Q:  Some organizations and individuals have characterized low-income pet owners who would benefit from spay/neuter assistance under SB 5329/HB 1406 as "irresponsible" pet owners who should not be assisted by "responsible" pet owners through a pet-food fee.  Is this an appropriate characterization of low-income pet owners?

A:  No.  Low-income pet owners often make significant personal sacrifices to care for their pets, often putting their pets' well being ahead of their own.  In addition, many individuals caring for dogs and cats, including feral and free-roaming cats are simply good samaritans trying to help animals they don't necessarily own.  Please see this sample of email that has been written to Save Washington Pets by people in need, many of whom are desperate for spay/neuter assistance.  

Q:  Why should I pay to help someone else get their dogs and cats spayed and neutered?

A:  Whether you own companion animals or not, you're among all Washington taxpayers who must pay millions of dollars each year to impound and shelter unwanted animals. The bottom line is that it's less costly to spay and neuter animals in our communities than it is to pay for impoundment, sheltering, and euthanasia.

Q:  Is the proposed fee in SB 5329/HB 1406 too financially burdensome on pet owners, particularly low-income pet owners?

A:  If the fee is passed along to pet food purchasers at the retail level, the direct impact will be less that $0.03 per pound of food purchased.  For a person who owns one dog and one cat, we estimate the financial impact to be less than $1 per month.

Many people try to speak on behalf of low-income individuals and say the fee is too burdensome, even at $0.03 per pound.  We hear from many low-income individuals who would love to have this bill passed--they consider the fee impact affordable and would welcome the opportunity to get their pets spayed and neutered for a low copayment amount of no more than $10 or $20.  The actual price they might pay without such a subsidy could be several hundred dollars for one surgery, depending upon the animal's species, its weight, age, and condition.  That can be a significant financial barrier for many people.

Q:  Why are you focusing attention on animals owned by low-income individuals?

A:  Low-income residents are the least likely to be able to afford the costs of spaying and neutering their pets, or even paying for routine or emergency care for their animals.  Studies have shown that “cost” is a major reason why people do not get their pets spayed or neutered.   Studies have also shown that pets in low-income households are less likely to be sterilized.

Q:  How do you define someone as "low income?"

A:  In Washington State, about 30.6 percent of households are considered low-income, where income falls within approximately 200 percent of the federal poverty level.  Incomes at or below this level are used to define eligibility for social and medical assistance such as Medicaid, food stamps, Basic Health insurance, federal Supplemental Security Income, and a number of other programs.  

Q:  Will it cost a lot to screen people to make sure that they're low income?

A:  No.  That would be contrary to specific directives in the bill.  A key element in SB 5329/HB 1406 is that in Section 3(2)(e) it emphasizes the need to mimimize administrative burdens and maximize efficiency; and maximize ease and convenience for people to apply for spay/neuter assistance. The lead agency, the Washington Department of Agriculture, would be required to develop screening criteria and procedures.