Last night I had a conversation with a new acquaintance. He told me that he had two cats that were about to “burst” (ie give birth). When I asked him why he hadn’t paid for his cats, he said: “It’s too expensive.” This man lives alone in a 6,000 square foot house, owns acreage and collects cars, and yet he wasn’t willing to spend $100 per cat to prevent unwanted births. He said: “It’s not a problem, I give the kittens in the grocery store.” Unfortunately, his attitude and actions are typical of and represent a great burden to animal lovers, as well as to state and local municipalities that must deal with large populations of unwanted animals. Every year we euthanize between 4 and 10 million domestic companion animals. Most of these are adoptable cats and dogs. In my opinion, overpopulation is preventable. Below are 5 suggestions that could radically change the fate of abandoned and unwanted animals. Implementing and enforcing these “laws” would cost less and be much more humane than our current system of maintaining public and private animal shelters.

1. Require a License. Anyone who wants to breed animals (or is too cheap to spay or neuter a pet) will need to purchase a license. The license would cost at least $1,000. A number would be issued and the license would have to be updated annually at a rate determined by the state municipality. Anyone not licensed and found with new offspring of companion animals will be fined $1,000 per litter and all animals will be immediately impounded and taken to a shelter where they will be spayed, neutered and placed with a responsible guardian (i.e. , new owners). If the fine was not paid, it would remain attached to the property like a mechanic’s lien.

2. Limit how animals can be sold. Sale of all animals would be limited to regulated pet stores. Anyone caught selling an animal on the street, through the newspaper or on the web would be required to do a minimum of 30 days of community service. Pet stores would need to keep an annual record of the number of pets produced by a licensed breeder and submit these records to the state.

3. Breeders would have a specific number of animals that they could produce each year. For example, a breeder may be allowed to sell a total of 50 to 55 dogs to pet stores. Since litter sizes vary, flexibility would be needed, but there would be a limit to the breeder. Any breed not in compliance would have their license revoked and all animals removed and placed in a shelter for adoption. They couldn’t get a new license. The number of animals available for sale would be based on supply and demand. If the number of animals available were low, breeders and pet store owners could make more money on each pet sold. The people who bought the animal may have to pay more for their pet and are therefore more likely to value and care for it.

4. Cities would be fined by the federal government for not capturing stray animals. Initially, the federal government would subsidize state and local municipalities so they could add staff to humanely trap stray dogs. Unfortunately, the number of stray animals euthanized during the first two years of this program would be high. The shelters would be very full; however, it would end the cycle and the costs of stray and unwanted animals. After the initial capture of stray dogs, cities and the state would be responsible for maintaining a no stray dog ​​policy. States that did not comply would be fined by the federal government.

5. Anyone who adopts or purchases an animal will have a 48 hour waiting period. People would go to the pet store, search for a pet, and once they selected a specific pet, they would fill out an application and pay a nominal fee. The pet store owner would provide a sheet to the prospective buyer on the annual costs of caring for the pet and provide a list of breed-specific needs. The buyer would walk away without the animal, and the pet store would run a criminal background check to make sure the buyer was not a prosecuted animal abuser. Pet would be placed on hold at time of request. 2 days later the buyer would have the right to acquire the animal. If the buyer didn’t show up on the pickup date, the pet would be taken off hold and the pet store would keep the money from the pet application. This would ensure that people buying pets have been informed of what they are getting into.

I realize that these original ideas have many potential problems. Some breeders and people with strays would shoot the surplus of any litter or kill animals inhumanely, millions of strays would be euthanized and people would break the law. But these tragic events are already happening on a daily basis. If we could adopt any of these policies, we could reduce the burden of stray animals on good-hearted people, as well as on federal and state budgets, and place the burden where it belongs: on breeders, pet stores, and the people who They refuse to spay or neuter. his farts.