Previous   Next

Do you think pet owners who are not licensed breeders should be required to sterilize their pets?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on June 28, 2007

Browse the archives

Photo of Jon Francis

“No. Just in case they want to breed them later on if it turns out to be a good pet. You don’t need a license to breed most animals.”

Photo of Ann Leiker

“I think they should. Like Bob Barker says at the end of every ‘The Price is Right,’ ‘Have your pets spayed or neutered.’”

Photo of Beau Winfrey

“That’s a tough question. On the one side you should have the right to breed your own pets. But at the same time there is an overpopulation of animals, and I hate to see so many animals being put down.”

Photo of Jenni Brooks

“I think it should be the owners’ decision, but there should really be more incentives for people to sterilize their pets. I just don’t like the idea of making it mandatory.”


jonas 10 years, 10 months ago

I suppose the far left wingnuts will think this is perfectly wrong despite the fact that they think its fine to murder unborn babies.

Bobbie Ward-Hinds 10 years, 10 months ago

Perhaps if it didn't cost $100+ to have the procedure done then more people would have their animals spayed or neutered???? This is especially true for farmers and others who have feral cat populations. We have over 40 cats that have been dropped off, wandered in or reproduced on our property - there's no way we're spending $4,000+ for vet care. Thank goodness for the spay/neuter clinic volunteers - we had four cats spayed and neutered plus microchipped, rabies shots, and wormed for less than one spay job at the local vet.

This question actually comes from a bill in California that is currently up for vote. The same state where you don't "own" your animals in San Francisco, you're it's guardian and the same state that elected Arnold as gov.

Rightytighty 10 years, 10 months ago

Jenni Brooks has a great point the cost of keeping a pet up perfect health is a costly expense.

H_Lecter 10 years, 10 months ago

I don't know about sterilizing them, but a good washing with an antiseptic soap couldn't hurt.

gkwhdw 10 years, 10 months ago

Our little community is getting too bossy and controlling when it's someone elses idea whether to spay your pet or not. MYOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Get a LIFE and worry about your own backyard!

Linda Endicott 10 years, 9 months ago

Well, I don't know...are human couples who aren't married required to be sterlized because they don't have a "license" to reproduce?

I know there are far too many unwanted cats and dogs in this society...but I think requiring something like this would backfire drastically. If it was required, there would be a LOT of people who would take in strays now who would decide not to if this was a law.

And I agree with bobbie...for vets who speak publicly about spaying and neutering and the unwanted pet population, they sure do charge a lot for the procedure.

Lower your prices, and you'll find a lot more people bringing in their pets voluntarily for spaying and neutering.

Grundoon Luna 10 years, 9 months ago

No. This is some dictatorial, despotic, facist Bullsh*t.

Way to be with the histrionics, Jonas.

jonas 10 years, 9 months ago

Azure: Shhhhhh! Don't out me! Can't you see I'm trolling here?

Crossfire 10 years, 9 months ago

Job Opportunity: The City of Lawrence Kansas is now hiring. Position: ---------------Pet Reproduction Abatement Enforcement Officer. ---------------Officer will need to check pets for evidence of sterilzation. ---------------Officer will issue warnings, citations and make arrests. ---------------Pets will be executed on the spot if they are acting illegally. Call 1-800-TailCop to apply.

Kat Christian 10 years, 9 months ago

Bobbi I so agree with you. the procedure is way too costly to the average consumer, which discourages people from having they spayed or neutered, much less shots. By the way it is healthier for the animal to get fixed - studies have been done to prove they live longer too. I think there needs to be more education about pet ownership. People who want a pet need to understand that it is a lifetime commitment. I can't watch the Animal Channels pet patrol because it is just so sad and makes me angry to see the animals they find have been so mistreated and negected. We need better screening capabilities to make certain people don't mistreat their animal. If someone is a bonified breeder (which should be monitored closely to keep them honest) that is one thing, but the average citizen breeding I think should be looked at and controlled somehow becuase there are so many animals mistreated, left to stray, used for target practice and sent to shelters to be uthinized. There are plenty of animals to go around so limiting breeding isn't going to make animals hard to get.

costello 10 years, 9 months ago

I agree with Jenni. Personally I think all pets should be spayed or neutered. But I don't think we need a law about it.

"the procedure is way too costly to the average consumer, which discourages people from having they spayed or neutered, much less shots."

Before you get the pet, you ask yourself, "Can I afford to have this pet spayed or neutered now (or within the next 6 months, if it's a kitten or puppy)?" If the answer is 'no', don't get the pet.

I can understand having financial reverses after you acquire the pet which might make it difficult to meet all of its needs. But spaying or neutering is done very soon after getting the animal. If you can't afford it, then you can't afford to get a pet right now, imho.

acg 10 years, 9 months ago

Dammit Jonas you almost got me! I read that and I started to rant in my head and then I paced around the office a few times with that vein in my head starting to bulge out and then I looked at who posted the remark and I cussed you a little for that. You suck! But it got my blood pumping. That's always good in the a.m.

craigers 10 years, 9 months ago

If adults aren't licensed breeders, can we sterilize them? :)

jonas 10 years, 9 months ago

Well it's too late NOW. . . . I guess I'll just have to wait for ANOTHER irrelevant topic that I can somehow fit it into to get my kicks.

Just like a true right-wing ideologue.

Compy 10 years, 9 months ago

I think this should apply to human reproduction only. That will reduce the number of abortions, while still keeping it legal.

Steve Mechels 10 years, 9 months ago

Dang, only took three replies to get to the topic of abortion.

Janet Lowther 10 years, 9 months ago

Why can't people mind their own d*m business?

Wake up people! This country has been legislated, regulated, licensed and ordinance-ed to the point of no longer qualifying as a free country.

Democracy is not freedom. It is the tyranny of the majority.

Freedom is having your rights respected, and your real rights, amongst which are the rights to life, liberty and property are not granted by government, they are inherent to being Human.

Flap Doodle 10 years, 9 months ago

What about the wild animals out in the woods? They're doing it like, well, like a bunch of animals.

acg 10 years, 9 months ago

Can we forget about regulating the birth of animals and start regulating the birth of people instead? I think people should have to pass some sort of test before they start popping out offspring. Clearly, a lot of folks should not be breeding. ; )

Adrienne Sanders 10 years, 9 months ago

Some of you are way off on the issue of cost of having a pet spayed or neutered. As Costello said, that is part of the cost of owning a pet- if you can't afford the spay/neuter, what are you going to do when the pet gets hurt or sick? Just let it suffer b/c you can't afford to take it to the vet?

Also, if you adopt from the Lawrence Humane Society, it's $75 for a cat or $95 for a dog that is already spayed/neutered and has had some of its shots. If you adopt one that was already fixed when it came to the shelter it's only $35.

I don't think the government should mandate this but I wish people had the sense to spay/neuter. There are millions euthanised every year.

packrat 10 years, 9 months ago

The government should not be regulating this.

sgtwolverine 10 years, 9 months ago

That sounds like it's just asking for trouble. So no.

hawklet21 10 years, 9 months ago

If people want their animals to have a litter or they don't want to spay or neuter, then they had better plan on finding a good home for each new animal that comes along. It isn't fair to let your cat or dog run wild and get knocked up, and then dump their babies off at the shelter when you can't take care of them.

Grundoon Luna 10 years, 9 months ago

R_I, I don't care who dreamed it up it is still facist.

Grundoon Luna 10 years, 9 months ago

Sounds like many of you are for chlorinating the gene pool.

The Humane Society also has grants that help pay for spay/neutering but there have to be funds available and income requirements apply.

mom_of_three 10 years, 9 months ago

We adopted a dog from the Lawrence Humane Society 7 years ago, and the adoption prices includes neutering. We checked with the same vet a few years later to neuter a puppy given to us, and for a private individual, it was over 5 times the price. We didn't want to bother our neighbor, who was a vet, but ended up talking to them about it, and our neighbor did it for a very agreeable price.
There are some vets in this town who run up the price of services in this town to afford their new additions, etc. Our neighbor vet couldn't believe the price our (old) vet was charging for stitches, care, etc. We now drive 30 minutes away to save over 60-70% off from what our old vet charged. Cheaper than what we could find in town. If you find the right vet, you can afford to own a pet.

Crispian Paul 10 years, 9 months ago

craigers (Anonymous) says:

If adults aren't licensed breeders, can we sterilize them? :)

Seriously, I know you are kidding, but really, this is not a bad idea right? You need a license to hunt and drive, but any a-hole can have a kid. Then screw them up.

mom_of_three 10 years, 9 months ago

By the way, both of our dogs and cats are spayed and neutered. Didn't have to pay for the cats, (two different) vets spayed them for free in exchange for a home......

sgtwolverine 10 years, 9 months ago

I'm wondering: if pets came only from licensed breeders, wouldn't they become more expensive?

PrincessConsuelaBananaHammock 10 years, 9 months ago

Very good points brought out today

I agree that it is VERY expensive to have a pet sterilized. I also feel that it should be the owners decision and not made law, but pet owners need to be responsible and make sure that if they have a pet that has not been sterilzed the are prepared to take responsibility for what may happen. Also, it amazes me that when you go to a humane society to adopt a pet they ask you to fill out pages upon pages of paperwork to insure that you are able to care for your new pet. They take several steps to make sure that the animals that leave the shelter are going to homes where they will be cared for, fed, and loved...... YET any idiot in this country can walk out of a hospital nursery with a newborn infant and no one stops and says, "ya know I don't think thats such a good idea" --- perhaps we need to focus more on sterilzing people who don't care for their young then worring about pets!

mom_of_three 10 years, 9 months ago

What's that quote from "Parenthood?" "You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming a#@(*le be a father."

Frederic Gutknecht IV 10 years, 9 months ago

Population control is very important. It's more important, and impossible, for people but mammalian pet population control is a good idea. I don't see mandatory neutering flying/working. I do think breeding pets costs us all and that if you want to breed your animal, then you should pay for the privilege. I can't see a way to make that work, since determining the cost to society is rather difficult. It seems that If you can't manage to afford neutering your pet, or that cold heart necessary to kill it if it's sick, then you can't afford a furry pal. Life isn't fair or easy. It's brutal, deadly and it's hard to change that with a law.

What the heck. I'll go ahead and wallow in my pet nazi mud hole. As a pet nazi, I'd charge a neutering fee for each new critter, whether it's neutered or not. I'd tax all mammalian pets. I'd kill NO-KILL shelters. They are rotten, stinking, torture chambers of doom. If someone truly loves animals, they can offer free neutering, vet care and mammal tax rebates for those that can't afford pet ownership. Cruel stuff , to be sure, so to compensate I'd make it easier to have pets in the workplace! Grumps and snifflers would not be tolerated, I could stay home! Wow. Being a pet nazi really goes to your head. I take it all back except for the grumps in the workplace part.

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

RI: "This is a tool dreamed up by the left."

You should be more specific, RI -- this is a tool dreamed up by "somebody" on the left, not the entire left of center community. Lets not go trashing all liberals because of one crack-pot idea, which this is. That would be like saying "the right" is responsible for everything uttered by Ann Coulter. We should just dismiss this one as a goofy idea and move on, without jumping on the blue / red wagon.

However, I support Jonas's and Blue's comments and I too am in favor of sterilizing Nazi abortionists.

pelliott 10 years, 9 months ago

No people shouldn't be required to sterilize their pets. I do think the humane society is correct to require sterilization for adoption of pets. I think most pets should be sterilized. I do think people who aren't responsible pet owners should be required to slaughter, cook and eat their pets.

jonas 10 years, 9 months ago

R-I: I'm not sure about your axioms, but your illustration is the coolest!!! 8^D

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

"You must agree with me: As our great nation quietly becomes more liberal, out personal freedoms and liberties are being usurped."

Are you talking about the rights and freedom to marry the person of one's choosing, not be held without charges, to privacy, to not have your phone tapped without a warrant, to a transparent government -- and you are blaming the liberals??? I'm confused.

If what you say is true about liberalism meaning less personal freedom, then the most conservative nations must have the greatest freedoms: Iraq, Afghanistan, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia -- well, I guess you see my point.

While the freedom to smoke in a bar or light off a bottle rocket might be taken away, you fail to recognize that this adds the freedom to work in a smoke-free environment and the freedom to celebrate the birth of the nation without fear that your house will burn down because of the randomness of aerial explosives. It is all a matter of perspective.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 10 years, 9 months ago

There was a guy in Franklin County who thought fixing an animal was against god. Pretty strange guy.

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

Well put, Easy. There is certainly hypocrisy on both sides, and even in the middle. No doubt about it. People who shout for freedom, then say you can't decide to marry someone of your own gender, or those who scream for freedom of speech, but want to have a public figure fired for making a racial insensitive joke on the radio.

RI, you claim to want "free private enterprise unfettered by government," but do you really want to go back to the days of American sweat shops and child labor? Or when a company could force you to work a twelve hour day and replace you without recourse or compensation if you get injured on the job? Do you really want to go back to industrial age concepts of safety in the workplace? Do you really want Wal-Mart to have the "freedom" to lock its employees in at night? In other areas of life, do you truly believe that laws that "limit" your rights against drunk driving or excessive speeding should be repealed simply because some selfish fool wants the "freedom" to put the lives of others at risk?

RI, you are buying into the conservative media hype against modern liberalism. I'll bet if you were younger you even have one of those bumper stickers that reads "Mean People Suck," when what you really intend is "People who don't let me do whatever I want whenever I want Suck, even if what I want to do could possibly harm other people."

Look at the truth, RI, and quit buying the hype.

jonas 10 years, 9 months ago

"post-modern liberalism influenced by neocon traits of communist-conservatism with drips of lush color-rich scents of Reform party aspects."

Are you saying that there's something wrong with post-modern liberalism influenced by neocon traits of communist-conservatism with drips of lush color-rich scents of Reform party aspects? I myself have heard that it's a vibrant political scene.

Linda Endicott 10 years, 9 months ago

I work 15 hour days, Bea, and I live in Kansas. And no, it's not against the law.

Up until the last couple or three years, my job was also considered exempt under FLSA, and any overtime was paid on this basis: all hours worked were lumped together, and then divided by some secret formula devised by the federal government. And if, using that secret formula, you received at least minimum wage for each hour, it was perfectly legal.

Still is, for a lot of folks. Fortunately, the state decided that my job category didn't fall into the FLSA rules. We're no longer exempt, and the employer now has to compensate us at time and a half for all time over 40 hours. Unfortunately, the company I work for sees this to mean that they can severely restrict any and all overtime, and if you go over 40 hours, you'd better be able to prove that it was totally necessary.

And the contract I signed with my employer is exactly as RI described...I can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all.

Job safety? my job, we're supposed to have all kinds of safety equipment...and the company rarely if ever provides it. Could they be turned into OSHA for this? Sure they could...but none of the employees will do this...they need their jobs, and they're too afraid of losing them for that little "no reason at all" clause...because management always seems to find out who the whistleblower is. And even though there's supposed to be a law against punishing whistleblowers, you know it still happens all the time anyway.

As for Wal-Mart locking its employees in at night...I'm pretty sure they do that in Ottawa already. It's a superstore, and open 24/7, yet after 10 PM the south doors are locked so that no one can enter OR leave by those doors. Considering the size of the building, I'm pretty sure this is against fire code, but so far they seem to be getting away with it. Besides, I thought that all doors had to remain unlocked during business hours??

mick 10 years, 9 months ago

All pet owners should be sterilized. The desire to own pets is a genetic defect.

Kat Christian 10 years, 9 months ago

Best VET in town Jarret Animal clinic - she's honest and affordable.

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

RI, you focused on the 12 hour work day part, but ignored all the rest, such as child labor, being replaced without compensation if injured on the job, etc... How convenient. Also, what you call irresponsibility others call freedom. I think it is extremely irresponsible to smoke in an enclosed building around other people, but others whine that it is a freedom being taken away.

Admit it, your claim that a liberal America means loosing your personal freedom is incorrect.

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

liberal does not equal socialist -- nice attempt at sneeking that one in.

When free will is used on a topic like mixing alcohol and driving, you dismiss that as necessary due to irresponsible behavior. Thus the societal rules (laws) you like are to manage irresponsible behavior, yet the rules you dislike are socialist in nature. You see not allowing people to smoke in the work place as an infringement on personal rights, yet it clearly is meant to stop irresponsible behavior that can harm others. Sounds like what I said earlier -- it is all a matter of perspective.

By the way, how does allowing gay marriage hinder personal choice? That is clearly a liberal idea that allows for greater freedom, which is in complete contradiction to your silly assertion about liberalism denying personal rights. Does it bother you when you attempt to read the world as black or white, but then you keep finding all sorts of shades of grey?

Emily Hadley 10 years, 9 months ago

Maybe a distinction when you register your pet for its tags? I think it would make sense to charge less to own a neutered pet in the city, since we all have to pay for animal control. The only people I have ever known in Lawrence who don't neuter their pets are unlicensed breeders (my classy neighbors) and those who won't spend the money on it (also my classy neighbors).

Every bred or accidental animal is a shelter pet's death, whether it be that dumped puppy or the one who won't get adopted because the person got a pet from a breeder instead. We are lucky to have a low-kill shelter, but it is very limited in resources and the number of animals it can care for.

Then there's the task of enforcing that people's pets are tagged...

pelliott 10 years, 9 months ago

my gosh fixing a dog is not a liberal or consevative stand. now fixing an election is, both sides. The decision to spade a cat usually crosses the political lines or can't you have an opinion of your own, not party line? If it isn't covered in the platform, you don't know what to think?

beatrice 10 years, 9 months ago

You spade your dog, I heart my cat, he clubs his wife.

I don't have one for diamonds.

Py, I don't like it when people say "Oh," when they mean "zero." Oh is an exclamation of surprise, zero is a number.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.