The Future of Dogs in an Animal Rights America
by Walt Hutchens



Order your copy here
Bulk prices available

The Purple Apron Project

Grooming Aprons and Towels embroidered with 'Fight Anti-Pet Legislation. It Affects Us All"

Mandatory Spay/Neuter

MSN laws are so commonly proposed as a one-size-fits-all answer that they are worth separate discussion.

In a the fewest possible words -- Don't go there.

These laws are generally structured to place pets in three tiers:

Sterilized pets are licensed at a nominal fee.

Unsterilized pet license fees are high -- $100 is common -- and generally limited in numbers, that is a kennel or breeder license may be required for as few as two unsterilized animals.

Breeder licenses are costly -- $250-$1000/year and often accompanied by punitive requirements such as standardized record keeping and mandatory reporting, facilities standards such as surfaces that can be hosed down, and no notice/walk in inspections. These requirements are of course impossible of compliance by the average in-home breeder of one to a handful of litters per year so the effect is to drive the best breeders to stop breeding or leave the area.

The theory is that the way to reduce what is termed 'overpopulation' (although excessive euthanasias of adoptable adults is the more common problem) is to reduce the birth rate and that intentional breeding is the main source of births. Both of these beliefs are false and accordingly, these laws don't work.

1. These laws don't reduce euthanasias -- in fact they often increase them. The reason is that the number of owned, supervised, unsterilized animals is much greater than the number of puppies/kittens they produce in a year's time and retention is sensitive to laws that increase costs. If an MSN law is passed and enforcement is strong enough to actually change behavior, the largest single effect is increased abandonment and the abandoned animals wind up dead on the streets or in a shelter.

2. Because licensing is often an enforcement point for MSN laws, such laws make licensing percentages drop like a stone. "Okay, if she has to be spayed for $150 to avoid paying a $100 per year license fee, I just won't license her -- in fact I won't license any of our pets."

However ...licensing is also a checkpoint for rabies vaccinations and a substantial fraction of owners only get rabies shots at the time of license renewal. Falling licensing rates means falling rabies vaccination rates -- a highly dangerous public policy.

3. MSN laws are most easily enforced against those who have to be most visible, particularly the careful home breeders who can be located via national and local club referrals, web sites, and advertising. As outlined above these laws are based on the belief that intended breeding is the cause of shelter euthanasias but the reverse is true -- pets from the best (most visible) breeders are the *least* likely to be found among shelter intakes because contracts requiring return of no longer wanted animals are the norm in this group, indeed some breeders now use a guaranteed repurchase clause.

I have spent hours reading newspaper stories and digging out what statistics can be easily found and I have yet to find one locality where MSN had a favorable effect. Some statistics for San Mateo County (California) are on line; MSN was a failure there after about a year and a half although it has not been repealed so far as I know. Montgomery County (Maryland) passed an MSN law but a government watchdog agency concluded that it wasn't working; it was repealed two years later. Los Angeles County passed the toughest MSN law anywhere but it was quietly deemphasized in favor of much more effective measures (discussed above) after a couple of years.

The usual natural history of these laws is a year of vigorous enforcement, a year of less enforcement, then enforcement only against people who make someone in the animal control establishment mad. Of course at that point, many otherwise good pet owners are violating the law.