Y’all, via Say Uncle, news so stupid I only hope it turns out to be a hoax. The California House has just voted to, in effect outlaw mixed breed dogs and cats. Under this law, you Californians will be required to spay or neuter your mixed breed dogs and cats, because only pure-bred dogs and cats are allowed to breed.
1. I think everyone should neuter their dogs and cats. It’s safer for the animal; it’s safer for the neighborhood; it lessens the amount they pee on things in the house (Orange Cat, I’m talking to you); it reduces embarrassing leg humping; it lessens dog aggression, etc. etc. etc. If you have a pet, you should neuter it. You should just do this because it’s good pet ownership. No law should require you to do it.
2. On the other hand, there’s an important point lost on California that I want to make perfectly clear. Purebred dogs are not healthier than mutts. In fact, many purebred dogs are exceedingly unhealthy. Human intervention in dog breeding has not made healthier dogs; it’s made dogs that look really different from each other. There’s a huge difference between those two things. Look at the English bulldog. That’s a dog that has been so fucked up by how we breed them that they can’t give birth vaginally. If English bulldogs don’t have c-sections, they can’t reproduce.
If we legislate out of existence mutts, breeders will have no healthy stock to which they can return when they’ve fucked up a breed we love dearly beyond repair. This should seem obvious, but it’s not. Dogs share more in common across breeds than they do within breeds. When scientists traced canine DNA back to the handful of Asian wolves all dogs appear to be descended from, they did not find that the DNA inherited from those wolves was clumped by breed (in other words, you couldn’t say “Hey, look, all German Shepherds are descended from Ancestor A), but instead evenly distributed. In other words, breed distinctions are more cosmetic than genetic.
Which means, importantly, that it behooves all of us to keep a healthy genetic pool from which to draw our canine fancies. If we have a pool to draw on, we can fix our foul-ups.
3. As Uncle points out, there are a lot of organizations that will call something a breed. Are they going to by AKC, CKC, perhaps BKC (B.’s Kennel Club)? For instance, the blue tick hound, a dog any Southerner would recognize on sight, isn’t recognized as a legitimate breed (yet) by the AKC or the CKC (though it is by the UKC). But clearly, if you breed one blue tick to another, you get that same kind of dog in the litter. What about the Blue Lacy? As far as I know, no Kennel Club recognizes that as a breed, but the state of Texas recently declared it one.
and
4. Purebred cats? Are you kidding me?! This had me rolling on the floor. Who pays for a cat? Who would pay for a cat? The whole point of cats is the wide variety of weirdness they bring into your house for just the cost of vet care. Don’t get me wrong. I love my cats and my cats are neutered, but I would never pay for a cat more than, say $25. See, here, because cats haven’t been divvied up into breeds as long as dogs have, you have an enormous pool of cats who are just cats and much smaller pools of cats who are members of breeds. The State of California really thinks it’s going to be able to get rid of the large pool of just cats? And for what?
Again, purebred cats aren’t healthier than cat cats.
No, something about this is really fucked up and stinks to high heavens.
Also, can I just say that I love a good black-mouthed cur? I just think that is a dog-lookin’ dog.
Tiny Cat Pants 
think everyone should neuter their dogs and cats.
Neutering has been shown to create an increased risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer) in certain large-breed dogs. That’s why we didn’t neuter our Bernese Mt. Dog.
For a long time now, I have thought that it would be a good idea to pass legislation stating that the only animals pet stores can sell are ones that come from local shelters. This would help to eliminate the puppy mills, and help ensure that homeless animals find homes. It looks like California is going in exactly the opposite direction!
Yep, pretty much everything all three of you have said so far. And I think it’s really much more than just widely known how much higher ratio of health issues with purebred dogs and cats are.
RockyCat, that’s a super idea about the pet store/shelters thing.
Preach it, sister!
No offense to any purebred owners out there, but every single nuerotic, seperation-anxiety-ridden dog I’ve ever seen was purebred.
I absolutely love English Bulldogs (they are my second favorite breed behind Sussex Spaniels), but they are just so miserable with their breathing problems, they’re actually a little depressing to have around.
This, coming from a lover of dog shows, and the AKC.
Pingback: Nashville is Talking » Play Ball(s)!
The one purebred cat that I have had was loveable but suffered from several health issues that the vet told me were “indicitive of the breed”. The litany of other cats I have had the pleasure of sharing my time and tuna with have all been “just cats”. Their personalities are what every cat’s should be… Neurotic as hell and completely entertaining in their crazed feline state.
Preach on Aunt B.
RockyCat, that is a FAB idea. I love it. I think there are good and bad points to purebred dogs, just as there are good and bad points about mutts.
I currently have the best dog I have ever owned. My dog Tiny is exceptionally well behaved, other than the fact that he’s a little cranky. Otherwise, he doesn’t jump up on people, doesn’t shit in the house, doesn’t take off running on me, etc, etc, etc. He’s half terrier (of some sort, we suspect rat terrier) and half chihuahua. Those 2 dogs, purebred-wise, are some of the most neurotic bastards ever, but somehow Tiny got the best of both worlds. Other than the random biting people, that is.
I don’t know that I readlly had a good point here, just wanted to blither.
my street-bred mutt can run circles literally and mentally around our daily visitor, the weimariner.
and, not that any one asked, but the vet thinks my street mutt has rottie, chow and german shepherd in her. In other words, all the breeds with nasty reputations except maybe pit bull or doberman pinscher (although maybe d. p. instead of rottie accounts for the ginger eyebrows).
She’s a glorious sweetie pie.
If I could have any dog I wanted, I would have a springer spaniel with a beagle’s personality. Can anyone explain to me how to manage this?
The only true purebred dog who’s personality I truly embrace is the Vizla. The chef and Ambie (in-laws) have their second one. Duchess is a bird dog with a weinmariner body type and is completely chestnut in color, including her stunning eyes. She thinks she is a lap dog and it a bit too bony to actually feel nice to snuggle with…
This is their second, the first being Duke (naturally) and they both are lovable creatures.
Other than that, I am all about mutts be it canine or feline. I am with the whole pet store selling them as opposed to puppy mills. Great idea!!
The whole point of cats is the wide variety of weirdness they bring into your house for just the cost of vet care.
Well put B. My cats are an endless source of amusement, bafflement, and companionship. They were free. My mother bought a pure-bred Maine Coon. It died 8 months later.
My sister paid something like $1000 for a “Cockapoo.” I told her to go to the shelter and get a puppy. “You don’t know it’s history” she said to me. She now has a thousand dollar mutt that shits and sleeps in it and is not potty trained while my mutt, Chelsea, was free and came to me potty trained. Go figya.
California’s probably just trying to come up with a way to ban pit bull breeds because most of them aren’t recognized by the major dog-breeding orgs. They’ve tried banning them outright on a number of occasions, but they can’t muster up the support (probably because those bans are a terrible and stupid idea).
There is something positively un-democratic and un-American about this law. This whole dog-breeding thing has always smacked of elitism and Old World nobility to me. Here we have the hegemonic power of the monied elites, joined with the media which is invested in the whole “dog-show” thing. I see here a conspiracy by Big Dog-Breeding to corner the market…
Sorry, ever since grad school I just cannot resist a good class-analysis rant!
All kidding aside, this is ridiculous news – and I love my good old-fashioned, democratic, god-fearing American mutt! (“Yes, Ginger is a good dog! Yes she is!”)
I totally agree, B.
Did anyone else see that recent PBS program about how most of the currently recognized dog breeds came into being during the Victorian Era when folks thought it would be fun to pass the time creating all sorts of horribly damaged designer dogs? Lovely. I love all dogs (and cats; I work for two generic domestic shorthairs) but the fact that, for instance, a bulldog is so wide at the shoulders that the puppies cannot pass through the birth canal is deeply wrong.
Just like with royal families, it is important and healthy to breed out on a fairly regular basis.
I love my cats and my cats are neutered, but I would never pay for a cat more than, say $25.
I don’t think you’ve been to a shelter or animal rescue group lately — the going rate is more like $80, which is what we paid for our younger cat last year.
Of course, what we paid for was a cat who was already neutered and had his first set of shots, so it’s more that those expenses were included than that we were paying for a specific breed.
I’ve always been a cat person, and I’ve never had a purebred anything (cat or dog). In my immediate family we are currently owned by a total of 5 cats (2 mine, 3 my mother’s), and they’re all absolutely spoiled rotten.
People who would pay obscene amounts of money to have a purebred animal–when there are so many “regulars” out there who need a home–strike me as either a little strange or rather pretentious. As, “look at me, I can pay $2000 for a dog”, when there’s no guarantee that dog will be any more lovable, healthy or well-behaved than that dog you can get at the pound for $50. (Same holds true for cats.)
Yes, spay and neuter them…otherwise you’re contributing to an ongoing overpopulation problem. And they’re a lot easier to live with, too.
Even though my two little buggers didn’t cost anything more than a vet consult, sometimes they’re worth their weight in gold…just for the unconditional love, cuteness, and sheer craziness their antics bring. I’d take them over most people any day.
We’ve always had mutt-cats and dogs, but now we have a Jack Russell terrorist (JRT) dog named Oliver.
Nice discussion of animal racism- thanks to all. Can’t commit, but I think we all know that inbreeding is risky. And that neutering of pets is good …
Our JRT was neutered at the earliest recommended time, but he humps with great gusto certain folks’ legs and feet, and pees liberally around the house (but never poops). And of course, consistent with his breed’s predilection, he Cannot Abide A Rodent.
He’s a small dog who has no idea of his own size. He would chase a fully loaded logging truck if he wasn’t always leashed. He is nearly 3 years old and still runs and jerks at the very end of his rope gasping when something catches his eye. Like when the horses are turned out. He goes nuts on his leash on the other side of the fence. He is a control freak! When the cat is in the house he makes sure that she is properly monitored. The cat (her name is Hunter) tolerates him, knowing he’s just another one of those tiny, Napoleonic assholes.
And yet, we still love the little bugger!
I think I prefer a good mutt. My last dog was part chow, part something else, and he was a good long lived dog. He died when I was 22, and we got him when I was 11, and I think he was a year or two old then.
Well, the law wouldn’t be all bad if it’d get you to move out here. *winks*
But seriously… that’s an idiotic proposal, and I hope it’s not true/not enforced/quickly overturned. I’ve never had any purebred pets (well, I don’t know.. do rats and farm ducks come with pedigrees?), and while I like the idea of discernible breeds/qualities (that is, I don’t agree with the people who want to see all such things dissolved, both because those arguments tend to be unsatisfying and because I’m shallow and like the idea of having a lot of interesting looking animals with more-or-less static identifications), I find the fetishization that generally comes with pedigree concern to be really squicky. As long as my pet is cute and healthy and well-behaved, I don’t need to know about the sex life of its ancestors for the past 50 years.
This law sounds snobby and such, but I disagree with the conspiracy theories (anti-pitbull, greedy breeders). The usual advice is, “If you don’t intend to breed your dog, get it fixed.” Well, practically no one “intends” to breed mutts. That breeding just kinda happens.
The legislators had to find a cut-and-dried criterion for which animals are intended to be bred, and which are not. BTW, as for most purebreds not intending to be bred either: friends who own purebreds tell me that they would have to pay more for an intact dog, since the breeders don’t like competition from their own product. So purebreds are already pre-fixed, unless they are intended to be bred.
My county animal shelters (Tampa) euthanize 29,000 unwanted dogs and cats per year. If there were any chance that this law would wipe-out mutts, then I would oppose it (as would my wonderful mutt). However, the law will probably barely make a dent in the problem of unwanted dogs.
Yes, but see, indifferent children, the fundamental problem is that some dogs have jobs, even dogs in Florida (we see this with the “pit bull” problem, with “pit bull” being a breed, a type, and a job description). There are people who breed dogs that don’t meet kennel club standards and those people have legitimate reasons to breed dogs. Folks who breed dogs for hunting want dogs that have stamina and good noses and other things and don’t necessarily give a shit if their dogs conform to decorative breed standards. Think of the Irish Setter/Red Setter controversy. The Irish Setter is pretty much useless as a field dog and so hunters outcrossed in order to breed a dog that works in the field and more closely resembles, at least in terms of usefulness, what the Irish Setter used to be. Should it be illegal for hunters who need a dog like the red setter to breed that dog?
Or what about folks like David Leavitt, who have been working to develop a bulldog that resembles the ancestors of the modern bulldogs and is a, as he puts it, free breather, free breeder, and free whelper? Do we really want laws to discourage that kind of work?
There’s a part of me that thinks there’s a weird class element to this too. Sure, there are a lot of places that do free or low-cost spay/neuter work* … but they’re generally extremely busy, and waiting for them can take months in a busy area. Paying to get an animal spayed/neutered can prove quite expensive, as there are a lot of vets that won’t take animals that haven’t also been thoroughly vaccinated.
(full text here)
So looking at it.. you’ve got four months from the animal’s birth (so woe is you if you find your pet on the street and decide to adopt) in which to come up with the money, get an appointment, take time off work, and get your pet fixed… or to find a free- or low-cost place, get on their schedule, take time off work, and get them fixed. If you don’t, you’ll be fined at least $500. There are definitely class issues there.
* The act does stipulate that: “To the extent that funding is available pursuant to this chapter, a local animal control agency shall establish a free and low-cost spay and neuter program for low-income individuals. The agency shall undertake outreach efforts to inform qualified persons about these programs.” Unfortunately, it does not stipulate how available funding is determined, or how much of said funding should be allocated to these types of activity. Nor does it specify what “low income” means for the purposes of this law (it’s generally fairly restrictive), or what specific kinds of services ought be provided (for instance, whether they ought also do free or low cost neutering for cryptorchid animals, which generally costs extra… despite being a rather common and life-threatening issue.) … in short, despite the ameliorative tone of the language, it’s widely enough written that not much is likely to change.