Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: Decreasing Unwanted Pet Numbers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default Decreasing Unwanted Pet Numbers

    In line with the thread on desexing, what do you think will reduce unwanted pet numbers and why?

    In my view, one effective way of reducing numbers is identification. If a dog, or cat, is able to be identified then I believe there is less liklihood of animals being euthanased in pounds and shelters.

    Compliance is an issue and this is where resources should be spent. If animals can be identifed, they can re-united with owners and owners who allow them to wander or who dump them can be held responsible and financially liable.

    There is a distinct and total lack of synergy with identifitcation measures and programs currently. We need a national system. A national fee structure. Incentives for compliance. Incentives to encourage all round responsible pet ownership.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Rockhampton
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Some sort of de-motivation for bybers/puppy farms to breed, and increased education on what responsible pet ownership and buying is. Not quite sure how to do that though.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    I agree that puppy farmersshould be more tightly controlled most definitely. However, it would mean that this would also restrict registered breeders as there is no way that I know of, to qualify what a 'puppy farmer' is.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  4. #4

    Default

    Cooling off period for pet stores.

    Stopping impulse buying by making people "hold" a puppy or kitten and having to wait at least 24 hours to pay for it and pick it up.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    589

    Default

    Making a licence to own compulsory

  6. #6

    Default

    I think concentrating on Bybers is a way to decrease numbers (in part obviously won't solve the whole problem but lots of it). If you look at the amount of puppies for sale by bybs on the net there are HUNDREDS it is insane.

    Legislation to make BYBing illegal and then enforcement of those laws. Ie if a dog is found to have been bred from and is not owned by a registered breeder then the animal should be confiscated (along with puppies if their are any), desexed and rehomed. This is where I think our taxes should be going not into desexing rebates. The more BYBs we cut out the better, then people have to go to breeders, pet shops (would prefer they are not allowed to sell live animals either or at the very least impose a waiting period as suggested above) or rescues.

    I realise it is unlikely you will ever be able to completely stop BYBers but if they bought in penalties for breeding when you are not registered and actually enforced punishments/fines/confiscation of animals it would help.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    I think I'd have much stricter conditions on point of sale for puppies and kittens.

    They'd have to be able to demonstrate that the animals are getting enough socialization with others of similar age, and with humans, and there would have to be a level of cleanliness about the accomodation. It shouldn't be a repellant level of smell and the coats of the puppies should be relatively clean. And puppies should not be left alone overnight before the age of 8 weeks.

    All puppies be microchipped before sale - does that really happen in NSW pet shops? It is supposed to. And proof of id eg valid drivers licence - to buy - so at least they have a chance of finding who bought the puppy.

    And I'd love to see an owner's licence. It should be cheap but include a test showing that the owners know the basics ie food, water, clean dry place to sleep and how to train a dog. Anyone who says "Rub their nose in it" for toilet training should fail.

  8. #8

    Default

    I think an owners license would be a good idea.

    I also think it would be in the best interest of the pet shops to desex upon leaving (even though as the other topic pointed out that this doesn't mean less animals).

    And education - People need to understand the needs of dogs and I mean really understand. Dogs aren't just something that can sit in the yard.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    Does mandatory desexing work to reduce the number of unwanted pets. It seems logical if there are fewer fertile animals, there would be fewer unwanted litters.

    But this doesn't seem to address the corresponding increase in ferals and illegal unregistered, undesexed pets. Governments and councils don't seem too keen in putting any money into policing this. They can't even keep up with burglaries and illegal building additions.

    This site suggests that mandatory desexing is good for stopping unwanted animals
    Population Control | Centre for Companion Animals in the Community
    And then links a cat study that shows that mandatory desexing made no difference to the number of animals going into the shelters (eg RSPCA) in the ACT.

    It didn't seem to address lack of enforcement of desexing, or the increase in feral popuplations. Ie it's one thing for a government to make a law, but it has zero effect if they don't actually enforce it.

    This paper seems more promising.
    http://www.ccac.net.au/files/The_iss...AM06Lawrie.pdf

    But it does point out that as capacity opens up in the city shelters, they increase their intake from rural areas - so it may be that unwanted litters that would previously have been dispatched by the farmer - are making it to the city shelters.

    It also points out that the most effective way to decrease the numbers of unwanted pets is to have community wide education and public awareness raising.

    I would think there is plenty of research available to show in wild populations that as resources increase, so does their population. So desexing may increase the resources available to (semi) feral animals and they breed more.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    I think I'd have much stricter conditions on point of sale for puppies and kittens.

    They'd have to be able to demonstrate that the animals are getting enough socialization with others of similar age, and with humans, and there would have to be a level of cleanliness about the accomodation. It shouldn't be a repellant level of smell and the coats of the puppies should be relatively clean. And puppies should not be left alone overnight before the age of 8 weeks.

    All puppies be microchipped before sale - does that really happen in NSW pet shops? It is supposed to. And proof of id eg valid drivers licence - to buy - so at least they have a chance of finding who bought the puppy.

    And I'd love to see an owner's licence. It should be cheap but include a test showing that the owners know the basics ie food, water, clean dry place to sleep and how to train a dog. Anyone who says "Rub their nose in it" for toilet training should fail.
    Yes, it happens. This is why I also don't believe the claim that pet shops are the big problem we think they are. If you look at statistical data for NSW pounds, the bigger percentage of dogs (and cats) are not mircochipped.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •