Cany, you only need to read more of this blog than this two-month-old post to know the answer to your question.

Meanwhile, I’m posting from Massachusetts. Most of the northeast has achieved much lower shelter death rates and very high spay/neuter rates with voluntary (sometimes subsidized, sometimes incentivized, sometimes just accessible because of mobile spay/neuter clinics) spay/neuter programs. And accessible adoption hours. And shelters that aren’t spirit-crushing to walk into.

One result is that puppies are rare in shelters here. We basically don’t have puppies in shelters that weren’t shipped in from high-kill shelters in the south.

Many shelters offer puppy classes and beginning obedience classes and sometimes reactive/aggressive dog classes, too, helping dogs to stay in the homes they have.

The Manchester, NH shelter has a pet food pantry—if you can’t afford to buy food for your pets this week, you can stop by and pick up what you need. And so far, they haven’t had to institute any means testing or proof of need in order to keep withdrawals roughly equal with donations. More pets staying in their homes rather than being surrendered.

I realize that none of this is punitive and it doesn’t Punish the Bad Public, but, hey, when I drop off a bag of food at my local shelter, normally about half the dogs will have “adoption pending” signs, while some of the remainder will have “not ready for adoption yet” signs. On one recent visit, every dog but one had “adoption pending”, “adopted”, or “not ready for adoption” signs—and while I was there a couple came in, mourned the “adoption pending” sign on the kennel of a dog they thought would have suited them—and then happily realized that the very similar dog in the next kennel was the one available dog not claimed yet.

This isn’t just because the culture in the northeast is innately different, either. When I was a kid, the shelters were crowded, dark, depressing places where an animal had seven days to find a home before it was executed. Dogs ran loose, and the normal place to get a new puppy was from a neighbor’s litter.

But things changed, and the change started with one rescue deciding that there was a better way, pulling adoptable dogs from shelters, and advertising where they came from. And shelter practices locally started to change.

Your ignorance is showing. Many if not most ethical reputable breeders also work in breed rescue. All breeders are not the same, and many of the good ones hate and fight the millers as much as you do. As for veterinarians, the amount of pro bono and reduced cost work they almost all do is pretty amazing, and nearly every veterinarian I know has taken home a “broken” pet or an orphan or two to provide a forever home.

You are also ignorant about mandatory spay-neuter. In fact, such legislation has failed EVERYWHERE it has been tried, and kills more pets than it saves.

I’m awfully glad you help animals. But you’re not the only one, by far. And by trashing the others who love animals and help them, you are making matters worse.

Not buying the line, Hamils. Not buying it at all.

Explain what YOU two HAVE done for shelter animals in terms of changing laws for better or forcing them to stand to state standards by putting YOUR money where your mouth is, not to mention your time.

I await the precious long list.

It is really sad that you take the position you do, especially you, Dr. Hamil. Sad, sad, sad.

and then switched to oppose on that bill.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/....._comm.html

Now Bad Rap advocates “SPAY-NEUTER PARTNERSHIPS: COOPERATION AND COMPASSION, NOT COMPULSION”
http://www.badrap.org/rescue/s.....rships.pdf

FYI on the process: your letters sent to the Senate do not count in the Assembly. Your letters sent to the Assembly B&P Committee do not count in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. I didn’t make the rules; that’s the system.

We have some sample letter templates to make it easier for those who struggle writing letters. We are also offering to fax your letters for you, at no charge.

C’mon folks, we need more people to get involved. SB 250 has squeaked by with the bare minimum number of votes 3 times in the past 2 months. A huge opposition response like we saw for AB 1634 would have killed SB 250, we KNOW that. Please send your letter to the Appropriations Committee members, and ask your network of friends and club members to do the same.

HSUS shifted from active support and open lobbying for AB 1634 to neutral on SB 250.

ASPCA posted a position statement saying that there’s no evidence that MSN works.

In California, the State Humane Association of California — a federation of 145 humane societies, spcas, and animal control orgs — sponsored AB 1634 but has no position on SB 250.

Local groups like Bad Rap that supported AB 1634 switched to oppose. Many other former supporters switched to neutral.

I think that are having success getting the message out that MSN KILLS, MSN COSTS, MSN FAILS. I think it’s having an impact.

The change isn’t happening fast enough for me, particularly in the California state legislature, but I think we are making progress.

“the ASPCA is not aware of any credible evidence demonstrating a statistically significant enhancement in the reduction of shelter intake or euthanasia as a result of the implementation of a mandatory spay/neuter law.”
http://www.aspca.org/about-us/.....-laws.html

A strong statement would have been say that MSN leads to higher shelter intake or euthanasia rates, which is what the data indicate, and that ASPCA opposes MSN.

The HSUS has no position on SB 250. They are neither pro nor con while they evaluate their official position on mandatory spay-neuter.

Anything else you want to know, I suggest you ask them, and stop slamming me for reporting that despite what you read on your e-mail list, the HSUS is not behind this bill. If you want to discuss the facts and your interpretation of those facts (as other commenters have), then fine. Ascribing secret and nefarious motivations to the folks here, not so fine.

As I’ve said, oh, a thousand times now: I’m very happy the HSUS is reconsidering its position on mandatory spay-neuter, but I don’t think there’s any guarantee that they will follow the lead of the ASPCA and come out strongly against it with a position statement that no longer supports it.

If they DO change position, I’ve written (also many times) that it will be in part because they recognize that no-kill has more fund-raising potential than pro-kill, including pushing for the execution of fight-bust dogs, feral cats (a position they have changed in favor of TNR), and endorsing shelter killings.

Now, take the hate elsewhere.