New Florida bill seeks to mandate shelter transparency

There's a new bill in Florida that was introduced this week by Senator Joe Abruzzo (Democrat, Palm Beach). The bill is SB 872, and would require all animal shelter operators in the state to compile monthly and annual reports of what happens to the dogs and cats that enter  the shelter.

Required data would include:

- Number of animals, by species, which were on hand at the beginning of the reporting period

- Number of animals, by species, that were impounded

- By owner surrender

- As strays

- brough in by animal control

-- and number of animals, by species, that were outcomed

- Transferred to another shelter or rescue group

- returned to owners

- adopted

- euthanized

- died or lost at the shelter

- and number of animals, by species, that were in the shelter at the end of the reporting period

All information is required to be posted in a timely manner both annually and monthly.

I'm a HUGE fan of this bill and hope it is able to move through the legislature. Transparency is extremely important for organizations and for the good of animals that enter shelters. Given that nearly all shelters in this country are either a) funded through taxpayer dollars or b) have tax exempt status by being a 501c3, I believe the public has a right to know how these organizations are doing (I think that many 501c3s in particular hide behind their tax exempt status and don't make the information available).

Many shelters that are succeeding in saving lives tend to make this information readily available. However, many shelters with high euthanasia rates, don't make the information public. It is my belief that in most communities if citizens are aware of the situation at their shelter they will demand better.

You can read the bill, as proposed, here.

The only thing I don't love about this bill is that I think monthly reporting may be over-kill, and that quarterly reporting would be sufficient. Otherwise, I really like this law and I think it could be emulated across the US. By forcing transparency, and making information readily available, I think we can get more public support for forcing shelter changes that are badly needed in many communities across the US.

 

Comments

[Marie-Odile Fortier]

This bill is a great idea. I'm leaning towards monthly reporting being a good thing, because it allows the public to have the most recent history when asking their shelter to change its way or when complimenting a shelter on its progress.

There should be an additional item to report, in my opinion: the primary reason for euthanasia for each pet that was put down. Was the pet unhealthy and untreatable? Was the shelter, and its foster homes, at capacity? Was the pet simply deemed to have been there too long? This information could help in identifying ways to improve practices at the reporting shelters.

The shelter that only puts down unhealthy and untreatable pets is actually saving all the pets that it can humanely save. The shelter that kills because it frequently reaches full capacity needs either greater capacity (new facility, foster recruitment, etc.) or quicker rates of adoption (numerous ways of getting pets seen in public spaces for adoption, reduced fees, reduced barriers to adoption, adoption events or specials, etc.). The shelter that kills most of its pets because of arbitrary reasons like a pet's appearance, age, or duration in the shelter clearly needs reform or new leadership. Knowing the reasons behind instances of euthanasia would help guide the direction for positive change. A shelter reaching towards No Kill would be very vigilant of why certain pets are euthanized and should have this information available.

[Marie-Odile Fortier]

Of course, I am generalizing when I discuss the different shelters' needs in order to support my point. The real situations are definitely more complicated and other programs, funding, or assistance could be desperately needed. Still, understanding why a shelter euthanizes the pets that it does can help identify how to change things in the best interest of every homeless pet in a shelter's care.

[Randy]

I like the premise of the bill but would like to see it expanded to all "rescue" groups. I know that is a push since many are not taxpayer funded. Yet I am not sure how we can be comfprtable for the animals sake if they are simply "rescued" or "transferred" from a shelter required to report to an unknown fate.

[Brent]

Randy, the bill officially applies to any organization that euthanizes dogs and cats. So any organization responsible for any deaths would have to report their numbers openly.

[Randy]

Brent-I saw that but got confused. Many "rescues" do not EU animals so they would be exempt as I read it. Hence as a reporting orgnization (one that EU's) I could transfer my animals to a non reporting group in or outside of the country and then problem solved. Don't get me wrong, I like the bill but I have also noticed an increasing number of low kill shelters have large numbers of rescues or transfers out (some times approaching 50%) and it makes me wonder. Also, I assume the rescue that EU's would have to self report? Don't get me wrong love the concept.

[Brent]

I read the bill the same way, and I assume that you'd have to self-report EUs. Not certain though.

I love the concept of this...but agree with you that it may not be perfected as of yet.

[Randy]

Brent-Also share your concern with the "non transparency" of 501c3's.

[Randy]

The only reason I mention it is there are some documented cases in LA of animals being shipped to Canada and shown as "live outcomes on LA's books" only to find they were being sent to a "rescue" that attempted to "sell" them at a local Petco. Final disposition of the animals was unknown. Still before I get too far off track I believe it is a great start and if we had good reporting state or nation wide then we could actually see what was going on rather than a bunch of acedotal reporting.

[Cockapoo grooming]

This bill is great. this can help us to follow up happen to the pet in the shelter hope this bill will be passed