Houston, TX - As I reported previously, Houston's animal control facility i.e. BARC has no effective Return to Owner aka Lost and Found program. In his 2009 assessment of BARC, No Kill expert, Nathan Winograd said “One of the most overlooked areas for reducing killing in animal control shelters is owner reclaims. Too many shelters looking to improve save rates tend to focus all of their efforts on providing spay/neuter services, developing foster care programs, and increasing rates of adoption. Clearly these are important and should be done, but shelters can achieve dramatic reductions in death rates by focusing effort on reuniting lost pets. Unfortunately, besides having pet owners fill out a lost pet report, something BARC does not even do, very little effort is made in this area of shelter operations.”
Winograd also said that “Those rare communities who have systemized their approach and become more proactive have more than doubled this rate of redemption. Washoe County Animal Services in Reno, NV, for example, returned seven percent of lost cats and 60 percent of lost dogs to their homes in 2007. Given the high per capita intake of animals (which some suggest would evidence high rates of “public irresponsibility”) one would expect the agency to have a very low redemption rate. Instead, it is very near the top in the nation. Why? The shelter is proactive in finding the people whose companion animals have become lost.
Before impounding stray animals, Washoe County animal control officers check for identification, scan for microchips, knock on doors in the neighborhood where the animal was found, and talk to area residents. They also carry mobile telephones so that they can immediately call the missing animal’s family and facilitate a quick reunion.”
"In Washoe County, impound is a last resort.”
Winograd went on to describe a Lost and Found reporting system that he recommended be put into place at BARC. That was 2009.
Today, BARC still returns only about 7% of animals to their owners while, as discussed, No Kill communities such as Washoe Co, NV return 60% or more of all animals to their owners. This tells me that a lot of animals entering BARC, and being killed by BARC, are actually lost pets whose owners want them back but who never had a chance to be reunited.
But, the situation at BARC is actually far worse than that. The notes on the kennel card of a Lab (who was killed by BARC because he contracted a cough at BARC) reveal something more nefarious and more deadly than no Lost and Found program. The notes reveal that even when the owner of a lost pet is standing right in front of a BARC employee, the employee still will not return the pet to his/her owner.
The kennel card notes show that a Collie was picked up with a group of dogs, including the Lab mentioned above. While BARC’s animal control officers (ACOs) were in the field picking up the dogs, a man walked up and said that he was looking for his lost dog. The man described his dog and the ACO confirmed that he had just put the man’s Collie on his truck. But, instead of returning the man’s pet to him, the ACO told the owner that he could retrieve his pet at BARC that day or the next. The ACO gave the owner a "not at home notice" (which was clearly a lie), then the ACO took that man’s pet to BARC, twenty miles away.
So, not only is BARC not trying to find the owners of lost pets to keep them from entering an overcrowded, high kill, facility, but even when a pet owner is standing right in front of a BARC employee trying to retrieve their lost pet, the employee will not return the owner’s pet. BARC employees instead take owned pets to a facility that is killing an average of 1,000 pets per month because of "lack of space".
It should be noted that ACOs do not always take animals directly to BARC. Many times they drive around for many hours until the truck fills up, or their shift ends.
What if the Collie’s owner went to BARC that day, but his dog was not taken there until after hours? He would have had to drive to BARC again on another day.
What if the owner did not have an automobile?
What if the owner was not able to take off work the next day, or 2, or 3, to retrieve his pet from BARC? How long did this owned dog stay at BARC, using scarce kennel space, while other dogs were killed because of “lack of space”?
How many resources were squandered on this owned Collie at BARC...i.e. vaccinations, food, employee time that could have been saved for animals that are truly homeless?
How many of the other animals that BARC picked up that day were owned pets that were lost as well? I think it is likely that the Lab that BARC picked up at the same address, and who was later killed because he contracted a cough, was also someone’s pet who never found him because they had no idea he was at BARC, twenty miles away.
How many owners never have a chance to find their lost pets because BARC kills them when their 3 day hold expires, or kills them when they catch treatable illnesses at BARC?
How many animals are being killed every day, every week and every year while BARC claims "lack of space" but they are actually being killed because of BARC’s ludicrous, regressive, kill-oriented practices?
Here are the kennel cards for the dogs that were killed by BARC on the same day that the ACO took the owned Collie to BARC. As I look into each of their faces, I wonder which perfectly wonderful, healthy or treatable, very adoptable dog did BARC kill that day to make space for the Collie whose owner tried to get him back? It turns my stomach to think about it.
BARC leaders not only refuse to follow Nathan Winograd's life saving recommendations, but they go even farther in the wrong direction and impound animals even when the owners are standing right in front of them asking for their lost pets.
BARC does absolutely the worst thing that they possibly could do and takes owned animals to a high kill facility where it is guaranteed that animals will be killed to make space for the incoming.
Last week, ARA Director, Alfred Moran told a reporter that BARC was following Nathan Winograd’s 2009 assessment of BARC. Other BARC employees have told me the same thing in the last few months.
But, let’s be perfectly clear. Taking an owned animal to a crowded, high kill "shelter" is not what Nathan Winograd recommended. In fact, it is the complete opposite of what he recommended.
How long will Houstonians have to wait until the city hires leaders for BARC who will actually implement the programs and services that have been proven to save 90% or more of all animals in twenty seven other communities?
How long will Houstonians continue have BARC and city leaders who break No Kill promises, then lie to us and just continue killing?
The road to No Kill starts with all of us
"The road to No Kill starts with all of us holding shelter leaders and elected officials accountable for their decisions and practices. Please continue to support shelters, rescues and elected officials whose beliefs, philosophies and actions match yours. Don't forget to let the shelter leader and elected officials who have lost your support know why you left them. The more your voice is heard, the more the shelters and elected officials will realize that No Kill is what we demand and will make happen! If you're not sure how No Kill would work on a city-wide scale, we highly recommend the book "Redemption" by Nathan Winograd." Friends for Life Animal Rescue and Adoption Organization, Houston, TX
Find out what Houston mayoral and city council candidates have said about No Kill issues on No Kill Texas Advocates website.
No Kill Texas Advocates Voter's Guide is also online. Please print it and take it with you to the voting booth on Tuesday, November 8. Please also forward it to all of your animal loving friends and family!
We must use the power of our votes to elect the animal friendly candidates into office.
