People, you missed the point...

There's one very brilliant point you do make here and it's this to quote you: ".... I challenged animal lovers to think outside the box and try to come up with a solution that is more reasonable. Plus the fact, I don't think anyone has thought of the possibility that this kind of law could make things worse, not better...." This I'm in full agreement with you---if people are forced to either get their pets spayed/neutered by a certain time or risk a fine, I think you're going to see a lot more pets just dumped in the street --the sad fact is, this happens all the time even WITHOUT such strict laws...I see this all the time here where I live in NY---that's how come many pets become strays to begin with...when the pet owner takes in that pet as a cute cuddly puppy or kitten, and the pet then later demonstrates going into heat..they won't bother and take the pet to be fixed, and it has nothing at all to do with money either, as my neighborhood is a fairly good one--so we're not talking about a slum area..far from it... so instead they take it to an unfamiliar place in their car and just dump it.. I don't know if they have this law where you live but it just as asinine---all pets need to have rabies shots...now I can see this with dogs...not that the dogs necessarily have rabies of course but to protect other people in case they are bitten by the dog..its a safety measure...but it also means that pets that are indoor pets...ones that never go out, like cats need rabies shots as well---why?? The pet never goes out...so why the shots?? I came up across the issue you bring up.... it's here at this link...there was one interesting comment--about enforcing spay/neuter at four months....which is agreeably too young for this--it is: http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1711881.php {Quote} "... Another good reason for opposing AB1634 is that the government should not be forcing us to have potentially damaging surgery performed on our pets. The studies that are often cited to prove pediatric altering is safe for dogs compared early altering with altering done at the usual age of about 6 to 9 months of age, which is still before physical maturity. Studies that compared dogs altered before maturity with dogs altered after maturity and with intact dogs show significant risks, including increased orthopedic problems like hip dysplasia and anterior cruciate ligament ruptures, increased occurance of urinary incontinence, increased risk of several common cancers with poor prognoses, such as bone cancer, and behavioral problems. Service organizations that breed their own dogs, like guide dog schools, have conducted controlled studies on early altering. They found that, when altered early, female dogs were more aggressive and male dogs were more fearful, significantly decreasing the number of dogs that could be successfully trained to perform as service dogs. I believe most pet owners will be happier with an altered pet and I strongly encourage people to do it, but if and when should be up to the owner, with the advise of their veterinarian, not government mandated...." So I'm in agreement there...to spay/neuter at four month is way too young and could endanger the animals health.