the dog be intact. However, the decision to sterilize a pet—and when to do so—rightly belongs to the pet's owner after  consultation with their veterinarian.
For communities seeking to address dog issues, the best approach is to address the cause of the vast majority of these issues—irresponsible ownership—by enforcing leash laws,  supporting and promoting educational programs on dog care, and providing low-cost spay neuter clinics in the communities where such services are needed.  The AKC offers a variety of ways to help.
 
1 American College of Theriogenologists. "Basis for Position on Mandatory Spay-Neuter in the Canine and Feline." http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.therio.org/resource/resmgr/docs/spay-neuter_basis.pdf
2 Sanborn, Laura J., M.S. "Long-Term Health Risks and Benefits Associated with Spay/Neuter in Dogs." May 2007.
3 "Rottweiler study links ovaries with exceptional longevity." JAVMA News. February 18, 2010.https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/100301g.aspx?PF=1
4 "Study finds neutering-disease link in Golden Retrievers."  JAVMA news.  March 20, 2013.https://www.avma.org/news/JAVMANews/Pages/130401s.aspx?PF=1

 
 
__._,_.___
  
 
 
  
              
                                                        
     
   

.

__,_._,___

AKC Canines at the Capitol!

AKC Canines at the Capitol! Stop by and meet some amazing dogs and learn what the AKC does to Benefit Dogs and promote Responsible Dog Owne...