You can follow this blog: on 
No mandatory spay/neuter law for OC pets
September 18th, 2008, 7:00 am · 16 Comments · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer
The 2007-2008 grand jury urged Orange County to adopt a mandatory spay/neuter law for pets.
Now the county has officially 
said, “No way!”
In its legally-required response to the grand jury’s report, “Is Orange County Going to the Dogs?” the county said, “This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or it is not reasonable.”
Nor will the county go on record supporting State Assembly Bill 1634, the mandatory spay/neuter bill pending in Sacramento.
The response was approved in August and due at the grand jury office Sept. 2.
The problem:
- In 2006-2007, the county euthanized more than 13,000 animals (about one of every two accepted) at a cost of $322,478.
- A large percentage of animals were put down not because they were unadoptable, but because there was a lack of space at the shelter.
The county’s solution?
“The Board of Supervisors has approved a pilot Spay/Neuter Voucher and Feral Cat Trap-Neuter-Release programs as part of the Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget with an initial County investment of $50,000 for each program. OC Animal Care continues to enhance its responsible pet owner education, which includes classroom presentations, shelter tours, government access channel advertisements, and a spay/neuter educational brochure on the homepage of OC Animal Care website,” the county’s response said.
“The Board of Supervisors has for many years approved a non-sterilized dog license fee that is substantially higher than the sterilized dog license fee to further encourage dog owners to spay and neuter their dogs. 
Currently, an unsterilized dog license fee is $100 for a twelve-month period. A sterilized dog license fee is $24 for a twelve-month period. Cat licensing in the County of Orange is optional and available through OC Animal Care.
“In response to the Grand Jury Report, the City Managers Financial and Operational Advisory Board has expressed interest in examining methods to achieve full cost recovery for the unsterilized dog license fee.”
Meantime, a South County animal group has numbers showing that the OC shelter’s kill rate climbed over the last year.
The Watchdog continues to ballyhoo the voluntary spay-neuter program adopted by the Live-Free-or-Die state of New Hampshire. Since it was adopted in 1994, euthenasia rates have dropped 70 percent, and 30,000 fewer cats and dogs came into shelters. How? By targeting low-income pet owners, and offering nearly free spay/neuter procedures.
A no-nanny-state approach even OC can love.
(To read the original story on the grand jury report, click here.)
More Watchdog:
- OC’s dead pets enter the food chain. Mmmm.
- OC’s dead pets enter the food chain, part two
- OC’s dead pets enter the food chain, part three
- OC’s dead pets enter the food chain, part four
- Stop the killing! A no-nanny approach OC can emulate
- Recycling dead animals 1: Waste not, want not?
- Recycling dead animals 2: Waste not, want not?
September 18th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Good to see our supervisors are rejecting Light Bulb Lloyd Levine’s AB 1634 PETA/Humane Society driven nanny state legislation.
This data is suspect. What is the breakdown of cats versus dogs euthanized? If they have the total number, they ought to at least break it down by animal type. They also ought to be able to sort it by breed. If this were implemented, do we really think that the animal control officers would be going into the gang areas where the pit bulls or “lab mixes” are being bred? They in all likelihood would cruise well heeled suburbs looking to harrass law abiding citizens. I think we have a problem with the makeup of our grand juries.
September 18th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Tax breaks for spayed and neutered humans…
September 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I am so glad this foolish bill was rejected. In addition to cutting into our freedoms, it would have likely been the end of the mixed breed and pet prices probably would have inceased four fold.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:31 am
If you are ok with this bill being shot down then you should go to the pound and adopt as many pets as you can. You are the reason soooo many of them are going to be put down. Shame on you. It is your responsibility to make sure your pet does not have unwanted litters. If you cant adhere to the laws for breeding, then maybe you should not breed animals. That’s why we have breeders license. So idiots dont keep making litters of unwanted pets. Its like the white trash culture of animals and you have made it worse by saying no to this bill. All we need is dog sized trailer homes. Freedom this, freedom that.. what about the animal who had no choice and is now going to die! F your freedom.. you did to them.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Just goes to show you people don’t give a sh*t about the animals. Before you spit on a law like this I recommend you volunteer in the shelters and be responsible for putting the animals down yourselves.
September 18th, 2008 at 11:03 am
We need this law! There are way too many irresponsible pet owners. When you get a pet it should be part of the family, it should be well trained and it should not be a nuisance to your neighbors. Too many people get a pet and abandon it in their backyards where it becomes a nuisance to the neighbors. Grow up you irresponsible pet owners.
September 18th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Why on Earth does anyone think it is their right to bring more animals into the world when they have no intention of keeping, providing food, shelter and medical care for those animals? When 13,000 in OC alone were killed because of lack of homes? Doesn’t ones “rights comes with “responsibilty? Why should we build more shelters so you can exerciose your right to cause more animals to die? You want your right to breed? An animal lover huh? Fine, step up and take care of every animal you just must bring into this world.
We, as humans, send men to the moon, our technology is amazing, we cure disease…but when it comes to over animal population we scratch our heads and decide the only solution is to build more shelters? This is simply humans not giving a #$*t because it doesn’t affect their quality of life one bit. Sad, true and disgusting. It would be nice if someone with a heart and a backbone can be in charge of laws regarding animals.
September 18th, 2008 at 11:20 am
im sure hitler justified his actions also..
September 18th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Finally some sense from the supervisors.
September 18th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Cannot believe people can think that letting animals run free and have liters of cats and dogs is fine knowing that 13,000 of them we will pay to kill. How many of those that do not want the law passes have actually been to the animal shelter.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
people should mind their own business and not worry about who is spaying/neuturing their animals. too many nosey people, especially those damn weird humaniacs who got nothing else but an animal
September 18th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
I would neuter my dog if the author of the bill get himself neutered first.
September 24th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Nosy people? If you think this is a violation of your rights and cutting your freedoms then I challenge you to go to the pound and work for a day with the animals that you have no problem killing. Its you and you people alone that are killing these animals. If you cant afford to pay for the dogs as pure breeds.. then you dont deserve them. If you think it takes away your freedoms.. what about the life of the animal you just killed because you wouldnt pay 40$ to have the overpopulation stopped. Sick sick people. Let me guess.. you all drive SUVs that have 20 gallon tanks because its your freedom right.. not the fact that youre distroying the earth. Just go die off.
October 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Personally I think this bill has good intentions but would not produce the desired results. The problem areas will be lower income neighborhoods where even enforcement of pet licenses would be difficult let alone enforcement of a spay/neuter law. How many pets in low income areas do you think are unlicensed? Since the large price difference for licenses between an altered pet vs unaltered pet is, in theory, supposed to encourage the owner to have them fixed, especially for lower income families, what makes you think that people willing to disregard one law wouldn’t disregard this one? I think stricter enforcement of the licenses along with the proposed spay/neuter voucher would yield better results.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:20 am
You all are idiots. I wish i could neuter the ignorant OC’ers. Go and put one of those dogs down yourself, then see if you dont agree with this law. morons
October 30th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
It is truly disgusting to hear people touting their “rights” to alter/unalter their pets. I’ll bet most of them are the reason why pets end up on the streets or in shelters, only to die. I cannot imagine why someone wouldn’t neuter their pet except so they can make some “easy” money. Granted, there are people who truly believe their pets health would be better without the neutering but those are few and far between. How so selfish though to let the animal suffer in heat because you had to exercise your “freedom”.
People like this disgust me and wish you’d do us all a favor and go jump off a cliff. Maybe that way, a few litters here and there could be prevented by your disgusting irresponsibility and selfishness.