Los Angeles Animal Control Director Ed Boks has a video on CNN that talks about the sharp rise in the number of animals entering the Los Angeles Animal Shelter. The shelter has taken in 22% more animals so far in 2008. Animals taken in due to foreclosures is up 21%.
Even if every single animal that came into the shelter was an owner surrender (which wouldn't be even close to a reality), the kill rate is still going up at a faster rate than the intake. The reality is that there is something else at play here as well.
Last February, the city of Los Angeles started enforcing its ordinance mandating sterilization for all dogs...with the intent to decrease the amount of shelter killings. However, Mandatory Spay/Neuter ordinances have never worked anywhere -- and in fact, much like what LA is seeing, they have the opposite effect.
Laws like mandatory spay/neuter just give animal control officers the authority to confiscate healthy animals from homes. The animals, that normally would be left with the owners, end up coming into the shelter system -- and because the shelters can't grow adoption rates by a huge percentage to make up for the increased impounds, the animals die. All because they weren't altered.
These owners then just go out and get "replacement" dogs...and they're not adopting them from the shelter either. Which then increases the demand for bred dogs -- having the exact opposite outcome than what was desired.
It is easy to take their statements at face value and blame all the shelter killing on the foreclosure market, but there is much more to it than that. Shelter decisions on policies and laws are causing the increase...the impact of the foreclosure market is only a small part of the overall problem.
Hat tipLA Animal Watch.
LA county may have started their MSN last year, LA city this year. But regardless of when they started, it is likely they will never give up the actual numbers because to do so, would mean MSN doesn't work--and the AR faction there will NEVER admit it. Their lies about "breeders" creating the OP is and always was- both intentionally wrong/subterfuge, but I seldom see many disagree with them.
To really get a good laugh, see Best Friends try and argue "Religious Proclamation" (I saw it on petdefense) and ending up sounding exactly like Peta. Which maybe they are.
Posted by: s kennedy | July 02, 2008 at 04:48 PM