Comments on: Forced spay-neuter laws don’t save pet lives or taxpayer money

By: michael wade

michael wade — Sat, 16 Apr 2011 03:10:08 +0000

MY PETS HELD HOSTAGE BY ANIMAL SERVICES!
Hello,
What happened today is an event that ALL Louisville residents need to know promptly. I have two registered yellow labs, that are my family pets. I am, in all aspects, a loving, happy, and wonderful owner towards my pets. Today, they escaped from our “fenced-in” yard by digging a whole under it. A few hours after I had discovered their disappearance-and putting up numerous “lost dogs” flyers- I recieved a call that they had been picked up by our Kentucky Animal Services( Jefferson County branch). I was thrilled to know they were safe, and went to go pick them up. After I identified my pets in the kennel, I was told that in order to get my PETS back, I would have to pay numerous fees; Which consist of: redemption fee ($30), Boarding fee ($10), Impoundment fee ($25), Microchip ($25), license fee ($59) Violation fee ($30) and numerous others. BUT…. this is the real scare and what needs to be addressed to ALL Louisville residents. They told me, I no-longer have the right, since my dogs escaped and BROKE THE LAW, to choose if I want my pets neutered, vaccinated and mircochiped. They said, I cannot retrieve my own pets, until they have both been neutered, microchiped, and caught up on the vaccinations. Note: my dogs are champion labs, in which we bread for numerous purposes. They are not strays, abandoned, or abused animals. They are our loving pets. The Animal Services has a 96-page ordinance that says this but people are NOT notified of its existance until it is too late. I asked the clerk and her boss if they or their bosses have read that ordinance, and they said, “No”. I am fighting this,nonetheless, and look forward to my victory over this battle, and the safe, UN-NEUTERED, arrival of my pets to our home. The spreading of this story will prove beneficial in numerous ways. A few of those in which consist of: Peoples pets get loose constantly at increasing numbers, many of which are loved by their owners. When informed, the people of Louisville about this ordinance that everyone is not aware of, this will prevent the heartache,trouble and the spending of a lot of money for the countless numbers of your own towns-people by empowering them with important notification of this “hidden” ordinance. Another way in which this will benefit people, that the high amounts of pet-owners, which is the majority of people in Louisville, will have the spreading of this vital information to thank for all their prevented trouble and useful knowledge regarding their loving animals; We want to help the people, and you can gain from this as well. Spread the word.

By: Gina Spadafori

Gina Spadafori — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:50:42 +0000

You might want to read more carefully, Linda, before you shoot YOUR mouth off.

Caveat writes, “… warrantless entry into any building that is not a dwelling, just for a look-see …”

What part of “is not a dwelling” are you unable to comprehend?

By: Linda

Linda — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:39:58 +0000

Caveat - why don’t get your facts straight before you start spreading false information. Your remarks about warrantless entry are totally inaccurate. If you were to bother to read the proposed legislation thoroughly, you would see that the warrantless entry does NOT apply to dwellings, which basically means backyards and fields - and it has nothing to do with just wanting a “look-see”. Do a little research before you shoot your mouth off.

By: Christine S

Christine S — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 04:13:02 +0000

@HH
I didn’t say need, though, I said require, which is really semantics, but I did intentionally try to avoid saying “need” for the reason you pointed out. I’ll roll with it though.

Of course I don’t need a Wii, but if my Wii slips out of its leash, or something and becomes lost, I’d rather make sure there’s not going to be a litter of Wiis that may end up homeless or worse. Except, you know, my Wii isn’t alive, so let’s pretend it’s a much-loved intact dog, that just spawned a litter of puppies. Not only would I have lost my dog, which I can’t even imagine, but I’d have also just contributed to homeless puppies.

Worst case scenario, yes, but it is possible, and it’s not a risk I’d be willing to take. But, I suppose you’re right too, if you want to leave your dog intact, that’s your choice.

But, I also think such a scenario (or even a more person-at-fault-scenario with the same outcome of puppies) is more likely for the ordinary person rather than a frequenter of this blog. And, that’s where low-cost s/n and education come in.

By: JenniferJ

JenniferJ — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:24:00 +0000

Just to clarify my above statement, when I said I would place an intact dog with this woman, I meant a dog that I personally bred, NOT a rescue. We alter all rescues. If they are not able to be altered for medical reasons, they are placed on long term foster care, sometimes lifetime, but rescue maintains legal ownership.

By: H. Houlahan

H. Houlahan — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:17:40 +0000

>short of a medical reason I still do not quite understand why a non-breeder would require an intact dog.< Really, whose place is it to decide what someone else is permitted to "require?" I have an acquaintance, not a breeder, who was denied a variance to keep, I believe, five well-trained and inoffensive dogs. She'd had to move suddenly to care for her ailing mother, and found herself, to her great surprise, out of compliance with a local ordinance -- so she foolishly outed herself by asking for a variance. No complaints from the neighbors, who were unaware of the dogs. But one person testified against the variance because "Nobody needs five dogs!" So random strangers get to decide what we "need" when it comes to our animals. Nobody needs a pitbull or Rottweiler. Nobody needs a dog with testicles or ovaries. Nobody needs a dog over 25 pounds. Nobody needs more than three pets total. Right? In my opinion, my neighbor does not need his ridiculous racing car, my doctor does not need to vacation in the Caribbean, no one needs a McMansion, a sailboat, a private airplane, a Wii, a leather sofa, premium cable service, a Big Mac. Yet strangely, nobody seems to feel they have to justify those things they have to me. I don't get to decide.

By: JenniferJ

JenniferJ — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:39:38 +0000

I recently talked for several hours with a woman who had just lost her bulldog to old age(12-1/2). She grew up with dogs and has had male, intact dogs her entire adult life.

She does not show or breed, her parents had working dogs, some neutered some not, and she simply prefers the subtle and sometimes not so subtle differences in an intact male dogs temperament and drive. She is a medical doctor as well and is very well informed of the risks and benefits of spay and castration. She has references and a solid track record with her dogs going back 30 years.

My placement agreement and contract states that companion puppies are to be altered. Any rescue we place is of course sterilized prior to placement unless medically dangerous. However, I would consider placing an intact dog with this particular woman on a non-breeding agreement.

Most behavior issues are best addressed and prevented with early socialization and early training. I am seeing an increasing number of dogs coming into our rescue who have already been neutered. The surrendering owners seem surprised that the dog developed aggression towards other dogs or people or is hard to control. They often seem perplexed that neutering them did not prevent or cure these issues. I’m afraid that to some extent the general public has been sold on the idea that neuter will take the place of training and socialization.

By: Judy Warling

Judy Warling — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:22:13 +0000

I have refered many people to the so called Low cost spay/neuter places in lake county and when they go, they are told that it can’t be done or they are put on a wait list, or they make to much money (they are just one step from the poverty line) For those of you out there that say, low cost spade/neuter is available, PLEASE get more information out there when and where it is. If it is in the downtown ares, a lot of people can’t get there. They work or do not have transportation. PLEASE try to have it at different spots.

By: trucorgi

trucorgi — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:40:20 +0000

>short of a medical reason I still do not quite understand why a non-breeder would require an intact dog.<

Any dog being shown in AKC conformation must be in tact. Doesn’t necessarily mean they will ever be bred. Aside from show dogs though, I want my dog to mature, growth plates to close etc. before altering. I do not want the state to tell me that I have to do it by a particular age. My vet and I will decide when the optimum time is for my individual animal.

By: Christine S

Christine S — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:37:36 +0000

@ Christie Keith-
Shouldn’t we turn that equation around, and have reasons TO do surgery on our pets rather than reasons NOT to?
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I tend to overlook the obvious.

As for the medical reasons, I think that’s another area that the-average-dog-owner can benefit from, on both ends of the spectrum. Joe-who-wants-to-breed-his-dog-because-she’s-so-well-behaved might be more likely to consider spaying if he finds out there are increased health risks, while Mary-who-wants-her-dog-nuetered-asap will be more likely to wait, or if necessary hold off completely if it’s explained that there’s a higher risk of complications than there is benefits.