The law would fine owners in violation $500 with a 30-day window to spay or neuter the animal to negate the fee. Breeders and work-dog owners will be able to purchase intact permits for their professional purposes.

 

The law, which would require that all cats and dogs 4 months or older be spayed or neutered, is based on a model in place in Santa Cruz County for the last 12 years.

 

“They have had a 64 percent decline in shelter numbers and a 75 percent decline in their euthanasia rate,” said Lee Heller, a Central Coast grassroots coordinator. “That’s our best evidence that this works. And they still have plenty of pets in Santa Cruz County. Nobody is going short of a cat or a dog.”

 

Lisa Peterson, a spokesperson for the American Kennel Club, said that while the organization supports the spaying and neutering of animals not intended for breeding, the law is misdirected, taxing responsible breeders for irresponsible pet owners.

 

“California already has a licensing fee structure locally and people who own in tact dogs are already penalized by sometimes paying twice the amount to have an intact dog versus a spayed or neutered animal,” she said.

 

But the California Healthy Pets Act is designed to replace the old licensing fee program and empower Animal Control to punish irresponsible pet owners. According to Alex Traverso at bill-sponsor Assemblymember Lloyd E. Levine’s office, D-Van Nuys, the first draft of the bill set the cost of intact permits at $100. But the fee was rejected for being too high. As a result, the fee has been redefined to relate to the existing fees for licensing that it would replace.

 

“It specifies that the fee may be no more than is reasonably necessary to support the cost of the program,” Heller said. “So if they’re substituting a permit program for a licensing program and there’s only slightly more paperwork involved, they can’t charge much more. That would be unreasonable.”

 

Some critics have remarked that the bill would charge breeders and intact pet owners twice for the privilege of owning intact pets. But the bill specifically states that there will be no duplication of fees.

 

Another issue of concern surrounding the bill is the age at which the mandatory spay and neutering is to be done. President of the Channel City Kennel Club, Merrillee Ford said that the age is too young and detrimental to the maturation of larger breeds. But the American Veterinarians Association does not share that opinion, said General Manager of Los Angeles Animal Services Ed Boks.

 

“In the state of California, in animal shelters, we’re required to spay and neuter all our animals at 8 weeks,” he said.

 

Education and its impact on shelter and euthanized animal populations has also been a hot topic among critics of the bill.

 

“Shelter populations actually have decreased over the last 20 years and the reason is because of public education,” Peterson said.

 

While the numbers reported in California support that statement, with annual euthanized cat and dog numbers down some 130,000 from 1995-2005 and annual sheltered numbers down some 100,000 in that time, Traverso and Boks claim that the numbers are underreported.

 

“I would challenge anybody who thinks this problem is being addressed to spend a week in a shelter where animals are being slaughtered and then come out and say that this problem is being addressed,” said Zak Meyer-Krings, one of Levine’s legislative aids.

 

Boks said, “Between March and September of every year, we take in 1,000 orphan neo-nates every month. These are kittens and puppies that are too young to survive on their own. Most of these animals have to be killed because people are being irresponsible with their pets.”

 

That irresponsibility is costing the state $260 million a year for state operated shelters and an additional $150 million to reimburse private shelters, Boks said.

“That’s what this bill is designed to do is end the killing as well as the inordinate cost in the state of California,” Boks said.