Bill Would Require Nearly All St. Louis Dogs and Cats to Be Sterilized

[The Northerner]

A bill under consideration in the St. Louis Board of Aldermen could make St. Louis one of the most restrictive cities in the nation when it comes to owning cats and dogs.

Board Bill 107 would require all pet owners to spay or neuter their dogs and cats and microchip them for identification. Those who don't want to sterilize their pets would be assessed a fee of $200 per year.

The sponsor of the bill, Alderwoman Lyda Krewson (Ward 28), tells Daily RFT that the goal of the bill is to encourage responsible pet ownership. Krewson worked with the city's Department of Health in drafting the legislation, which comes on heels of the city of St. Louis facing something of a stray animal crisis with the closing last year of the city's animal shelter.

"The goal of this, over time, is to cut down on the number of stray dogs and cats in the city," says Krewson. "When we take on pets, we also take on the responsibility of caring for them. We already require that pets be vaccinated for rabies and that people abide by the leash law. This is just another step in that direction of caring for our pets."

Read more: http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/09/pets_spayed_neutered_st_louis_city_bill.php

[FSogol]

1. Good idea. n/t

[hlthe2b]

2. Yes... I agree...

I'm sure many of us have looked sadly and adoringly at our aging beloved pets and wished that we could have had "just one litter." However, the truth is, that early sterilization saves lives-- lives of those pets that overpopulate and won't find homes... and even (statistically) the lifespan of those pets sterilized and are thus at less risk for reproductive cancers (and mammary cancer).

[iris27]

3. I don't know if I agree with the yearly fee, but otherwise I think this is a good idea.

St. Louis city has had an epic stray problem for a while. Maybe they could just make people jump through some paperwork hoops to certify their intentions to eventually (responsibly) breed their cat or dog, and pay a one-time fee that would be a bit more expensive than to the average cost of sterilization and chipping. The fee would just exist to tip the economic scales in favor of the latter for those who might be on the fence. Maybe it could be used to subsidize the spay/neuter costs for pet owners who'd have trouble affording it?

[sinkingfeeling]

4. I have no problem with this, assuming there will be a licensed breeder program.

[get the red out]

5. Our dog came that way

When we adopted our dog from the shelter she came that way. I don't see this as so bad. If someone has their heart set on breeding they will pay the fee; someone who is afraid that their male dog won't look masculine enough out for a walk without everything intact might rethink that idea when their wallet is involved.

[justiceischeap]

9. Personally, I find dog balls to be way unattractive

I was at a Celtic festival this past weekend and a woman had 2 Irish Wolfhounds with her and their doggie balls were dangling all over the place. It was disgusting to have to look at that. ;)

[ClarkUSA]

6. That's a good start, considering the huge number of puppy mills that operate out of MO.

I hope it's the beginning of a nationwide trend. Access to low-cost neutering and spaying clinics should be offered to proven low-income wage earners. Either that, or give up owning pets that you can't afford to care for properly or use as backyard breeding machines for income.

[kestrel91316]

7. Fine with me. There's no shortage of dogs and cats in the US that I have noticed.

[TwilightGardener]

8. Good--but make low-cost spay and neuter easily available.

I'm all for it.

[Pacifist Patriot]

10. You beat me to it.

Why not use that annual assessment to off-set the cost of the procedure for others.