I'm for euthanasia to control animal population, including controlling human population. There is no way we can go for "no kill" shelter! Breeders should be taxed heavily for producing more pets, especially the ones that import exotic pets/wildlife!

As for Human population, surrogate moms should not be allowed, including the use of fertility pills. We have way too much population to feed ourselves! All resources are dwindling and prices are increasing due to too much demand and not enough supply.

DIFFERENTLY YES BROWARD SHELTER SHOULD BE A "NO-KILL SHELTER FOR ALL ANIMALS - ALLEN DAVIS HELPED ME WHEN K WAS HERE AND IN LOVING MEMORY OF LADY K - IT SHOULD BE CHANGED TO A N0 KILL SHELTER AS TRI COUNTY IS. URGENT ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY

Every shelter should be no-kill, even if the idiots running the counties have to take a pay cut to pay for it.

Diane,

No, I do not believe that ANY shelter should be "NO KILL". Having seen "Unadoptable" dogs/cats live in kennels/crates/cages for years and years, I can tell you that is infinitively more cruel than humane euthanasia.

Some animals have severe medical conditions, behavioral issues, etc...that make them unadoptable. Sometimes, even dangerous.

As for Mandatory Speuter laws....well, as a responsible breeder, why should I be punished because of stupid, selfish, irresponsible people? Why should I have to pay $$$$$ for a "breeders" permit?

Why should I have to pay $$$$$ to keep dogs that I have in the show rings intact? Why should I have to prove myself to anyone?

I have had one litter of puppies in the last 5 yrs. I know where all those puppies are, they are microchipped, their contracts stipulate MANDATORY obedience training, and I have first right of refusal on those dogs. I am in close contact with all the owners,and those dogs are going to be 2 yrs in December.

Mandatory Speuter laws do not work. That has been proven---all you have to do is "google" it.

What should be done instead is the following:
1) Enforce the current laws on the books.
2) Open up low cost speuter clinics across the county. In a county this size, I would like to see it start at 5 clinics.
3) Offer free dog training at Animal Control. Make it mandatory for people adopting certain breeds of dogs. Make it mandatory for second time offenders of leash law violations. Make it mandatory for vicious dogs.

To boot, speutering before 1-2 yrs of age can have very negative affects on the health of dogs.

Simply "google" Dangers of Spaying and Neutering.

Past president of the California Veterinary Medical Association, Dr. John Hamil, wrote:
It is inappropriate to mandate a controversial and possibly life threatening surgical procedure. As CVMA has argued in the past, decisions of this magnitude should be made after consultation between the owner and their veterinarian

http://saveourdogs.net/health.html

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

A couple of other points that are floating around in my head:

1) Since there are more cats than dogs being euthanized, why don't these laws apply to them?

2) Where are my constitutional rights in this issue? If a mandatory Speuter law is passed, it interfers with my rights to own property and make money. Is the county going to compensate me when I loose$40,000.00 from not being able to breed my Rottie? (4 litters of puppies, at 10 pups per litter at $1000.00 per pup---and that price is low, once she finishes all her titles, pups will go up to $2000.00 each.)
3) If shelters are sooooo overcrowded, then why are they "importing" dogs from other countries to adopt out? Tri-County Humane Society just brought in a bunch of dogs. Why did they do this, when if you call to bring in a stray they will tell you that they are full and have no room.

http://doglawsatlarge.blogspot.com/2007/12/dog-shelters-import-from-around-world.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-30-dogs-usat_x.htm

http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/archives/redefining.htm

Here is a quote from a website on Counties were MSN have failed:

Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws—A Failure Everywhere
January 29, 2008
Santa Cruz County, California

* 1995 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
* change in shelter intakes and euthanasia rates are no better than the state average
* animal control costs doubled after passage
* Animal control costs "spiraling" out of control, according to a Santa Cruz Sentinel investigation
* Capitola canceled animal services contract with county due to rising costs
* Watsonville threatening to pull out due to rising costs
* licensing compliance dropped significantly

Supporters of AB 1634 frequently claim that Santa Cruz County had a 50+% reduction in shelter intakes after they imposed mandatory spay/neuter in 1995. This is not true. There is no way to take the official shelter data published by California's Department of Health Services (CDHS), or any subset, and generate this amazing Big Lie that AB 1634 supporters have been claiming. Every single data point on their impressive-looking chart is a total fabrication.
If you are curious how this compares to the shelter data Santa Cruz County actually submitted to the CDHS, as required by state law, here are the comparisons for dogs and for cats.
San Mateo County, California

* 1991 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
* dog deaths in the areas governed by the ordinance, increased 126% and cats 86%, but decreased in parts of the county not governed by the ordinance
* dog licenses declined by 35%

The nation's first mandatory spay/neuter law was in San Mateo County, CA. It was primarily pushed by the Peninsula Humane Society (PHS). The PHS assessed the San Mateo MSN law to have been "disappointing" since it led to increases in shelter killing. As a result, the PHS does not support CA AB 1634. Note that the supporters of AB 1634 do not even mention San Mateo because it is so widely recognized as a failure.
Los Angeles, California

* 2000 mandatory spay or pay ordinance
* Decline in licensing compliance since pas
* sage of this ordinance Animal control budget after passage of the law rose 269%, from $6.7 million to $18 million.
* City hired additional animal control officers and bought new trucks and equipment just to enforce the new law

Montgomery County, Maryland

* mandatory spay/neuter law was passed but later repealed as a failure
* 50% decline in licensing compliance while ordinance in effect
* Euthanasia rates declined more slowly than before the ordinance passed

Fort Worth, Texas

* ended its mandatory spay/neuter program
* licensing compliance fell off after passage of the ordinance
* There was a reduction in rabies vaccinations which lead to an increase in rabies in the city

Camden County, New Jersey

* 1996 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
* PAWS NJ comments 5 years later, An analysis of these statistics shows the Humane Society of Southern NJ which operates the Camden County Animal Shelter, to be consistently one of the leading, if not the leading killers of animals in the state of New Jersey.

King County, Washington

* 1992 mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
* License compliance decreases since passage of the ordinance.
* Animal control expenses increased 56.8% and revenues only 43.2%.
* In 1990 animal controls were $1,662,776. By 1997 animal control costs were $3,087,350.
* Euthanasia rates fell at a slower rate after passage of the ordinance.

King County, WA is commonly held up by supporters as an example of MSN success. These two articles illustrate how MSN supporters spin the data.
Aurora, Colorado

* mandatory spay/neuter ordinance
* licensing compliance has dropped dramatically.

Pinellas County, Florida

* breeder licensing since 1992
* animal control budget increased 75% with revenue increasing only 13%.
* shelter intake and euthanasia rates increased after the law took effect

***********
Again, before trampling on the rights of those of us who are responsible with our animals, maybe, just maybe, the existing laws should be enforced.

Just a thought.

The shelter should go no kill and that woman who runs it now, Lisa needs to be replaced FAST. She is arrogant and has no clue as to how people really feel about animals. She also arrogantly and without discussion removed a valuable link from the agency's web site that lista a daily animal intake so those with missing animals can check to see if there was a pick-up near them. Of course to be sure you probably need to go there but the information was valuable so you don't have to make daily trips. MAYBE they will get it right and list information correctly.

These people also are not careful in checking for microchips. I have lot numerous cats to their wanton killing and later learned from a contact at the agency that they were my cats. Sorry, can't reveal the name.

There is a difference between humanely euthanizing and just killing animals with no regard like Broward animal care does. They have empty cages and still kill animals. They are known to keep valuable animals for themselves and killing others in front of living animals. They do not give love to an animal before it dies. This is the difference. People who care about the animals should be working there not people who leave cages empty, have no regard for the animals and leave them in stinking squalor as we have noted on our fact finding visits. WAKE UP and get all of the facts facts before you say something like it is not the fault of the workers and give your opinion. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things and Broward animal care is definitely doing it the wrong way. It is a black mark on us all for allowing it to happen.

Very well said! Thank you for keeping it real! No-kill is, unfortunately, not a possibility as long as there are irresponsible pet owners out there who breed and turn in their pets when it is no longer "convenient" for them to keep.
I agree that a mandatory spay/neuter law needs to be passed and enforced (and that should include humans who continue to overpopulate our planet)

No-kill is a great idea, but people are living in some kind of irrational fantasy thinking it could be a reality.

Yes, we have private no-kills, many times they are overcrowded and as a private facility they then have the option of refusing to take another animal. The county shelter can NOT refuse to take an animal in. ...and don't think the Humane Society of Broward is all that it's cracked up to be - that's a myth. It's also a myth that they don't euthanize. On the other hand wouldn't it be nice if the Huizengas would donate as much money to the county shelter as they have to the Humane Society.

The county commission barely allocates funds for the shelter as it is now, can you imagine the outcry from human rights organizations if enough money is allocated to keep a no-kill shelter over human programs?

Do you know how long a new shelter has been in the works and can't seem to get done? Empty adoption cages in the shelter? Of course because this shelter is so outdated and primitive it is almost impossible to keep animals healthy in the close quarters. One airborne illness and there is no choice but to immediately euthanize as a precaution.

Lousy employees? Yeah, well blame the county again and the inability to get rid of people who don't do the job they're hired to do. The county so afraid of some kind of lawsuit for improper firing, needs to compile a book before they will fire someone.

WAKE UP and get all of the facts facts before you say something like it is not the fault of the workers and give your opinion. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things and Broward animal care is definitely doing it the wrong way. It is a black mark on us all for allowing it to happen.

Hey Tim -- actually, what I was saying in the post, is that it's not the fault of the workers that we have any of these large county-run shelters that usually have a kill policy. It's the fault, primarily, of a growing number of irresponsible owners who don't realize owning a pet is a commitment that lasts the lifetime of the animal. Not to mention the irresponsibility of people who do not spay and neuter.

How these shelters are run, however, certainly is largely the responsibility of the people who work there and those who administrate the program.