More on Los Angeles MSN

A couple of weeks ago, I posted that Los Angeles' euthanasia rates had increased 31% this year, following their passage of a mandatory spay/neuter law in February, 2008 (although enforcement won't begin until late summer). However, thanks to some handywork by LA Animal Watch posting a link to this site I can provide a little bit more texture to this.

Based on these numbers, here are the intake and euthanasia rates for dogs only from 2002 - 2007 in Los Angeles:

2002:

Intakes: 33,634

Euthanasia: 17,345

Adoptions: 8,804

Returned to Owner: 4,580

2003:

Intakes: 29,997

Euthanasia: 12,834

Adoptions: 8,750

RTO: 4,679

2004

Intakes: 26,307

Euthansia: 9,988

Adoptions: 8,523

RTO: 4,351

2005:

Intakes: 25,165

Euthanasia: 8,137

Adoptions: 8,564

RTO: 4,542

2006:

Intakes: 24,416

Euthanasia: 6,927

Adoptions: 9,226

RTO: 4,030

2007:

Intakes: 25,140

Euthanasia: 6,038

Adoptions: 10,614

RTO: 3,952

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intake through May 2007: 9,545

Euthanasia through May 2007: 1,905

Intake through May 2008: 11:457

Euthanasia through May 2008: 2,510

The actual numbers to me are just staggering.  From 2002 to 2007, the city consistantly and steadily reduced their euthanasia rate by 67%. While 6,000 dogs is still way too many, they were making steady and consistent progress. While some of the progress was made in adoptions, a large amount of the progress was made in lowering their intake numbers.

So far in 2008, the city has had a 20% increase in dog intakes, and a 32% increase in dog euthanasias.  This is the first time in 5 years that the city has seen an increase in shelter euthanasia. 

I'm not sure why they decided they wanted to enact Mandatory Spay/Neuter, but it certainly hasn't had the desired effect.  One of the easiest ways to decrease the killing in our shelters is to decrease the number of animals that are impounded. Mandatory Spay/Neuter just gives officials one more reason to impound animals....and thus, increase the euthanasia rates. 

Editor's note: This post has been updated to reflect an accurate date of when Los Angeles CITY passed its mandatory spay/neuter ordinance and its beginning enforcement date.

Comments

[s kennedy]

Re the followup on Winograd at Ventura, CA as promised...see http://www.petdefense.wordpress.com for review. I thought he did a good job and the dog fanciers/others liked what he had to say. The PETPAC reality is to bridge the gap between pet fanciers/shelters to work together toward saving more. There is a study which shows what I have said re shelter animals/temp testing.. nearly 47% of adopted animals (dogs) exhibit some behavior aggression after adoption. That is also on petdefense.

[Becky]

I'm certainly no expert on dog behavior, but I am of the belief that when a dog is brought into a new home, w/ strange leaders/owners/territory, along w/ a lot of action and language that it does not understand, as happy as the dog may seem about his new place, it still suffers fairly serious stress for quite some time. I believe it takes longer than most people believe for a dog to feel totally comfortable, trusting and secure when popped into a new home. And I don't think most people will give them that. Maybe my theory would explain the percentage of adopted dogs that exhibit certain degrees of behavior aggression?

[s kennedy]

Could be! i will get the Winograd article link, he has a theory that temperament is not correctly diagnosed, which i agree with.

[Splash]

According to numerous news reports here in California, intakes at all shelters are up. Intakes of elderly dogs are also up. They are attributing it to people losing their homes.

So, there may be more at work here than spay/neuter ordinances....just saying.

PS love your blog, keep up the great work!

[Splash]

According to numerous news reports here in California, intakes at all shelters are up. Intakes of elderly dogs are also up. They are attributing it to people losing their homes.

So, there may be more at work here than spay/neuter ordinances....just saying.

PS love your blog, keep up the great work!

[Brent]

Splash,

If you look at the other shelter numbers that are in that link above, there are some other interesting things:

Ventura County: Owner relinquished down 14% for 06/07

Riverside: Impounds of both dogs and cats up 8%

Merced County -- 2007 intakes down 17% for both dogs and cats, Euthanasia down 22%

Certainly some of the data is a little older and the owner reliquish has upped since the first of 2008. But nobody is seeing nearly the 31% increase that LA is seeing. Meanwhile, according to the LA County numbers, 19% of their intake is from owner surrender -- I'm having a hard time believing that if 19% of the intake is owner surrender, that the increase in impounds of 31% is based solely on increased owner surrender (LAAS doesn't track why the dog was impounded).

I tend to agree that owner surrender is probably up, and playing a role in those numbers, but I don't think they account for even a majority of the number going up.

It's just pretty amazing that in the 60 months prior to September of 2007, only twice has the number of euthanasias gone up vs the same month year prior. Since September, the first month of the enforcement of the spay/neuter ordinance, it has happened in 8 of the 10 months. It could be the economy, but I think the coincidence in timing of the up-tick is too much to ignore.

Thanks for stopping in.

[SmidgenCA1]

This article is misleading. According to a mayor's aide who works closely with the City of Los Angeles Shelter system, they firmly believe the increase in animals ending up in the shelter is DIRECTLY a result of people losing their homes in the massive amounts of home foreclosures in the Los Angeles area.

Please do not use mandatory spay/neuter laws as a way of pursuing your personal agenda

[SmidgenCA1]

Further more, since enforcement hadn't even begun on the spay/neuter mandate, you are drawing a conclusion that cannot be factual -- where are your statistics that people are turning their animals in because they don't want to/can't afford to have their animals spayed and neutered?

To be honest, you don't have any such statistics.

[MichelleD]

This is Brent's blog he can use it however he chooses.

MSN is ALL ABOUT someone's personal agenda. Where is your evidence? MSN hasn't worked anywhere - please post your evidence it has. It is a well published fact cost is the number 1 factor keeping people from altering their pet - the post is on this blog.

[Brent]

Smidgen,

What "agenda" do you want to accuse me of? Wanting to save the lives of animals? Guilty as charged.

I think the economy is a nice excuse for LAS. I really do. They adopted out 3,000 more animals this year than they did the year before...and yet STILL had euthanasia's increase 22% on the year.

Their total impounds on the year were up 20%. That's a lot -- especially given that owner relinquishments are only about 17% of their total impounds.

If these weren't similar results as what we've seen EVERYWHERE mandatory spay/neuter ordinances were enacted, I'd dismiss it as a product of the bad economy....but the reality is that this is what everyone has seen when they put into place this ordinance.