Ed Boks stated that in 2005 the City issue 38,000 S/N certificates and this is what accounted for the big drop in impounds during the first year of his watch.
The I heard over 40,000 were distributed in 2007 and heard even 42,000 in 2008.
Now we hear from Linda Barth through Rick Orlov that in 2008 only 34,000 certificates were distributed, and of that 34,000, only 35% were ever actually utilized. That is, out of the estimated 800,000 dogs and cats in LA, there were only 11,900 City-assisted S/N surgeries, or about 1.5%.
On top of this, we also here through Orlov that Phyllis Doughgerty alludes to "a study" apparently on LA, although Rick did not specify, the area of the study. Phyliis said:
"A licensing study showed that from 1972 to 2008, 479,269 cost-assisted pet sterilizations were performed under various programs," Dougherty said. "This steadily reduced the number of animals impounded during those years from 83,500 to 25,478."
Dougherty said that resulted in a savings of $77 million during that period, as well as a reduction in euthanasia from 110,000 to 18,000 animals.
Where did these numbers come from? What study? Why hasn't this info been on the LAAS website? How accurate and credible is the study? Who did it? When?
Once again, it is clear that there is no transcparency in Boks numbers. A story comes out about a program ending with an explanation that does not make sense. Then a couple of more stories come out with different explanations and even different numbers.
Now we find out there hasn't been more than 12,000 affordable S/N in any year through the City program even though I believe Boks has talked about $2,200,000 for the program.
Rick Orlov's newest piece:
Restoration of free pet spay-neuter plan sought
By Rick Orlov rick.orlov@dailynews.com 213-978-0390 Staff Writer
Updated: 03/17/2009 02:32:16 PM PDT
STERILIZATION: Zine, Garcetti dismayed to hear of Animal Services discontinuing program.
Surprised to hear Animal Services had halted a program offering free and discounted spay and neuter surgeries for cats and dogs, two Los Angeles city councilmen said Monday they want to restore the program to help pet owners comply with the law.
The program was specifically adopted to support the city's recently enacted spay and neutering law - one of the nation's toughest pet sterilization ordinances.
Councilman Dennis Zine and Council President Eric Garcetti want to know what is needed to restore the program, which offered $30 and $70 certificates. And one will call for its immediate restoration.
"In the long run, the cost of pet overpopulation will significantly outweigh that of of the spay-neuter coupons," Chris Olsen, an aide to Zine, wrote in a letter to the city's Spay and Neuter Advisory Committee.
"(Zine) will introduce a motion that directs Animal Services to reinstate the program immediately," Olsen wrote.
But the advisory committee also claimed to have known nothing about the suspension - even after meeting with Animal Shelter officials just a day before the program was stopped.
Animal Services officials said they cut the program as part of a plan to save about $150,000.
"All we were told is the department was having some budget difficulties and needed to make cuts," said Laura Beth Heisen, chair of
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Spay and Neuter Advisory Committee. "We were told all city departments were making cuts and there might be a slight impact.
"This is more than a slight impact. This affects the entire program we have going."
Garcetti spokeswoman Julie Wong said council members were never informed of the decision.
"We were told there would be cuts in every department, but never told they were ending this program," Wong said. "If we had been told they were going to suspend this program, we would have objected."
The department announced last week that it had suspended the program last Tuesday. It said the city was facing a $17million shortfall this year and upwards of $450 million next year and had to do its share.
"We are working very, very hard here to process the certificates we have as quickly as possible to see where we stand," said Linda Barth, assistant general manager of the department.
"Obviously, we are pinching any penny we can. The city is looking at a big shortfall and we are looking to save where we can. We believe very strongly in the spay-neuter ordinance and the importance of spay and neuter to reduce the unwanted pet population."
The city last year adopted a law requiring dog and cat owners to have pets spayed or neutered when they reach four months of age. As a way to promote the program, the city included the certificates to cover most of the costs of the procedure.
During the 2007-08 fiscal year, the department issued 22,000 of the $30 discount coupons and 12,000 of the $70 certificates. Only 35 percent of those were used within the 90-day time period, Barth said.
Heisen said that not only should money be found to restore the program, but that someone should be hired to exclusively oversee it. A similar recommendation was made in an audit by city Controller Laura Chick released last August.
"What we have been saying is they need someone assigned full-time to the spay-neuter program," Heisen said. "All they have is a clerk processing the certificates. They need someone overseeing the program and looking to see how we can make it more effective."
Heisen said it costs the city $200 per animal to process and place them in a shelter - far more than the cost of a spay-neuter certificate.
"When we give out a certificate we are trying to get to people who need to spay or neuter their pet," Heisen said. "If they don't and their pet has a litter, they give away a few animals, turn them in to the city or just let them loose. That just adds to our problems."
Phyllis Dougherty of the Animal Issues Movement said halting the program could end up costing the city more, with more unwanted pets being born and placed in shelters.
"A licensing study showed that from 1972 to 2008, 479,269 cost-assisted pet sterilizations were performed under various programs," Dougherty said. "This steadily reduced the number of animals impounded during those years from 83,500 to 25,478."
Dougherty said that resulted in a savings of $77 million during that period, as well as a reduction in euthanasia from 110,000 to 18,000 animals.
So all this time when Boks said they gave out 38,000 or 42,000 coupons, only 35% were used? Why not just print one million coupons and throw them up in the air. Then he can say he distributed one million coupons. I want to know how many surgeries were actually performed.
ReplyDeleteOrlov's article says - "The program was specifically adopted to support the city's recently enacted spay and neutering law - one of the nation's toughest pet sterilization ordinances."
ReplyDeleteNOT TRUE!
I've been publishing The Pet Press since Aug, 1999. In that very first issue I had a list of groups participating in the s/n discount coupon program - there were 20 groups listed and the coupons were worth $20 for cats/ $30 for dogs.
NEVER in the ten years that I have been putting out The Pet Press has that program EVER been disbanded!!
Lori Golden
The Pet Press
Laura Chick (love her) did an audit of the s/n program and actual numbers can be found there. I have written documentation of all the lies by Boks vs. the actual numbers that the council has seen. Working hard here people trying to get rid of the man. All of the information and proof can easily be found on the internet, the problem is, no one has put it all together before in easy reading for the council.
ReplyDeleteOrlov mis-stated. The program was part of the argument in getting the council to agree to PASS the MSN law. It was in existance prior but was used as a promise that no resident of L.A. would be burdened because everyone would have access to s/n services if they could not afford them. That is the BIG problem.
ReplyDeleteHere is the URL for the Chick audit.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lacity.org/ctr/audits/FinalAnimalServicesSpayAndNeuter081908.pdf
Nowhere do I see any numbers on the redemption rate--of course I read it quickly. Can you find them?
Ok, according to Phyllis Dougherty impounds steadily decreased from 83,500 to 25,478 animals. Euthansias decreased from 110,000 to 18,000. I guess I'm kind of dense, but why was it we needed to enact a MSN law in Los Angeles, again? Unless of course you can tell me her numbers are false.
ReplyDeleteThis is typical. There has been no causal relationship or nexis shown between sterilizing a dog and whether or not that dog ends up in the shelter.
ReplyDeleteLAAS does not keep track of how many of the dogs in the shelter are intact; they don't even know how many of the dogs that are returned to their owners.
Likewise, there is no statistical basis for Phyllis Dougherty's numbers. The rescuers WANT to think there is a connection between SN and roaming dogs. But they have no data.
It's time to stop being angry, start collecting statistics and stop making assumptions. Economically disadvantaged people are being unfairly singled out and maybe unnecessary dogs and cats are dying.
Cathie Turner
Concerned Dog Owners of California
I don't have her earlier numbers. I don't know where they came from, but her 25,000 figure for current impounds is about 20,000 low.
ReplyDeleteThe arguement is that that reduction over the years was do to combined City and public/nonprofit efforts, but 18,000 killed is not zero. We are looking for zero killed, not in 20years, but now.
To say that positive change is happening anyway and this means mandatory spay/neuter is not necessary, sounds like a breeders arument who does not want to pay the unaltered fees.
18,000 is not zero. Something more has to be done. Personally I don't think mandatory spay/neuter is it.
I think put great restrictions on breeders selling dogs and cats in the City and County could make a big difference.
This is typical. There has been no causal relationship or nexis shown between sterilizing a dog and whether or not that dog ends up in the shelter.
ReplyDeleteLAAS does not keep track of how many of the dogs in the shelter are intact; they don't even know how many of the dogs that are returned to their owners.
Likewise, there is no statistical basis for Phyllis Dougherty's numbers. The rescuers WANT to think there is a connection between SN and roaming dogs. But they have no data.
It's time to stop being angry, start collecting statistics and stop making assumptions. Economically disadvantaged people are being unfairly singled out and maybe unnecessary dogs and cats are dying.
Cathie Turner
Concerned Dog Owners of California
The issue is that we all need real numbers. And sadly we have to look at this as a % euthanized on a per thousand basis. The numbers that are reported to the State of California by the City of Los Angeles indicate that owner turn ins are between 30 and 35% of the dog at the shelters. And, for the most part, those dogs are the older, the ill or those with behavior problems. Healthy well-adjusted dogs that are an integral part of the family are not being surrendered. And of course for cats, there are huge numbers of neonatal kittens. We need a TNR program for cats.
ReplyDeleteNeither owner turn in nor neonates are likely to be affected by MSN. The only dogs that can reproduce accidentally are those that are intact and wandering. And repeat offenders are owned by irresponsible people. There needs to be an accounting; animals of repeat offenders need to be altered. LAAS needs to step up and get out there and impound those dogs. But Boks cannot even tell is how many of these there are.
We need to stop assuming anyone who has an intact dog is a breeder. The vast majority of people who show dogs have never and will never breed their dogs. But that is a connection Boks does not seem to be able to make.
Redemption Numbers and rates are in Appendix-B, last two pages. THANK YOU for this and more Laura Chick.
ReplyDeleteBrad Jensen
Cypress,CA
The rates shown are for the percentage of surgeries where certificates were used versus the total number of spay/nueters by all methods supported by the City.
ReplyDeleteThat is, animals are fixed at shelter surgeries, by certificates, spaymobile, etc. All these are considered City-sponsored S/N.
The percentages Chick cites are the percentages of ALL sterilizations that are related to certificates, not the percentage rate of the utilization of certificates.
There no where is stated the number of certificates given out or the redemption rate.
The dept does know how many cats and dogs that are adopted need surgery. 72% of cats and 55% of dogs adopted need to be sterilized. This comes from the annual report 05/06.
ReplyDeleteI'll check out Chick's report.
Sorry Ed. I should have read LC's report a little more carefully before posting.
ReplyDeleteA couple of excerpts From the Desk of Ed Boks:
1. Barker, who will be named by Alarcon to an advisory committee to help with outreach, said the statute won't be a burden on the elderly or poor residents because the city offers about 11,000 vouchers for free surgeries a year and another 20,000 discounts.
2. While it costs $135 to euthanize a cat and $195 a dog, it costs $60 to $80 to spay or neuter them, according to Los Angeles Animal Services General Manager Ed Boks.
And then from a document on the CAHealthyPets website:
1. Based on estimates from the City of Los Angeles Department of Animal Services and the California Department of Health Services, California’s local governments spend more than $250 million every year to shelter and/or euthanize unwanted animals. This estimate does not include the capital costs of building new shelters.
So it would seem that taking vouchers and discount coupons out of circulation would actually COST taxpayers MORE. Unless of course... all the above was just a lie.
Brad Jensen
Cypress,CA
Why don't you count all the intact dogs in the shelter?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean, "you" count all the intact dogs.
ReplyDeleteTelephone Boks or Barth and ask them. I doubt they'd have the current stats as they vary daily, but last years? Probably they would have them.
I don't see the relevance to the spay/neuter ordinance if that is your drift.
I'm not sure where you're going with counting all the intact dogs either. Will you please explain a little more? Thanks.
ReplyDeleteBrad Jensen
Cypress,CA