Jason wrote on November 29, 2009 09:30 PM: "what about the pets of people who will not be able to financially have the pet spay or neutered?"

Simple: THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE PETS! If you can't afford to pay for spay/neuter, then you can't afford to take care of a dog or cat when they have real health problems.

Bad News wrote on November 22, 2009 06:47 PM: 4 months is much too early to be performing elective surgery, especially removing sexual organs. Ask any veterinarian.

People -- stop with the emotional reactions and THINK about REALITY before you support new regulations because they sound good, or the stated intentions match your beliefs. There's more than one way to ... neuter .. a cat, so to speak.

4 month neuter spay is ANIMAL ABUSE

Michelle Alessi-Zannone wrote on November 21, 2009 12:51 PM: In violation of this new law will the fines collected be put toward funding animal control?? or is this just another way for public officials to get 2 ply quilted toilet paper for their building's restrooms? I believe the fines are excessive and what about the pets of people who will not be able to financially have the pet spay or neutered? What do we think will happen to those animals?

Michelle Alessi-Zannone wrote on November 21, 2009 12:38 PM: I believe it is important to have your pet fixed. It is horrible all of the poor little dears that lose their lives each year at a shelter.However 4 months is like what to us in dog years 6 or so? That is just too young in my eyes to put anyone through a non life threatening operation. Maybe some form of saltpeter in puppy chow would be a better fix for those too young for the procedure.Also is this to be our fate by controlling human over population and to cut down on welfare costs with the same solution? But if it will cut down on the homeless population, abandoned children and tax payer funded programs then why not have your 8 year old daughter's tubes tied or 10 year old son can have a vasectomy so there is less of a chance for teen pregnancy and help cut down on the unwanted people problem in our country!!NOT!!

Luke Thomas wrote on November 20, 2009 10:47 AM: Though it can't be strictly enforced, there will be PLENTY of people willing to snitch. Get em' snipped or pay the piper! It's about time!!! People are sick and tired of unwanted puppies and kittens. Keep in mind dogs and cats do NOT have the option of condoms.

Mo wrote on November 20, 2009 10:24 AM: I have had unsterilized dogs for years without a single coupling of intact dogs, let alone a litter. The key is responsible ownership. Spay/neuter at 4 months is like sterilizing a prepubescent child. Hormones are necessary for proper growth. There is ample evidence that pediatric spay/neuter can actually cause serious health problems in dogs, esp. lg breeds. Plus, MSN does not reduce euth. rates & costs related to shelter care. Dumb, dumb, dumb...

Joe wrote on November 20, 2009 09:50 AM: In addition to the overpopulation, I also am in favor of this ordinace for the protecction of other animals. I take my dog to a dog park every day and am fed up with it being attcked by non neutered, aggressive dogs. Many of the owners don't want their pits and shepards neutered because of a macho thing. They put the rest of the pet population at risk. This ordinace is a good thing, although I thinkit more appropriate at 6 months versu 4.

april wrote on November 19, 2009 11:18 PM: I think this is the absolute worst thing this city has ever done. The only way the city knows that people have animals is when they take their pups to get shots and the vet send the info to the city.....so now what? when these people pick up a puppy (could be from out of town too....hello)why give him all his shots if the vet is going to submit to the city that they have a puppy. Now we get to have dogs with no shots running around (biting, scratching) cuz who can afford sterilization as well as a fine- which what happens than. the animal gets taken away? to where? i cannot wait until we get a New Mayor. Oscar Goodman is so stupid. Why didn't we all get to vote on this? 4 months is harmful to animals....who are are the idiots that voted? Did they even do any research or are their brains to small to understand the realm of things? Is there a petition or something to file against these idiots.

virgo9 wrote on November 19, 2009 12:09 PM: I also worry about how many people will get kittens and puppies from people and then won't take them to the Vet for shots and exams in order to avoid getting on the "list". I agree with Tally only the respondsible pet ownersl,who are already getting their pets spayed or neutered, will abide by this law. Are we going to start having animal control police break down our doors because they suspect that we might have an unsterilized pet? I think this is a stupid and unenforceable law, but then what do you expect from politicians that have the mind set that they can pass a law and fix everything.

tally wrote on November 19, 2009 11:40 AM: I understand there is a problem

But I don’t agree with this “solution”

Responsible pet owners will follow the law even though they are not the cause the irresponsible will ignore it like they do everything else and the problem will not go away.

I also see the number coming down, as the housing market has foreclosed on all the losers and they dumped their pets there are not as many people waiting for the ax to drop so their will be less animals to discard (the dim politicians will think their new law helped)

More odd notes
4 months is to early
The dog catcher will be drunk with power to write tickets

When I moved away from the city of Vegas the dog catcher sent me a ticket for not paying my dog registration tax, these people are not capable of increased power