Do you think people who abandon their pets should be fined?

There are millions of pets being abandoned by their owners. Sure some might have good reasons for not being able to keep their pets, such as financial crisis (can't afford to feed the pets), or illness (can't take care of the pets), or maybe no longer have the time to take care of the pets due to work or school or other important matters.

However, in many cases, the owners simply got bored with their pets, or don't want to take the responsibility any more while they are still fully capable of taking care of the pets they bought in the first place. Once in a while, I even saw questions on Yahoo Answers about "How do I kill my fish? I am bored with it"...

Some people dump their pets in front of animal shelters, some people simply drop them off the car on the street far away from home.

In my personal opinion, it is perfectly fine trying to find someone to adopt your pets when you are no longer capable of taking care of the pets due to financial, health, or time restrictions. It is not fine to dump the pets simple because "I am bored with it". It is even worse to just ditch the pets on the street.
When you get a pet, whether or not you get it for free or bought it with money, you have already made the decision to take care of the pet and make sure it lives a good life. Any unreasonable change of mind is bad...simply bad...

This is also my personal opinion that a penalty fine should be applied except when the pet owner is in financial crisis. Yes, that means all else should be fined even if take the animal to the animal shelter. It is ok to give them to a friend or someone else for free or for a fee.

Do you think there should be penalty come with ditching pets without a good reason? Extra fine for those who simply dump their pets outside?

I totally agree with you. If they aren't fined, how are they going to learn? It makes me think of, whilst mostly unrelated, something about the National Health Service in this country. Often patients' health are at risk due to malpractice, but due to the NHS's red tape policies and often spending their budget on trivialities, the only way they'll learn sometimes is if somebody sues the pants off them if the allegations are serious. The same logic applies to many things. Thieves will never learn if they're let off the hook quickly by the police. Abusive pet owners might cause another pet unnecessary pain if they decide to get one again.

There are services out there that can help people find their pets a new home should they be in a financial crisis, if they don't have other means (e.g. relatives or friends). As for the fish question on Y!A, it was probably a troll. Many questions on that site are written by trolls with nothing better to do. As I stated, I don't think a financial crisis is justifiable grounds for causing a pet harm. However, many illnesses can be debilitating, so sometimes an owner can be afflicted with something serious that may cause them to inadvertently neglect a pet. For this reason, I don't think owners should be fined if their reason is a health problem. (As long as it's genuine.)

I don't understand your survey the way it was worded, so I didn't vote. My view is that if you can no longer take care of your pet, for whatever reason, take it to a responsable rescue or shelter!!! Don't just abandon it!!! Around here, the forclosure crisis has caused an unfortunate new trend; dogs left behind in the empty house and cats dumped outside. "Cats hunt, so they can survive outdoors!" NO THEY CAN'T!!!! An indoor cat doesn't know that the rodent they have been chasing for fun is something to be eaten! Insread, (if they live long enough) they find their way to my yard and I end up with yet another mouth I can't afford to feed. And they seem to think that since the bank is forcing them out of their house by a certain date they want it for someone else right away, so the dog is left behind for the new people to find and fall in love with. Instead, it's maintance workers or realtors finding the dog days or weeks later and calling Animal Control. If the dog is even still alive by then, they have one week at Animal Control before they're put down. I found out about this from a realtor friend. I wound up with a mother cat and eight kittens found in an empty house by a nosey neighbor and brought to my vet. People, TAKE THEM TO A SHELTER!!! Our shelter has a surender fee, but if it's a hardship situation they will reduce or waive it. About 90% or more get into the adoption program, and THERE IS NO TIME LIMIT!!! Stop listening to your neighbor's urban myths and TALK TO THE HUMANE SOCIETY YOURSELF!!!!! Anyone who just abandons their pet is guilty of animal cruelty and should be arested! The whole problem is finding them, and proving it. "sigh!"

The reason behind I say fine or charge the people who take their pets to the shelter is because too many of them just think shelter is a place to get ride of their pets without feeling guilty. Among them, many are also simply bored with their pets. Taking a pet to the shelter without a good reason is still no better than abandon them on the street. So I say a fee should be applied for those who dump their pets at the animal shelter, while a higher penalty should be applied when someone simply drop their pets off on the street.

You might think it is a little harsh to those who take pets to the animal shelter, but it will make irresponsible people think twice before jumping onto the bandwagon of getting a pet, then decide they get bored with it soon after.

The rule should be signed by anyone who buys a pet. That should cut down the poor planned pet ownership by a lot, which in return will reduce the amount of abandoned pets.

I think if you are taking you animal to the shelter/rescue then you are being responsible by giving it a second chance at a good life, although it should only be as a last resort, after you have tried friends, relatives advertising.
I don't think people should be fined for surrending their pet to the shelter/rescue as this may lead to people not wanting to go to shelter, as they may not be able to afford the fee.
if the pet is dumped outside the shelter/rescue or in the street or left behind in a house then yes a fine should be enforced, as they try to do on animal cops.
I haven't voted on the poll as the option i wanted to put isn't there.

The problem is too many pets are dumped at animal shelter each day, many had to be ... killed, after nobody wants to adopt them. By allowing free dumping at animal shelter, it is just giving a free way out for irresponsible pet owners. Charge a fee for dumping at animal shelter, charging extra fee for dumping them elsewhere. These are really not excellent methods but might be effective to reduce the amount of abandoned pets. By making new pet owners sign such agreement upon purchasing of a new pet, it will also reduce the bandwagon of irresponsible pet owners.

If people are charged for using shelters they will not use them, and will likely dump else where hence worsening the problem you are trying to solve, alot of rescues in the uk will not put down a healthy animal, they will only do that if there is a serious health problem other wise they will remain in the rescue center until adopted.

From what I heard, a lot of animals were put down in animal shelters. At least in the U.S.
We just need to find better way to identify individual animals. So random abandoned pets found on the streets can be traced to the owner who did it. Then they won't be able to just dump their pets, because it's going to cost them much more than sending the pets to the shelter. The end goal is to get them not to dump the pets at all, or rather to get them think twice before getting a pet. Only the people who are willing to take care of the pets for the rest of the pet's natural life have the right to get a pet.

Ram, I completely agree with what you are saying, but I think it is a bit too idealistic. We are going to have to accept the fact that there are going to be people who make mistakes, and even worse, people who are just plain stupid. So there needs to be an option for people to give up animals without penalty, like a shelter, because those people are going to have the animals anyways, and if that option isn't there the animals will just die slowly, be dumped on the street, or killed.

As for people who just abandon or abuse their pets, the should be cited &/or prosecuted. But again, in order for that to hold, there has to be an easy option for people to get rid of the animals they don't want.

And I agree that should never happen, if you get an animal you should have a plan on how to keep it for it's entire life, but as I said, there will always be people who don't, either out of irresponsibility, or out of disaster.

I was looking up some shelters to see what their requirements are for dropping off a pet, since I've never done it, I've only adopted. http://www.sterlingshelter.org/humane-so...r-adoption
Has in read letters that due to space limitations they can't accept any more surrendered pets without an appointment and they have the right to reserve and reject any pet. They also don't accept pets that are aggressive, have a bite history, or severe medical conditions or on medications. All of which are very reasonable reason to get rid of a pet, not great ones but understandable. I the dog is aggressive and bites, you can't have it around your children, especially small children. And it's not uncommon now for neighbors to sue if they get bit by our dog while you're at work. Because any pet, stray or surrendered, with an open wound has to be quarantined for six months or euthanized, some shelters won't take on those animals. If you pet passes that, you are required to get your veterinarian to fax both handwritten medical records, history, and a copy of your pet's entire vaccination records. Plus you have to pay a surrender fee that varies depending on the medical history, vaccination status, spray/neuter status, breed, age, reason for surrender, and how long they expect the pet to be in the shelter until it's adopted. So, while giving your pet to a shelter, if you live near one is idea. Sometimes they aren't practical and it's more expensive to give them away than it is to get into that apartment that accepts them that you can't afford. I don't admire people who abandon their pets but if they have too, they need to allow them to be outside so they can at least scavenge some food. I hate it when the pets are stuck inside a house without water or food. I don't think it is fair to fine people for not being able to get their pets into a shelter. If there was a guarantee way for people to give up their pets, then yes, it would be fair to fine them but sometimes people can't safely get rid of their pets.

Being a responsible pet owner includes neutering or spaying them to prevent diseases and unwanted pregnancy in females. I still see strays here in our area because the local authorities are not prioritizing animals laws. More importantly, owners just let their animals go if they cannot feed it anymore and they don't have the money to bring it to the vet for check up. There are currently only two known animal shelters in the Philippines since animal laws are still developing in our country. People should definitely decide and consider their economic status before considering getting any pets. They will be considered as the nuisance of society for being irresponsible.

Most people make the serious mistake of acquiring a pet with a fixed aim not necessarily for companionship. For example, some pet owners of dogs purchase them because of their perceived aggressiveness to intruders to serve as sentries. With time, the dog inevitably ages resulting in lethargy and passivity to strangers. Some pet owners, ungrateful to their charges after a lifetime of service dump them under the cover of darkness for rescue centres to adopt them. I cannot fathom the heartlessness of this because the animal should be pensionable in another existence not discarded at its hour of need. Some pet owners technically dump their dogs even without making them leave the confines of their homes. They no longer give them food or other forms of sustenance and adopt a cruel live and let live attitude. Its not uncommon to see such pets looking harassed and harangued with their ribs sticking out as they forage for leftovers. So I posit that pet owners who dump their pets should be punished with hefty fines being considered as a deterrent. In my country, animal advocates are not visible where it really matters. But some cases of cruelty against pets are successfully prosecuted though the deterrent aspect against committing the crime is sorely lacking.