http://www.ocregister.com/arti.....ter-animal

There is also a comments section. Dr Jim from these blog comments is active in them as drjames. LauraS is doing a slam bang job of countering him, but it could use more commenters from those opposed to MSN in general.

If you have forgotten, Dr Jim tried to use New Hampshire (a state funded voluntary program to help financially disadvantaged residents) to justify SB 250, a state mandated unfunded ordinance guaranteed to punish low income pet owners.

Anyone else think it’s a complete coincidence that NH was used to support SB250 by proponents in the bill analysis? And carefully worded to give the impression it’s MSN when it’s not????

My account with the OCR is not letting me comment, I have an email in and hope to have it rectified soon

Thanks. So for some reason, people in her country are more savvy about dog reproductive systems. And it sounds like they use some sort of abortion drug when females get pregnant by accident. I wonder what it would take to get animal owners in this country to follow suit on both.

Unaltered cats that roam free are a whole different topic.

“I would love to know how they do it.

Again, what is “normal/baseline” for people in those countries? Do they never let dogs meet each other? Do they usually have only one dog or keep only one sex? Or do they have plenty of “oops” litters but kill any “excess” pets themselves, instead of taking them to a shelter?

Comment by Mary Mary — June 4, 2009 @ 12:18 pm “

I wrote to a friend of mine who has dogs in Holland and had her read this blog and write me an answer. She gave me something I can post—without her name. But it will give you an idea of what Europeans think, because she is not alone (I’ve heard similar before). Here’s what she told me:

“Lots of people over here see Americans indeed as barbarians in reference to
neutering/spaying dogs in general. We donot understand that at all. Because
we simply donot neuter or spay any dogs without a very good reason. And that
is mostly a healthreason (sickness). So the main reasons for
neutering/spaying is because of medical reasons.
Some people donot like that their female comes into heat; problems with the
hormons, the bleeding so too much of dirth in the house and problems with
keeping them several weeks in the house as well. And also not taking any
risk for a litter.
The males mostly are helped because of a too dominant charakter. And lots of
people think that the charakter will be less dominant afterwards!
So mostly females also are helped because they got an infection (mostly
after their heat). Or get an infection during the pregnancy or after giving
birth.
We also think that it is really barbarian to neuter/spay a female especially
before their first heat.
Not only that but it is proven also to be very wrong! And also the chance on
other forms of cancer are higher incase you neuter/spay before the first
heat.

People over here very are very capable of handle their intact males and
females together.
Also without too much of accident litters. And when an accident by
coincidence comes than suitable people are found for
the puppies often very quickly. But it really does not happen very often.
Nowadays also some people use a medication to break of the pregnancy.

I hope you can do something with my comments.”

http://www.spayusa.org/about/about.asp

http://saveourdogs.net/2009/03.....tatistics/

http://www.hsus.org/pets/anima.....on_us.html

Santa Cruz County’s per capita annual spending for animal services is $11.92, having doubled since mandatory spay/neuter passed. That is extremely high. If all of California paid that much, yearly animal control costs statewide would increase from $250 million to $453 million.

California’s state and local governments are being crushed by huge budget deficits. California cannot AFFORD the cost of mandatory spay/neuter.

By comparison, Calgary’s per capita annual spending for animal services is $3.30 (US dollars). If all of California paid that much, yearly animal control costs statewide would decrease from $250 million to $125 million. Costs to the taxpayers would decrease to ZERO using the Calgary model, because Calgary’s animal services are entirely funded by licensing fees.

Santa Cruz County’s per capita kill rate for dogs + cats is 16 times higher than Calgary’s.

Everybody loses with mandatory spay/neuter. The citizens lose with high taxes, and the dogs and cats lose with their lives.

Yep, there are a lot of shelter animals, but there were once, 1975 anyone?, 4-5 times MORE.

Irregardless however of whether or not the homes are out there (and Maddies Fund and others have all crunched the numbers and they are)
Mandatory Spay neuter DOES NOT WORK.

In every case of it’s application, impounds have at least initially gone up. And in places where there were eventual declines, they were out-performed by neighboring regions, so MSN still continues to cause more death (Santa Cruz).

And licensing goes down, and fewer dogs and cats get vaccinated.
Costs soar as funds that could be going to outreach and low cost services and TNR programs are spent on fruitless, targeted, ineffective enforcement of an unpopular ordinance.

Enforcement of leash laws etc… becomes more sparse even though the failure to enforce these was a contributing factor to the issues MSN purports to address.

People working TNR become easy targets for harassment. And ferals continue to be slaughtered in shelters. Why else would Alley Cat Allies be so adamantly opposed to MSN?

When the “reasonable” MSN ordinance fails, instead of admitting the error, MSN proponents push for MORE laws and inspired ideas such as 5-10 year moratoriums on breeding. The end of vital genetic diversity in many breeds and the effective extinction of many as by 5 years fertility in many breeds of dogs is already ebbing.

MSN has failed the real world acid test. It fails the Scientific Method most of us learned in what, sixth grade? It has been a disaster in many places and a sick sick joke in others. Lake County with MSN and the worst kill rate per capita in California and killing well above the national average. Los Angeles instituting MSN and seeing a nearly 300% rise in costs while reversing their precedent setting trend of shelter number reduction through services and outreach

MSN COSTS, FAILS, KILLS.