by Duluth News Tribune
November 13, 2012 at 6:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
The cost of owning a dog or cat in Duluth is apt to go up if the Duluth City Council has its way.
Tags: animals, city council, Duluth, money 14 Comments »
Increasing pet registration from 10% to 80 or 90% is certainly a majestic, lofty, and unobtainable goal. Maybe the council should increase the fine for noncompliance from $50 to $1000.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 31 8
All this DFL countrolled council thinks about is another revenue scheme they can place upon the residents. I think its time to clean house in the council.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 36 16
Wasn’t this brought forward by Jim Stabuer? Last time I checked he wasn’t a DFLer.
Like or Dislike: 8 0
The article was a little sketchy on where the money goes from the license fees. If it goes to the general fund, I am against it. If it goes to animal shelters and free rabies vaccinations, I am all for it. As to those too strapped to buy a $12 license, how do they afford pet food?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 27 8
The other thing I would support wholeheartedly is free spay and neuter (and already do where I live). Adopted pets at our local shelter are all spayed or neutered. Even our hunting purebreds (and all our cats) have been spayed or neutered and we bred only one of our female dogs. All the puppies were spoken for before she was even bred. In 50 years of owning pets, there has never been an unintended litter. Do you do the same?
Like or Dislike: 12 1
Who pays for that “free” spay/neuter?
Like or Dislike: 7 1
In many places, pet license fees pay for free spaying and neutering services.
Like or Dislike: 9 2
Like I posted in the site before the council voted on this. The first thing the council should do, is seeing this it in the paper and comments could be posted, is to read what people have to say. Not everyone can make it to a meeting to voice their concerns. Then think about the subject on hand and give it some time before making a final decision. Think about the positive and negitive impact this has on people. Then consider if this would meet their goals. Balance things out for the people as well as the city.
With that said, think about grandma who don’t get the paper and does not have a computer because of limited money from social security. She ownes a cat name Fluffy who would now be in violation of the ordinance. And Fluffy is her only living companionship. Now how is grandma to know. I know, have the city send every resident a copy of the new and any further ordinances put into law so everyone is aware. Now grandma has a decision on her own. Does she keep Fluffy and miss a few meals to have Fluffy licensed and visited by a vet for blood work and whatever else at 140 dollars a pop, meaning granda may have to miss a few meals, or does she give up her only companion. And to whom, the city. Now if grandma give up the cat, the shelter has an extra cost.
Now look at Dad who wants to get a indoor pet for their child at xmas. Instead of adopting a pet, paying vet bills, buying a license, not to mention all the pet supplies, decides to buy a stuffed animal instead. Now the shelter has more animals to deal with. What is gonna happen when the shelter has so many animals and no-one to take them. They will have to destroy the animals. Now whats fair.
Some things just are not that important and should be weighted out for the people. This could have the opposite effect of what the city wants to do, raise money.
Think about, the council should on this and every proposal. Don’t forget, get the word out of any change so everyone knows.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 21 4
When I say, get the word out, I mean come up with a method of notifying all residence of changes in city ordinances. Then everyone knows and their is no excuse.
Like or Dislike: 9 4
How about charging an entry to riders of the Chicago Express instead? Your average Golden Retriever is going to cause far less trouble & social costs than a Gibmedat.
Like or Dislike: 16 5
I own a dog., I take care if my dog.
Why in the heck should pay a special tax to pay for people who don’t take care of their of their dogs?
It’s a G.D. non sequitur. Why do I have a special moral obligation to pay for the cost of irresponsible creeps more than any other citizen of Duluth?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 19 1
I don’t have trouble with the city trying to improve the shelter. Just so the money doesn’t get taken away at some point for other city operations. What’s next? Will they want us to put a license on our BBQ grilles? We already have a street light fee.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 17 1
I say BS. How about my neighbors Goldfish, Hamster, Rats, Snakes, Parrots? This is a discriminatory tax.
How about focusing on the Dog Shot on the Lakewalk instead of trying to find ways to rape taxpayers funds.
I have to live within my means, why doesn’t the City Council?
Like or Dislike: 13 0
as a money maker: I remember as a kid having to get a bike license is that law still in effect?
Like or Dislike: 6 0
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company