LA officials: Planned cuts at animal shelters will lead to more deaths
Posted: 04/28/2010 07:09:17 PM PDT
Updated: 04/28/2010 08:03:53 PM PDT
A pooch awaits what fate has in store at the City of Los Angeles East Valley Animal Shelter located at 14409 Vanowen St., Van Nuys, Calif. | See photo gallery. (Hans Gutknecht/Staff Photographer)
RELATED STORIES
- Animals
- Apr 28:
- Poll: A third say pets listen better than husbands
- Budget crisis
- Apr 27:
- Panel rejects Villaraigosa's spending plan for the city
- Jan 9:
- County says vulnerable are targeted by plan
- Austerity ahead for California
- Jan 8:
- Union vows to fight 'inevitable' layoffs by city
- Jul 24:
- L.A. County, city to keep their share of gas taxes
- Assembly delivers budget bill
The city killed more than 19,000 unwanted dogs and cats and 4,000 other animals last year. But some city officials and rescue advocates say a proposed $1.8 million reduction to Los Angeles' Animal Services department will not only mean more euthanasia, but more animals roaming around uncontrolled on the streets.
"How can can you be talking public safety as a priority and gutting animal services?" Councilman Richard Alarc n said Wednesday.
"This will have a severe effect and it's obvious we're moving in the wrong direction to the no-kill policy."
The proposed cuts will also likely mean the closure of the Northeast Animal Care Shelter in Mission Hills, as well as personnel losses equal to the entire staff of another animal care center, according to city documents.
Those cuts will require a 58 percent increase in the number of dogs and cats euthanized over the next fiscal year, according to Kathy Davis, interim general manager of the Animal Services department.
"The department believes this will obligate the mayor and council to choose closure of an operating animal care center and to sanction a likely resulting increase in pet euthanasia," Davis told the council's Budget and Finance Committee in a recent 14-page memorandum.
"If our Northeast facility as well as one other large animal care center close, we expect that number to rise to about 30,000 pets (annually) that we have to euthanize," Davis elaborated in an interview.
"The only thing that could keep this from happening, unfortunately, is money. We've tried to live through this - through the early retirements, through the work furloughs - but we're at a point where we've cut to the bone and now anything more than this means an amputation."
The City Council's Budget and Finance committee is holding hearings this week on the budget of most city agencies, including Animal Services.
When he released his budget last week, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa warned that fixing the city's massive deficit will require sacrifice from every agency and employee.
"The mayor was the first to say that this was a very difficult budget, it is not perfect, and he looks forward to working with council to make it better," mayoral spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton said.
Daniel Gus, a Sherman Oaks rescue advocate, decried the proposed closure of the Northeast shelter.
"What a crime this will be," Gus said.
He also said certain cuts, such as the license canvassing program, would be counter-productive because they are revenue-generating.
Clearly though, both rescue advocates and officials agree, the most moving aspect of the cuts is the impact they will have on animals' lives.
The city is required to hold the animals for five days before euthanasia, but officials said the city has extended that to eight days for cats and nine days for dogs.
Last fiscal year, the city euthanized 11,938 cats, 7,623 dogs, 292 rabbits and 3,802 other animals.
Davis said that three years ago, city animal shelters were euthanizing fewer than 16,000 animals. More than 30,000 are returned to their owners or adopted out.
Those figures are down from a decade ago when, according to department records, the city euthanized 53,000 animals and placed only 13,000 for adoption.
The budgetary impact to her department, Davis said, is the proposed 26 working days reduction of city workforce that will mean an effective cut of eight animal control officers, 14 animal care technicians, three registered veterinary technicians, four clerical staff and two supervisors.
Davis said those reductions were the equivalent of the staff of one of the six fully operational animal care centers.
The Northeast Animal Shelter to be shut under the proposed budget cuts has never been open to the public but is used to hold about 200 animals at a time, officials said. It has the capacity for 900 animals and has been used as an evacuation center during fires and floods.
"We use the facility to keep animals that are under quarantine (and) evidence animals for crimes that you have to keep separate or those with special medical needs," said Linda Barth, assistant general manager of animal services.
Officials said all shelters are often already overcrowded by the increase in animals taken in every day, either as strays picked up on the streets or pets turned in by owners who can no longer afford to take care of them.
At the East Valley shelter in Van Nuys, center manager Helen Brakemeier said that on any given day the number of animals remains at about 200 dogs and 100 cats because adoptions fail to outnumber the animals taken in.
"We just try to keep up and encourage adoptions, but the numbers don't really drop," said Brakemeier.
On Wednesday, for instance, an owner had dropped off three pug-mix puppies at the shelter, but it likely was going to take three separate adoptions to move them from the center.
"I would like to have all three but I'm only looking to adopt one," said Julie Ward of Shadow Hills, whose pug died recently.
Another visitor Wednesday was Renee Merrill of Ventura, an adoption placement specialist, who said she has been working diligently to find homes for pets in shelters, fearing what will happen if she does not.
"For every pet I find a home for, I'm actually saving two," said Merrill. "A home for the pet that's being adopted and it opens a spot for an animal in a shelter that otherwise might not be there."
5 comments:
I am concerned for the plight of the animals; but more so not because of budget cuts but because I have no confidence in LAAS management to handle the situation. For years, they have cried about being understaffed even when they had more staff than ever. Surely the managers can take a harder look at cuts and arrive at some creative ways to keep programs going.
For example, why don't they transfer some of the "fat cats" from administration to the shelters to help out? Most of them don't even know what to do with themselves during the day. The least they could do is assist at the shelters, where the real work is done.
I agree with the last post. Management has to understand that the City is in tough budget times and cannot continue to make excuses about why animals cannot be saved.
The Department needs to find ways to get things done, not continually make excuses why things can't get done.
First they build huge state-of-the art shelters and then they close them down.
They tell you to spay and neuter and release, then they go after you for trapping without a permit.
They encourage you to adopt, but don't tell you that there is only a 3-animal legal limit.
If you see a problem, they tell you to do something about it yourself and redirect you to organizations to help you resolve the problem. Then they kick you in the face, threaten you, and order you to stop when you do what the organization advises.
They push TNR, then go after you for "maintaining more than the legal limit" and order you to get "rid of them."
It's about time they closed the shelters. These people either don't know their ass from a hole in the wall, or they just like intimidating people by throwing around their authority.
Maybe they're just a bunch of incompetent hypocrites who are too lazy to go after the real crimminals so they punch in the clock and put in their quota for the day by going after the easy targets.
It's about time the shelters closed down and those people found somewhere else to go, away from animals. Maybe push a lawnmower somewhere, do some custodial work, front office reception, or work at a bakery.
That leaves the ACTF to resolve animal issues. They go two-by-two, their threats are more severe and carry a gun.
Ever fell like Linda Blair in the Excorcist? They encourage you to TNR and adopt, then they send the ACTF after you to get rid of the animals they have "encouraged" you to spay and neuter, foster, and adopt yourself, after you've had them for five years.
What they want to do is close the shelters so that people end up letting their dogs loose on the street to fend for themselves from now on. If you have four dogs and a cat, "you need to get rid of two!"
If you have five cats, "get rid of two of them." They can care less if any of them were LAAS fosters and you've had them and loved them for five years. They can care even less if any of them are TNR's. You need to get rid of them.
WHY IS THAT?!!
Besides euthanizing all of those animals at the shelter, they want you to have your own animals killed. This isn't the City of Angels anymore. It's City of the Gestapo.
Kianna~
On 4/30/2010, a visitor to the North Central pound posted the following:
"At the North Central shelter there was cage after empty cage after empty cage when I was there on Tues. I lost count at 50. Was there a sudden miracle and people werent dumping dogs as much there? My answer came when I saw a volunteer in tears. They had just killed her favorite dog [and no notice. I guess doesnt believe in the list which gives notice which dogs are in danger]. They said that they cant take care of so many dogs. Whether or not that is true, stand by to stand by when there are more budget cuts.
My friend police officer told me of standing by with an injured dog who had been hit by a car, AC never coming for 3 hours while the dog lingered in agony. 1 Animal Control Officer for the whole city who was responding to emergencies all over. This is common, the norm, not the exception. Budget cuts? There is nothing to trim here."
Can you say massacre?
The City of Los Angeles Animal Service Department is targeting people who rescue and foster - whether it is from a neighbor who misunderstands what fostering is, or from some other person who for whatever misguided reason decides to file a complaint. Those "rescue" people typically have more than the three cats or dogs that are allowed by the City. And what happens to the dogs or cats that are being fostered for adoption or "rescued," when A.S. determines there are too many in the rescuer's household, the City most likely will take and euthanize. Why, because the shelters are full, the City cannot get the adoptions it needs to make the "no kill" policy happen, but it will enforce a policy against well-meaning people who rescue those animals from the streets. Makes no sense! If the City wants to move to a "no kill," policy, it must rely on those very people who are doing the "rescue" and the fostering for adoptions. So many rescuers are up to their ears in cats or dogs because those are the animals that "the public" has not bothered to have spayed or neutered, or fenced in or are simply abandoned when they move out of a residence, or when the animal becomes ill or they just don't want it anymore. LAAS knows the difference between someone who is "hoarding" animals and someone whose animals are healthy and are either being fostered for adoptions or are being well cared for. We are not so naive; LAAS is not doing the job of protecting animals. Leave those people/groups/individuals who actually help you do your job alone, As for the "No Kill" policy - - either stand up for it, or just shut up about it, because the harassment of "rescue" volunteers and kind-hearted people has to stop, or the lawsuits will begin to make it stop.
Post a Comment