.jpg)
The Commision on Animal Control & Welfare quietly
removed discussion on shelter reform legislation. After
over a year of hearings, prospects for passage appear
dead. Animal lovers vow to continue the fight.
The prospects for shelter reform legislation in San Francisco being passed by the Commission on Animal Control and Welfare appear dead. This week, the Commission quietly removed from its agenda, any discussion of the issue. Over a year of hearings, which included heartbreaking testimony of how animals were betrayed by both the city pound and the local SPCA, have led to nowhere. But animal lovers vowed to take their case for reform straight to the Board of Supervisors.
A Year of Wasted Hearings
Over a year ago, the Commission began hearings on why the City, once considered the leader of the No Kill movement, has fallen behind other communities who not only have exceeded San Francisco’s rate of lifesaving, but have achieved No Kill despite a higher per capita intake rate and an economy harder hit by the Great Recession. Despite a 16-year head start, the once safest community in the United States for homeless dogs and cats is now in the shadows of communities as diverse as Reno, Nevada, Kansas City, Kansas, Shelby County, Kentucky, Charlottesville, Virginia, Tompkins County, New York, Berkeley, California, and others.
After hearing testimony of animals needlessly being killed, after watching the city pound pass the buck, and after watching the San Francisco SPCA eviscerate lifesaving programs in order to use donations to stop a financial hemorrhage at its multi-million dollar fee-for-service hospital, even while turning needy animals away, the Commission began considering shelter oversight legislation that would require all San Francisco shelters to commit to saving San Francisco’s neediest animals. According to supporters, they wanted to force the shelters to do what they would not do willingly, despite a mandate to do so.
The effort was directed at extending the safety net to the last of the savable animals still being killed in San Francisco’s animal control shelter—sick and injured but treatable animals, Pit Bulls, feral cats, older animals—and it was an achievement easily in reach given that San Francisco has the lowest per capita intake rate of any municipality in the nation. As a result, there was a growing consensus that the City could have easily achieved this goal, even while importing thousands of out of county young and small dogs and cats to meet adoption demand, as the San Francisco SPCA is currently doing (roughly 1,700 last year alone).
ASPCA & HSUS Demand the Right to Kill
The discussion pitted animal lovers, No Kill advocates, and local rescue groups on one side; and, on the other, the City’s two largest shelters: the San Francisco SPCA and the City pound. Ironically, the San Francisco SPCA was at one time considered both the leader and “the crown jewel” of the No Kill movement and spearheaded the national movement it resists today. Even the Humane Society of the United States and the ASPCA, organizations which helped create the paradigm of killing we live with in the U.S. today appeared in San Francisco, fighting for the right of the shelters to continue to kill animals.
Former San Francisco SPCA President Ed Sayres, who now heads the ASPCA, sent representatives to testify against a mandate for a No Kill San Francisco. Despite personal knowledge of the City and an understanding that it is an achievement easily within reach, his representatives called it “radical” and told the Commission to take no action and thus maintain the status quo—a continuation of killing.
HSUS went so far as to suggest that saving these additional lives would lead to increased animal suffering—a hopelessly irreconcilable contradiction. Under HSUS’ muddled thinking, we shouldn’t have voting rights legislation because that will lead to disenfranchisement. We shouldn’t mandate civil rights laws because that will lead to discrimination. We shouldn’t pass environmental laws because that will lead to more pollution. It not only makes no sense a priori, it makes no sense in light of the tremendous success communities which have achieved No Kill experienced by committing to the endeavor whole-heartedly.
No Kill Within Easy Reach
San Francisco’s city pound takes in roughly 6,000 dogs and cats annually. That’s 7.5 dogs and cats for every 1,000 human residents. Meanwhile, the national average is 15 dogs and cats for every 1,000 human residents. So San Francisco takes in half the national average. By contrast, Tompkins County (NY) takes in 26 per 1,000 and is saving over 90% and has been for seven years. Charlottesville (VA) also takes in 26 per 1,000 and is saving a greater percentage of animals than San Francisco. Washoe County (Reno, NV) takes in 39 per 1,000—that’s five times the rate of San Francisco. It also takes in almost three times the total number: 16,000 per year. Yet they are saving 90% despite the second highest unemployment rate in the nation.
“The bottom line,” said one rescue advocate, “is that San Francisco is not No Kill because neither the City shelter, nor the SPCA will save the last 10% of savable animals being killed at the pound, even though they could. Even though other communities across the country are doing so. The pound itself won’t because it is easy not to. And the SPCA won’t because they believe it is easier to adopt out small dogs and kittens they bring in from outside of San Francisco. So unless the Commission stands up and says, ‘This is intolerable’ and forces them to, San Francisco will never be No Kill.” The Commission, however, intends to do no such thing.
The Commission’s History of Cowardice
Bowing to pressure, sacrificing the animals in the process, and proving critics correct that they are inherently incapable of leadership, the Commission tabled the measure. It is no surprise. Commission cowardice dates back to 1993. It was that year when then-SPCA President Richard Avanzino asked the Commission to embrace what he dubbed “The Adoption Act,” a law which would have made the killing of animals in San Francisco illegal if there was a rescue group or No Kill shelter willing to save them. Facing opposition from the City pound, which was holding these animals hostage by threatening to kill them despite the SPCA’s desire and ability to save them, the Commission caved in to anti-No Kill critics and refused to endorse it.
As one critic explains,
Now, they are again being asked to support greater lifesaving when it is far less controversial, and widely embraced around the country, and they still won’t do the right thing. Whenever the issue requires them to show courage, they back down.
Every social justice movement represents change, and the status quo always has its champions. In the end, progress depends on challenging the status quo, and that inevitably means challenging those who champion the status quo. This is unpleasant. This requires courage. It takes leadership. But success demands nothing less. And sadly, the Commission is not up to the task.
Those who brought San Francisco rates of killing to where they are now are not those who run the SPCA or City pound today. They are those who had to stand up to the types of people running those agencies today. But they had the strength to do in spite of their opposition and in spite of the fact that the Commission 16 years ago failed to summon the courage to stop the pound from killing San Francisco animals that the SPCA wanted to save. Yet the same forces at work then to undermine lifesaving in San Francisco are the same forces working to undermine it today.
“What we need to do is to fire the lot of them! The cowards on the commission, the bureaucrats at the pound, and the do-nothings at the SPCA,” said a rescuer, who requested anonymity.
Once thing is for sure, San Francisco’s animals and San Francisco’s animal loving citizens deserve better.
What you can do:
- Write to the Board of Supervisors and tell them you want a fair and impartial Commission. Having representatives from agencies the Commission is supposed to oversee and regulate is a conflict of interest. Have them remove the seats held by SPCA, the City pound, and other government agencies subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction.
- Write to the Board of Supervisors and ask them to champion a No Kill San Francisco irrespective of Commission inaction. Explain to them that other cities have surpassed San Francisco's rate of lifesaving, and that no added costs are needed to achieve it. San Francisco should not be second rate.
- Wage a very public campaign showing that needy animals are still being killed in the city, but need not be. Highlight the “Power of One”: All it would take is just slightly over one additional dog or cat adopted, reclaimed, neutered and released, or treated at the SPCA’s new hospital daily to achieve No Kill. Just over one per day. There is no legitimate reason why two of the largest, best funded agencies, with the lowest intake rates and the most modern infrastructure in the nation, cannot save just over one additional animal per day.
- And if all else fails, gather signatures, not for a petition that the Commission and the shelters will ignore, but as part of a public initiative to put shelter reform legislation on the ballot! It was the threat of a public initiative that forced the City pound to back down in 1993, fearful that such a process would expose their regressive, anti-animal positions to all animal loving San Franciscans.
For further reading:
How the San Francisco SPCA Let us Down
Scathing Editorial Breathes New Life into S.F. No Kill Reform Effort
Subscribe to articles from Nathan J. Winograd: If you would like to receive an e-mail when new articles are available from Nathan Winograd, click on the "subscribe" button at the top of the page.
If you like Nathan's articles, you'll love his books. Redemption is the most acclaimed book on animal shelters ever written and the winner of five national book awards. His new book, Irreconcilable Differences, is a collection of essays on animals, animal lovers, and the No Kill revolution.
Visit his bookstore by clicking here.
Comments must adhere to the terms and conditions of the comments policy.
Comments
Sad, tragic, outrageous, but typical. Fire them all!
What a disgusting turn of events. And, I cannot believe that the HSUS and ASPCA interferred in San Francisco to advocate for killing. The more I read about these organizations, the more disgusted I become with them as well.
Please provide mailing or email addresses for the Board of Supervisors so people can write.
I'm on it right now. Let's put our disgust into action by letting them know no added costs are needed to do this. Thanks for this article.
Good job stirring the pot, Nathan! Thanks for keeping this important issue alive. I'll be curious to see if FixSanFrancisco.org stays involved. To those looking for the board's addresses, here's the link to their contact info = www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=1616
It is devastating that we, San Franciscans, have not stood against this unnecessary killing of our SF animals while others are brought into SF... charity begins at home... where are you all? Please step forward and demand protection for our animals right here and NOW. Wake up San Francisco!
Instead of no-kill, they are going to review "goat fencing." No lie, it is on the agenda. I guess that way they don't have to take any principled stands because the animal killers at ACC or the SPCA won't oppose them. I don't suspect their is an anti-goat fencing lobby like there is a well paid, lazy, corrupt, inept, uncaring anti-No Kill lobby called the SPCA and Animal Care & Control.
I have attended the AWC meeting before and let me tell you they are NOT in the interest of SF animals, they are incompetent. Month after month, "we" the public speak and they have that lazy do nothing attitude. The leadership ( or should I say lack thereof) of ACC, SF/SPCA and the Commission should be ashamed of themselves. I do not know how they look at themselves in the mirror and go to sleep at night, I guess that is what karma and judgment day is for. What a bunch of inept and worthless people they are. I hope they all are treated the way they treat SF animals, with the mind set of, lets just not deal with it , only care about our own agenda’s and just dispose of and kill the animals.
FixSanFrancisco.org is committed to making No Kill a reality in San Francisco. We will not end this battle until our goal is realized.
Nathan- Thank you for exposing these people and the issues for what they really are. We need to get ACC, SF/SPCA and the AWC to finally listen and do something.
Get the word out to STOP DOONATING TO THE SF/SPCA and shift the focus to supporting the local SF rescue groups.
FixSanFrancisco.org remains firm in our commitment to pursuing all necessary steps to realize No Kill status in San Francisco. San Francisco has been a whisper away from achieving No Kill, yet other communities who have had to struggle against much greater odds have succeeded and have far surpassed our city. The community must voice loudly and clearly and continuously what it expects and demands. No savable animal in our shelters must die.
When I said not to bet on a No Kill San Francisco, I was referring to the achievement of No Kill under the leadership of the Animal Welfare Commission. Will SF eventually become No Kill? Without a doubt. As long as animal lovers like FixSanFrancisco and others continue the fight, No Kill's conquest is a virtual certainty. But because it is opposed by the SPCA and the City pound, and because the Commission continues to tuck its tail between its legs, it will take longer than necessary. And that has a body count.
Like FixSanFrancisco and others, I too remain committed to ensuring that the fight is not finished until the war is won. And mark my words: to the Board & leadership of the SPCA, to the director and bureaucrats at the City pound, to the cowardly and inept Commissioners, we will win. And you will be swept aside.
And when No Kill is finally achieved in San Francisco, you will be held to account for your failure to champion it when you could have saved the lives of thousands
GMS will contiune to fight the fight. We too, along with FixSanFrancisco.org, remains firm in our commitment to pursuing all necessary steps to realize No Kill status in San Francisco.
Well, it was another discouraging and worthless AWC meeting last night. As Nathan stated, No-Kill, was quietly removed from the agenda, although the public DID make a showing to express their concern on the lack of progress with the No-Kill initiative. Angela Padilla stated that she welcomed anyone to help her draft legislation. Angela mentioned that she, on her own, could not come up with anything (being a lawyer and all as she so arrogantly stated) after her meeting with ACC and SPCA. She stated that ACC and SPCA made their case as to why No-Kill would not work from a legal perspective and it did sway her to the other side even though she believes in No-Kill, really????
So, wake up San Francisco and let get aggressive on this issue. I leave you with this thought in mind... Every day at ACC toward to end of the day an announcement is made calling for the animal care attendant to go to room 208 ( the kill room) and imagine seeing this helpless animal being injected with poison
Here is the rest of our post:
So, wake up San Francisco and let get aggressive on this issue. I leave you with this thought in mind... Every day at ACC toward to end of the day an announcement is made calling for the animal care attendant to go to room 208 ( the kill room) and imagine seeing this helpless animal being injected with poison and watching it take its last breath AND WHY because we can’t come up with a better solution??? These innocent animals deserve this? Are you kidding me….. How much blood needs to drip from the hands of these people before they do something …… The killing of savable animal in SF needs to stop AND can we all stop calling it Euthanasia and start calling it what it is… Murder.
I agree that last night's AWC meeting was deeply disappointing, and their attempt to stonewall us by delaying the meeting for an hour and fifteen minutes was pathetic. Kudos to everyone who saw through this tactic and waited them out.
Angela Padilla's claim in last night's AWC meeting that it is not legally feasible to make San Francisco No-Kill is ridiculous. There are No-Kill cities sprouting all over the U.S., and there is no reason San Francisco cannot be part of this movement. If Austin, TX (Texas!) can do it, we certainly can do it.
Austin TX just passed a law making it illegal for the shelter to kill an animal if there is an empty cage at the shelter and a whole host of other requirements. What the What San Francisco?
I have a question? Who is adopting all the animals left behind with borderline behavior problems, medical treatments needed and old age? The economy is bad and more and more people are surrendering cats & dogs. What makes you think warehousing these animals is a solution? People dont walk into shelters looking for an 11 year old cat thats fearful and has kidney failure. Dont get me wrong. I know you all have good intentions, but are they realistic in this economy where shelters dont have the funds to house the animals given away by people who cant afford them either?
San Francisco has the lowest intake rate of any municipality in the nation and yet there are other communities saving all those animals you claim no one wants. Reno and surrounding NV communities take in five times the number of animals per capita and they are saving them despite the second highest unemployment rate in the nation. They are adopting out not just the "cute and cuddlies," but the "old and uglies." As are others: Shelby County KY, a state with some of the lowest per capita incomes in the country, is No Kill. There are also now No Kill communities in NY, CA, CO, KS, UT, VA, and elsewhere. If they can, surely a community as progressive as San Francisco can and should. In fact, the SF SPCA imports 1,700 animals from outside the City to meet adoption demand. Give people a chance to do the right thing and some of those will open their hearts and homes to a needy animal from S.F. Right now, however, both the SPCA and animal control are not even trying. And that is unacceptable.
Let's bring this back from the abstract to the down and dirty reality. This is not a fanciful scenario; this is what happens every single week. You have a pet, let's say a cat. Your cat is 10 years old, mildly arthritic, black and needs her teeth cleaned. Your cat has lived all of her 10 years with you - she has been the only cat in the household. *see next post*
*cont'd* So the worse that can happens does happen - you and your cat - due to the economy - lose your home. In spite of your herculean efforts to find a safe and appropriate home for her you in the end have no option but surrender her the SF/Animal Care and Control. Your cat, scared, confused, lonely and surrounded by unfamiliar sounds and smells, other animals and food she does not like, not to mention being confined to a cage, after a few days is 'tested'. She is shown a cat and reacts fearfully or aggressively. Check, she has 'failed'. Next, a fake rubber hand on the end of a stick, the asses-a-hand, is jabbed towards her, while she is imprisoned in her cage, and she hisses, swipes or growls. Check, she 'fails'again and SF/ACC decides not to put her up for adoption. In other words, she's a failure in their eyes. So, they make her available to the SF/SPCA. *see 3rd post*
The SF/SPCA has been intent, these past few years of the soon to be over regime, on finding reasons to 'decline' animals in order to accomodate the importation of out of county easily adoptable animals, so they find ways to 'fail' your 10 year old, black cat who needs her teeth cleaned. Last chance is a rescue organization - Give Me Shelter - and they are overburdened, more so than is the norm, they simply cannot save your cat. Know what happens to her? Your cat dies. Yor cat is killed. YOUR CAT DIES! Happens all the time and not just to cats - it's worse for dogs. (It's appallingly worse still for 'other' animals like guinea pigs, king pigeons, rats, et al.) You need to speak up for the sake , for the sanctity, of the lives our SF animals.
Comment by Lucky G. deleted for violating the terms and conditions of the comment policy against advocating for the killing of animals.
Comment by Lucky G. deleted for violating the terms and conditions of the comment policy against ad hominem attacks.
The next AWC meeting is on 4/8 at SF City Hall... Everyone must attend and speak out for the NO- Kill movement
To all people who want to end the needless killing of SAVABLE animals in San Francisco, join us at the AWC meeting at 5pm at SF City Hall ON 4/8. Also need to stop ACC and SF/SPCA with the way the temperament testing is done, it is a total scam and you should all be outraged. It’s as meaningless as the absurdly false Live Release Rate used in SAN FRANCISCO and around the country. IT is designed to KILL animals or deem them as NOT adoptable. A temperament test can be manipulated to tell any story desired. IF YOU CARE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITIES ANIMALS YOU MUST ATTEND THE AWC MEETING
great idea !! Just checked their website. Show up in force to the April 8, 2010 Animal committee meeting (City Hall, room 408, 5:30pm) and show your support of No Kill for San Francisco. San Francisco's animals deserve better.
Nathan - maybe you could take Angela Padilla up on her offer to and draft the No-Kill legislation since she states she cant do it on her own.
We will be there... wonder how many animals were killed between the last AWC meeting and the one on April 8th.... tick tock goes the clock as the body count rises....SHOW UP IN FORCE ON APRIL 8TH and tell the Commission, ACC and SF/SPCA ...THAT THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE
Bonnie, if only you were sincere. How hard is it to understand that there are communities taking in larger numbers of animals which are no-kill. They don't have a magic wand. They do it because they care and work hard on a fraction of the assets that San Francisco has and in communities with lower income and education demographics. There are now no-kill communities all over the U.S. Why not S.F.? We've had a 15 year head start and yet we've fallen behind because of lack of leadership. Stop being an apologist for killing. S.F. is a first rate city and it should have a first rate shelter system. That it doesn't isn't anything to defend. P.S. The no-kill advocacy center has a document on temperament testing in the age of no-kill on their website.
Great comment Michael. People who care take action and come up with solutions, unlike Bonnie comments on why things cant happen....lazy...lazy people .
AWC meeting tonight 5:30pm at SF City Hall . No-Kill is on the agenda. Please make a showing and fight for No-Kill
To Bonnie Franklin-
You wrote, "How do you test a cat when you have only so much time to gauge their behavior and twenty more cats just like it waiting in the wings. Lets hear it? I want a step by step temperament test explained to me."
The problem is not the test itself, it's the place and people doing it. Shelter people, trainers, and behaviorists are NOT QUALIFIED to conduct these tests. What! Any experienced rescuer who takes in and socialized dogs or cats can tell you in a moment what problems the animal presents, how to correct the problems, and how long it would take.
The arrogance of shelter people is the problem here. I can name 5-10 San Francisco rescuers who can outperform any renowned behaviorist in this specific area. And I live in Minnesota.
(Continued in next comment box)...
Continued...
Bonnie, the problem here is your archaic shelter model. You workers go to your job every day, work, and then go home at night. Rescuers don't have that luxury. We LIVE our jobs, 24 hours a day. This isn't a job to us, it's our lives.
Mind you, I'm not talking about the typical volunteer foster home who just provides room and board for animals. I'm talking about those of us who dedicate our lives and everything we have to save unwanted animals.
We have mastered how to take in the worst cases, turn them around (rehab), and then rehome them ourselves. No shelter worker even comes close to this broad experience. How do I know? Because I grew up working in a large shelter and sanctuary. After 45+ years of experience, the most effective people at assessing behavior are those of us who do this every day of our lives.
Despite that, you shelter people think you know better than us! Behavior testing is a scam. Real life experience is what is needed, not some "t
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!