Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

twiggysrevenge asked in PetsOther - Pets · 1 decade ago

What do you think about the Bob Barker Bill about spaying your pets?

Do you think they should make it illegal for you to not have your pet spayed or neutered?

Update:

It would allow for serious breeders to continue their practice.

11 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Not sure what he had to say because I didn't read about it. I have wondered if pets (dogs and cats) should be required to be spayed or neutered when the owner resides within a city's limits. Ideally, the cost would be minimal. Only those with a license to breed their pets would be exempt. It would certainly bring the problem of stray animals and unwanted pets to a screeching halt. I realize there would be those "above" the law who believe it wouldn't apply to them. However, it would eventually put the affordable pet out of most people's reach since it would leave only the breeders with pets for sale at atrocious prices. So it likely would not be in the best interest of animal lovers. But an interesting theory nonetheless.

  • 1 decade ago

    no, because that would mean that there wouldn't be any puppies or kitties period, because even the breeders wouldn't be able to breed their pets. I think people should spay and neuter their pets if they don't want to end up with a whole lot of baby animals that they can't take care of, but I don't think that it should be illegal for anyone if they chose not too. People often think that litters are only 1 to 5 babies, but they can be up to 7 or 8 or even 9 babies, and so many babies are not able to be taken care of and have to find a home, yet no one wants to take care of them because either they already have a pet or they're allergic to them, or other circumstances where they can't take care of them and I think this is why the Bob Barker Bill came into place, to not allow other baby animals to suffer without good homes like so many of them do.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think that would be bad. Pets that are adopted from the pet shelter already are required to be spayed or neutered so in a way it is a redundant bill and would only make things hard on pet owners that want to breed their pets. It would probably make owners that want to breed their pets go through all kinds of red tape to get a license, pay special fees and all that crap. No way!

    A better bill would be a bill to sponsor free voluntary spaying and neutering programs.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    If you really think about it spaying and neutering a cat or dog will slow down the kitten population and when people go and get a kitten there won't be any. There will be only older cats and dogs to take in. Also there will be pure breeds and People might not want a pure breed cat or dog. What they are trying to do is to get the older cats and dogs to be adopted and not kittens. I would not want a cat, I would want a kitten to help it develop its personality and that makes a better cat when it is older. I would want a cat that is mixed breed then a cat that is pure breed. I hope it won't pass. I don't think it will pass because certain people have pulled out of it and they are no longer supporting it. They have thought over it and they fiqured out what could happen. At the age of 6 months the cats and dogs will have to be spayed and or neutered and people will have to show prove that it was done and if they don't have this done it will be a 500.00 fine.

    It is only in California that they are doing this.

    If you think about it there won't be any animals in the future because of this.

    Bob Barker is behind this.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Joan Z
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    When you consider that for all the shelters in the country to be cleared out, every house should have 14 cats and 3-4 dogs. Unless you are willing to make this sacrifice, think hard about how not crazy Bob is. Every cute little kitten born, means another cat has to die. This situation has to be taken by the horns and get under control.

    P.S. I have done some of my part, I have 15 cats, most I didn't get them as cute little kittens, unless I kept one from a litter I rescued, they were rescued, adopted, or they found me as strays. And they are all fixed.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I think Bill needs to find a hobby and stay out of politics. As much as I rant and rave about people spaying or neutering their pets, the fact is that is their choice whether or not to do it. And that is exactly as it should it be. JMHO of course.

  • 1 decade ago

    He is nuts.

    But most pets could be spayed or neutered at least 90% but I don't think they will ever get them all.

  • 1 decade ago

    What? That doesn't make sense to me.....if EVERY pet is spayed/neutered then how would they reproduce? We wouldn't have any more pets.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think gov't already minds our business too much! Suppose, for instance, I wish to breed, responsibly, mind you, MY pet? Should I be penalized for the misdeeds of other, irresponsible pet owners? It's BS is what it is, pure and simple. Some people definitely should not have pets, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, what say?

    Source(s): responsible pet owner ALL MY LIFE. 44 yrs. old presently
  • herne
    Lv 4
    5 years ago

    I hear what your asserting, I stay in So Cal and once I heard that I laughed because of the fact how are they ever going to enforce that. particular, i think of human beings could desire to be greater to blame whilst it incorporates their pets, like do no longer throw them away whilst they circulate. they could desire to make the attempt to discover a sparkling place the place they are able to nonetheless have the animal they wanted to start with, do no longer unload the animal it is not this is fault. human beings could desire to awaken and get animals from the kilos/shelters, etc, those animal choose residences too. besides if human beings pick animals and are not waiting to pay the value to repair them, the pound will restoration them for you. even inspite of the incontrovertible fact that the animals are not broken, they're going to restoration them for you. lol Sorry, i could no longer face as much as that one. it is going to exciting to work out how they are going to enforce having human beings restoration their animals. I truly have a cat who became homeless whilst she confirmed up and claimed me and desperate to stay, some one shifted her into independent ( had her fixed ). i haven't any papers to coach that it became already carried out, i don't be attentive to who did it or perhaps the place it became carried out so as that i will't even coach that it became carried out. permit's settle for info some human beings do no longer even have their canine vaccinated for rabies, or have a licenses for his or her canine. What makes those human beings think of they are going to get their canine/cats fixed? it is going to likely be exciting to work out how all of this works out!

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.