By
 Charlotte
Laws, Ph.D.
Los Angeles kills
30,000 – 50,000 of our dogs and cats at our city shelters
each year for an annual cost of $14 million dollars. Not
only does this turn our city's animal "shelters" into death
houses, at great expense, it is entirely unnecessary.
"No kill" means to end
the killing of all healthy or curably sick dogs and cats at
shelters within city boundaries.
Mayor Hahn says he
wants to make L.A. "no kill" by 2008, but inside sources say
this is mere rhetoric, for he will be out of office by then,
and that city bureaucrats have no notion how this objective
might be accomplished other than to increase shelter space.
The city is spending
$154 million to renovate and build new shelters. At the
completion of the construction project, the kennels will
increase from 366 to 1253. These 887 extra "runs" may give
the animals a longer holding time, but L.A. cannot solve its
euthanasia problem without a more comprehensive plan,
drawing on a cooperative effort between government agencies
and the animal rescue / welfare community.
"No kill" is an
achievable goal: San Francisco has virtually succeeded,
while Utah, New York City and various counties around the
country have begun the process.
These areas rely
heavily upon financial assistance from a nonprofit called
Maddie's Fund, which has $200 million dollars in free money
available to aid localities, even entire states, with the
"no kill" objective. Maddie's Fund provides a structured,
ten-year (or shorter) plan.
Rich Avanzino, the
head of the organization told me several months ago, "Until
you, no one has ever asked us to help Los Angeles. We would
probably give $20 million, but since the city is so big, we
would require that you raise a matching $20 million in
nonprofit funds over a decade. This would be easy. New York
raised $16 million in a few months."
Though I was shocked
to learn I was the first from LA to approach Maddie's Fund,
I saw it as a cue, the impetus to do extensive research and
write a full-scale proposal for Los Angeles.
My three-part
proposal—which costs nothing to implement and will
eventually save the city money—is weaving through the
bureaucracy now. It has made it to the ears of the L.A.
Animal Commissioners, been passed by the Greater Valley Glen
Council, and sits on the desk of Guerdon Stuckey, the new
General Manager of Animal Services.
The first two parts of
my proposal are to be undertaken simultaneously.
First, I have proposed
that each of the 86 Neighborhood Councils in Los Angeles
appoint a local Director of Animal Welfare (DAW), who will
have a duty to look out for the animals in the area. The DAW
might arrange Animal Care Fairs, with free spay-neuter, dog
training, education, and adoption services. One DAW might
deal with dog-fighting problems, while another may assist
with horse-related issues. Neighborhood Council meetings and
newsletters are cost free means for reporting progress or
pulling the community together for a particular project. A
similar idea was practiced in Alameda County, resulting in
emptier shelters.
Secondly, Los Angeles
must prepare the general strategy. It should establish a
nonprofit regardless of whether it decides to take Maddie's
Fund money or "go it alone." The Maddie's Fund two-pronged
program--which focuses both on increased adoptions and
spay-neuter efforts--will not give money directly to any
government entity, but only to a nonprofit set up on its
behalf. In addition, people prefer to contribute when a
nonprofit tax deduction is available. Two local businessmen
have agreed to donate a combined $500,000 to start the
matching fund.
The new Los Angeles
nonprofit can review numbers, strategies, and successes
related to current Maddie's Fund participants. Data is
available on the Internet, and the base plan can be found at
www.MaddiesFund.org
Maddie's Fund money
can be used to finance or supplement spay-neuter and
adoption costs, as well as to bankroll less orthodox
campaigns. Utah has a "Hooters for Neuters" program, which
links pet population control with the restaurant chain. Some
Oregon malls install satellites to advertise adoptable dogs
and cats to shoppers.
Many localities have
instituted free dog training, "pets ok" rental referrals,
humane education, free feral cat assistance, foster homes
for pets, enforcement of laws regarding current breeding
limits, longer or different shelter hours to accommodate the
public, better public relations and professional advertising
campaigns, and bathed and beautified shelter dogs to make
them look more adoptable. Incentives can even be provided
for those who adopt from shelters, such as free shots and
medical exams for their new companion animals.
Thirdly, my proposal
allows for a potential legislative solution after the
completion of part one and two; if, for example, Los Angeles
has not eliminated the killing of pit bulls and pit bull
type dogs. This is currently the problem in sections of
Northern California. These types of dogs are regularly
euthanized, while all other breeds find homes.
The State of
California disallows breed specific legislation with respect
to dangerous dogs (Section 31601), however it says nothing
about breed specific legislation for highly un-adoptable
animals. The latter shifts emphasis away from depriving
people of a right, such as the right to own the dog of their
choice, and towards the need to preserve a life.
A "Highly Un-Adoptable
Dog Law" could be presented in the form of a short-term
pilot program and passed as an ordinance by the L.A. City
Council. It could require, for example, pit bulls to be
"fixed" and micro-chipped, and prohibit those not already
living in the area from entering. The pilot program could be
evaluated routinely for its efficacy or lack thereof.
A number of city
officials, Maddie's Fund representatives, animal welfare
leaders, and insurgent animal activists reviewed my drafts
in advance. All expressed approval and a willingness to
cooperate with the plan, an astounding achievement,
considering the conflicting opinions and combative attitudes
that have dominated the L.A. shelter situation for some
time.
If my proposal can
find a home in L.A., perhaps our four-legged friends can
look forward to homes too, rather than the rendering plant
near Vernon, where many unfortunately find themselves now.
_________________
Charlotte Laws, Ph.D.
is a member of the Greater Valley Glen Council and the
president of the League for Earth and Animal Protection
(LEAP). Her full "No Kill" proposal can be found at
www.CharlotteLaws.org
### PR Writers and
Storytellers..
Have a interesting story?
- Do you love to write about animals?
- Would you like to interview our Muttshackers?
- Are you an expert on a dog related topic?
- Do you have expertise in Dog Law?
- Do you have animal rescue experience?
- Are you a veterinarian or expert on dogs or
breeding?
- Do you have a interesting service?
If you answered YES to
ANY of the questions above then
you are the person we're looking for!
Become a Muttshack contributor and have your
article read by thousands! Submit your
article below.
|
