SPCA urges stricter laws, stiffer fines : News-Record.com : Greensboro & the Triad's most trusted source for local news and analysis

Although much of the blame for abuse falls on the owners, animal advocates with the county and the SPCA say laws need to be stiffened to discourage irresponsible owners from having pets and to give animal control officers more power.

Suggestions include:

* Laws that regulate dog breeding. Animal officials say no laws discourage excessive breeding and puppy mills. As a result, many animals are born with serious health problems, aren’t cared for properly and are abandoned.

A law designed to regulate commercial breeding passed in the state Senate in August, but was pulled before a House vote. The bill could be reintroduced this year.

Opponents of the bill said it would infringe on property rights and could harm responsible breeders.

* Taxes on spaying and neutering. Overman, with the SPCA, said owners should be required to pay a small fee for animals that are spayed or neutered and higher amounts, such as $25 or $50, for each animal that is not.

* More control for animal control officers. Such officers are confined to work within the civil system, mainly to levy fines. Animal Control officers said that being sworn law enforcement officers would streamline the process for bringing criminal charges in more serious abuse cases and enable them to carry a firearm and Taser for better personal protection.

* Stiffer penalties for animal abuse. Currently, most forms of animal cruelty that don’t involve torture, mutilation or beating are misdemeanors punishable with short jail sentences and/or small fines.

In the most serious cases, police can levy a felony animal cruelty charge that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, a fine or both.

* Updated local animal ordinances and fines.

d_random

January 10, 2010 - 10:23 am EST

Join www.humanesociety.org and www.ncvaw.org.

Cemetery

January 10, 2010 - 12:41 pm EST

Seriously, these laws need to be much stronger!!!

blackstream

January 10, 2010 - 1:22 pm EST

While I agree with some of these, I don't agree with any legislation that creates a tax on animal ownership of any kind, for any reason. We're already an over taxed People as it is. Another thing that really bothers me is the two faced approach animal control takes. Here in Lexington, we had an incident where a kitten became facsinated by the middle of a busy street. When we called animal control, the excuse given was that they didn't have anybody on duty to handle the problem. This is typical of animal control. They never can "do anything" when it requires them to do something. I was asked why couldn't I take care of the kitten until Monday when they might could come do something. I have three dogs on my property, one of which lives in the house. Not a good idea for a cat. Besides, I don't care for cats. However, I don't want to see any animal get killed for no reason. Fortunately, someone came along and decided they wanted the kitten. Since they want stiffer penalties for animal abuse and the like, the Winston Salem police need to be fined for shooting an unarmed bear!

Jarhead

January 10, 2010 - 3:02 pm EST

Until the lawmakers get involved with this problem,there will never be a gestapo convicted of anything. Thanks to the eight years of a dictatorship under Herr Bush.

jstevenh1952

January 10, 2010 - 5:20 pm EST

It is a shame that people who decide to include pets in their lives are irresponsible in the care and well being of their animals. I also believe that the mis-treatment of annimals, more specifically domesticated annimals inappropriate.

What is an even bigger shame is,this paper and those that own pets feel that the care and well being of animals is the moral and financial responsibility of everyone, not just those who own them.

A significant portion of our citizens choose not to have pets. possibly a majority. We are not cruel to or do we mistreat animals.We don't attend cock or dog fights. Nor do we condone the eating of horses or cats.We don't have a pet by choice. Yours is to have one. Please do not include non-pet owners in some social-ethic group, promoting it is in the best interests of our community that annimals are cared for at the expense to all. I don't buy into that.

What organizations like the SPCA propose is unfunded taxpayer mandates for the care of pets. They pull heart strings with pictures of abused annimals in ads and commercials soliciting contributions and laws protecting them. Stipulatng "annimal rights".

Laws that when or if implemented place the treatment of annimals a felony, with jail time are even more amusing. C'mon people. Who is going to pay for this? Taxpayers.

I find it rather foolish that those who do (have a pet), demand I should bear a portion of the economic responsibility .

Get a life pet owners.

samsonsmom

January 20, 2010 - 12:10 am EST

I have 4 dogs, 3 birds, 1 cat, 1 rabbit & 1 horse. I have not asked & do not expect anyone else to help me support my animals. 3 of my dogs are spayed or neutered which I paid for myself. I have not yet gotten the other fixed, but will soon. My cat & rabbit are inside so I have no reason for thinking they will get pregnant so they are not on the top of my list as of now to be fixed right away. I'll do it when I get ready. I think a tax on animals is stupid. I work to support my animals the same as I support my kids. I don't think that non-pet owners should be obligated to help support any animal, animal shelter or anything else of that nature if they don't want to. I think that it's a persons right to have animals as long as THEY are the ones supporting them. If you want to have 20 dogs then you should be able to support all of them. It's not my responsibility to help you take care of something that you don't have to have. If you can't support your animals then find someone that can who will take them.
As for an extra tax for spaying & neutering cats & dogs, that's just going to keep people from getting them fixed even more. It's already expensive enough without an extra tax added to it. That's just how I see it.

bsro1973

January 10, 2010 - 6:10 pm EST

I get sick of hearing the property rights argument against necessary regulation. Cmon people, this is a smokescreen for people wanting rights to do what they please without any thought for their actions. Also, the same people who complain about animal control not being able to do their job will complain about any motion to increase revenue which will allow the animal control officers to be able to do their job.

Brekka

January 10, 2010 - 7:22 pm EST

I have worked closely with several different county shelters here in NC, humane societies, and am currently with a rescue group. I'm going to be the first to say the above measures probably won't work. Most cats and dogs brought into rescue were just dumped on the road or let loose in the countryside. I don't blame the breeder because most are honest and truly want the best for the puppies the breed. Owners all ready pay a fee for the spay or neutering adding a tax just expands the government and doesn't help the SPCA. Giving more lenient laws and tax breaks to rescue organizations would help. They all do struggle financially and suffer from to over regulation. Some rescue groups are considering closing because of these struggles. It doesn't matter how tough the laws become there will always be abuse. What we need to concentrate on is taking care of what those who do make it into rescue. In addition, most rescue groups pay for the spay and neutering of the dogs. Why should they be taxed at a higher rate when they are helping the animals?

coyotekus

January 10, 2010 - 6:45 pm EST

First off when anyone has a pet they should look at the fact IT IS a long term commitment.No Matter What comes.Would anyone get rid of their kids because they cant afford to feed them?Have a family member be put to sleep for the same reason?Well in some way it has happen and still is happening.And the same goes for ALL animals.YES we need stricker laws on animal mills,and anyone who negelct or abuse any cat,dog,bird,fish,any animals they have.I still have my dog and cats and granted ive made a few changes for them they are still alive,and well cared for.Even when I lived in a place where no animals are allowed they are like my kids.They are not going nowhere.As far as taxes if you dont want the xtra for someone elses wrong doing THEN START AND CONTINUE TO HELP THE SPCA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Go and donate what they need its tax ductuable idots.Also help on rescue any animals and go help at any animal shealter.And see that since you may or may not have an animal do you like whats going on to them?Would like that to be done to you or a family member or your pets?Everybody is strap for money but we all can make a change for ourselves and everyone else.Includeing the animals.And getting your animals or strays fix is cheaper at some places but those people who make the effort for money to have it done may not have time off from work to bring and pick them up.Its at least a 2day process.So thats another thing that anyone can help out on.It may piss you off for the Extra taxes or Stronger Laws but something should have done a long time ago.So really think hard before you blame the SPCA or any animal rescue group on WHY they want it done or changed.

January 20, 2010 - 12:11 am EST

Rick

January 11, 2010 - 9:52 am EST

A pet tax? What would that accomplish?

news-record.com

LIFE