Why to they always leave out the cats?  Their are hundreds of stray cats here and that could be prevented too.

Thanks for the info, this does help explain the budget crisis. How many other decisions have been made like this?  We need more info like this about the city budget and the decisions that are being made.  This one takes the cake.

The animal control officers that are making contact for licensing will be carrying information for low cost spay neuter programs.  The SPCA has a voucher for free spays and neuters for feral cats.  These cats must be unowned and wild - catch them and the SPCA gives you a voucher to get the cat altered.  Then you can release the cat and that cat will no longer be reproducing.   This is known as a catch and release program. 

Low cost spay and neuter is available through the HOPE foundation and the SPCA with assistance available through Kern Humane society.   

BAKRES - less than 8% of dogs in the City of Bakersfield are licensed - this program has the ability to more than pay for itself.  If  the officers do their job and license, they should be making money for the City and paying for low cost spays and neuters.  Ultimately this will bring money to the budget - not take it away. 

Everyone please send an e-mail to our City Council and request that they work smarter by targeting our specific problem and resolve it sooner instead of later.

KATE...it doesn't matter if dogs are licensed or not here, but what does matter and what will make a difference is for our community to require pets be spayed and neutered. 

Pup...you are right and always have been.  People who are going to s/n their pets already have and will, so we need to require those that currently do not s/n thier pets to be responsible one way or the other, time for them to either s/n now or get a legitimite exemption.

All the rescuers efforts are for naught if the community doesn't work together to put an end to our local nightmare of pet overpopulation - killing 1,600 pets per month is not acceptable anywhere, but especially not in a community with our relatively small human population. 

We need everyones help on this, and that includes local legislators -- this dilemma is in their hands now...rescuers and volunteers are doing everything they can and sadly, are quickly running out of resources.

The city does need our input on this.  I sent a e-mail and hope everyone does.  This project is a waste of money and besides we need relief from pet overpoupulation here asap.  I'm with pup tell them to cowboy up. : )  

Giving information?  They already have the info...please, give them citations for violating us all.

Bakres...I completely agree with you about the city's need to target our specific problem here. ;o)-

catzzz...as usual you are right about the cats! ;o)-

Katelump...I understand that the two officers that will be canvassing for dog license compliance will be carrying information about spaying and neutering pets.  But don't you understand that people that are willing to take responsibility to spay and/or neuter their pets are already doing so?  The responsible, local pet owners and taxpayers are being forced to pay for those that won't s/n their pets.

Besides, s/n information is already available in our local media and elsewhere, (and almost daily in the Bakersfield Californian).  If two officers are going to canvass, instead of carrying info about s/n pets -- they should be handing out citations to those that aren't s/n their pets, (and instead are dumping their litters at our local shelters at our expense). ;o)-

Hey all, this dog license scheme is not a legitimate or valid means to raise funds for low-cost spay/netuer services for our community even tho it is being touted as such.  Only ten cents on every dollar collected are going to be used for low-cost s/n services, the rest goes to the general fund.  This is just the local officials trying to make a big show of helping animals here while collecting more revenue for the coffers.

Bak Res

We are doing little or nothing to help the animals now - 10 percent for spay neuter is a step in the right direction. 10 percent towards saving lives rather than just funding euthanization of  most animals that come through the shelter is the right step.

In case you haven't noticed the general fund is drying up!  We all benefit from the general fund!   I enjoy the parks, the Fire Department, the hospital and law enforcement protection .  I will gladly help fund all of those things while I help get other animals spayed and neutered while paying my dogs licensing fees.  10 percent is far better than the nothing that we are doing now.

Katelump...the city is still doing little or nothing.  Ten cents on the dollar is not a step in the right direction -- not in face of the travesty this community is facing. And not when probabilities are that this program will yield 0%.  The City Council picked this program to reduce pet overpopulation instead of a more practical, proven, effective solution. 

This was definitely the wrong step and as Lois pointed out on her recent blog, "animals are dying while we dither." ;o)-

I am very happy that the SPCA s/n day event was a success and I would like to thank you and the others that worked there that day.

I am also very happy that the H.O.P.E. Foundation is coming back to Bakersfield.

But the number of animals altered would be much higher if we had a msn ordinance here because msn would bring permanent low-cost s/n clinics to our area -- people could schedule appts. at their convenience during any of several days per week -- there would be no waiting list, (during which time lots of pet breeding can still occur).

Dog licensing enforcement may be a start, but remember, if done in lieu of a program that could help even more animals, it isn't a start, it is a roadblock.  Let's check back in a few months and see if our euth rates have been significantly reduced. ;o)-

Pup

Where exactly do you think these mythical permanent low cost spay neuter clinics will appear from?  Do you have somebody in mind that is going to suddenly set up these low cost permanent clinics? 

Please let me know - I would love to be in touch with these permanent low cost s/n clinicians because they are hard to come by right now.

Laurie Weir

P.S. pup maybe you should exercise caution with your accusations and harmful words and you would not find yourself in a position that requires you to apologize to people.  But thanks for your apology - I'll accept it. 

Katelump...That is because low-cost s/n clinics will not set up in an area that shows no economic feasibility or potential for same -- which is why I have been saying that a msn ordinance here would help our community in more ways than one -- all would benefit; most of all -- animals and taxpayers.

P.S. You have made accusations and stated some very harmful words in your prior comments, most of which I have graciously overlooked --  but everyone makes mistakes and I don't mind apologizing for mine.  I am not on the blogs to insult anyone -- I simply want to see our community get an effective program in place soon to reduce our pet euth rates as soon as possible. ;o)-

Pup

I am so sorry that you found it necessary to delete some of your comments on other blogs.  Again, anything I say on a blog I would say directly to a person in conversation.

Really - if you are dedicated to spay and neuter I would hope that you would be volunteering your time at the spay neuter clinics.   

 We definitely have a need and a clientele to support low cost clinics as witnessed each time a clinic is held.  Attracting a permanent low cost spay neuter clinics is difficult.   Furthermore,  why should a capable veterinarian permanently cut his/her income? 

Katelump...anything I say on a blog I would say directly to a person in conversation as well.  I have never said anything on a blog here or anywhere else, that I would not stand by.  Deleting old comments/blogs is kind of like defragmenting a computer -- nothing more, nothing less.

Working at the spay neuter clinics is not the only way to help animals in our community.  I do animal rescue work and help animals on a daily basis.  There are plenty of us in this community that do animal rescue work, even though you don't see us at the occasional county spay neuter clinics, (those only occur every sixty days or so).

In a answer to your question, a veterinarian should not have to permanently cut his/her income.  That is what I have been trying to tell you about low-cost spay neuter clinics -- sustained high volume business makes a low-cost clinic a viable endeavor -- everyone benefits.  But that sustained high volume business, (such as that generated by a local msn ordinance),  is necessary to attract a permanent low-cost spay neuter clinic.  Such an ordinance would help our community and our pets in many ways. ;o)-

Pup

Once again - you are not paying attention!  H.O.P.E. will be doing clinics every other week starting July 14, 2008.  Not every sixty days - every other week.  Here is that low cost spay neuter option that you like.  If the demand increases so will the number of trips per month.  So - Pup  - I hope that you are telling everyone you know that low cost is available through the SPCA starting July 14th.

Pup - we do not have MSN and yet we are offering a low cost spay neuter option.

"Working at the spay neuter clinics is not the only way to help animals in our communityWorking at the spay neuter clinic"  Pup you are always talking about spay/neuter so I thought working clinics would be a good fit for you.  Spay neuter gets those "euth numbers" down and saves taxpayers money!

So "defragment" away - I think erasing your blogs is a way of getting rid of ill conceived words.

Really now Pup - you would tell someone to their face that they just sit around trying to look important   or let's see    you would mock a person's surname during your regular conversation with that person?   From the few times I have seen you at the ACC meetings your manners appeared to be better than that.

Katelump...We have had low-cost s/n options such as the occasional county events, as well as the services offered by the HOPE Foundation, in the past -- that isn't anything new.  The problem is that those services have been available and still haven't put a dent in our local euth numbers.  We need a way to get more people to s/n their pets -- so far, (for years), nothing has worked to effectively bring that about -- according to the results in other communities, msn can effectively bring that about and substantially lower euth rates -- isn't that what we all want?

Getting rid of ill conceived words?  Not mine. ;o)-

I do not like too many laws and/or unnecessary laws, and I sure don't like government always looking over my shoulder.  But when it comes to protecting children and animals -- laws are the only effective way to safeguard them.  And yes, I know and believe they must be protected and so yes -- I will go along with laws that have been proven to accomplish that end.

If you look at our records here, you will see that we do have and have had low-cost s/n programs available here, but as I mentioned in my comment above -- that isn't the real issue here.  Problem here is that few people will get their pets s/n and that is resulting in high pet euth rates.  How do we get more people to s/n their pets?   Look at what has and hasn't worked and what is working in other communities.  A mandate to s/n pets works to get euth numbers down according to studies and stats -- it isn't just an idea -- it has been documented.  Why not implement that system here to protect our local pets?

No one here has explained why they leave out the cats, when we have a huge cat overpopulation problem here.  (Except pup, because msn would reduce the cat overpopulation).  Until everyone stops fighting against msn, our pet euth numbers are gonna keep rising and more pets have to die.  What is the big deal about msn?  I am ready for msn here and now.  I want the suffering for pets here to stop now.  The sooner the better.  Why is everyone against an ordinance that would prevent pet overpopulation?  That makes me wonder what their real agendas are.

If everyone that decides to have a cat would s/n their cat or cats, then we wouldn't have such a large feral pop. of cats and if we did, they would already be s/n and couldn't reproduce.  Everyone knows that a msn ordinance is the humane thing to do.  Why do they keep coming up with other programs that aren't going to work.  Nothing changes here.

How exactly does low-cost spay/neuter leave cats out in the cold? Last I checked, you could spay/neuter both cats and dogs at the HOPE and SPCA clinics. Hey, the SPCA even has FREE TNR (trap, neuter, release) vouchers to get feral cats fixed. It's a new program and it requires neighbors working together to get the cats trapped and brought it, but it has already brought the count of feral kittens in my parents' neighborhood from over a dozen last spring to one this spring (from the one female that avoided the traps, always have a couple of those).

See, no laws or even money required to deal with the feral cats locally. All you need is a little time and community involvement to get the vouchers, trap the cats and transport them to the vet. I just wish this program was advertised better so that more communities would take advantage of it. TNR is a proven method to deal with feral cat populations. MSN wouldn't even make a dent on feral cats since ferals are unowned animals. Most of their numbers come from breeding amongst the ferals, not from abandonment of previously owned animals.

Shwaine...you are right, low-cost s/n does not leave cats out.  I think you have a great idea of a little time and community effort to get all of the feral cats altered.  But it would have to be all of them because just two cats can produce hundreds of kittens in just a years time...and each one of those kittens can do the same.

But back to your idea...when is it going to happen?  Have you organized a group?  Who all is going to participate?

Evidently, there are not enough animal rescuers and/or people to get enough cats altered to get control of our local pet overpopulation problem here.  If there were, we wouldn't be having this problem.

Why not mandate s/n so that everyone will have to do that?  At least temporarily until the problem is under control? 

Hey, I've dealt with my neighborhood and my parents' neighborhood except for that one female that just refuses to be trapped. I've told all my friends that I'm willing to help out with similar efforts in their neighborhood. It's something called acting locally. Maybe if more people did it, we'd have less of a problem. Organizing a group isn't going to help though if people aren't willing to "act locally". It's not as if you can go around hopping fences and trapping cats in people's backyards without their permission. MSN is equally toothless because again, you have no enforcement of the mandate, which renders the mandate moot except to a small portion of law-abiding people (who probably already have their animals fixed and their dogs licensed).

Shwaine...you should talk to people in communities with a msn ordinance and you will find out it works for everyone.  There is enforcement of msn -- called fines and it hits people where it hurts -- in the wallet.  If they aren't going to put value on their animals, the mandate quickly does that for them.

Pup

Now you get it!!!  Just replace MSN with Mandatory licensing.   In your own words Pup, "called fines and it hits people where it hurts -- in the wallet".  The licensing fee for an unaltered dog is $75.00 per year  or the owner has the option to have their dog spayed or neutered and pay only $15.00 per year ($10.00 per year if they buy a three year license). 

Now do you get it Pup?  Licensing is just like MSN because most people will opt to have their pets spayed or neutered to save on licensing.  Let me quote you,  "If they aren't going to put value on their animals, the mandate quickly does that for them."   So see - licensing works just like MSN.

Laurie Weir

Katelump...I wish you were right about that, but according to studies done in other communities, licensing doesn't significantly reduce pet overpopulation, (I wish it did since that is what the City of Bak has chosen to do).

Keep in mind that the licensing fees have been reduced for altered dogs here in our community for years -- yet our euth rates are still going up.

Also...what about the cats -- are dog licensing fee discounts for altered dogs going to motivate people to alter their cats?

Pup

For the Umpteenth time - you keep disregarding the fact that although mandated, licensing has been grossly under-enforced for many years.    So with enforcement of mandated licensing I believe that pet owners will be forced to at least consider spay/neuter just to get their licensing fees down.  We now have the low cost spay neuter option to help them get the animals spayed/neutered. 

Pup - Columbus took a chance and found a whole new world!  Let's give enforcement of licensing a chance at making a difference in the pet overpopulation problem.  

All those ads in the paper every day and still we are being forced to destroy over 1, 500 pets per month here.  How about a moratorium on breeding until we can get our shelter numbers down?  I can't think of a valid reason to allow this many pets to continue to be destroyed every month, while people continue to fill our community with more and more puppies.

Sioux...I understand that there is no quick fix...but how about a fix that is targeted at our community's specific problem? 

Katelump...Okay, let's give enforcement of licensing a chance at making a difference in the pet overpopulation problem.   But how long until we decide that we should do more about reducing our shelter and euth numbers?  The SPCA, Alpha Canine and local rescuers are always full, and KCAC is always full.

Please let us know how the licensing program is working so far.  They have been at it for over two weeks, so how many license fees have been collected since they started two weeks ago?  I think it is time to supplement the license program with other effective programs to get the euth numbers down, (the sooner, the better).

Pup

Your lack of attention to detail frustrates so many - including me.  The program has not formally started because the hiring of the enforcement officers has not been completed. 

But - H.O.P.E. pulled out of the SPCA today with 25 cats and dogs on board for the first low cost spay neuter collaborative - that should make you happy.

Are you serious -- they haven't started?  After all that you have said about how great your licensing enforcement program is and how it is going to take care of the problem, etc. -- and they haven't even started yet?  When are they going to start?  

When are you going to take pet overpopulation seriously?  Isn't this a problem that should be addressed -- or -- should have been addressed a long time ago?

Apparently Pup has never been through the hiring process for a county job. First there are weeks (maybe even months) searching for appropriate candidates. Then there is another series of weeks screening those candidates to get the final picks. Then there's the process of doing all the appropriate checks (health, background, etc) on the final candidates before they can start work. It can take months at times....

Pup

Don't be so fragile!   I am serious about pet  overpopulation everyday.  I took pet overpopulation very seriously again just yesterday when H.O.P.E. pulled out of the SPCA parking lot with a van full of cats and dogs to be spayed and neutered.  July 28th is the next  opportunity and people are already signing their pets up for that trip.  Pup encourage people to get their animals spayed and neutered - teach them about the H.O.P.E opportunity.  Help get the word out about a way to fix the problem not just talk about the problem.

The City is obligated to hire appropriate personnel to handle these licensing positions.  The problem of pet overpopulation did not crop up overnight and it will not disappear overnight. 

Take a breath Pup - you are going to be okay.  Yes I know that animals are dying everyday and that is not okay with anyone involved in this situation.  Be angry with those that are continually breeding and dumping - not with those that are trying to effect change.

I think it is great that the City and County are at least addressing this issue instead of totally ignoring it as they have in the past.  So change is in the wind and the problem is starting to be corrected.

Why not require the universal spaying and/or neutering of pets so that everyone, (not just those of us that already s/n our pets), will be required to s/n their pets? 

And so that people that let their unaltered pets run free on the streets would be appropriately fined and those fines could go to provide animal services in our community? 

This preventative measure would result in a significant reduction of animals at the local shelters, and the animals that did end up there would have a chance to be properly cared for and then adopted, (rather than destroyed after 96 hours to make room for more and more and more).

And, the majority of animals coming into the shelter would already be s/n and our limited funds wouldn't have to be spent on s/n of all shelter pets.

Currently, boxloads of pups and kittens are being dumped at our local shelters...that is a whole lot cheaper for people to do than to s/n their pets and prevent those litters in the first place.  Why not require these people to s/n their pets like the rest of us do?

This dog license plan is never going to work anyway.  The City is not facing the problem of animal overpopulation and this plan will do nothing for the cats.  Half of the problem here and the costs for taxpayers is all of the cats being dumped everywhere. Dog licensing is just gonna waste more time and funds instead of  solving the real problem (which has nothing to do with dog licenses).

Catzzz

Time for a wake up call for you.  The City is trying to address the animal overpopulation issue. 

Low cost spay/neuter programs such as H.O.P.E.  cover both dogs and cats.  In fact, the H.O.P.E. van pulled back into town on Tuesday with a load of 25 dogs and cats that were just spayed/neutered.  It worked beautifully and the next H.O.P.E. van will pull into town on the 28th of July to pick up another load of dogs and cats to be spayed and neutered at a very low cost to the owners.

The County/SPCA clinics are split between dogs and cats and are very successful.  Furthermore, the SPCA has a catch,spay/neuter and release program for feral cats - free vouchers are available at the SPCA.  

SO, as you can see, the ball has been put into motion on low cost spay/neuter and Bakersfield is finally beginning to address the issue of animal overpopulation.

The problem did not crop up overnight and it will not go away overnight.  Regardless of MSN or no MSN - action is being taken and progress is being made.

Bak has done nothing, to date, to address the local animal overpopulation issue -- and our euth numbers continue to go up, not down.

The H.O.P.E. Foundation returning to Bak, has nothing to do with the city or county.  The local SPCA agreed to sponsor H.O.P.E.'s pet s/n services here in order to facilitate their return to Bak.  (The reason H.O.P.E. stopped coming to Bak the last time was because of the 40% cancellation rate -- people weren't showing up for their appts. -- that is how important it is to some people to follow through on getting their pets altered).  H.O.P.E. needs to average around 100 pets per run to make it feasible for them to come here....so once again, they probably will have to discontinue if all they are getting is 25 pets at the time.  Besides, H.O.P.E. was here for almost a year the last time and our euth numbers continued to go up, not down.

The County/SPCA clinics have been available off and on as well, but our euth numbers are going up, not down.

The ball has been in motion for low-cost s/n off and on for years, but that doesn't necessarily put people in motion to follow through and get their pets altered. 

What is wrong with requiring the people to s/n their pets like the rest of us do?  If a requirement was on the books, these people would have to at least pay a fine and that might just motivate them to be responsible.

Pup

Yes Pup,  we all know that our prisons are so empty  because we have more and more laws on the books.  Get real - people continue to break laws regardless of how many laws there are on the books. 

Bakersfield SPCA, Kern Humane and Alpha Canine are taking the burden off of H.O.P.E. and making it cost effective for them to come for as few as 25 animals.  H.O.P.E. is glad to be of service to Bakersfield and you are wrong about H.O.P.E.needing 100 animals per trip to break even. 

The City took the first step by at least discussing this long hidden dirty secret known as animal control - which has been run more like an animal abatement program.  Enforcement of existing laws gives the citizens of Bakersfield the opportunity to comply  without burdening officers with a new law to enforce.  Furthermore, we have a low cost spay/neuter option to assist people with getting their animals spayed or neutered which will allow pet owners to save money on their licensing fees.

More and more animals are filling the shelters in part due to the downturn in the economy.  With people losing their homes (NOTE: Bakersfield is #7 for foreclosures in the United States) their animals simply become a burden and many have no choice other than relinquishment to a shelter.  I am sorry that you choose not to believe this fact - but it is true.  The economy is coming into play in this situation.  This is driving "euth numbers" up.

Just to educate you on a few points:

1.  The SPCA chose to start with a small number of animals for their first few trips with H.O.P.E. just to see how it  would all work out.    All of the first trip spots were sold out.    The second trip on July 28 is more than half full and filling up quickly.  So there is a definite interest in low cost spay neuter without MSN.

2.  H.O.P.E.'s first go round in Bakersfield (the effort was in conjunction with the County Animal Control) failed because the venture was not well promoted, fees were not collected in advance and with no perceived value people simply walked away from the opportunity for low cost spay/neuter for their pets. 

3.  The City is looking at kicking off their licensing enforcement program within the next four to 6 weeks.

So once again - things are slowly beginning to change for the better.  I reiterate - this problem did not come up overnight and it will not go away overnight.

Your argument makes no sense.  You extoll the benefits of laws out of one side of your mouth as you rail against laws out of the other side -- all in one breath.

This law will not fill up the prisons, nor would it 'burden officers' as you have indicated above.  On the contrary, it would give the officers a tool with which to execute their duties of 'animal control.'

If foreclosures have increased our shelter numbers that is one more compelling reason to get the intake numbers down quickly by way of prevention now; instead of a few weeks from now after your hiring process is completed and resources are spent to canvass for dog licenses, in the hopes that dog lic enforcement will motivate people to s/n their pets.

I understand that this problem did not come up overnight, but allowing it to continue for years is a travesty.

Pup

Take a breath - your approach to MSN indicates that you believe people will simply run to the vets' offices if MSN were to be put into place.  As usual you read half of everything and dissect the information into the bits that you can rave about.  

The point about the prisons was that new laws do not make citizens responsible or law abiding.  If new laws made people law abiding our prisons would be empty - wouldn't they?  You read half of the statement and ASSUMED that the message was to imprison people.  I think not!!!

The issue is that enforcement is what will make any law have teeth.  We have not enforced licensing or encouraged spay/neuter. The City is about to enforce the mandated licensing law and I hope that the County is soon to follow.  We do not need another mandate when we already have a law that will have the same effect if it is simply enforced.  The enforcement of licensing will soon be under way.  

Pup - you would be the first person to flip out if the City hired irresponsibly and put information into the hands of someone that is not trustworthy with that information.  So moving ahead with the appropriate precautions is the only responsible approach. 

I am always amazed by the fact that you actually believe that enacting MSN will suddenly create responsible pet owners.  You actually seem to believe that MSN will not require follow up and/or enforcement.  You somehow believe that MSN is the panacea that will take the money out of  backyard breeding and all without enforcement of the law.  You actually believe that not one more officer will be needed to enforce MSN because it will magically take care of itself.   GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!

With the realization that foreclosures are causing increases in shelter intake numbers - how would you propose we prevent that from happening? 

Why not implement a requirement to s/n pets here locally and see what the results are, rather than just rail against it? 

If a universal requirement to s/n pets was on the books, it would be equitable for everyone.  No one group is being picked out; people will have a compelling reason to s/n pets now instead of later.  Why not get the requirement on the books and see what happens? 

Nothing else has worked here and our animal service officers have no recourse to prevent people from carelessly or deliberately having litter after litter after litter at our community's expense as well as costing so many animals their lives.

The first step is to get this law on the books.  The next step will be enforcement, starting with enforcement at the level it is currently at and see what develops from there.  It certainly wouldn't increase pet overpopulation and just might decrease it -- so why not try it?

What if having a requirement to s/n did substantially reduce pet overpopulation here, as all evidence from other communities suggests?

Why are you against doing something that could be started immediately and has the potential to save so many animals from the grim reality of pet overpopulation and save limited resources for our community?

Pup

I am trying to avoid the inevitable lawsuits that go along with MSN - litigation only prolongs/delays implementation of the law.  There go more precious taxpayer dollars up in smoke defending more nonsensical lawsuits.

Then there all of the herding dogs that will not be spayed or neutered.  Let's not forget all of the agility dogs and show dogs that will not be spayed or neutered.  Oh yes - then there are all of the service dogs that will be excluded from MSN.  The list goes on.  MSN is so full of loopholes - that is why A.B. 1634 failed,  too many exclusions.  Mandatory licensing requires a license for every dog - agility, service, herding, mutt - it does not matter.  Each owner must buy a license for their dog.

So what if MSN does not significantly reduce pet overpopulation - then what?  There you go again with another law for the books.  What really works is low cost spay neuter programs. 

Why on earth would we add a new law and not enforce it?  Isn't that how we arrived at this point?  So your suggestion  "The first step is to get this law on the books.  The next step will be enforcement, starting with enforcement at the level it is currently at and see what develops from there" is foolishness at its finest. Just put the law on the books and do nothing about it.  Good luck with that.

I have to make sure to copy your quotes because you delete most of your nonsense - oh wait you defragment your blogs (as though you are storing all of this on your personal computer).

Avoiding lawsuits is not a valid reason to avoid a local spay/neuter requirement.  Any lawsuits that were brought against msn were eventually dropped -- this mandate has been proven in other communities.

I did not say just put the law on the books and do nothing about it.  I suggested that we put the law on the books so that our local animal services people would have something to enforce. 

Btw, service dogs, police dogs, herding dogs, agility dogs, etc. are always s/n -- they can't perform their tasks if distracted and are required to be s/n.  A dog doesn't have to be intact to perform well at any human contrived tasks. 

If low-cost s/n worked...it would have worked by now.   You didn't answer my question...why are you so against a simple requirement to s/n pets that would apply to all equally?

Also, I never said that I 'defragment' my blogs, I said that I delete old blogs and/or comments because no one reads them after a certain amount of time anyway.  It is easier to take care of a small file.  What difference could that possibly make to you?  Also, please remember that you voluntarily posted your name.  I prefer to keep my name private to protect my family.  Don't you remember what happened to Audrey?  I think it is stepping over the line to publish someone's name without their permission.  Also, none of my comments are nonsense.  Why the personal insults and public announcement of my name?  Is that your best argument against what I have suggested?  You are not only being unscrupulous, you are down right mean and maybe that is why you are finding yourself in your current position.

Pup

I am in good standing in my community and have received the support of many on my position of enforcement of licensing.  For the first time agencies are interacting for the benefit of the animal community.  Kern Humane, Bakersfield SPCA and Alpha Canine are joining forces to implement low cost spay/neuter programs.  This has never happened in the history of Bakersfield.  So yes, I think my stand has helped unite forces for the good of the animal community.  Low cost spay/neuter programs are working right here and right now in Bakersfield all without MSN.

Lawsuits are a total waste of taxpayer dollars and must be researched and represented until they go away.  These are dollars that might be better spent possibly on long term housing of shelter animals or low cost spay neuter.   So avoiding lawsuits is imperative in this time of dwindling resources.

First, I am using your very words  about defragmenting your past blogs.  You erase your nasty statements and mockeries and refer to those erasures as defragmenting.  The blog where you mock my surname - do you remember?  Erased.  Maybe you are not aware that you are not storing this information on your computer - TBC is storing it.  You do not have any files to worry about concerning this blog.

Regardless of that - lawsuits are a burden foisted upon all taxpayers.  Whether or not they are dismissed or "eventually dropped"  the lawsuit must be researched and represented.  This is a huge waste of money that might be better spent on possible long term housing for shelter animals instead of euthanizing them.

For the first time in the history of Bakersfield,  humane agencies are interacting for the cause of low cost spay neuter.  Kern Humane, Bakersfield SPCA and Alpha Canine have come together to support a low cost spay neuter program in conjunction with HOPE. I contacted the SPCA about bringing HOPE back.  The SPCA team has worked diligently to get this program restarted.   If I helped in any way to bring this consortium together I could not be happier.  Low cost spay neuter is happening and all without MSN.

I am against putting another unenforceable law on the books when we can get to the same goal by simply enforcing the laws that we have on the books.  Yes, I know that they have not been enforced - but they are going to be enforced now.

You are so ill-informed about herding dogs!  At each and every ACC meeting the lady from Inyokern insisted that her herding dogs must remain intact to keep their herding instinct and drive.  Furthermore, they must remain intact to further their blood lines.   Again. you were not listening or did not care or whatever.  Show dogs must remain intact  as well as a laundry list of other dogs and again that is why A.B.1634 failed.   Too many loopholes.

So rather than set ourselves up for loopholes and exceptions let's try a law that applies to everyone without exception.

I was trying to confirm who you are - now I know.  By the way thank you for the nasty letter that you wrote.  Personal attacks are so uncalled for.

Maybe you are ill-informed about herding dogs.  Are you basing your info about herding dogs on some lady from Inyokern that insists that her herding dogs must remain intact to keep their herding instinct and drive?!    And that they must remain intact to further their blood lines?  (All of them)?  So all of Kern County can not require the spaying and neutering of pets because of one person's opinion?

You aren't reading my comments -- I wasn't suggesting AB 1634, I was suggesting a simple, local, requirement that pets in our community be spayed or neutered, so that our animal service people would have a tool to help reduce local pet overpopulation.

I never said I defragment blogs...I said I delete old blogs -- and you are right, they probably are still in the TBC data system, but they aren't in my file, so who cares?  I have never written you a nasty letter, so once again you must be confusing me with someone else.  If you think personal attacks are uncalled for, why are you making them?  Your arguments here are not logical and now I understand why, you are simply arguing against me, not my idea.

" maybe that is why you are finding yourself in your current position."   What position am I in? Please explain.

Pup

Shall I post your letter to the ACC here?  Your name is on it - just to remind you.

As I explained above, I prefer to keep my name off the blogs for reasons I already stated, so you do not have permission to use my name.  That being said, you can post the letter here without my name and I will let you know if it was from me, (but as I said before, I didn't write you a nasty letter).

I will not elaborate on the 'position you are in' because you already know what that is -- I don't want to add to your public humiliation and that is why I was discreet about it in the first place -- be careful what you ask.

Also...why are you going so far with the personal attack?  Can we get back on topic?

What personal attack are you talking about?   Again, I reiterate, what position am I in?  I am in good standing in my community as far as I know. 

You intimate that I have something to be ashamed of and I can assure you that I do not.  So speak your mind - I personally would love to know what position you think I am in.

I have never based my thought process or opinion on the words of one person - herding dogs were an exception that applied to A.B.1634.  This exception would have been applied here as well was the point of the statement.

Now this bad news is even worse.  After recent, local, budget cuts -- is there any money to hire those people that were going canvas for dog licensing as a means to reduce pet overpopulation here?

Katelump...where is your dog-license-enforcement-as-a-means-to-reduce-pet- overpopulation now?

Everyone...please, before you leave your comments and outrage over re-visiting this subject...consider what is happening here to the beloved animals that we call 'pets.' 50 - 60 of these sweet innocent creatures are being shuffled to their deaths every single day here, seven days per week.  While you live your life...too many animals are dying -- this is preventable.

Our community has been plagued with pet overpopulation for far too long.  This pet overpopulation is costing us between $1.8 -$2.7 million dollars per year, (just to process and dispose of the surplus pets that no one wants).  The euth numbers are still going up...when is enough going to be enough? 

Kern County Monthly Numbers of Pets Euthanized 2008

• Jun 2008 = 1,731
• May 2008 = 1,657
• Apr 2008 = 1,419
• Mar 2008 = 1,319
• Feb 2008 = 1,097
• Jan 2008 = 1,206

I know most that blog here have already spayed or neutered their pets -- maybe it is time for a universal requirement that everyone in our community get their pets spayed or neutered, not just the responsible pet owners.   If we could get our five Kern Supervisors to pass such an ordinance in August, and have the ordinance go into effect in 120 days -- we could begin to make a difference and get these numbers down.

An ordinance like this would be similar to the hands-free cell phone law.  People are gradually adjusting and coming up with the money to purchase a blue tooth, etc..

People would hear about the requirement to spay and neuter their pets and they would begin working toward putting money aside and arranging to get their pets altered.  Altered pets means less discarded pets.  When will the people in this community be willing to take this appropriate and necessary action to change this terrible travesty?

deadpups.blogspot.com/

Please consider the import of this and the importance of putting a stop to it.  Find out about communities that require pets to be spayed or neutered, look at their stats and their budget, etc..  This simple measure would not take your rights away and would save thousands of pets from enduring the process of impoundment and euthanasia, as well as saving our community funds that should be better spent than  on destroying this ongoing surplus of hapless little animals.  Thank you.

"The fate of animals is of greater importance to me than the fear of appearing ridiculous; it is indissolubly connected with the fate of men."  Emile Zola

I am headed out of Bak town for several weeks...but a part of my heart and mind will be here with those dear sweet animals that are being needlessly put down every single day here.  Kind Regards to all, Pup