Dog License Fee

Re “Commission Recommends Raising Dog License Fee,” Jan. 11.

Citing an epidemic of unwanted dogs and cats, the Animal Regulation Commission has proposed an increase (to $100) in dog license fees. While I agree that there is a problem with the number of unwanted dogs and cats in Los Angeles, imposing higher fees on legitimate pet owners is certainly not the answer. Those of us who choose to comply with existing regulations and who obtain licenses for our dogs are generally responsible enough to prevent procreation of unwanted litters. It is the irresponsible pet owner (who chooses not to license his or her pet) causing the problem.

Cats are not required to be licensed. How is the increase in a dog license fee going to affect the number of unwanted cats? The commission proposes to require unaltered cats to remain indoors. Any unaltered cat over four months of age found outdoors will be impounded and the owners fined. Exactly how will the fine be assigned to the owner? Without a registration program, how do commissioners intend to track down the scofflaw cat owner? Are they really going to capture these cats and test every one for sterility?

Would not a better solution be increased penalties for failure to license both dogs and cats? In this way, we would punish the guilty instead of the innocent.

MICHAEL ALLEGRETTI

Northridge