By Greg Pollock

Florida HB451 is already inciting controversy, even before the bill has found a committee. The piece of legislation makes mandatory the sterilization of all pets over the age of four months, with an included 30-day grace period. The bill also provides some dubious exemptions, including racing animals, such a greyhounds, other competition animals, service animals, and those for whom “sterilization would endanger the animal’s health because of its age, infirmity, disability, illness, or other medical consideration[s].”

Opponents of the bill claim that forcing pet owners to sterilize their pets is not only a violation of owner rights, but of the pets themselves. The American Kennel Club (AKC), the most notable registry of purebred dog pedigrees in the United States, is in opposition of HB451, issuing the public statement via their website: “It is vital that all breeders and concerned dog owners in Florida contact their elected state legislators and voice their strong opposition to this unreasonable and unenforceable measure.” The AKC’s view isn’t surprising, considering the legislation’s exemption on sterilization for licensed breeding dogs comes as no consolation to an organization that specifies dogs should be no younger than 8 months before breeding. Under the proposed legislation, no newborn dogs would live long enough to even reach the AKC’s determined breeding age before being sterilized. Other opponents to the bill argue a similar case against its listed exemptions: that any racing greyhound or competition animal will also not be performing until after the specified 4 months. In essence, very few of the listed exemptions are even possible in modern pet practice.

The issue is particularly complex because advocates both for and against the bill feel they are protecting pet rights. Those opposed opine that their pets are being mutilated, while those in favor of the bill espouse the protection of the potential offspring of unsterilized pets. Animal shelters and animal rescuers have been vocal in their support of HB451. The text of the bill argues “many euthanized dogs and cats are the offspring of family pets” and that “one unneutered male dog or cat can impregnate dozens of females, leading to hundreds of unwanted animals.” Opponents to the bill argue that the language of the bill itself uses poor data and misrepresented information to push its agenda.

Californians may remember when the same law passed in the city of Los Angeles last February by a 10 to 1 vote of the city council. This victory hardly set a precedent for pet sterilization across the nation, as many opponents of HB 451 worry might happen. It did, however, attract some news attention, as INXS member Garry Beers and noted pet sterilization advocate Bob Barker were present to commemorate the legislation’s passing.

If the allegedly shaky language and incorrect facts of Florida’s HB 451 cause trouble when it finds a committee, Floridians may not be out of dog house yet: Florida HB 189 seeks to remove local regulations on breeding for “dangerous dogs,” giving some opponents to the bill fears that the legislature may backdoor the issue county by county if a more sweeping legislation fails.