.
There is amazing news coming out of Winograd’s No Kill Advocates/Solutions. These are very partial statistics and I would want to see the progression of numbers over the entire year as opposed to just the year end rate. Everyone has heard negative rumors about the Rancho Cucamonga and Philadelphia systems. As a matter of fact, Philly’s stats seemed self-contradictory at times as I pointed out in previous posts. Yet I never saw any hard evidence of poor performance at these shelters.
Past calls to these shelters has never resulted in the release of any statistics either. Therefore, there was always room for doubt of Nathan’s claims.
If the statistics below are indeed accurate, and include all animals vs. “adoptable,” “healthy,” etc., the results are incredible:
Philadelphia
In 2005, the City of Philadelphia asked us to do a complete assessment of shelter operations and make recommendations to improve program and service delivery with a goal of creating a No Kill Philadelphia.
Since the implementation of our recommendations, as 2006 comes to a close PACCA announces that the save rate for dogs and cats is the highest in the City's history. Less dogs and cats are being killed in Philadelphia than ever before, with 65% of all cats currently being saved.
Charlottesville, VA.
Until April 2005, the Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA, an open door animal control shelter in the South, was the target of criticism for what some in the rescue community saw as unnecessary killing.
In 2005, all that changed. A new director embraced our philosophy and programs, asked us to help train their staff and make recommendations on policies. Only one year later, the agency is finishing the year saving 95% of dogs and 92% of cats, a level of success unmatched by any other community in the nation.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
After taking over operations, deaths for dogs and cats are at all time lows. Of particular note, for the same period as 2005, the save rate for dogs has increased to 81%, the save rate for cats has increased to 57%, and the save rate for other animals (rabbits, hamsters, gerbils, etc.) has increased from a paltry 27% to 70%.
Note that these systems are smaller, or even much, much smaller than the LA City or County operations, and Nathan’s stats appear to mix improvements in percentages compared to the same period as last year (Rancho) and absolute live releases in the other two cities. Yet, in either case the results are astounding.
The obvious questions arises: are Nathan’s results, if true, sustainable? Are they repeatable in even larger systems such as LAAS, LA County, NYC, etc.?
No comments:
Post a Comment