"When intact dogs are illegal, only outlaws will have intact dogs."
My thoughts; though this applies for all areas, not just Chicagoland,
The big problem I see with these things is: just making something prohibited doesn't really stop the problem. the irresponsible owner who doesn't care about an "oops" breeding will probably be the same person who doesn't bother with spaying/neutering their dog. People who don't care about legal issues certainly won't care about this.
Are the cities going to help needy owners with the financial cost of altering? Not all pet owners are financially secure, and thus consider spay/neutering an expense they can't afford.
And who is going to cover the extra man-power expense of examining dogs to ensure they're within compliance? Inspecting the dog, filing paperwork, and all the administrative work and time that comes along with that sort of stuff. Will they do follow-ups on non-compliant owners and dogs? Won't that take manpower away from more serious issues such as fight-rings, abuse, and neglect cases?
Let's be realistic, not everyone with an intact dog wants to be a breeder. Some are against altering for macho, health, even religious views. To assume that this will make BYBs more respectable is a nice idea; but like the American Prohibition period, it didn't solve the problems caused by alcohol. It won't fix these problems, it'll just make what they do illegal. And I really can't imagine dog-fighters caring about such legislation because they are already generally involved in other illegal activites of varying severity.
Just more political ideals formed by some ivory tower admin without any real grasp of the street-reality of the situations. |