Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

CAMERON: Well-meant spay-neuter bill a hardship

By Georgia Cameron, Special to the Rocky

Published January 14, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Speakout

More stories »

As someone who has been actively involved in the animal rescue world for a number of years, I understand the intentions behind last year's Colorado HB 1185, now a law requiring shelters to spay or neuter animals prior to them leaving the premises. Rescue workers clearly encourage people to spay or neuter animals as a protection against overpopulation and abuse.

Unfortunately, this law burdens responsible shelters with red tape, making their work harder and putting more animals at risk.

The problem with HB 1185 is not that it seeks to reduce the number of unaltered animals in Colorado. The problem is that it severely hamstrings private rescues and foster programs when accepting - and finding new homes for - young puppies and kittens. Numerous veterinarian studies have demonstrated that to spay or neuter too early can produce long-term physical ailments such as frequent urinary tract infections. There are also preliminary studies suggesting that the reduction in hormones produced by sterilization too early in an animals' life cycle can cause bone formation issues that can adversely affect hips and joints.

Most if not all rescues already have programs in place to ensure their young adoptive animals are spayed and neutered within an appropriate time frame.

This procedure cost is built into the adoption fee, and most times there are arrangements made with veterinary clinics to provide the service to the shelter animals at a reduced rate.

In cases of animals deemed too young to alter, the new law requires that an additional fee be collected at the time of adoption. This fee is set by the commissioner of the Colorado Department of Agriculture. Once sterilization has been performed, that fee is to be returned to the owner. In the event that the new owner does not comply with the alteration and provide paperwork to the shelter, the fee is to be surrendered to the Pet Overpopulation Fund or a local spay-and-neuter education fund. Public animal shelters may be eligible for a waiver. However, this rule increases costs for those looking to adopt an animal.

The additional paperwork this deposit structure creates, not to mention the burden it places on an already stressed system, does not address the issue of alteration compliance. Rather, it creates a general hardship for any shelter that wishes to allow puppies and kittens to go home prior to 16 weeks of age, as they are the ones that now must enforce and comply with these new sterilization rules.

Also troubling is that the Colorado Pet Overpopulation Fund does not address the alteration of homeless animals; it subsidizes the costs of the procedures for animals that already have homes. In this way, rescues are being pushed to collect money that could otherwise help their organizations serve unwanted and needy animals and instead provide that financial boon to dogs and cats that already have homes. Increased costs for shelter mutts do not increase the likelihood of their adoption.

While I am a full supporter of sterilization of pet animals, I do not believe that it is the place of the Colorado legislature to dictate how I enforce those measures within my own organization. It is difficult enough working in an industry where there is so little money but so much need; the increased bureaucracy and detailed bookkeeping that my nonprofit organization must now adhere to wastes precious time and complicates a procedure that already must compete with breeders of purebred puppies and those out to make a profit.

How many additional animals will remain unadopted and potentially euthanized because of the time exhausted on new red tape measures?

As a concerned citizen, and one for whom animal rescue is a true passion, I object wholeheartedly to this new and unneeded law.

Georgia Cameron is vice president of NSC Rescue (www.NSCrescue.org). She is a resident of Denver.

Comments

  • January 14, 2009

    8:20 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    How about we have a bill to spay or neuter irresponsible pet owners? That would solve a lot of problems.

  • January 14, 2009

    12:45 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BlueCarp writes:

    Ms. Cameron points out yet another way that the government has proven its incompetence.

    Far too many of us look to the government for "answers."

  • January 15, 2009

    8:49 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    glowrock writes:

    For once, I agree with Mike. Irresponsible pet owners DO need to be spayed or neutered, to keep more of their irresponsible selves and off the streets and limit the transference of their genes into the pool! :)