It’s a good thing Hollister council members have given
themselves some more time to consider alternate strategies to
address the city’s overpopulation of stray pets, because a proposal
to require spaying and neutering of two dog types made no sense and
would come without teeth.
It’s a good thing Hollister council members have given themselves some more time to consider alternate strategies to address the city’s overpopulation of stray pets, because a proposal to require spaying and neutering of two dog types made no sense and would come without teeth.
Council members at a meeting earlier this month delayed a decision on the spaying and neutering ordinance targeted at pit bulls and Chihuahuas’ owners. City and animal control officials in arguing for the mandates pointed to the fact that a large majority of surrendered and loose dogs, and attacks by those animals, are pit bulls and Chihuahuas. On the heels of that delay, there were two recent attacks involving pit bulls and Chihuahuas. One included a pit bull fatally wounding a Chihuahua after pulling it from an owner on San Benito Street. The other involved a pit bull and Chihuahua, who had the same owner, entering a yard and killing three cats.
Such laws elsewhere have had little effect in curbing the frequency of such instances, while city officials have yet to surmise how in the world they plan to enforce the rules. Instead of moving ahead, they wisely put on the brakes in the presence of a City Hall chambers filled with opponents, one from as far away as San Antonio in representing the Chihuahua Club of America.
Rather than wasting time on a symbolic ordinance with no means to enforce, officials now have breathing room to look at alternatives from opponents and others. To start off, isolating the pit bull and Chihuahua from other dog types and breeds offers an unrealistic solution. They happen to be the two most popular types of dogs in the area, but what about addressing irresponsible owners of other dogs when those situations arise? Why give favoritism, especially considering the larger cost to prospective dog owners with the spaying and neutering requirement, to certain breeds and people? As long as we are trying to correct a problem, let’s look at the problem in its entirety.
To a large extent, the issue is rooted in the practice of back-yard breeding and operation of puppy mills. And that is where city officials should start as they look at ways to increase enforcement and send a message to violators. Drastically heightening the fines, and ramping up enforcement, could put a decent dent in the supply side of the market. It needs one because in at least some instances, it’s fair to conclude an inflated number of such breeding operations, and puppies, has contributed to the stray-dog problem here.
Officials also should look at ways they can incorporate technology into the process, perhaps by examining how feasible it might be to require tags that can confirm a dog’s spaying or neutering status through an electronic transmitter.
Overall, the best solution is to increase enforcement using laws currently on the books, as opposed to creating new ordinances that authorities simply can’t enforce.
Fine heavily. Require restitution when damage is done. And if the case is severe enough, put the violators in jail.
