Pet License Fee Increases Get Preliminary OK

Citing a public health crisis caused by 27,000 stray dogs on Los Angeles streets, the City Council gave preliminary approval Wednesday to dramatic license-fee increases and restrictions on animals that are not spayed or neutered.

Several animal breeders said the ordinance unfairly penalizes responsible dog and cat owners, and some council members worried it may create a financial hardship for low-income pet owners.

But the council voted 10 to 3 to adopt the ordinance, which city officials say is the toughest in the nation, after a majority of council members said drastic action is needed to reduce the number of stray animals roaming streets and attacking residents.

“The overpopulation of dogs and cats in this city is a crisis of epic proportions,” Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas said. “It is a threat to the public safety and public health of residents, particularly to children.”

The measure would increase the license fee for dogs that are not spayed or neutered from $30 to $100 and double the $50 fee for a breeder’s license required of anyone whose pet has a litter of cats or dogs. The license fee for an altered dog will remain $10.

The measure also would require unaltered cats to be kept indoors. It sets a $500 fine for violators of the ordinance after two warnings.

The higher license fee will provide a financial incentive for dog owners to have their pets spayed or neutered, because the cost of the surgical procedures is readily available for under $100, according to Dan Knapp, director of the city Animal Services Department.

“The $100 is designed to help individuals think seriously about what they are doing,” Knapp told the council. “We have individuals who are allowing their animals to breed.”

About 42% of the city’s licensed dogs are unaltered.

The Animal Services Department estimates 160,000 dogs in the city are unlicensed. Of those, about 27,000 were found last year as strays on the street. Knapp said there may be as many as 1 million stray or feral cats on the streets.

Council members cited testimony at previous hearings by schoolchildren who said they were threatened on their way to school by packs of roaming dogs. Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski said there were 76,000 dog bites in Los Angeles last year, most involving children.

The ordinance is also humane for the animals, Councilman Mike Feuer said.

“We have stray animals who are unwanted, unprotected and uncared-for in huge numbers roaming our streets,” he said.

About 47,000 dogs and cats--three-fourths of all strays brought to city shelters--were put to death last year, many because they went unclaimed. The city’s euthanasia rate is about 8% higher than the national average.

“I have seen the problem in the last 35 years go from bad to worse,” said Erika Brunson, a member of the Coalition for Pets and Public Safety, a group of volunteer pet rescuers. “We have spent more of the taxpayer money killing animals in the shelters and not enough on spaying and neutering them.”

About 50 supporters of the ordinance, including actors Diane Keaton and Earl Holliman, attended the council meeting and many cheered when the council voted for the ordinance.

“We are thrilled,” said Susan Taylor, executive director of Actors and Others for Animals, a North Hollywood-based group. “We have to start motivating people to go out and spay and neuter their animals.”

Animal-rescue groups that backed the ordinance pledged significant private funds--more than $300,000--to provide discounted or free spaying and neutering for pets of low-income owners.

However, about two dozen pet owners and breeders urged the council to reject the ordinance, saying that similar fee measures have not worked in other cities, current Los Angeles programs are having an impact on the pet population and the higher fee will penalize people who breed dogs and cats responsibly.

“The major brunt of the ordinance will fall on responsible pet owners,” said Joan Miller of the Cat Fanciers’ Assn.

She predicted that many people will now go underground and not report animals and litters to avoid the new fees.

Mary Di Blasi of the California Federation of Dog Clubs said other cities have backed away from similar ordinances because they did not work, but Knapp said that was only in cities that had lax enforcement and education.

Council members Nick Pacheco, Nate Holden and Rudy Svorinich, Jr. voted against the measure, saying that the higher fee would be too large a burden for many people, especially low-income residents.

“I’m really concerned about the dollar amount and the effect it will have on poorer communities,” Pacheco said. He voted against the ordinance after the council rejected his proposal to set a June 2003 sunset date so the ordinance can be reevaluated for its impact on low-income residents.

Because it did not receive a unanimous vote on the first reading, the ordinance was set for final approval next week, when only eight votes will be needed for passage.