KC DOG BLOG

Preparing for takeover and a small Christmas miracle

Our group, the KC Pet Project, is gearing up to take full control of the Kansas City, MO Animal Shelter beginning January 1.  It's weird essentially starting a new shelter organization with 20 new employees to inherit a completely full animal shelter that currently has about 250 animals in it.

But that's what we're preparing to do.

In 2010, the shelter impounded 7,250 dogs and cats. Of those, about 40% were killed.  While this certainly isn't as bad as it is in many places, it is still plenty of killing, and way better than it has historically been in Kansas City. In 2009, the city made the decision to hire a private contractor to run the shelter as opposed to the city running it. That happened, and the shelter almost immediately went from one that killed 60% of the animals impounded to one that killed roughly 40%.  Still high. But better.

Our goal is to lower that still.  While getting to no kill is the ultimate goal, it may take us some time.  The Kansas City shelter remains one of only a couple of open admission shelters in the metropolitan area, and some of the live-saving infastructure still needs to be built (we are blessed to have a very strong low cost spay neuter program operated by Spay/Neuter Kansas City which has helped lower impounds over the past several years).  Also, about 20% of the dogs impounded at the shelter are 'pit bull' type dogs -- and with many of our surrounding suburbs having breed bans, they are more difficult to find homes for. 

But we're going to be creative and find a way.

One significant thing that is helping is embracing the many very strong rescue groups and volunteers in this community. While they haven't always been embraced, we are embracing them.

For the past month, KC Pet Project has employed our Executive Director at the shelter to work with the city staff to help in a smooth transition.  The shelter we inherited was above capacity. Our kennels are the two-sided kennels with the guillotine doors separating the two sides so dogs can be moved from side to side to ease in cleaning. Most of the kennels at the shelter are doubled down so there are dogs on both sides. 

While there are a lot of reasons this isn't optimal, it does give us the ability to hold animals longer in order to give them a chance at findng homes. Unfortunately, it also gives us very little wiggle room for increased capacity. 

Last Thursday night, Animal Control dropped off 30 more dogs at our shelter. We were officially beyond our maximum capacity.  But instead of doing the "easy" thing, which would be to kill for space, we sent out a plea. We put the list of dogs that were on our "short list" and sent an email to rescues and our volunteers for help. While our volunteer base is relatively small, they are outstanding, and they responded.

Within 24 hours, we were able to secure several foster homes for our long-timers, get several dogs adopted, and get several others sent to local rescue groups. 

We have a large transport coming up tomorrow, which will free up some space for us at the shelter. We also have a huge New Years Day Adoption Event planned (yes, a huge adoption event on the first with an almost entirely new staff -- should be exciting) which should help more.  It will at least give us a little breathing room for a few days.  So for now, crisis averted.

While I'm not going to completely change the focus of this blog -- I will, from time to time, post updates on our transition at the shelter. My hope is that giving real examples of our successes and failures can help others who also wish to transition their local shelters into No Kill Shelters also. 

So here is a key learning from our small Christmas miracle:

In the No Kill Advocacy Center's Companion Animal Protection Act, there is a clause that requires shelters to give 24 hours notice before any adoptable animal was killed. This isn't a pain in the butt -- this is a huge opportunity. When we officially hit our "above capacity" situation, we provided all rescues and volunteers 24 hours to pull from our shelter.  They responded by pulling enough animals to keep any from having to be killed.  And that's pretty darn cool.

We may not always get bailed out -- but we're going to try. And isn't giving animals one last chance at adoption worth it?

 

The Convenience of Killing

By now, you've probably heard the news about Ace.

Ace was an emaciated pit bull that late last week, wandered into an Ace Hardware Store.  The well-meaning store owner, who was touched by meeting Ace, called Detroit Animal Control and they came out to pick up Ace. 

Unfortunately, Detroit Animal Control has a blanket policy that it does NOT adopt ANY pit bull type dogs  -- or,  release any of them to rescue groups.  So Ace was destined to die.

However, there became a groundswell of support for Ace, and many people around Detroit and around the country pushed for Ace to be given a chance. 

On Wednesday night, these advocates got a huge win, when a Wayne County Judge filed an emergency injunction preventing the city from euthanizing Ace, or any dog that resembled Ace.

Unfortunately, in spite of the injunction, the city killed Ace anyway.  Yip, in spite of an overwhelming number of people who wanted to help save Ace, and in spite of a court injunction saying they couldn't kill Ace, Ace died at the hands of local authorities.

Shirley has noted that if Michigan had a law similar to CAPA, then Ace would be alive right now. She's right of course, but I think there is a larger, systemic problem that needs to be addressed. It's that sadly, and strangely, we have somehow created a large, tax-payed shelter system that apparently lacks any compassion, and has found it more convenient to kill animals than to save them. And that's a problem.

Now, I'll note that not all shelters have this problem -- as there are some that deserve to be celebrated.  But there are still WAY TOO MANY shelters that operate similarly to the one in Detroit -- and it needs to be reformed.

According to a statement by Detroit Animal Control, neither they, nor the city received the reported court injunction -- and because Ace's time was up, he was euthanized killed.  This claim seems a little odd to me given that a reporter was able to obtain a copy of the injunction, it was plastered all over local news, and I knew about the injunction from 1200 miles away.  And Marji knew about it too. 

Bruce King, the general manager of the Detroit Health Department continues in his statement:

"At the end of business today, the dog referred to as Ace was euthanized following the expiration of the four-day holding period and departmental policy.  We are not insensitive to the overwhelming appeal from citizens for an alternative approach. We are, indeed, heartened by the appeals.  However, if we grant this one exception, we are simply not set up for what will undoubtedly lead to overwhelming appeals in similar cases."

 So there -- it's not that they were insensitive -- but, well, if they saved this one, then they would be inconvenienced by the public who would then think that other 'pit bulls' would have the right to live too -- and, well, we're just not set up for that.  Besides, just this one case has really caused a public safety nightmare for the city:

"Urgent calls for help from elderly citizens, school principals, postal supervisors and police are going unanswered because our Detroit Animal Control dispatch line is overwhelmed with calls from outside the city, state and even the country," said King.

See, because so many people wanted to help this dog in spite of our bad policy, we HAD to kill him, because it was causing a public safety issue. We had no other choice.  Uh huh.

King also reiterated that:

"DAC is acting in accordance with the Stray Holding Law facilitated by the Michigan Department of Agriculture that mandates quarantining stray animals for 4 days; while ensuring they are provided for."

So Mr. King, we get that you didn't break the law, but let's be clear here, the four day hold time is the state MINIMUM requirement.  There is nothing keeping you from holding the dog for longer that that 4 days, or releasing him to a rescue group, other than your complete lack of compassion. 

Now, an attorney in Detroit, Corbett O'Meara, plans to try to get Detroit officials held in contempt of court for violating the court injunction.

What happened in Detroit is sadly not abnormal. Earlier this week I noted another city, Springfield, MO, that has created a law that has not decreased the number of dog bites in the city, but has directly led to the death of over 1500 dogs and is declaring the law a "success".  Springfield has a similar policy prohibiting the adoption groups from saving 'pit bulls' from their shelter. This type of non-caring city-run shelter is far too indicative of the standard for city-run shelters  -- managed by people who find it more convenient to kill the dogs than to actually work to save them.

Ace's death is a tragedy -- but his isn't the only one. Hundreds of dogs like Ace going into Detroit Animal Control, and Springfield, MO and shelters just like them every year and meet the same fate, with no fanfare, and no chance to live.

And this is why reform is necessary.

For more (I'll update this throughout the day):

For the Pit Bulls - Detroit Animal Control Riding the shame boat to fail

Bless the Bullys - For dogs like Ace, where's the justice?

For the Love of the Dog - Ace is Dead (in Detroit)

Bad Rap - Ace: A fitting mascot for Detroit city policy

 

So what is the Companion Animal Protection Act?

Over the past couple of months, several states including New York, Texas and Rhode Island have begun looking at passing the Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA).  A similar bill was passed in Deleware last year.

But with all of the talk about CAPA, I have neglegently failed to post an overview of the law on this blog.

That is changing right now. Now, by all means, don't take my word for the law. Read the template for the law in its entirety here (it's only 11 pages, so won't take you long).

In a nutshell, CAPA seeks to legislate shelters following the No Kill Equation. The tenets of the No Kill Equation are really not controversial. All of the tenets are known to be successful in their own right, including comprehensie adoption opportunities, foster care programs, shelter socialization, proper shelter cleaning, medical care and rehabilitation for treatable animals, TNR programs, owner retention programs, proactive return to owner policies and good public relations programs.

CAPA is sadly necessary because there are still far too many shelters that are absolutely failing in too many of these areas -- many because of non-caring, non-compassionate leadership. 

So here are the key points of CAPA:

 1) Requires all dogs, cats and rabbits to be altered prior to adoption unless there is a health reason as cited by a licensed veterinarian and such sterilizations must be performed by a licensed veterinarian.

2) Allows for the care of feral cats

3) Requires a 5 day holding period for impounded strays - -with a variety of different provisions for young animals that are not weened and for those that are irremediably suffering.

4) Requires the same holding period for animals that are relinquished by their owners for euthanasia if the animal is determined to be in good health and not aggressive.

5) Requires proper treatment of  injuries and diseases and cleanliness of kennels (cleaned no less than twice per day) for animals in the shelter.

6) Require a shelter to provide 48 hours advance notice to regular shelter and rescue contacts (either by phone or via email) prior to euthanizing an animal. Then, if another shelter or rescue agrees to take an animal that is to be killed, the animal must be surrendered to that organization with no pull fee.  Shelters or rescues may be excluded if any of the organization's current directors or officers have been convicted of any type of cruelty or neglect for animals.

7) Forbids public or private shelters from limiting or obstructing adoptions for any animal based on arbitrary criteria such as breed, age, color or any other criteria other medical condition or aggression -- or the adopter's fitness to adopt.

8) Requires shelters or rescues to promote animals for adoption and requires them to be open for adoption seven says a week, a minimum of six hours per day, requires evening and weekend adoption hours and off-site adoption events.

9) Prevents an animal from being killed if there are empty cages or kennels, available foster homes, or other organization willing to take the animal.

10) Requires an animal to be killed via lethal injection (not the gas chamber or other method of killing).

11) Requires public accountability so shelters must make public the number of animals impounded each year and how many were adopted, returned to owner, transferred to other rescue groups, reclaimed by their owners , lost, stolen or killed -- and posted in a conspicuous and observable spot. This information must be presented to any owner surrending an animal to the shelter. 

12) Requires revenues from dog licenses to go back to animal control and used for low cost spay/neuter services.

There's obviously a lot more to the bill - -but this is the gist.

Almost all of this makes 100% sense -- and is just mandating by law programs that are proven to work and be successful at saving animal lives. Unfortunately there are still opponents to this law.

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

The big three organizations, HSUS, ASPCA and Best Friends have opposed versions of CAPA in the past, and emails suggest that at least HSUS is working behind the scenes in Texas to oppose CAPA.

Some of the opposition, at least in New York, centered around the name of the law.  The name "Oreo's law" was centered around a specific dog that was "rescued" by the ASPCA, then killed after being physically rehabed because the ASPCA deemed Oreo to be too aggressive.  A New York area group, Pet's Alive, offered to take in Oreo and help her with her rehabilitiation, but was deniied. And Oreo was killed.

Thus, the ASPCA opposed "Oreo's Law". Best Friends opposed the law too -- in part because the ASPCA did, and in part because of a concern that they, and the ASPCA had with the law.

According to language crafted by Gregory Castle at Best Friends, centers around provision #6 above. As Castle wrote:

"One (reason)was the language around who would be approved to claim an animal from a shelter. The Kellner/Duane Bill allowed any animal 501(c)3 to do so, but excluded competent rescues that weren’t federally tax exempt. Having that designation does not reflect an organization’s ability to handle animals and see them adopted into good, loving homes. A 501(c)3 is merely a tax designation and says nothing about the organization’s track record or skill to do right by the animals, especially animals that might need a little extra care. That doesn’t even account for those out there who might take advantage of such a loophole for unscrupulous reasons."

Now, I'm not going to deny that there are organizations (or people), disguised as 501c3 organizations, that are involved in unscupulous behavior. The writers of CAPA agreed, and even put in the clause that if anyone on their board has ever been convicted of animal cruelty or neglect, they can be excluded. This leaves only the "questionable" 501c3s that have never been convicted as being of concern -- that is keeping the rest of the bill from passing.

While I'm sure there are problem groups out there (I do know of a couple), there are currently cruelty laws on the books in every state to deal with those folks.  And they should be dealt with -- regardless of whether CAPA exists or not. Let's face it, if someone wants animals for "unscrupulous reasons" or for hoarding, or whatever, there is no shortage of animals out there for them to get their hands on. This small number of "rescue" organizations should be dealt with -- with, or without, CAPA.

On the flip side, there are literally hundreds of thousands of animals that are getting killed in public and private shelters every year because the shelters are not making even basic efforts to save lives. CAPA would mandate that they do.

For weeks now, Yesbiscuit! has been writing about the ongoing slaughter at the Memphis animal shelter (you can read a list of 'concerns' here)  -- and everything they're doing is a) legal under the current law and b) avoidable if a law like CAPA was passed.

But Memphis is far from an isolated example.

In Kansas City, our shelter temporarily shut out volunteers after allegations of abuse arose -- causing hundreds of animals to get less care than they were getting with the volunteer support. In Ohio, more than 80% of the county shelters kill dogs solely based on breed -- this is common in many areas including a shelter in Virginia that fought for the right to kill all 'pit bulls', in Little Rock, Houston, Springfield, MO and others. There are countless shelters that prefer to not work with rescue groups, and never post adoptables online, or let people know before animals are killed. There are many more that keep half of their kennels empty at all times to make it easier to move animals to different cages every morning so they can more easily clean dirty cages.  I'm sure nearly every reader of this blog has an example of virtually all of these in their own community.

And all of this is completely legal and without regime change, cannot be solved.

So while I don't want to completely dismiss Best Friends' concerns, there are solutions to the small number of bad 501c3's out there who are causing problems -- whereas CAPA provides a very viable solution to the much larger issues of public and private shelters that are not even trying. 

CAPA is a good, smart law -- already passed in the state of Delaware-- and deserves support in Rhode Island, Texas, New York and elsewhere when it is proposed.

For more:

Mandating Collaboration - Winograd

Fallout from Oreo's Law teaches us that old habits die hard - KC Dog Blog

Why I love CAPA - -Reason 547 - Yesbiscuit! (because shelters literally have to exhaust all reasonable alternatives to save healthy/treatable pets before killing).

Ending Sheltery Tyranny over Rescuers -- Winograd