Vinnie, a confident, social guy, would love a home, even if he had to share the space with other cats and dogs Photo: Philip White
Many people are surprised to learn there’s a legal limit to the number of dogs and cats you can have in Los Angeles. Whether you live in a multi-acre compound or a one bedroom apartment, by law you’re only allowed three dogs and three cats per residence.
Initially this might appear to make sense. We’ve all seen upsetting video of animal seizures at the homes of hoarders who get in over their heads with fifty, a hundred, or even hundreds of animals. Although hoarders may start out with good intentions, by the time authorities intervene often the dogs or cats are suffering from severe neglect.
Purebred Jack Russell Trooper would normally have been adopted quickly, but an accident left him with a limp, and without a home Photo: Jackie Bass
The only problem with this justification for pet-limit laws is that most animal care and mental health professionals agree hoarding is a mental disorder. People who suffer from mental disorders generally don’t curb their compulsions based on what the law allows.
The ones who are really hurt by pet-limit laws are the cats and dogs waiting for good homes, and responsible potential adopters who are unable to provide those homes because they’re afraid Animal Services will raid their home and seize their beloved pets. What’s the use of giving an animal a home if the City can come at any time, even if the pet is well cared for, and take that animal away to a kill shelter (all L.A. City and County shelters are currently kill shelters)?
Kitty, both beautiful and very sweet, would do well in a home with other cats Photo: Vanda Krefft
Some courageous caregivers adopt anyway, striving to keep a low profile so they can continue to provide safe homes for as many pets as they can properly provide for. But these people, motivated by kindness and the willingness to do what it takes to give animals in need a loving home, live in constant fear of discovery – of what? Their dedication to caring for dogs and cats? Because they’re willing to devote their lives and money to helping homeless and often stereotypically “unadoptable” animals, they live in fear that those animals may be taken from them and killed.
I know of one family that gives a wonderful home to many handicapped and chronically ill cats. These are nice, normal people who have accepted that they don’t get to take vacations like others do. They aren’t going to have a hot new car, or a “media room” with the newest flat screen TV, because their money goes to cat food, medication and vet bills. But they’re making the lives of many cats happy and love-filled who otherwise would very likely have been killed long ago. The catch? This family doesn’t dare tell anyone how many cats they have – not even friends and fellow rescuers. They live their lives under a cloud, simply because they choose to do what we say we value in this culture, which is to be kind, unselfish, and giving to less fortunate creatures.
And cats are much easier to hide than dogs. How many homeless dogs could be saved, instead of killed in City and County shelters, if every caregiver who had three dogs but had the willingness and resources to care for four or more were able to do so? I know one woman who, damn the torpedoes, has four dogs, most of them seniors, and who is thinking about adopting a fifth special needs dog. Her dogs are the cleanest, nicest, most well taken care of dogs you’ll ever meet, even though if she hadn’t adopted them many of them might still be languishing in shelters, or worse, given their ages and special needs.
I know some people will object that it’s “too difficult” to care for that many dogs or cats. But it’s only too difficult if that’s not what you want to do. For those with the time, resources and love to give, it would be nice if our City and County gave them the option to feel on secure legal footing while providing a loving family to the homeless dogs and cats of L.A.
Comments
Please give details about Trooper, the JRT with a limp. I'd love to foster him and help find him a good home. He looks so much like my own JRT, Tank, that my heart breaks every time I think of him in a shelter.
Carolyn,
Trooper's at Friends of Animals Foundation, the private shelter where I volunteer. They have their own facility so they don't foster dogs out, but if you wanted to volunteer you'd be welcome to come in and meet him and, of course, he is looking for a good forever home.
If three dogs and three cats are not enough animals for you, than you're a hoarder. This arguement that laws only hurt people who follow them is totally flawed. We have laws so that when people break them we as a society can hold them responsible for going against a rule that we as a collective have agreed is the right way to live by to eliminate bias and have a just system. The fact of the matter is that people may be able to feed and house more than six animals, but if these animals have special needs isn't taking care of more than six animals spreading the support a little thin? Did you ever ask yourself where the magic numbers of 3 dogs and 3 cats came from? I really don't think they were just pulled from the sky, in fact, they were probably determined by a group of perfectly responable people who asked themselves "what would be the max number of cats and dogs every home could have if every home chose to max out how many pets they wanted and still be responsible pet owners?"
Stan,
I don't know if you live in L.A. but someone did pull the number three from the sky, as different cities have different limits. Can Miami residents care properly for four dogs, but L.A. residents can only manage three? If you do live here it'd be good for you to know that animal control law here is in fact quite arbitrary. Many people of good faith are working to change that.
Hoarding is a mental illness with an established list of symptoms, of which having many more animals than the legal limit is just one. Hoarders deny obvious medical issues, neglect spay/neuter, their own health, and basic hygiene, and collect more animals than they can care for even after their animals have been seized - facts that laws don't change.
There are a lot of homeless animals and a lot of people who are willing and capable of looking after them. The only other option would be killing them. I believe allowing responsible caregivers to legally give them homes is a more humane option.
I don't live in L.A. however your own article seems to imply that you believe that where a person lives does have something to do with how many pets they can have as your first article states:"Whether you live in a multi-acre compound or a one bedroom apartment, by law you’re only allowed three dogs and three cats per residence". As crowded as L.A. is I don't think that six animals under one roof is really that low, especially when you have to remember that the rule is being set assuming that everyone would potentially excerise their right to max out the number of animals they were allowed to have.I've always been a supporter of quality of care versus quantity, even if that means putting an animal down versus a hoarder getting their hands on one and only continuing to put the animal through suffering. I think that if a group of people who have the resources to take care of more than six animals a piece wanted to make a difference, they could get together and create their own shelter.
Stan,
Sorry if my point re space was unclear. Here many people have small places, many have large homes. The difference is - how many animals can comfortably live in the space? A Great Dane will be happier in a large home, but many small/senior dogs and cats would be perfectly content in an apartment.
You’re creating a false dichotomy insisting the only alternatives are hoarders or death. My point is there IS a third alternative: to allow owners to give a home to as many animals as they can responsibly care for. It’s simply false to suggest there’s no difference between someone who has lots of animals and a hoarder. I know people who have lots of animals and spend thousands on vet care. That is by definition not a hoarder.
Also, your math doesn’t add up. Shelters are restricted as to how many animals they can house. One shelter, or ten, cannot make a dent in the kill numbers. But allowing hundreds or thousands of pet lovers an extra dog or cat, or two, can make a difference.
Also, not to get populist, but what the heck – creating a shelter is not something the average person or group can do. The cost of L.A. real estate is famously prohibitive, even now. Plus there are a host of logistical issues, from zoning to permits to construction, etc. that would need to be overcome in creating a new shelter, while animals are dying right now. There are no such logistical issues with one or two extra pets in a single home. I'm not saying all owners would choose to have more animals, but many would if they could guarantee their safety.
Why can't Los Angeles make the choice that saves lives? It's hard to think of anything more pointless and cruel than killing a perfectly healthy dog or cat when someone might be happy to give him or her a home.
I agree that the need for homes for animals is great everywhere and that it would be great if every homeless animal could find a loving home.
I think the best answer though would be to encourage more people to adopt a few animals than to try to allow the few that are willing to adopt the ability to house more animals.
Each of us only has so much time and energy no matter how devoted we are to the cause.
Big picture-wise, wouldn't it be better for an animal lover to spend half their time caring for three animals and the rest spreading the word to encourage others to adopt and find countless other animals homes (versus 3 more) than to spend all (or virtually all) of their time caring for six animals?
If laws were changed to increase the limit of how many animals a person could have to a greater number, wouldn't that just make things easier for hoarders?
Efforts to change laws regarding animals, in my opinion, should be focusing on much stricter punishments for abusers.
Stan, hoarders are not the norm. You act as if everyone wants to have 80 cats in the house. Those people are mentally ill and will continue to 'break the law' no matter what limits are imposed.
Most people don't start out wanting a large number of animals, but their hearts ache when they see or hear of an unwanted, neglected or needy animal, and they think....well, maybe I can make room for one more. Just like people who take in foster kids. You wouldn't think that ...gee, a kid would be better off dead than in a house with too many kids, would you? Of course not. If the foster family can handle it and everybody is healthy and happy, why should it bother you?
So are you saying we should just have no laws since criminals are going to break them anyways? Wow, way to hold people responsible for their actions.
Their are limits for a reason and it's the duty of those who enforce the law to make sure laws are held up. You can't just adopt an infinite number of animals, just like you can't just adopt an infinite number of kids.
Why do you people act like in order to be compasionate you have to tolerate people breaking the law? Or that trying to enforce following rules is pointless?
This past weekend I was volunteering at my local shelter and heard multiple people say "I wish I could adopt another cat, but I already have three". Then, realizing that they couldn't adopt anymore animals, they decided to DONTATE to help the animals that were there. You can still contribute without having to foster or adopt. People who continue to adopt beyond five or six animals (not 80) are doing for THEM not for the animals. Stop kidding yourselves.
Mental illness is no more an excuse than being a criminal in their right mind. It's just instead of putting them in jail, they should go to a mental ward. These people need to be removed from society just as much as any criminal does as they obviously pose a threat to themself through poor care of their homes and health, as well as others, namely animals.
Where is the attribution for this legislation????
I cant't beleive how many feel they have the right to tell others what they can do with their lives. For one a hoarder is someone who collects many animals doesnt spay them get them proper care and their residence is filthy mainly with animal waste. They are not concerned with how many cats or dogs they are allowed to have. They have a mental problem. They probably like the animals but dont have any money to care for them all. Even if there is no legal limit a sane person knows his/her personal limit. I see no problem for someone to have as many pets as they want as long as they can provide for them reallyy what is the problem here? Its nobody's business but theirs. What about those with farms maybe they shouldnt be allowed to have all their animals?
I think people should just be allowed to have as many pets as they want if they are willing to vaccinate clean up after care for and put up with a lot of pets so what its their business.
I cant't beleive how many feel they have the right to tell others what they can do with their lives. For one a hoarder is someone who collects many animals doesnt spay them get them proper care and their residence is filthy mainly with animal waste. They are not concerned with how many cats or dogs they are allowed to have. They have a mental problem. They probably like the animals but dont have any money to care for them all. Even if there is no legal limit a sane person knows his/her personal limit. I see no problem for someone to have as many pets as they want as long as they can provide for them reallyy what is the problem here? Its nobody's business but theirs. What about those with farms maybe they shouldnt be allowed to have all their animals?
I think people should just be allowed to have as many pets as they want if they are willing to vaccinate clean up after care for and put up with a lot of pets so what its their business.
Some people are blinding themselves to the fact that keeping more than a couple of pets causes problems for others. If someone lives in the apartment next to me and has 7 dogs - that's an issue. If they live next door and their dogs are pooping away stinking up my backyard too, that's an issue. It's obviously a much more limited problem if there is a limit on the number of them.
Some people feel that taking an unwanted animal into their home is the most noble thing in the world. Get over yourselves. Donate money to shelters, donate money to save wild animals, endangered animals, animal habitats. Personally giving that street cat a home doesn't make you the noblest person in the world, and certainly doesn't give you the right to infringe on your neighbors rights.
Ah, but if you infringe on the rights of others, even if you have ONE pet, that is already addressed in the law. You are right but number limits do not help.
I THINK THEY SHOUL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DOGS YOU CAN HAVE IN A HOME ESPECIALY IF YOU HAVE A BIG YARD LETS SAY YOU HAVE A DOG AND IT GETS PREGNANT THE LITTER CONTAINS 4-DOGS WHY CAN YOU KEEP THAT LITTER AND MAKE SURE YOUR DOGS IS OBLIGATED TO GET SPAYED. ANOTHER THING I THING SPAY AND NUTER YOUR DOG THAT SHOUL BE A FREE SERVICE. A ANIMAL IS VERY PRECIOUS THEY DONT KNOW HOW TO PROTECT THEMSELFS. SO THIS SURVICE SHOULD BE FREE. EVEN IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT. I KNOW ALOT OF PEOLPE THAT CANT AFFORD IT AND THERE DOGS GETS PREGNANT AND THE DOGS JUST WONDER OFF TO ONE OWNER THEN ANOTHER AND ANOTHER THAT SUCKS.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!