City Council Catching Up On Spaying And Neutering?
By Walter Moore, Candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles, MooreIsBetter.com.The City of Los Angeles kills tens of thousands of perfectly adoptable and adorable pets every year. My platform includes -- as it did in 2004 -- mandatory and free spaying and neutering, to cut down on the number of unwanted pets, and the resulting carnage.
State Assemblyman Lloyd Levine recently proposed the same thing on a state-wide basis. And now, in April 2007, the L.A. City Council is considering doing it. So reports the Daily News.
This is a good thing! Please take a minute to let your City Council Member you support this measure. Every person, regardless of political persuasion, should support the humane treatment of animals. We need to stop the cycle of unwanted births followed by mass killings. We need our city to be better than that. We need to live up to the name, "Los Angeles."
Posted by Walter Moore @ 4/18/2007 08:12:00 AM
23 Comments:
I was at the meeting yesterday. Here are some notes from it.
It still needs to be approved in the State. Today the City just endorsed the bill. It was a long City Council session but it passed 12 for, none against. Marie Atake, Ed Boks, Teri Austin, Mary Catalano, Daniel Guss, Judie Mancuso, Cheri Shankar and others were there to support the bill. It was a wonderful positive discussion. Alarcon said "why don't we just make this mandatory in LA City? Why do we have to wait for the State?" They promised to write a motion to do it in the City immediately. Rosendahl said he's not a breeder though he did let his dog have three litters. He gave the puppies to friends. He said the City must enforce licensing. There is revenue there. Garcetti was upset because he didn't know that the canvassing program was no longer active. He reprimanded Boks for not telling City Council that they ended a program they approved. Rosendthal reprimanded Boks for not enforcing current licensing which would get the pets spayed and neutered. Cardenas said we need more money for more vouchers. If this becomes law, the people will need free and easy spayneuter surgeries for their pets. The City must do this.
Boks stated that "LA leads the country in spayneuter." No, it doesn't. He said "1,000 neonates a month come into the shelter but we're expanding our bottle baby foster program!" And how many were fostered last month? Only 46. He said $18 million of the $25 million budget goes to euthanize unwanted animals. That's $818 per animal when the rest of the state spends $105 or something? He said they did 39,000 vouchers in 2006 and will do 44,000 in 2007. Previously he said he'd do 59,000, another time he said 120,000. He said all the spay neuter clinics will be open early next year. He said two will be open in a month, one of them is NC. I really doubt that. 35 speakers for it, 4 against. The ones against had very weak arguments.
Did you see Boks state that we have enouch vouchers to spay and neuter all unaltered pets in LA? We sure as hell do not. Does anyone really know how these vouchers work? If you are a senior citizen or poor and receiving welfare, you can get a voucher. The voucher is only good for $30 off the surgery at certain vets. The surgery costs $40-$200 depending upon size, type and sex of animal. You only get $30 off. Some people don't have any money. They will not be able to afford this. They also have no way to get to the clinics. Most of these clinics are not in the poor areas. These people don't have cars. The spaymobiles can only do so many surgeries. Boks again lied to City Council. The Council members do not realize they were lied to.
Heck, Boks stated that "LA took a giant leap to nokill in 2006!" The euthanasia rate did not go down at all. This is the first time it's not gone down. The past General Managers all reduced the euthanasia rate. It was at 41% when he got here and it's still at 41%.
Boks promised to make LA nokill by 2010 if not 2008. At this rate it will never happen.
at least the judges spayed AV's legal team.
I don't understand at all why everyone's so quick to move off that. especially Walter.
dude, that's the knockout punch, I'd be starting the count if I was you.
The Mayor was handed his greatest defeat, his whole education reform rested on this. The guy's an idiot, officially, and anyone letting this slip by I would have to question.
forgetting vouchers for a minute, what else do you offer?
at least the judges spayed AV's legal team.
I don't understand at all why everyone's so quick to move off that. especially Walter.
dude, that's the knockout punch, I'd be starting the count if I was you.
The Mayor was handed his greatest defeat, his whole education reform rested on this. The guy's an idiot, officially, and anyone letting this slip by I would have to question.
forgetting vouchers for a minute, what else do you offer?
Regarding licensing, did you notice the annual fee for dog licensing went up 50% from last year?! Even though the fee is "only" $15 a year, this is still a huge increase. Imagine if Villaraigosa et al. had the guts to charge unlicensed (i.e., illegal) immigrants $15 a year or more rather than giving them mucho freebes. They strain the social infrastruct
^
infrastructure alot more than canines..
An ordinance should be passed which requires the spaying and neutering of all illegals.
Walter I am all for being good to animals but here is one we will disagree on. Why do we need a government program here? This is another city "function" that I think the private sector and non-profits could handle better. Pet supply companies could fund the SPCA to provide the services the animal shelter does at less cost and better service. And I am familiar with the fact that there are 100s maybe 1000s of animal rescue groups out there. I think they are better inclined to deal with this than the city.
Some time back my mother who is partially disabled and a senior citizen had a cat "adopt" her and then threw off a little of kittens. The City did absolutely nothing for her but I found a cat rescue group that was an amazing bunch of people who really helped us out. They were able to take these cats, get them medical care, get them fixed and then adopted out.
Sounds like a good solution to me.
Mayor Sam,
The rescue groups are wonderful but they can't handle the 56,000 animals a year that come into the public shelter. The private groups are always at maximum capacity and animals are still left out on the streets. The City and private groups need to work together.
Legally animal services comes under public safety. It is the city's responsibility to keep people safe from animals, safe from dog bites, cat bites, rabies, accidents caused by stray animals... It's their job and we're paying them to do it. I think the budget was $25,000,000 for 2007. There was also that $150,000,000 bond measure to pay for the new shelters and clinics.
Matt - Education is a separate issue, and a separate post.
Sam - The reason we need government intervention is to protect the stray and unwanted pets, who, of course, have no lobby of their own. It is the humane thing to do.
It is also the fiscally responsible thing to do, rather than give more tax money to special interests to build more shelters at inflated costs.
If I am elected Mayor, I will stop the killing of healthy pets IMMEDIATELY. It's just plain wrong to kill innocent animals who want nothing more than a loving home. Plus, pets are good for people: companionship, security, health -- you name it.
P.S. Just so we're clear: I also intend to save the sick pets. The only cases where a pet should be "put down" is to alleviate suffering.
Seniors can get dogs free if the dog is eight years or older, the animal is nutered, licensed, and chipped for free. An eight year old dog, depending on the breed, needs medical care just like senior people do..
A senior must pay $85.00 to $100 for a puppy, or under than eight years, neutering $100.00, license $15.00 and chipping $25.00.
I think that they think an old dog is easier to handle for seniors, but ultimately the animal suffers.
I tried to save two animals last year and wouldnt pay the fees...give it to me for free and I will be responsible for it for its life or mine...whichever comes first. Should it be mine...my friends will take care of it.
My other complain is we are unable to rent if we have an animal...unfair....I pay for other peoples children, schools, food and medical, but I cant be given enough to have a free puppy
I think I am going to have to find a more libertarian city to be move to. Any suggestions?
The seniors for seniors program was never approved. It does not exist yet. I agree that people should be able to rent apartments with animals. Maybe just a security deposit.
The euth rate in LA did not go down in 2006! What is the Mayor going to do about it? Boks has failed LA. All the other managers were able to reduce the euth rate but thisnokill king has failed.
12:15:
You put your finger on a way we can go to "no-kill" in a hurry.
My platform includes requiring landlords to accept pets, PROVIDED the landlord will not be liable for damages or injuries caused by the pet, and will be able to evict if the pet becomes a nuisance (e.g. incessant barking, owner doesn't clean up after pet, etc.).
Sam -- Once you have a dog, you can't go back. Besides, I think even a libertarian can make a case for government intervention to protect children, the mentally ill, the handicapped, and pets.
Walter, as you wisely noted, spay / neuter needs to be 100% FREE to anyone who shows up and asks for it. It will save money in the not so long run. 100% free and available at EVERY shelter, not just the money-grubbing veterinarians' offices.
Unfortunately, this (and many other points) were lost on Boks. But I think that City Hall is finally wising up to this Wisenheimer.
The more I read your commentaries, Walter, the more I like you and your chances for elected office. Please don't change once you get there.
Who was the jerkoff who said that this was going to hurt TOURISM???
What a maroon.
Walter's promise to stop killing animals immediately is more than enough evidence to show that he's unprepared and unqualified to run the city. If he doesn't understand the ramifications of such an idiotic suggestion, he shouldn't be allowed within 100 yards of City Hall.
How about shelters for homeless and KENNEDY REPUBLICANS?
8:51- no, more like "macaroons."
8:42 -- I won't change. No one who loves dogs and cats would ever accept the ongoing and unnecessary slaughter of our little innocent friends.
As much as I like pets, Los Angeles has bigger issues to deal with. Maybe we should make Moore the mayor of our animals, since this issue seems about the limit of his capabilities.
Killing pets at shelters is an IMPORTANT issue you moron. Your comment shows how ignorant you are. The pet overpopulation problem impacts the city in many ways.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home