FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Companion Animal Network www.CompanionAnimalNetworkTV.orgGastonia, NY 718-544-PETS (cel) RESPONSE TO GASTON COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL STORY GASTONIA, NC and QUEENS, NY (Dec. 3, 2008)—
On Nov. 5, 2008 the attached email was sent by Mr. Reggie Horton of Gaston Animal Control Department in response to a concerned neighbor’s scathing letter to Mayor Stultz complaining about the way the Gaston county animal pound is being operated by Mr. Horton.
We are not at all surprised that a few weeks later a state inspection failure about Gaston Animal Control from the NC Dept. of Agriculture is released. I urge you to read our prophetic distribution of November 6, 2008 in response to the complaint and Mr. Horton’s defense, which we have incorporated into this news release.
Having brought major reforms to the animal control services of New York City, Lafayette, Louisiana and the capitol city of Armenia, Yerevan, Companion Animal Network hopes to share its expertise with the Gaston community.
Unfortunately, animal control shelters have traditionally been a place to exterminate surplus animals in all regions of this great country, not heal, cure, rehabilitate, nor adopt them out. The same has been true in almost all other nations. However, with the advent of the internet age, since 2000, a vibrant "rescue community" was born, catching municipal animal pounds by surprise at the sudden focus of attention upon such previously "out of sight, out of mind" governmental services. Consequently, law suits, protests, legislation, media reports, rescue partnering have all come to be used by animal advocates to bring rapid reform to municipal animal pounds. Unfortunately, many humane advocates and potential adoptors are unable to bring themselves to enter the premises of municipal kill shelters to either volunteer or adopt. Some, however, lay blame entirely at the municipal pound administrator's doorstep. Such vilification, though understandable, is usually misplaced, because the shelter director has much LESS of an arsenal of weapons with which to bring true reform at his/her disposal than the public can possibly realize.
The ACO director must comply with local, state and federal laws, adhere to and prepare budgets, make sure necessary supplies are never out of stock, make sure personnel coverage is accounted for, respond to the needs of the public, the animals, and the employees. The task is daunting, to say the least. To simply blame the ACO director for not being able to hold/place the immense number of animals being brought in is as unfair as blaming the animal for being surrendered by its owner. Once this is understood, then one can explore how to constructively move forward.
In his email Mr. Horton cites a 1.74% reduction in intakes and an 8.23 % reduction in euthanasia as progress. Needless to say, those are such trivial amounts that the statistical margin of error and/or coincidence may be the reasons for such reductions. In order to claim credit for any reductions there must be an identifiable reason for them. Mr. Horton does not state to what policy or program implemented between 2007 and 2008 he attributes the 8.23 % reduction to. Without such it is premature for Mr. Horton to claim that any reduction was a result of "progress." How, then, CAN Gaston County move forward?
We can inform how we brought about the changes in New York City which reduced its euthanasia from 150,000 animals a year from the 1960-1990s to just 18,000 in 2007. We can inform about how Lafayette, Louisiana a few months ago, committed to reform its animal control agency at the political level, and how fast they have been able act. We can inform on Caddo Parish in Louisiana did likewise within the last year. We can inform how dozens of other communities have made this transition. Gaston does not have to reinvent the wheel. It must simply follow the path already well carved out by hundreds of other municipal pounds. Former San Francisco SPCA Chief Operating Officer Nathan Winograd, who in the 1980s transitioned the nation's first animal control pound to low kill goes into more details in his book "Redemption." In summary we wish to mention some of the more important elements necessary for true progress in this field.
1) First of all, the goal of reducing euthanasia must be more than hyperbole. Concrete redirection of the mission and purpose of animal control must be changed from one of being an exterminator to that of a life saver. From being one of an enabler to the public's whims to that of a provider of solutions to the public's pet animal needs. This is a psychological change, and is the most difficult of ALL the changes necessary. This includes having employees who are courteous, who make every attempt to find the owner of animals found astray as required by NC GS 130A-192, and cultivate partnerships with rescue groups by calling breed rescue groups when particular breeds come in, putting out email alerts, cleaning cages with 30% bleach after use to eliminate Parvovirus and Distemper, having quarantine areas, not intermingling litters, having hours past 5 PM weekdays and weekends by staggering staff days/hours so working people can adopt and drop off boxes can be eliminated, holding off site adoption days at parks every weekend, at county fairs, and at superstore parking lots, to name a few. This "behavior" change on the part of animal control personnel draws in volunteers and adoptors, and positive media. None of these cause the increase of a single budget item. All of these can be done with simply a change of the "mindset" of animal pound personnel. If the shelter director does not implement these changes THEN he/she can be blamed for refusing to operate a well-run public animal shelter. We do not know whether Mr. Horton has ever been asked to make these doable changes. Until then, it is premature to blame Mr. Horton or his staff, or at most, Mr. Horton can be blamed for not being interested enough in his job to do such research and homework.
2) Second, the manner of euthanasia must be only intracardiac injection. Mr. Horton's contention that some animals are too wild to hold to be injected indicates that he and his staff do not yet have sufficient expertise in the field of animal control. There are techniques to injecting feral and aggressive dogs and cats. We are certain they know where to receive such training as it is common knowledge. Permitting inhumane and cruel euthanasia methods such as gassing desensitizes the kennel staff, which prevents the staff from making the "mindset" change of Item #1 above. Inability to accomplish #1 dooms the entire topic and the ACO director then loses credibility and the benefit of the doubt. This desensitization explains why the animals were not being fed. After all, why make them heavier to carry the carcasses after killing? This desensitization prevents all the policies and programs mentioned in Item #1 above from being implemented, because killing becomes “the” job instead of the policies and programs mentioned in Item #1.
3 A new shelter is always welcome, especially when the existing one is so flawed as in Gaston. However, governmental agencies must learn to provide their services despite the lack of an "optimum" facility or budget. If a house is burning or a crime being committed, the fire and police do not say they could not use their hoses or guns because they were too old and non-functional. They take the non working hoses and guns out of the hands of the staff "in advance" and routinely test all guns and hoses for functionality before putting them in the hands of the staff. If the shelter has problems, there are always "workarounds" available. However, the shelter director must have the motivation and the inclination to discover them and implement them. In Terrebonne Parish in Louisiana, they did not have a quarantine building, but showed good faith in collaborating with Companion Animal Network and we obtained a $40,000 grant for them, with which they built a quarantine building. Likewise, we obtained over $250,000 in grants for 10 animal control agencies in Louisiana, because they collaborated and sought to become an animal rescue shelter rather than an extermination center.
In Lafayette recently, weeks after we reached a settlement in our law suit, the Parish hired a full time vet for the first time in its 300 year history, published its first ever medical protocol manual, is getting rid of the gas chamber in July 2009, is spaying and neutering all its adoptions, and, similar to Gaston, had been talking about the need for a new shelter for a dozen or more years......the Mayor appeared on a TV news interview to announce the beginning of the construction process for a new shelter. Volunteers are now welcome as the ACO staff has made the "mindset" change and is friendly to all and everyone in the community is working together to get to the next step. All this took just 6 months !!! Several years form now, assuming they continue to stay within the new currant "mindset," Lafayette will see a true and significant reduction in intakes and euthanasia and animal control expenditures.
In summary, we ask those who live in Gaston County to not blindly lay blame at Mr. Horton and his staff, but rather to approach Mr. Horton and their County Board of Commissioners with these "doable" suggestions rather than "pie in the sky" requests for more money, or for utopian demands to "end the killing," and instead provide this "roadmap" to low kill. Give Mr. Horton and the County Commissioner a chance first by proposing small but significant changes such as the #1 and #2 above, and by offering to volunteer at off site adoption locations, offering to act as outreach coordinator for full breeds and puppies as they are more easily removed by category specific rescue groups, leaving more cages available for the mix breeds and adults to give Mr. Horton and his staff some "wiggling room."
# # #
Companion Animal Network (“C.A.N.”) has advised, among other municipalities, New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, New York State Senator Frank Padavan, and numerous other public officials on animal control policies and has been acknowledged by the New York City Council with Resolution #985 for educating its members on the animal control problems of New York City. C.A.N. was the architect of the reforms in animal control which came about as a result in New York City, which consequently brought $15 million in grants to its animal control services. C.A.N. has been honored in New Orleans for its continuing post-Katrina support programs for Louisiana municipal animal pounds
