Effects of Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws

One of the programs of the No Kill Equation is high volume, low cost spay/neuter services:  "Low cost, high volume spay/neuter will quickly lead to fewer animals entering the shelter system, allowing more resources to be allocated toward saving lives."  

Some people take this thought in the wrong direction however, and believe that laws should be passed to  mandate  that all  pets  are sterilized.  These people rationalize that if there is a law that forces everyone to spay/neuter, then there will no longer be an "overpopulation" of pets being killed in shelters each year.  However, the people who suppport mandatory spay / neuter laws have not researched what has happened in communities after these laws have been passed.  

These laws are not having the desired effect i.e. a reduction in kill rates in local animal shelters.

The Spring 2010 issue of The American Dog magazine contained an article written by a woman who claimed that dogs are dying in shelters because people are debating spay / neuter laws.  The article contained a lot of factually incorrect information regarding MSN laws. The article also contained some undeserved and very unprofessional personal shots at some of the most respected and knowledgeable leaders of the no kill movement i.e. Nathan Winograd and Rich Avanzino (of all the people who were quoted, these two men are the only people who have actually transformed high kill shelters into no kill shelters).  When I complained about the article to the magazine, I was offered the opportunity to write a rebuttal to correct at least some of the incorrect information.  My rebuttal, "Effects of Mandatory Spay Neuter Laws", is currently printed in the Summer 2010 issue of the magazine.  However, the magazine changed some of my words and deleted kill rate statistics for communities who have passed MSN laws, therefore I am running my article, in its entirety, below. 

I am responding to the article entitled “Spay and Neuter Laws; Humans Debate While Dogs Die”. I would like to provide more accurate information regarding the effects of Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws (“MSNL”) on shelter killing. I would also like to address other factually incorrect conjectures in the article, but will stick to the topic of MSNL at this time. 

MSNL have been in effect in various communities for some time so we now have ample opportunity to ascertain whether they reduce shelter killing. When we research these communities, we find that while increased voluntary sterilization does help reduce the number of animals entering shelters, MSNL do not decrease the number of animals entering or being killed in shelters. MSNL have backfired. In fact, MSNL have resulted in more abandoned animals, higher shelter admissions, higher kill rates, lower compliance with licensing and rabies vaccination laws, and radically increased costs for animal control. People become afraid to get pet licenses because proof of sterilization is required. They are afraid to go to a veterinarian for rabies shots or medical care because veterinarians are required to report them. People abandon their pets because they fear fines and penalties.

Numerous studies have shown that the primary reason people do not sterilize their pets is costs. For example, a study conducted by Harris Interactive for Alley Cat Allies and published in the Journal of American Veterinary Association, confirmed that the single most influential predictor of whether a cat is sterilized is the income level of his/her owner. In addition, in May 2009, PetSmart released a study that again confirmed that cost is the primary reason people do spay/neuter. Furthermore, a study conducted by the Dept of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences at Texas A&M University and published in the Preventive Veterinary Medicine in January 2010, again found that cost was the number one reason for not sterilizing pets. Some people simply cannot afford the costs and passing MSNL will not change this fact. When the result of not sterilizing is an unaffordable fine or confiscation/impoundment of the pet, animals die.

The Harris Interactive study also found that more than 80 percent of owned cats in the US are already sterilized. This means that the majority of unsterilized cats are unowned strays.   MSNL would do nothing to increase the sterilization of unowned cats and would not reduce their deaths in shelters. In fact, MSNL would increase the killing of unowned cats, particularly feral cats because many shelters automatically kill all feral cats, or any cat that vaguely acts feral i.e. shy or scared cats.  

For example, Reno (Washoe Co.) Nevada is saving 93% of dogs and 89% of cats. This is despite having a per capita intake rate over two times the national average. (Reno has also been hit much harder by the economic downturn than L.A. where kill rates are rising. Even though the author claimed that the economic downturn has caused kill rates to rise in L.A., clearly this isn’t the correct explanation.) The Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA has a save rate of 92%; Tompkins Co., NY SPCA has a save rate of approximately 95%; The San Francisco SPCA had a save rate of roughly 97% in 2008; In Montgomery Co. TX shelter killing declined to 18% in 2009;  In Calgary, Canada all healthy and treatable pets that enter their shelter  are saved.  All of these shelters dropped their kill rates without MSNL.

For more information:   If you wish to receive periodic updates from No Kill Houston, you can sign up to receive our e-newsletter.  Click on the link on the right side of our website. 

Also read our Blog and follow No Kill Houston on Facebook and Twitter. 

Check out our new PSA.

To receive an email notice each time I post a new article on Examiner.com, click the “Subscribe” button at the top of the page. 

*Click here for a list of low cost spay / neuter clinics in the Houston area.