Greens legislating companion animal laws

Desexing at the point of sale?

What, with tin snips?

EvanJames said :

stop pets being seen as a disposable commodity

This legislation does little to stop it… Then again this draft is rather poor, with little legislation covering other animals (yes cat & dog owners, other pets exist believe it or not)

Felix said :

Why do so many people run the ‘it’s not perfect and won’t fix everything therefore lets not do it at all’ argument all the time?

Because I’m a realist.

So how do you desex a goldfish?

I just had a skim through the legislation and it appears that the changes are mostly about breeding 1) dogs and cats 2) for sale. Looks like if you breed without any intent to sell, then no licence is required.

It all seems quite reasonable. Boring! What happened to the good old days when everything the Greens said was radical hippy ideology?

Interestingly, new legislation was introduced in May 2008 which said that cats must be desexed before the age of first breeding. Obviously this is not working, and who polices this anyway?

The requirement to have a licence to breed is also already in place, and has been for many years. Again, who’s there to police it?

All of these changes would be wonderful if only the ACT government would actually enforce the laws that they create.

So how do you desex a goldfish?

I’m well in favour of random people having to get a licence and jump through hoops before they’re allowed to get their hands on 1 or more desexed cats or dogs.

In fact, let’s make the fees about 1 million dollars and put it towards care of our native wildlife. Put a few of those dollars towards getting me an Indian Mynah bird trap + some CO2.

Is there anything about professional sports stars & animal husbandry?

Why do so many people run the ‘it’s not perfect and won’t fix everything therefore lets not do it at all’ argument all the time? It’s ultimately just a doctrine of despair.

The problem is real and this legislation is, at least, a reasonable first stab at fixing it. It will probably need some amendment as things unfold – new legislation is rarely 100% successful in its first form – and there are probably good arguments for additional work, particularly to really hit puppy farms, which are vile and shameful.

But I don’t believe that this destroys the value of this legislation. Requiring a licence is imperfect, but it’s one process that will tend to discourage impulse purchases of cute puppies. And surely, for the majority of responsible pet owners, it will a mild nuisance but one they’re willing to put up with in the interests of protecting animals similar to the ones they love.

More legislation to make the greens feel warm and fuzzy at night. But will it have any impact on the pet industry? Doubt it. They can legislate to make people give advice…. but will this be enforced? Doubt it… Will the advice differ from the current bs and incorrect information they tell new pet owners who can’t do their own research before purchase? Doubt it. Would the pet industry exist without many of the clowns who buy live animals and subsequently can’t be bothered to care for them, or kill them from neglect/improper housing? Doubt it.

Dealing with (read: hindering/shutting down) puppy farms I’m in favour of…but banning me as a responsible pet owner from deciding that one day in the future I might like my dog to have puppies by requiring that I:
1) Pay the government yet another fee and submit to their inspections of my property
2) Require that I obtain this licence before I go in search of a suitable puppy for my house which, given the requirements for these breeding licences, is going to be difficult as most breeders will assume that potential buyers of puppies will not have these licences and will pre-emptively desex animals to speed-up the process of selling the animals.

I’m sorry, but this proposed law is well and truly over the top. A better solution would be to require licenses for people who wish to breed more than say five (or another number) animals simultaneously. Further, a law preventing the ownership of pets by people who have proven that they are not capable of owning pets responsibly would be a good idea.

A blanket ban on responsible pet owners (and the vast majority of pet owners are responsible) from exercising their discretion through licencing and mandatory desexing smacks more of revenue-raising and overt government interference than of attempting to solve the problem. I’m also a tad surprised that the Greens, given their “rights of animals” stance don’t believe in the rights of domestic animals to breed…although I shouldn’t be surprised seeing as they seem to be more interested in governmental control of everything than in their “green credentials”.