Home | Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Public Notices | Galleries | Obituaries | Subscriber Services | Kingman Digital | Contact Us
Kingman Daily Miner | Kingman, Arizona

home : opinion : editorials May 26, 2016


9/23/2010 4:02:00 PM
New Reader Poll: Spay & neuter program

Our new Reader Poll asks, "As a taxpayer, would you be willing to fund a no-cost spay & neuter program?"

Feel free to leave comments below. Poll is located on the lower right of the home page and all news pages.

Related Stories:
• Letter: A spay/neuter success story
• Animal groups sound off on proposed ordinance


    Most Viewed     Recently Commented
•   Drug overdose investigation leads to murder charge (4173 views)

•   Arizona rules to change for brake light infractions (2773 views)

•   Kingman's Army Air Field Museum closing (2616 views)

•   More burglary charges added to list against Kingman man (2097 views)

•   Indictments: One man ends up with five DUI counts (2078 views)



Reader Comments

Posted: Sunday, September 26, 2010
Article comment by: nnp nnp

@disgusted with death....it's true that my car needs repair, but I got it from someone else cheaply and will fix it at my expense! I was writing satire to illustrate the point that other people who do share your interest/hobby/preoccupation/whatever should not have to pay anything at all for negative outfallings of your chosen obsession - in this case, pets. Personally, I see pets as a childhood experience really, and the several neighbors whose dogs bark at night here do not have childen.

Posted: Sunday, September 26, 2010
Article comment by: Disgusted with Death

Yes something definitely needs to be done. I had a dog that NONE of the shelters would take. He had been abandoned, and needed a home. I begged the shelters to take him, and was basically extorted by one of them to pay for training for the dog before they would take him. These shelters are given charity to operate, but then they fail to take in a wonderful dog, just because he was afraid and had been abused. Its disgusting. The dog is presently being kept on a chain out in the desert. Pretty sad that a wonderful pet cant find a loving home. I would have kept him but have 4 already. In spite of all my tears and pleading, nobody was willing to help except for someone who really does not have the resources, but who does have the love to try. It was that or euthanasia, and atleast where there is life there is hope. Its heartbreaking and this is only ONE dog. They have feelings, they love, they show emotions. They deserve to be happy and healthy. I am all for a program to help cut down on the population so they dont have to be murdered, or thrown away.

Posted: Sunday, September 26, 2010
Article comment by: Well nnp

NNP.

For all we know you abused your "old car's" engine by never doing any maintainence.

When the Anti-freeze was low did you fill it with tap water? How many times did you fill it?...Was the solution more water then anti-freeze?.

Every Mechanic will tell you the water out here will destroy your head gaskets from the mineral content...

The last oil change?...can you remember?

What Im getting at is simple. Responsible Pet owners try to train their dogs to not bark all night. They also dont let their pets use you yard for a toilet. Your car may not have blown the head gaskets had you been a reponsible owner and maintained it properly. New anti freeze instead of tap water, watching the temp guage when driving etc, etc....Just like taking responsible care of a pet.

Fix your own car, then take care of it better.


Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: nnp nnp

the head gasket in my old car just went out and the repairs wil cost hundreds of dollars. My old car didn't bark all night or wander onto other peoples' properties to relieve itself, so none of you will be offended if I telephone the City of Kingman and have a new tax on all car owners, the proceeds of which will pay for my repair job. Especialy those of you who have newer cars shouldn't mind paying for my repair job.

Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Look at it this way

Nobody wants more taxes...Ok..We see our illustrious leaders waste our tax money on rediculous things.

Fully loaded county vehicles, Metal detectors, gun lockers, extra staff to deal with the "protection" issues. Its seems once a week we read about something purchased or appropriated for that is wasteful.

Setting aside a few bucks to eliminate a Major problem like animal over population. Why not?.

At least we could see some of the tax money doing something useful. Instead of watching it drive by with tinted windows. A/C blowing ice cold on a person thats going to waste your tax money on their pet projects.


Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Hillarie Allison

I read these comments and wonder if some really understand the enormous problem pet over-population is in Mohave County and that to care for this problem is already funded by your tax dollars! Who do you think pays for Animal Control and subsidizes Western Arizona Humane Society? The cost to the tax payer to round-up, house, kill and dispose of unwanted pets is huge. How much more cost-effective to have pets spayed/neutered and prevent the over-population problem rather than chasing our tails after they are born! And I'm sure God doesn't want to see innocent creatures killed because there simply aren't enough good homes. The procedure is relatively simple with very little discomfort, which can be managed with meds for a day or two. Most animals are good as new within 24 hours. If you think carrying a litter of puppies every 6 months is easy, you're worng. Backyard breeding has to stop, accidental breeding has to stop and only licensed, responsible breeders should be allowed to breed. This will save the County money in the long run.

As for rescues needing help, EVERY rescue is dependent on donations of everything from food and money to all types of pet items. No rescue is funded by Government, although some might receive occasional grants from private organizations. Most are funded through private contributions and the people who do the rescuing. Rescue, for most, is not a hobby. It is a way to help the community deal with the unwanted or abused pets, who through no fault of thier own, no longer have a home! Not all rescued pets are unwanted. Many come from homes where they were dearly loved but can no longer be cared for, due to illness or death or loss of income. Those of us in rescue struggle daily to keep the animals well-fed, vetted and cared for.

Choosing not to have a pet is responsible, but to deny a subsidy to help correct this problem is wrong.No different than those who have never had children but pay school taxes and childcare taxes. I agree there is too much government, but something has to be done to stop this inhumanity of killing healthy adoptable pets and spay/neuter is the only way to do this humanely. It's that simple!


Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: otta know better

I would be in favor of a very minimal tax to support this cause, but I mean tiny. Like some of the other posts, people take on animals knowing the responsibilities, and I too believe they need to share the majority of that burden at least. There are some people out there that are ready and educated on having at least one pet or rescue, but cannot always afford this much needed procedure right away. Of course the "not right now but soon" turns into "too late or never". I purpose a program with an income curb. Based on income, and how many animals needing the procedure, the owner can contribute what is fair and affordable. This way all intended pets are fixed, and the cost is shared. Maybe even look at a county or city fincance program where the person does a "promise to pay" on what they wouldn't have had to pay up front on the curb program. After so long (depending on total # of pets or income), fine or tax them for the remainder. We would fine them anyway if the animal was picked up and not fixed--what's the difference? At least this way they can get the service, have AMPLE time to pay off remainder, and those who don't want another tax for others' problems don't have to be the only paying parties. This will also give owners a chance at making things right ASAP for the community, the pet, and themselves while at the same time display their integrity on the "promise to pay" if given the chance. Usually, if someone gets help when all fails, they do pay it forward out of gratitude once they get the chance.

Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Lotti B Benker

I strongly believe in the no kill philosopy.,which
implies that spay/ or neuter is the only moral obligation. Pets live longer if they are altered.Creating a license fee for breeders is
a viable solution to off set costs by reasonable
means.The county could save money in the
long run by not having to "house and board" so many unwanted orphans and than have them
euthanized after 3 days. Yes, we truly need a
low cost clinic on a sliding scale per income.


Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Highly Amused

The local spay and neuter clinic do offer 'low income' spay and neutering. For example, I think the cost is somewhere around $75 - 125 per animal (it fluctuates depending on sex, breed, and weight of dog) at a vet clinic. At the local spay and neuter clinic, the last time I had an animal neutered was a male cat. I believe the cost at the time (6 years ago) was $25. For females it is $40. This cost barely covers the use of medical items used in these surgeries. The vets and volunteers are just that - volunteers. They do not receive payment for their services. They are simply helping those who can not afford a normal vet. This is also relatively inexpensive as it is. If you can't afford the shots/spay/neuter at this clinic, you shouldn't have an animal. They, like children, are a responsibility and priviledge. Not something to be taken lightly.

Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Margaret Tudor

I support spay/neuter, but would rather see the funds go to a rescue group than to the so-called humane societies where the greedy hands take most of it and the mo ney never gets to the animal needs. It should be paid out on a sliding scale by income, and should be required.

Posted: Saturday, September 25, 2010
Article comment by: Lora Appauled

Not only do we need a spay/neuter program in Mohave County, but it makes both fiscal AND moral sense to do so. If you crunch numbers and compare cost to spay/neuter, versus the cost to euthanize, and all the hidden costs and benefits, a spay/neuter program is the clear winner. We mustn't be so short-sighted as to say, "I don't want my tax money going for animal lovers and their causes".....because I got news for everyone---our tax money is already being wasted on this problem, and it's like pouring water through a sieve...it's doing absolutely nothing to address the problem. YES! Let's invest in a Spay/Neuter program! PLEASE!

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Laura Coronado

It's so funny how some of you want to talk about no taxes and the fact that people on assistance have 1-3 animals, smoke, and have cell phones so no more taxes. Then your too afraid to write your name. I agree with all of you about how we complain about needing to spay and neuter our animals without more taxes. My idea would be taxes for people on assistance should be like this have them bring in their rent, utilities ect. ect. and give them just enough money left for toilet paper and shampoo. That way the money we save can go to education for people to take better care of their animals and help them spay and neuter.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Jerry S.

Yes I would be willing to help. This county needs to get a spay & neuter program set up. Wahs has a good program & Mutt masters is for Kingman residents only so that doesn't help people in anywhere be there. People need to held accountable for their pets. They need to pass a law that require that all pets be spay & neutered just like Nevada & California. The over breeding needs to be stopped. You know if you stop the over population of animals then the rescues wouldn't be over full and Mohave County Animal Control wouldn't be euthanizing 1000's of animals every year. I'd be willing to take my taxes from MCAC and give it to a spay & neuter program any day!

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Betsy Betsy

For those of you who are against having your tax dollars fund a spay/neuter program.....where do you think the $$$ come from to murder these pets at the shelter?....
It's costing YOU the tax payer, a minimum of $95 to euthanize a dog or cat.....$45 for its 3-day boarding, $25 for the euthanasia medicine & $25 to dispose of the body. This $95 could
instead be spent to spay or neuter the animal, and to help stop the unwanted breeding cycle.
In 2009, 5,596 pets were needlessly murdered in Mohave County - 466 pets each month, 16 pets each day .... to the tune of $531,620 of your hard-earned taxes......$44,302 a month, $1,477 a day. In only 5 months of this year 2010, Mohave County has already spent a minimum of $207,000 of your tax dollars -- you don't think that's a waste? Even if you're neither an animal-lover or a pet-owner, you're tax dollars will be used to either murder these animals or to spay & neuter them...... There's alot of tax-dollar supported programs that I don't like or in which I can't participate - but I'd much rather see my taxes being used for something positive, than for an atrocity for which we're all gonna go to hell for allowing this to happen to God's creatures!


Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Pat Knudson

I am completely in agreement with Hillary Allison's opinion. The cost of a spay/neuter program will be saved over and over, when we no longer have to maintain such a large rescue operation.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

As long as it is low cost and not "free", I can handle it. I agree with Hillarie Allison, if you cannot handle 10 or 20 bucks, you really should not be getting a pet.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: A hobby a problem

Someone said it is a hobby and I agree we make choices whether to bring domestic animals into our lives. I would be glad to help pay for spay and nuetering to keep pet population down. I have a spayed female dog who I love and take care of.

The government is all ready involved. Animal control and the so called humane society are all government run

Dogs make wonderful pets when they are properly cared for but they can be nuisances and predators. They can attack children and livestock and nip anyone. They can bark incessantly. They are close kin of the coyote and wolf, wild dogs. The government is there to enforce order. We all pay for services we don't use. Over population not only has many unwanted animals killed but creates problems. We need spay and nueter.


Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Grant Funded Spay & Neuter?

A grant funded spay & neuter program, you say? Like SNIP from WAHS? http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubsectionID=797&ArticleID=38566

Or perhaps SPOT via Mutt Matchers?
http://www.muttmatchers.org/

The problem isn't the lack of programs, the problem is the word doesn't seem to be getting out. (Another problem is getting people to understand & care about pet overpopulation but I don't have time for that rant right now).


Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: No Autograph

I believe that if you want a pet then this is one of the costs that you have to consider, if you can't afford it then you don't need a pet. I see so many people on government assistance and they have 1 - 3 pets, smoke, have a cell phone and subscribe to cable or satellite TV, no I'm tired of more taxes.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: minnie mouse

Of course I would help pay for the spay and neuter progarm !!!! and why not ? ALL THE ANIMALS THAT ARE PUT DOWN THE NUMBERS ARE UNBELIEVABLE !!!!! SOMEONE NEEDS TO TAKE ACTION !!! ADOPT IF YOU CAN FROM A SHELTER

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Jamie Atkins

Count me in ! As a animal lover, I would have no problem having some of my taxes going to a no cost spay/neuter program.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: V Stokes

@ Spay and Neuter

So you support it..but think it's inhumane and against Gods plan. Does that make any sense to anyone else?

Guess it's better to just put a .22 round through their brain?


Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Kele kele

Yes, on a sliding scale. No license should be issued without spay or neuter. Also sliding scale for ID chip. Too many animals in this county and the spay and neuter would help tremendously. I would be willing to help pay for the program even tho I do not have an animal.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: L M

I would support this and be happy to pay for a low cost spay and neuter program.

Posted: Friday, September 24, 2010
Article comment by: Truly Concerned

If a rescue cannot afford to feed the animals they take in, why should the taxpayer spend their money, to feed these animals when its someone elses "hobby".
I personally would rather see my money spent on a senior citizen or child in need.
I think the Spay & Neuter Clinics should be free for one year to anyone bringing in a pet, that would go along ways to solving this ongoing problem, then in 2012 start charging on a sliding scale.
When the call is put out there, by a rescue that needs help, we freely give dog food & cash, this is free does the rescue appreciate this?
I agree most people who get something for free don't appreciate it, but let's think about the animals, who have no voice. Just because the Human might not appreciate the "freebee" I'm sure the cat or dog will.



Page 1  - Page 2 -  Page 3



Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to Facebook character limits. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Required
Last Name:
Required
Telephone:
Required
Email:
Required
Comment:
Required
Passcode:
Required
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.
   


Advanced Search

Find more about Weather in Kingman, AZ
Click for weather forecast



Find it Features Blogs Milestones Extras Submit Other Publications Local Listings
Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Find Kingman Jobs | Kingman Chamber | e-News | Contact Us | RSS | Site Map
© Copyright 2016 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Kingman Daily Miner is the information source for Kingman and surrounding area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Western News&Info, Inc.® Kingman Daily Miner Online is a service of WNI. By using the Site, kdminer.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to email your questions, comments or suggestions. Kingman Daily Miner Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.


Software © 1998-2016 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved