Well, we agreed in my last blog that things are falling apart at the Dallas Animal Shelter. And, that something must be done. That “SOMETHING” cannot be accomplished without the cooperation of the ENTIRE Dallas community. What this blog attempts to address, is the definition of the “entire” community. It “should” mean EVERYONE…and it’s not just as simple as “animal rights”/ “animal welfare” distinctions. I think that there are concerned, compassionate, educated and knowledgeable individuals within those two VERY broad camps, but the distinctions blur into each other, and go SO much further than these two over-simplified labels.
There is a very healthy and active “Animal Rights” community within Dallas (see original blog post…) and that’s not necessarily a bad thing…but it IS a bad thing, when they are the ONLY “voice”. When they are the only ones “working” on behalf of what they believe is best for animals. When they are “SEEN” as the ONLY ones working on behalf of animals by the community and the media. Unfortunately, many within the rescue community have discovered just how harmful the 2008 ordinances were for them as well. Most rescues lost the majority of their fosters in Dallas…and it seems that many rescues are viewed in much the same light as breeders. Rescues continually fight the perception of “hoarder” since the passage of the ordinance. Rescues, by ordinance, are subject to unannounced home or facility inspections. DAS has a strained relationship with rescues, and I still remember Kent Robertson when he first came on board, in September of 2008, when asked why 501 (3) C rescues could not just “pull” animals, and why an adoption fee was required, he stated, and I quote, “Why should rescue make a profit on a healthy, adoptable animal, when we can?” Quite obviously, DAS was NOT about getting animals out, IF they had ANY possibility of monetary value that DAS “might” be able to reap. And if not? Well, the animals just become another “euth” stat. He did think “thoughtfully” for a moment and then agreed, that if the animal was heartworm positive, or severely injured or sick, that he “could” possibly consider those cases, on a case-by-case basis, and perhaps let some of ”those” go to rescue at no charge. In ALL the years I have pulled for my rescues, not one shelter has EVER charged a fee. Most will only let 501 (3)C non-profits pull, and they require the rescue to provide a list of APPROVED persons who can “pull” on behalf of the rescue, but most make a copy of my driver’s license, ask me to sign their paperwork, and usually try to pawn another one or two dogs off on me, before I leave. I’ve never paid a penny for any rescue I’ve pulled from a shelter, municipal, private, or otherwise. When asked about the “inspection” requirement of the ordinance (and this is not a one-time home visit, many rescues have been harassed by multiple, multiple visits…) Kent replied to the rescue volunteers in the room, “Well, we have to make sure you are not a “hoarder”. I guess DAS just assumes that WE are all criminals, until proven otherwise. Of course, these past couple of months seem to be proving the REAL criminals are AT DAS!!! In addition, much of what goes on at DAS or it’s commission, is simply “vindictive” in nature.
The breeders and professional canine and feline groups were ostracized greatly with the passing of the 2008 ordinances. They were basically told by the council that their “contributions” were not important. Opposition groups called them murderers and worse. Their events brought great financial reward to the city, in lease income from the sites in which they hold their event, in the hotels and restaurants they stay at and eat in, and in partaking in all of the culture and entertainment that Dallas has to offer. They are the ones producing healthy, well-tempered pets. Much of that has been lost since 2008. Fanciers and breeders still show at events, but rarely stay in the city, or eat in the city, or purchase their gas in the city. Or “play” in the city. They refuse to support a city which refuses to support them. They continue to support the “clubs” which supported them, even though it wasn’t successfully. The citizens of Dallas now also suffer a loss of quality animals being accessible to them as pets. Many breeders have left the city. The “pet limits”, breeder requirements, additional licensing and permit fees, and most certainly the greatly increased penalties and fines for non-compliance, have convinced many reputable breeders that it is too expensive, and too large an invasion of their privacy, to continue breeding. Many of these are highly reputable breeders, who breed because their hobby is showing well-bred animals. Most breeders ARE involved in rescue, especially in their breed rescues. That have extensive experience in reproduction, in whelping, in raising puppies or kittens or whatever the species may be, in dealing with health, nutrition, and various other fields of animal husbandry. Responsible breeders are experts in temperament and in behavior. The overwhelming number of GREAT breeders is completely ostracized because they “breed”. A few large scale, unethical breeders now are the “face” of ANYONE who ever has a litter. Or shows a dog or cat. Or even competes with one. The experience of the GREAT breeders we have here would be invaluable, but it’s been made quite clear, their expertise is actually despised, because they “breed”. Their wealth of expertise could have an incredible impact upon DAS and their policies AND their success. But because they “breed”…they are the devil incarnate. But don’t fear, Dallas….the bad breeders will still be here, because they ignored the old ordinances, and they’ll ignore these too…but they will keep pumping out puppies…so your supply won’t go away…just the quality…but don’t worry, those will be the next generation of euthanasia statistics.
We hear consistently that volunteers are non-existent at DAS. Well, take a look at the volunteer application. Six pages, the last time I looked. It is so invasive, and so presumptive of the volunteer’s potential “guilt”…why would anyone wish to bother? In addition, the atmosphere at the shelter has to be dismal and depressing, and it appears that non-disclosure statements are required as well. Yet, the shelter in my area (not Dallas), had almost 8,000 volunteer hours last year. 50,000 citizens walked through it’s front doors, and it’s facilities, looking for a new family member. This shelter requires those who wish to volunteer, to provide their personal information, and a background check. And a willingness to share your time, and your ability to be reliable and be at the shelter when you state you will. They have the same, beautiful, green shelter, and strangely… EXCEPT…everything THERE…works! The air conditioning, air-reclamation, recycling system, (resulting in a single case of kennel cough last year) and a very dynamic volunteer force. They are adding a spay/neuter surgical suite, and additional kenneling space. And enjoy roughly an 80%+ placement rate. They virtually do not euthanize for space. It’s as close to “No-Kill” as there is in the area, and I’m sure Winograd would be proud. They recognize, appreciate, and IMPLEMENT the ten REQUIREMENTS needed for successful “No-Kill” and they are most definitely an open admission shelter, and actually assist other local shelters by taking in additional, adoptable animals. It works, and anyone who says it doesn’t, is confusing “No-Kill”, with “no-kill”, didn’t implement the necessary steps, or simply didn’t try. The irony is, that I don’t believe my local shelter “perceives” their model as Nathan Winograd’s model…but, they have implemented the same requirements, and enjoy the resulting success.
In mandating spay and neuter, without having a REAL low-cost, or NO-COST option for those who can’t afford it privately…you have put citizens between a rock and hard place. What happened in Los Angeles as soon as mandatory spay/neuter passed? Yes, the vets in the city substantially INCREASED their spay/neuter fees…because now, legally everyone had to get their pet sterilized, so vets took advantage of the public, who knew that the public legally had to do this. Oh yeah, the coupons that LA promised would be available to those that could not afford the surgery? The city has budget problems, so those have all been terminated with one day’s notice. So, I guess those that don’t have the discretionary funds to sterilize their animals, legally should surrender them…since they are breaking the law. How does that drop euthanasia rates? Incur the cost of the surgery, or incur even more in fines, citations and fees. Or lose your pet. We can talk about “overpopulation” in another blog…but citizens are not criminals because they don’t spay or neuter their dogs. Or at least they “shouldn’t” be considered criminals. And the policy borders on racism in most communities. In Dallas, in three of the poorest districts, there are virtually NO veterinary practices, and those that do exist, aren’t taking on new customers and have elderly veterinarians. But go to North Dallas? Yes, there’s a veterinary practice on EVERY corner. And I do plan to discuss the benefits AND RISKS of spay/neuter surgeries in future blogs. And risks there are! And owners should be made aware of both the benefits and risks and make an informed decision. If government is going to FORCE the surgery, then the government should be responsible for paying recompense to owners whose animals die in surgery, and those which are left with lifetime consequences. I figure a few court cases against any city that enacts MSN, and are sued for damages…will rethink the policy. Now, you think I’m anti-spay/neuter. Far from it. I think that’s reason that we have been SO successful in radically reducing our euthanasia over the past forty years, when we euthanized over 13 million animals, and the population of companion animals was a fraction of what it is today. So voluntary spay neuter is a very critical piece of continuing to reduce our killing rates in shelters. About 21 million folks are looking to acquire a pet in any given year. So, it’s not a lack of homes, nor is it overpopulation. It is a failure of shelters to work. It’s too easy to kill.
It always amazes me, that cities and organizations that claim to work on behalf of animals believe that brow-beating the population, ASSUMING AND IMPLYING the citizen is the problem, and attempting to “scare” them with extremely punitive laws and measures….will find success. Exactly the opposite is true. Encouragement is the key. Reward is the key. Dallas desperately needs a LOW cost mobile spay/neuter unit. It needs to identify the poorest and neediest areas of the city, and offer those services at no-cost. It can offer the same services in other areas of the city, but at a slightly increased cost, to help offset the costs for the poorest neighborhoods. Offer discounted registration and micro-chipping with vaccination. Or vice-versa. If you have “targeted” breeds which you wish to see sterilized on a greater scale, offer a small gift card or rebate, to bring in the “targeted” breed for surgery, registration, and micro-chipping. Give a little to get a LOT! These are just a few “ideas”…and every community does it differently. Some cities offer a free travel voucher on metro transportation if taking an animal for a spay/neuter. Those in low-income neighborhoods often own ONE vehicle, if any…so transportation to a vet is problematic. Or one parent works, and one stays home with small children. And makes it impossible to be compliant. The potential solutions are endless and can be uniquely “fitted” to any community. If they are creative, compassionate (to both animals AND citizens), and able to “encourage” compliance by owners, instead of frightening them to death, and taking their animals…unique solutions will be found. I suspect an initiative such as this, might even find financial support from local clubs, in a cooperative effort. Breeders believe in spay/neuter, and most require it in their contracts for animals that aren’t going to be bred. Breeders are an incredible wealth of knowledge in whelping and raising neonates. They make great fosters, or great mentors. Rescue volunteers? Good god…they are the salt of the earth…and to assume up front, they are hoarders and sick people, will not help you place needy animals. And here’s a concept…a home that doesn’t work out, is still a helluva an option as opposed to being killed. Yes, I agree that in “some” cases, euthanasia is the kinder option. But the very, very, very last act of desperation. There’s things much worse than placing an animal in a home that doesn’t work. We have become so critical of people and homes, that we have basically eliminated all but the obsessive/compulsive cleanaholic from consideration. And then wonder why so many animals are in shelters and rescues. Yes, you need guidelines and homechecks…but old dogs don’t always need fenced yards with active adults, zero-lot line homes should allow 80 year ladies to tether their toy poodle for a couple of hours, and big dogs CAN live in apartments successfully. As for limits…they only limit the number of potential homes for needy animals. The Gideons are obviously able to care for 17, yes….SEVENTEEN animals, most of them elderly, most of them on meds….and yet I know people that can’t adequately care for one healthy animal. So, do numbers indicate responsibility?
We need to sit at the table, all of us, with equal voice, and listen to each other. AR/AW/rescue/breeder/pet owner…and once and for all, make those who govern us, listen to what we each offer, and what we each expect, and then do something incomprehensible…compromise, and find what really works for the animals. The show communities, which have been severely hurt by the ordinances, have a rare opportunity to reach out, become involved in the solutions that MUST take place. We were ignored once…and look what happened. There are many good ideas out there. They need to be heard. Contact your council representatives…contact Mary Suhm and Tom Leppert. We all have the opportunity to re-shape DAS, and the community, and perhaps bring a new dawn of cooperation and understanding. It’s easy to say, “I told you so”, but much harder, and much more noble to put that aside, roll up our sleeves and offer to help. And if ”we” don’t, then we let someone else do so…without our voice and our example.
In addition, the incredibly harsh and punitive ordinances do not work. They certainly haven’t had any effect on the CORE issue, for which these ordinances were even EVER considered. I believe that REASON was loose, roaming, and aggressive dogs in South Dallas. I don’t see a decrease in their numbers, and in fact, we have seen a rise in attacks. We certainly haven’t seen ANY decrease in euthanasia or impounds at DAS in TWO years. Matter of fact, the stats are slightly worse. Behavior at the shelter, is literally criminal. All volunteers and rescues are viewed as “hoarders”. And the breeders in Dallas (including some of the most reknown, respected, and successful in the country) have moved from the city, or are “underground”, accessing veterinary care and vaccination outside the city, or, worse…other lower income owners, in fear of losing their animals, because they are not spayed or neutered, are no longer going to the vet at all, and are not registering animals. And what will happen when they are caught? They will be fined so harshly, they won’t be able to afford to keep the dog, so another “euth” stat gets in line. So, shall we become the Gestapo, and go door-to-door to every citizen’s home, and wrench the family pet away, children crying??? Because we don’t spay or neuter? How does this reduce impounds and euthanasia? We kill the majority there now, how will bringing MORE in, help? We have lost our minds.
And here’s my “told you so”… $25,000 in 2001, and $25,000 April, 2010…paid to HSUS to “evaluate” and make recommendations as to how to “improve” the policies and conditions at DAS. Kind of makes you wonder what kind of “advice” you get for $50,000 these days. And if this is REALLY HSUS advice and evaluation…perhaps what we are hearing about HSUS is true as well. (again…that’s another blog)
That’s it for today, kids. Back to the grind of a real job. And you’re probably quite relieved that I don’t blog everyday!