Should Spay/Neuter be Mandatory?

04 Sep

I followed an interesting thread on the Craig’s List Pet Forum tonight. Someone was polling the community on whether it should be mandatory that dogs and cats should be spayed or neutered. There was some discussion about breeding dogs, but assuming you could make exemptions for reputable breeders, what do you think?


Posted by on September 4, 2007 in In the News


12 responses to “Should Spay/Neuter be Mandatory?

  1. Cara

    September 28, 2007 at 11:39 am

    I think it should be made mandatory for dogs that aren’t intended for breeding. But it would be hard to prove that.

    Plus, so many dogs at the dog park I go to are not fixed, and the boy ones pee on people to mark their territory. It’s a little obnoxious.

    Fixing your dog can help make them calmer and less aggressive, which is good for all dogs. So if you aren’t intending on breeding them, why not?

    What do the pro-life people say about this. Geesh.

  2. Debi

    October 3, 2007 at 3:02 pm

    As an owner of dogs all my life, and now involved in the Pet service industry, I am 100% in favor of mandatory spay/neuter of dogs and cats. There are far too many animals that are eventually euthanized because of un-responsible owners. Unless you are a breeder of pure breeds, and show dogs, then that would be an exception. I belong to a SPAY/NEUTER orgainazation, we encourage your pet to be “fixed” early on, and we also provide partial payment to help thoses who cannot afford the procedure. It is VERY MUCH an issue, and spay/neutering is the best way to go to ensure less killing of unwanted pets!

  3. Jenn

    October 26, 2007 at 2:22 pm

    Oh I think it’s s great idea. No reason at all to not do it if not breeding. My husbands boss related a terrible story about his sweet female Sheperd mix.. had she been spayed, she would not have gotten uterine cancer. She’d still be alive now.

  4. Bobbi

    October 26, 2007 at 6:33 pm

    Mandatory spay/neuter is actually less effective than voluntary spay neuter – the compliance is significantly less, so few dogs are actually altered. Also, FYI, there are other legitimate reasons to breed dogs – hunting dogs, herding dogs, preservation of rare breeds, etc.

    EDITOR’S NOTE: I absolutely agree that breeding a dog who can contribute to the breed — a dog who has desirable qualities of temperament, instinct and conformation — can be a good thing. And in a mandatory spay/neuter program, who gets to decide which dogs are suitable for breeding and which should not be bred? If a dog is deemed suitable for breeding, does that mean it must be bred? What if there is a dog who might be a great contributor to her breed, but because their are still homeless strays in shelters, she is spayed. Even if it were possible to enforce spay/neuter with all these considerations, what about strays and feral dogs? The whole mandatory spay/neuter idea may be a concept that makes us feel better concerning the pet overpopulation problem, but which — in practice — is unworkable.

  5. Darla

    November 27, 2007 at 5:34 pm

    Where did you get the statistics that “Mandatory spay/neuter is actually less effective than voluntary spay neuter – the compliance is significantly less”? That sounds irrational. Most people, even if they are irresponsible enough to breed non-purebred dogs, do not want to break the law. Why would passing a law make them less likely to neuter? These statements sound like they come from PETPAC, a front for dogfighters who pretend to be dog lovers.

  6. Bobbi

    November 29, 2007 at 7:32 pm

    Darla, you can look up the statistics on mandatory s/n at Best Friends Animal Society and the No Kill Advocacy Center, which both show that mandatory spay neuter is significantly less effective than voluntary. The reason is that mandatory s/n greatly decreases compliance, not just with s/n but also with licensing. It also increases relinquishments significantly.

    PetPac is not a front for dogfighters. PetPac is a lobbying group formed of working dog people, purebred dog rescuers, show dog people, police dog people, herding dog people, and many others who got really mad about AB 1634 and hired a lobbyist.

    I don’t have a strong opinion on PetPac one way or the other, but I probably know 50 people who have donated to them – and at least 45 of the 50 have helped us with rescue, and NONE of them are dog fighters. Several are nationally known working dog people (police dogs, herding dogs, etc.)

  7. Nancy

    January 4, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    I am not sure it should be manditory but I do aggree about people should have to work in the euthanasia room for a day.
    That would be a very fitting punishment for what they do.
    All of my dogs are spayed and neutered even my MH field champoin dogs are altered and will never be bred.
    I work with a dog rescue and see so many perfectly great purebred dogs in rescue that even though mine have done everything they should have to be bred they will never be.

  8. kwing

    April 27, 2008 at 1:46 pm

    My thoughts on the issue is that it will affect the owners and reduce the pet population, but puppy millers will just get a permit and go on mass producing puppies legally. There needs to be a better system.

  9. Naut

    September 25, 2008 at 12:00 am

    Absolutely against mandatory spaying and neutering.

    It does nothing to reduce the number of animals in shelters and increases the overall cost of to the taxpayers.

    Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws – A Failure Everywhere

    City of Los Angeles
    – 2000 �spay or pay� ordinance
    – Decline in licensing compliance since passage of this ordinance
    – Animal control budget after passage of the law rose 269%, from
    $6.7 million to $18 million.
    – City hired additional animal control officers and bought new
    trucks and equipment just to enforce the new law

    Santa Cruz County, CA
    – 1995 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
    – change in shelter intakes and euthanasia rates are no better than
    the state average
    – animal control costs doubled after passage
    – animal control costs “spiraling” out of control, according to a
    Santa Cruz Sentinel investigation
    – Capitola canceled animal services contract with county due to
    rising costs
    – Watsonville threatening to pull out due to rising costs
    – licensing compliance dropped significantly

    San Mateo California
    – 1991 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
    – dog deaths in the areas governed by the ordinance, increased 126%
    and cats 86%, but decreased in parts of the county not governed by
    the ordinance
    – dog licenses declined by 35%.

    Montgomery County, MD
    – mandatory spay/neuter law was passed but later repealed as a failure
    – 50% decline in licensing compliance while ordinance in effect
    – Euthanasia rates declined more slowly than before the ordinance

    Fort Worth TX
    – ended its mandatory spay/neuter program
    – licensing compliance fell off after passage of the ordinance
    – There was a reduction in rabies vaccinations which lead to an
    increase in rabies in the city

    Camden County, New Jersey
    – mandatory spay/neuter ordinance in 1996
    – PAWS NJ comments 5 years later, �An analysis of these statistics
    shows the Humane Society of Southern NJ which operates the Camden
    County Animal Shelter, to be consistently one of the leading, if
    not the leading killers of animals in the state of New Jersey.�

    King County, Washington
    – mandatory spay/neuter ordinance in 1992
    – License compliance decreases since passage of the ordinance.
    – Animal control expenses increased 56.8% and revenues only 43.2%.
    – In 1990 animal controls were $1,662,776. By 1997 animal control
    costs were $3,087,350.
    – Euthanasia rates fell at a slower rate after passage of the

    Aurora CO
    – mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
    – licensing compliance has dropped dramatically.

    Pinellas County Florida
    – breeder licensing since 1992
    – animal control budget increased 75% with revenue increasing only
    – shelter intake and euthanasia rates increased after the law took

  10. Ah yes

    September 27, 2008 at 9:38 pm

    Anybody got a link for this rabies outbreak in San Antonio?

    Mandatory spay and neuter means very expensive dogs and then no more dogs. Or importing strays from overseas, which sounds rather expensive.

    I’m not a supported of irresponsible reproduction of dogs, but precluding future generations from enjoying dogs… what did future generations ever do to you? Mandatory spay-neuter is worse, unless one favors the end of pet ownership.

  11. German Rottweiler breeders

    August 18, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    I believe it should never be mandatory because it is the right of the owner to decide that. But when it comes to stray dogs and other unique circumstances then it would be a different scenerio.

    Vom Bullenfeld German Rottweilers

  12. German Rottweiler breeders

    August 18, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    People will have very varying opinions, so of course it’s kind of a controversial topic.

    Vom Bullenfeld German Rottweilers


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: