Unless you are willing to throw poor people in prison over kittens, you can't really effectively enforce pet ownership laws, because the judgement-proof will keep pets.

I suppose you could have roving cat detector vans that would spay and neuter any cat they could get their hands on unless it had approved breeding chips embedded inside. I've heard a documentary on such a thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOonOtyoplY

Poor people aren't the problem here, it's the relatively wealthy who feel that responsible pet ownership laws don't apply to them.

So we'll solve it with more laws. Brilliant! Just outlaw murder while you are at it too!

Brilliant! If murder was legal, we'd see a lot more of it, don't you think?

If murder was almost unmonitored, you could definitely improve the situation with some laws and some enforcement of those laws.

I don't understand your mockery here.

Do you know how traumatic spaying is, and how absolutely trivial it is to not get your dog knocked up unintentionally?

Until you snip all your own tubes and those of all your children, keep your euthanasia propaganda to yourself.

Every human causes far more environmental harm than any animal.

What does this have to do with environmental harm? I thought the discussion was about animal population.

I'd also argue that starving to death is pretty traumatic, hence why we should have better regulation on pet population.

See the part where it’s trivial for a responsible pet owner to not get their dog knocked up.

> Do you know how traumatic spaying is

How traumatic is it? The surgery and recovery doesn't look that hard. And heat's not exactly pleasant.

> how absolutely trivial it is to not get your dog knocked up unintentionally

I wouldn't say it's trivial to guarantee your dog never gets out or has a visitor to the yard. (And your own track record here is just an anecdote.)

> Until you snip all your own tubes and those of all your children

I can control myself, and if my child gets pregnant that's their responsibility. A dog can't be responsible for its own babies.

> keep your euthanasia propaganda to yourself.

The fuck?

Eugenics, I should have said. The point remains.

Have you ever even had a dog? You speak as if you’re pretending to be an expert in canine physiology but everything you say is just plain wrong.

For one, my dog can control herself just fine around studs while she’s in heat. And her being in heat is a minor, annual, occurrence. Contrast that to humans, whose heat is painful and monthly. Would you advocate for forced snipping of all human tubes as you so callously do re canines?

Glad to hear that you’ve somehow managed to “look” at a dog post invasive surgery and determine “idk probably not bad”. I assume you didn’t notice the months-years-lifetime of depression following?

A period isn't heat, snipping tubes doesn't stop a period, and humans are able to decide for themselves. And keeping your dog from breeding without spaying is exactly as "eugenics" as spaying.

> I assume you didn’t notice the months-years-lifetime of depression following?

If there are any long-term effects I will easily bet they're because of hormones, not trauma from the surgery, and if you actually did get the tubes tied then you would avoid hormonal changes.