SACRAMENTO (CBS13) – A new bill sitting on the governor’s desk would fine dog owners for not licensing a pet.

The bill also requires pet stores and rescue groups that sell dogs to submit reports to local licensing agencies.

The fine for not registering your dog would be $100.

People who support the bill say it will generate $3 million annually in Sacramento County alone if only half of the pet owners registered their dogs.

“If we had something like this that required mandatory reporting of sales, we could go after the licensing revenue which comes directly back to the shelter. It would help us with taking care of the animals and also hiring other employees here,” said Dave Dickinson of the Sacramento County Animal Shelter.

According to the Humane Society only about 16-percent of dogs in California are licensed.

Comments (62)
  1. FLOP says:

    I’m all for it! If you want a dog, then be prepared for the responsibility of owning one. That includes licensing them.
    It is far to often that you see someone getting a dog just to have one and not paying any attention to them whatsoever. They just rot in their backyard sometimes just tied to a chain with no interaction with humans. And don’t even get me started on the whole pit bull BS where a certain portion of our population breeds or obtains them for illicit purposes or status. That fee and subsequent fine should make you think twice before you have them as well.

    1. J says:

      I agree with you on the responsibility thing, but I honestly didn’t see the huge need in licensing my dog. Also the poor guy had health problems so he never received all vaccines so would they allow a waiver for any dog with health problems or force you to vaccinate? You also must realize licensing a dog has nothing to do with responsibility. It is all about raising money and it clearly states that in the article. I drained my savings on my boy only to lose him. I have insurance for my cats (don’t have a dog currently but would insure it too) and I think that or having a savings account set up for you pets is responsible, not giving money to the government. I am all for helping shelters and have donated my time many times to help shelter and rescues. It doesn’t sound like the license money would go only to the shelters. Sounds like it would go to a broke state that I didn’t break.

    2. mbee says:

      How about we license you to breath, that would make you responsible for the pollution you cause and help fund the police retirement fund. License fees won”t do a thing to fix your complaints. The fee just rips you off.

  2. NoLicensing says:

    This is nothing but a revenue making law. Why the hell should I register my dog? What exactly do I get in return for registering them…nothing…absolutely nothing!!! Oh because the shelters need money or anmal control needs money or because the city needs money…BS. We as citizens should only have to support things that benefit us not these other things like shelters,animal control officers “that never come when called” or the city.because they can’t balance a budget. Then they wanna charge you almost 200 hundred dollars because your dogs not fixed. NO I don’t have pitbulls but I want the option of breeding my dogs so other people can have the same joy iin life I get from the specific breed of dog I have. In my case it wouldn’t even be an issue if the fees were 20-30 dollars but I have both male and female unaltered dogs. It could end up costing me almost 400 dollars for licensing.My thing is what do I get for 400 dollars? We as the citizens of Sacramento are already getting less from our local governemt.So why should I give them more and get basically nothing back in return?

    1. J says:

      You get nothing for your 400 dollars. It’s a stupid waste of time. And money that could be used on keeping them happy and healthy.

    2. bri says:

      all the rescues are full, nice purebred dogs, becuse of breeders more interested in makiing money off dogs than protecting the breed, and some of the biggest problems are backyard breeders that are breeding a dogs that are not always good healthy dogs. And selling them and some of those dogs wind up sometimes in shelters. If you don’t want to pay for licieneing your breeder dogs, then there should be a County liciense for Dog breeding.
      Also Dogs do get out of yards and if they have a tag on, its easier to find the owners. I have found several dogs, and the CIty was able to get a hold of the owners thry their licence

  3. Michael says:

    This is nothing more than a PET tax, plain and simple. I live in an extremely rural area rarely take my dog off site. Why would I be compelled to license my dog? What next, my cats, chickens, gold fish????

    Give me a break.

    Leave Cali NOW.

    1. Matt says:

      Leave state, family, job, friends because of a “pet tax”…I don’t think so.

  4. rmcsticks says:

    brown needs a helmut

  5. rmcsticks says:

    cbs fix your site

  6. rmcsticks says:

    cbs who works on your site a 6 year old

  7. KLiK says:

    how about my unlicenced gun to shoot the roaming animals!

    1. Larry Bob says:

      you should not use a gun

      my neighbor hates the cats in her gardens and we have several dozens feral cats. She uses a slingshot with ice cubes to knock them out

      1. Matt says:

        I doubt that…she just talking chit.

  8. mbee says:

    Folks, this is about money and ripping off the taxpayers, 3 million more for the shelter when they already have enough to operate? How about licenses to breath,. licenses to drink, license to eat, that would fund the country , tens of millions of dollars to the union and bureaucrats so they can live the high life while those peons the taxpayers live in a mud hut. The license fee is already way overpriced and now they want to hold a gun to your head so you will pay up.

  9. bill says:

    Never ceases to amaze me how government officials never tell you what the purpose of their “licensing” will do for the public. All they ever talk about is the “revenue” it will generate!

    Pet licensing is a scam just like marriage licenses!

  10. Randy says:

    When will the people finally wake up to excessive taxation. Better to bring back King George. Less taxation, more freedom, and just as currupt.

  11. Bolwa Annifreeze says:

    Brilliant Liberals at Work Yet Again – another fee . . . another payment to the government to squander. Less dogs will be adopted, less people will want the government ‘regulating’ their pet dog and what is the real result – less dogs have homes. Animal control is not so great at doing their job in the first place.

    Of course, the fee will have to increase again to pay for all the new non-workers – but at least we get a few illiterates off the street into a government job. We have so many barking, run around loose dogs in my neighborhood – I would like to see a law that starts paying me by the hide to dispose of them.

  12. Bob says:

    Great another way to get more people who can’t afford the cost of a license to abandon their pets.I do think that more people should be more responsible for their pets.But maybe instead of constantly making new ways to get money why don’t they just start to really enforce the laws we have now.Make a law grab what money you can then blame everyone else for goverment being broke and then make a new law for more money.NEVER FIX ANYTHING

  13. TLordaGama says:

    Dogs need to be spayed and neutered, they need to be up to date with their shots, with an ID on their collar. A license has always been just a way for the county to get more money, ie taxes, which is what it is, a tax on your dog!
    Well tell Jerry that means the dogs will have to go on unemployment in order to pay for their license! Responsible dog owners take care of their pets, a extra tag around their neck does help any dogs.
    I might add Parvo is rampant because people fail to get their puppies their shots!

  14. Larry Bob says:

    Note P00P tax
    So will this add jobs and cleanup similar to the dog p00p tax we have now in EG because of people not picking up after their dogs at the parks?
    Because there’s still a lot of p00p at the parks…

    Out of the five dog neighbors I have only one is licensed. I doubt the bull owners want anyone knowing.

  15. jackie says:

    Time for a dog licenseing protest in front of the state capital. Remember a few years back when they wanted to raise the license fees outrageously and require a license for every critter ya owned(except cats) and hundreds of us protested why discriminate against unlicensed dogs when kitty critters do not have to be licensed at all, NOT FAIR!

  16. wilson says:

    Dog Licensing is just one more form of government finding a method of taxing individuals to suck the life out of the economy. I think we should protest ALL licensing fees, etc, that go to the government and make them call a tax a tax! The CA legislature has lied to us for decades by claiming the taxes they pass are not taxes. Impeach them all. Civil Disobedience NOW!

  17. dan says:

    Give me a break.
    Here we go again the state of Ca taking more and more from us
    this is a new tax

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s