RSS
Home
Santa Cruz SPCA director says spay/neuter ordinances go a long way to resolve pet overpopulation
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
On June 2, SB 250 the Pet Responsibility Act passed the California Senate by 21 to 16. The bill simply requires that dogs be spayed or neutered unless their owner/guardian obtains an unaltered dog license when they license their animal. SB 250 also requires that roaming cats be spayed and neutered by their owner/guardian. SB 250 moves to the California State Assembly Committee on Business and Professions this coming Tuesday, June 30.
In California, Santa Cruz County was one of the first counties to implement a spay/neuter ordinance in the state. The Santa Cruz bill is similar SB 250. San Mateo County preceded Santa Cruz, but its bill only covers unincorporated areas of the county.
Lisa Carter is the executive director of the Santa Cruz SPCA. The SF Cats Examiner interviewed Carter about the Santa Cruz ordinance and the results in her county since its implementation.
SF Cats Examiner: How long has the Santa Cruz spay/neuter ordinance has been in effect?
Carter: The Santa Cruz spay/neuter ordinance was passed in 1994 and went into effect in 1995. Let me provide some background. In the early 1990s, the Santa Cruz SPCA was the contracting agency for animal control in Santa Cruz County. We were concerned about intake and euthanasia numbers –30 percent of dogs were being euthanized and over 60 percent of cats – and so we went to the community to discuss ways to help save animals’ lives and taxpayer dollars. We had several public forums, and as a result there was widespread agreement that the best approach was a spay/neuter ordinance that would prevent the birth of unwanted animals, effectively getting to the source of the problem.
In 1995, we began implementing the ordinance. Its chief features are to spay/neuter dogs and cats at six months of age. Police, search and rescue, service, and herding/livestock dogs –and breeding stock for all these– are exempt, as are animals with health concerns and dogs in boarding kennels. An individual has the option to purchase an “unaltered certificate” allowing one litter per year for a single dog or cat, for a fee.
SF Cats Examiner: Do you find enforcement an issue?
Carter: As with any new law, some people said it’s unenforceable or Animal Control will be at every door. None of that was or is true. Enforcement was folded into the Animal Control officers’ existing duties. If a dog or cat owner is cited for some other cause – failure to license, at large, etc. – or come into the shelter, we apply the law. We did not, and do not, have the personnel to go door-to-door, nor did we ever think it was necessary to do so for our law to be effective. We always believed that there wasn’t a need to increase our staff or budget to enforce the ordinance. Our goal was to educate our community and change the culture to be more aware of and responsible about pets and overpopulation.
SF Cats Examiner: What are today’s results vs. before the law was passed?
Carter: We have decreased euthanasia over 70 percent in the past 15 years while our human population has increased. Most telling, when the Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority began design of a new shelter to replace the aging facility, it was able to design it with fewer cages because of the reduced number of animals needing care. Such a downsizing of shelter facilities is unheard of in communities that don’t have aggressive pet overpopulation reduction programs. Conversely in Los Angeles and other cities and counties in California new shelters that are being built are 200 to 400 percent larger than those that they are replacing. Either they have no spay/neuter laws or some, like the city of Los Angeles or Riverside County, have only just recently adopted them. But the fact is most California shelters are warehousing and killing animals.
SF Cats Examiner: There have been assertions that your numbers have actually gone up? Why is that?
Carter: We hit a snag in 2004 when the Animal Services Authority – now in charge of animal control services for the County -- assumed the City of Watsonville, which had not had a spay/neuter ordinance, and its shelter. Suddenly, we had an over 20 percent increase in population, none of whom had been required to alter their pets or had accepted the importance of doing so. Our numbers reflect that, with a rise in both dog and cat intakes and euthanasia rates since. At this point in time, we’ve been able to hold at roughly 2005 numbers for dogs and reduce numbers for cats, but it will take us a while to bring Watsonville fully into the fold and restore our downward trend
SF Cats Examiner: How do people get the message in Santa Cruz County about the law?
Carter: People in Santa Cruz know about the ordinance through a Humane Education program, which includes an amazing full time teacher and her volunteers that go to K-12 schools. We also work very closely with County Animal Services Officers to get out the message.
SF Cats Examiner: Anything else you would like to add?
Carter: I think it’s important that your readers understand that spay/neuter ordinances are not a single solution to the problem of pet overpopulation but they are one important tool to address the problem at its source. Because of our spay/neuter ordinance in Santa Cruz, we no longer euthanize animals because of space.
We need to resolve the problem of pet overpopulation, and spay/neuter laws go a long way to do that. Where euthanasia continues in shelters that are effectively warehousing animals and need to reduce the numbers, very compassionate people are doing work that no one should be asked to do.
In addition to Santa Cruz County, Lake County has a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance that went into effect in 2005 with the first year of enforcement 2006. According to Paula Werner with Lake County Animal Control, figures from 2007 and 2008 following enforcement indicated that the number of animals coming in remained steady despite a population increase and an increase in Lake County Animal Control officers in the field collecting strays, etc.
Werner said that even more telling about the effectiveness of the program, the animal intake from the city of Clearlake, which accounts for 30 percent of all the strays in the Lake County is down this year by 30 percent from January 1 to June 24 compared to the same period a year ago. Werner said that this supports the department’s expectation that the ordinance in some areas needed to take time.
You can call or email members of the California State Assembly Committee on Business and Professions about SB 250. The members’ phone numbers and emails are available at this link:
http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=129
Related Articles:
Comments
