Should there be limits on the number of pets a person can own?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Nobody should own an animal.

What a dumb statement.

Hit a nerve?

They are shelter cats for whom I have provided a safe, comfortable, loving existence. I would, however, feel great guilt if I kicked those cats out into the cold to try to fend for themselves because some moron thinks that animals that have been domesticated for thousands of years and have come to depend on humans for survival shouldn't be part of human households.

excuse.

Such an argument is an appeal to tradition and a logical fallacy. Her argument was that cats and dogs have been bred and raised in domestic settings for so long that they have evolved to survive in that setting and not in other settings. It's a biological argument, not an "its been that way forever" argument.

It's "slavery" to have pets, don't you understand?

Don't expect PETA or HSUS to tell people the truth of where they TRULY stand.

I'm sure there's some great philosophical arguments about why it was wrong for humans to domesticate animals in the first place. But such philosophy is useless because there's no practical application. Animals are domesticated and there is no possible way to turn back the clock. Your choices are either extinction of the species or further captivity. And I think that most philosophers would argue that life in captivity is better than extinction.

In other words, cats discovered that human settlements were a rich source of food (rodents), and they obtained access to even more food by becoming tame enough to live among humans. They eventually selected for tameness and "cuteness" so people would take them in.

in my life. They're good for people, by the way.

I don't have any use for animal rights people.

which include the right to humane treatment. Humane treatment of domesticated animals includes providing a safe environment for them; in the case of cats and dogs, that's probably a human's home. If some PETA nutjob demanded I evict my cats they'd be immediately howling at the front door, demanding to be returned to their state of "oppression." Sorry to be a member of the speciesist ruling class, but my cats are my friends and my responsibility, and I doubt they feel particularly oppressed by living in my warm, comfortable house and eating whenever they feel like it.

what type or property are they living in.

is it a public health or safety issue?

So if one guy wants 200 poochies, why not?

I don't like the idea of limits, but some people simply aren't responsible enough to make a good decision.

are not properly cared for. Some parents are irresponsible. I can't imagine that being the justification for limiting the number of children people may have. FWIW, I support prosecuting irresponsible pet owners as well as irresponsible parents. Once you accept the charge of care giver, be it for an aging parent, a child, or a pet.... one must be held to a standard. :hi:

there's a difinitive chouce when you adopt an animal, wether you just take it in or pay for it. With children, unfortunately, many come from irresponsible behaviour. If you try to adopt a child, believe me, there are lots of hoops you have to get through before any agency says yes!

have 2 dogs, three cats, and unfortunately we're moving (we own our house) and have to rent soon, on a temporary basis. What to do with three extra pets when most places only take a maximum of two? I can't dump them in a shelter (they're family), and I don't know anyone who wants them, and long-term boarding will be unaffordable. So we're gonna try to sneak them in wherever we end up, and hope we don't get caught. :-(

If the place is a recognized rescue, for example, that's fine.

However hoarding is another issue altogether. An elderly cat hoarder used to live behind me and had about sixty cats. They were feral, breeding like crazy, and neglected. The lady that looked after them tried to feed them oats. As a result, they were getting in everybody's garbage.

There should, for example, be a different limit on number of pets in a one-bedroom apartment as opposed to a ten-acre lot with a separate kennel facility.

or more than three total dogs/cats seem to be more likely to get "in over their head" both financially and logistically if one or more of them get sick.. Everything goes swimmingly as long as everybody in, say, a home with 10 cats is young and healthy, but as they get older, clients get overwhelmed by the medical issues and cost and work involved.

Heck, I am a veterinarian, and find myself getting overwhelmed when I have more than 3 when they get to needing meds and lab work and stuff.

I support the Los Angeles ordinance that places a limit of 3 animals on households (unless they have a kennel permit). Of course, I don't rat on my clients with more than 3, but I don't encourage the keeping of more than 3 and won't assist in the acquisition of more than that unless somebody has one foot on a banana peel.

I really would like animals to have health care benefits too, but I don't think our civilization is advanced enough yetfor that, if half of us can't even seen the need for access to health care for people.

through proper husbandry and proactive vet care can save people huge amounts of money.

and some people can afford to buy insurance, but it's a spotty coverage and many animals suffer because they have to die unattended or because in the case of pets, their owners can't afford to get them care.

I can pay for this one cat's care without worry. Three or four older cats? I shudder to think about that cost. I may add a second cat someday but that would be it for me. I do know people who can and do spend what it takes to keep more cats healthy.

In the past couple of decades my practice experience has gone from "fire engine" practice to preventive health care and well-pet medicine. We can prevent most serious pet emergencies with proper husbandry and proactive medical preventive care.

Most my patients never need to go to the emergency clinic or run into my place without advance notice. I tell my clients how to keep their kitties safe and well, and work very hard to detect medical problems LONG before kitty can say "Help, I've fallen and can't get up!" It's not so exciting, but I sleep better at night.

The vet practice has generous hours but there's a 36 hour window between Saturday afternoon and Monday morning when there is no coverage and the furball showed the first signs of distress on Sunday morning. He may have made it until Monday morning but I didn't want to chance it.

so I can pick and choose who I refer to, but none are cheap........

I HAVE to refer after-hours cases. In a city neighborhood with a population in excess of 1 million (humans), I can't be available after hours, lol.

Not just how many, but what kind. I don't mind my neighbors keeping chickens, but a couple of cows would eventually stink up the block. Unless I live out in the country, etc... A zoning issue.

not just for kennels, but also for fosters. Many pet fosters often have more than the limit at any given time due to socializing a litter a a time. I think there should be exceptions for those AFFILIATED with a rescue, kennel, or other type of shelter, so that volunteers can have more. The reason I think this is OK is that as was pointed out above, one of the problems is not being financially capable of taking care of multiple pets, but in a foster situation generally the affiliated organization assists with this. I get free food and vet care for my foster kitties. Otherwise, I never would have gone beyond 3 because it get so costly.

I agree with what you've stated, and it's an important point. We have areas here that have limits, and areas that don't. That way, if we do have a couple dogs at a particular foster and it puts them over the limit, if someone calls to violate them they check a list and I'll get a call. After some simple math, the complaint goes away.

It always pays to be chummy with the local authorities in cases like this. Saves a lot of legwork and problems.

Thank you for your post.

pets, kids, houses and cars

animal hoarding is illegal in at least some areas of the US.

laws should be written to require people have enough acreage and be forced to plant enough vegetation to make their property CO2 neutral.:sarcasm:

Should there be limits on the number of humans a cat can own?

I'm not sure they could manage a whole houseful of humans.

way of many ways to get at the pupppy mill problem.

the rules for you.

In Minneapolis, where I live, you can have only three adult animals (3 cats, or 3 dogs, or 1 cat and 2 dogs, or 2 cats and 1 dog, etc.). This ordinance is not strictly enforced; many people have more than this -- but it's a way to deal with extreme cases and hoarders.

Three cats, two dogs, a rabbit, a fish, and a shitload of hermit crabs in a huge tank.

Wait, there's also the squirrel that lives in the attic.

I think that if limits are going to be imposed they should first be imposed on how many children you can have. However I do believe that people who are obviously neglecting their animals should have those animals taken away. A woman near my own home had over one hundred cats in her single wide trailer, some of them dead and just lying in the floor rotting, I think she is in jail now.

I adopted 2, now there are 8 more outside.

At least I know that everywhere I've ever lived has required an occupancy permit with an upper limit on the number of pets in the residence.

We have 5 dogs. 4 Newfoundlands that we show (2 AKC champions and 2 young ones we imported from Germany)along with one pet Pomeranian. We are members of two Newfoundland clubs as well as 2 AKC kennel clubs. All these dogs live in the house with us along with 3 cats. Our home is not large, only 2 bedroom but it does not matter as the dogs want to be wherever we are. A 12 room house would still not have a dog in it unless we were.
We also have 4 horses that do not live in the house but have 40 acres of pasture and a barn to live in.
These animals get better medical care than my husband or I do. I have the number of vets in 5 states on my cell phone speed dial.

No I don't think a number should be the deciding factor. I have seen people with one dog leave it outside in all kinds of weather tied up with no shelter. People who forget that this is a living breathing animal that asks nothing but to be loved and share your life.

People like that should never be allowed to own any animal. How to enforce it??? I don't have an answer but that wasn't the question on the poll.

As long as the animals are safe and well taken care of, there should be no arbitrary limit. There are so many stray pets and so many semi wild animals like possums and raccoons where I live which come to residential areas because we have paved over their natural habitat. Those I do not try to take in, but I do feed them because they are starving. I have taken in a number of stray cats who would have died if left outside. Right now I have six. They live inside and I take good care of them and keep them well and feed the ones that I cannot take in like I feed the wildlife.

The problem is, my city limits me to four cats, so two of my cats are toast if they ever find out. I heard once that one of the measures of a civilization is how well it treats its helpless members and its animals. Right now we suck in both of those areas.

as many as they can adequately care for.

This number will be highly variable (property size, difference in needs of varying species, money they have for feed and care, mental state, etc). So it should be judged as it is now, by the demonstrated welfare of the animal.

Also, the more pets people have the more the good people who are "working the streets" have to tend to, and the more the techs have to euthanize.