Don't know if this goes here or not, just don't really see why this is worth the $14 million. Schwarzenegger backs speedier killing of strays SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to repeal a state law that requires animal shelters to hold stray dogs and cats for up to six days before killing them. Instead, there would be a three-day requirement for strays. Other animals, including birds, hamsters, potbellied pigs, rabbits, snakes and turtles, could be killed immediately. Schwarzenegger has told the state Legislature that the changes could save local governments that operate shelters up to $14 million. An estimated 600,000 dogs and cats are put to death each year in California, including 34,000 in Los Angeles alone. The waiting period has caused overcrowding and forced some shelters to kill off animals simply to make room for new ones, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance. "Because of space limitations, the shelters are being forced to euthanize animals who are otherwise highly adoptable immediately after the holding time," Palmer said. Despite Schwarzenegger's huge popularity, some political observers think the proposal will meet stiff resistance. "There is no organized constituency of cats and dogs, but certainly the pet owners of America will find this reprehensible," said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, Sacramento. "Cats and dogs are like mom and apple pie," she said. "Don't mess with the pets. Most people prefer them to other people." The 1998 law is named for former state Sen. Tom Hayden, who said the governor's proposal "will inflict heartbreak on a lot of owners and people in the animal adoption world."
Don't care one way or another about the policy itself, but I don't understand 1. if people prefer these pets to other people, why aren't they out adopting these pets?, and 2. Why would people make a big deal about three days? I understand those three days could be the difference in an animal being or not being adopted every once in a while, but I can't imagine it would make that much difference in the total number of animals that were killed.
Horrible. Absolutely horrible. Arnold was one of the only republicans I was starting to respect, but not anymore.
Is this necessary? Are there really that many wild turtles and potbellied pigs roaming around California to warrant legislation? What about non-potbellied pigs? Do they go free?
Perhaps the specialized nature of those pets causes situations where having to keep them around for six days because of the state law increases costs on shelters. The shelter where I got my cats has rooms for cats and room for dogs. I'm not sure they would be equipped to handle turtles. And I'm not sure such animals are all that adoptable. Plus, they aren't cute at all, so I'm obviously not against killing them.
Turtles and hamsters rejoice! The Terminator changed his mind. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20040625-1629-ca-animalshelters.html SACRAMENTO – Saying he made a mistake months ago that would have made it easier for shelters to kill stray dogs and cats, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Friday he has reinstated the state's six-day waiting period before lost animals could be killed. As part of his budget proposal that was first drafted in December, the governor had asked the Legislature to repeal a 1998 law that requires the shelters to hold animals up to six days before destroying them. The governor wanted to save money bu cutting the waiting period in half. But after a nationwide storm of protest, the governor hastily organized a press conference outside his Capitol office and told reporters of his error. "I realized last night that there was a mistake that I made on the budget," he explained, noting he only had a few weeks to put his proposed budget together between his inauguration in November and when the document went to the printers in December to meet the Jan. 10 deadline for delivery a spending plan to the Legislature. The idea to cut the waiting period would have saved local governments that operate the shelters $14 million, according to the governor's office. Statewide, an estimated 600,000 dogs and cats are put to death each year, including 34,000 in Los Angeles alone. In addition to cats and dogs, the shelters also care for many other animals including birds, hamsters, potbellied pigs, rabbits, snakes and turtles. H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance, had said the six-day waiting period caused overcrowding and forced some shelters to kill off animals. Despite Schwarzenegger's huge popularity, some political observers think he is stepping in the cat litter. "There is no organized constituency of cats and dogs, but certainly the pet owners of America will find this reprehensible," said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, Sacramento. "Cats and dogs are like mom and apple pie," she said. "Don't mess with the pets. Most people prefer them to other people."
It's funny since it might pit one liberal branch against another. We all know that there is a hunger problem in parts of the U.S. Why can't we feed them stray pets? PETA would be all over this but if it saves lives I say do it.
Because meat from dogs and cats, being carnivores at the top of their food chain, has very little nutritional value. Also, since the animals are not raised in a controlled environment, a great number of strays harbor various diseases. Plus, there would be a huge moral uproar if the government suddenly decided that it was okay to serve Fluffy for dinner. Overall, a poor idea all around.
I realize that Arnie's last name is hard to spell, but come on - if you're going to start a thread about him, double check the name. It's SCHWARZENEGGER.