Austin Pets Alive! Resource Center: The Future of Austin's Pound?

We're delighted to tell you about an amazing new program in Austin. Dr. Ellen Jefferson, founder of Emancipet (Austin's lost-cost spay-neuter provider) is taking on a new project: creating a Resource Center that will keep pets in homes, redirect pets away from Austin's pound, and remove animals from Austin's pound before they are killed. We believe that if anyone can pull this off, it's Dr. Jefferson. Please wholeheartedly support her new effort to reduce the killing of Austin's pets. Here is a recent letter from Dr. Jefferson about her new endeavor:

Dear Austin,

---

How is it possible that a city like Austin is still killing over 50% of the animals in it's shelters? It is unbelievable but true: dogs and cats just like yours and mine are still dying in Austin. Just today I read about a young husky mix with a wonderful temperament and good behavior, who will likely get euthanized because he won't be given the opportunity to get adopted. I am tired of being heartbroken every day for these animals wishing I could do something more for them. Aren't you? For those of you that don't know me, I founded EmanciPET Spay/Neuter Clinic in 1999 because I believed that spay/neuter was the only answer to the problem of too many pets being euthanized in our animal shelters. I still believe that spay/neuter is an integral piece if the No Kill recipe. EmanciPET is doing a great job getting over 80,000 animals fixed in and around Austin. However, I no longer believe that it is the only piece needed to create a No Kill city. One reason is that there are now statistics that show that there are many more homes available for a new pet each year than the number of animals we kill in animal shelters. Spay/neuter is still a cornerstone but there is more that needs to be done. As I have gotten to know the shelter system better over the years, I have come to realize that a community like Austin could have a shelter that does better in terms of life saving. Does that mean that I think Town Lake Animal Center is bad? No, I actually think that the fact that the city funded shelter is charged with animal control rather than animal welfare makes it impossible for our city to think in terms of "no kill". Austin is lucky enough to have a Humane Society that saves about 2500 animals a year. While this is definitely admirable, we need more animals saved. I recently joined Austin Pets Alive! as President because I don't want to wait for our city government to change the mission of TLAC. I don't want to wait the years it will take to build a new city shelter that might be able to save more animals. I am not the only one that doesn't want to wait- the 13,000+ pets killed each year don't want to wait either. I believe Austin Pets Alive! is the organization that can make this happen. Austin Pets Alive!'s mission is to promote and provide the resources, education and programs needed to eliminate the killing of companion animals in Austin. APA! has been creating smaller safety nets for pets for 10 years. With that mission in mind and the massive amount of work that needs to occur to get Austin to No Kill, I am asking you to help Austin Pets Alive! create a facility that can temporarily shelter all the animals that need our care so they don't have to go to TLAC. Help us create the facility that will implement life saving programs. The Austin Pets Alive! Resource Center will focus on prevention, retention, and adoption with innovative, efficient, and most importantly life-focused procedures. Please join me in solving this problem NOW. We can do it. Our organization is run solely by dedicated volunteers. The amount of time and energy our dedicated volunteers are spending on this project is astounding. We need more people to help. If we all pitch in, I have no doubt that Austin, over every other place in America, can become No Kill in a very short period of time. I am bringing to the table the background and expertise to implement the operations. I need you to help APA! by donating for a building, volunteering to help implement these life saving programs NOW, and spreading the word so that all of Austin knows about our plans. There is hope for these pets, we just have to unite and make it happen. Let's stop the daily killing of 30+ animals at our shelters. Sincerely, Ellen Jefferson, DVM Austin Pets Alive! President www.austinpetsalive.org PS With as little as a $50 donation, we can save one animal today and find it a new home using our PASS program (read below). With a bigger donation, we can continue to grow our fund to move into a facility where we can actually shelter animals and not rely solely on foster homes. Read about some of the programs that are already in place with Austin Pets Alive!: 1. Positive Alternatives to Shelter Surrender- a program run entirely on foster/volunteer time that gives owners a chance to place their pet using our adoption locations such as PetSmart and Petco. This creates outlets so animals don't have to go to TLAC where they will likely die. 2. Thanks to APA! and the working relationship we have with Town Lake Animal Center, the TLAC long-stay adoption dogs get a chance at off site adoptions before their time is up. We are able to take these animals, that would be euthanized due to time constraints, out to get adopted. 3. Rescue- due to the wonderful (but very few so far) foster homes we have, we have been able to take puppies and dogs from TLAC that would normally be euthanized for minor skin problems. Our foster homes give them the time they need (we provide the medications) and they are good to go in as little as 2 weeks (and highly adoptable!). We know that by choosing animals that would be slated for euthanasia, we can decrease the number of animals killed at TLAC. Just imagine how many animals Austin Pets Alive! could save with a facility! Click here to get involved!

---

As city council elections are pending, please think about getting out to vote.
Laura Morrison and Randi Shade both took time out of their incredibly busy schedules to come hear about Austin Pets Alive! last night. I am truly amazed that they found this to be a high enough priority to listen with the election so close. They both are concerned about Austin's animals and want to see Austin be a leader in the animal world.

Mandatory Spay/Neuter Success? Not Remotely

One of the methods proposed to reduce shelter killing in Austin is a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance. As you may already know, the nation's leading shelter expert, Nathan Winograd, has repeatedly written that such ordinances do not work. See, e.g., http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/pdf/mandatorylaws.pdf.

Nonetheless, a very vocal supporter of mandatory spay/neuter ordinances in Austin has touted King County, Washington, as proof that mandatory spay/neuter ordinances work. Specifically, he reports that King County has a 0% kill rate, and provides this website as evidence: http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/AnimalServices/about/statistics.aspx . I decided to take a look to judge for myself.

What I found is that the actual statistics from King County's website reveal not success, but instead a common shelter-management lie: by labeling all killed animals "unadoptable," King County is able to report a 0% kill rate of adoptable animals. Meanwhile, its shelter continues to kill 40-50% of the animals it takes in each and every year. If we use that standard, then basically every shelter in the country is successful and wonderful because they are able to define away their killing by calling all animals they kill "unadoptable."

In fact, if we use King County's formula for calculating a kill rate--- that the relevant figure is the percentage of "unadoptable" animals killed, then Town Lake Animal Center too has a 0% kill rate because TLAC (like King County) defines all animals it kills as "unadoptable." Thus, using the same logic, TLAC is a shining example of perfection in animal care WITHOUT a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance-- even though it too kills roughly half of the animals it takes in each and every year.

In truth, neither King County nor Austin is an example of success. They both kill about 50% of homeless pets each year. That's because neither a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance nor TLAC's management has succeeded in ending the killing. On the other hand, every shelter that has fully adopted Nathan Winograd's methods HAS ended the killing. Here is a link to his method: http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/nokillequation.html .

In Winograd-led Charlottesville, Reno, Ithaca, Ivans County (UT), and Orange County (VA), open-admission municipal pounds are killing less than 10% of ALL animals. And in Winograd-led Philadelphia, where the kill rate was 90% just three years ago, they are expecting a 20% kill rate in 2008.

In King County, on the other hand, they are generally killing 40-50% of all animals. That puts King County in the same category as Austin. Here are King County's kill figures:

2006: Total Killed (4331) / (Total Disposition (11259) - Dead on Arrival (381)) = 40%

2005: 4666 / (11990 - 392) = 40%

2004: 5436 / (12413 - 437) = 45%

2003: 5935 / (12701 - 493) = 49%

2002: 6142 / (13649 - 660) = 47%

2001: 6300 / (14588 - 983) = 46%

2000: 6069 / (14735 - 1336) = 45%

1999: 6061 / (14640 - 1378) = 46%

1998: 6432 / (14743 - 1318) = 48%

These figures clearly demonstrate that a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance is not the answer to Austin's animal-killing problem. The real solution is to adopt the methods of the cities that have ended shelter killing--- not those who have failed to end shelter killing. If we are serious about saving animals, we have but one choice: adopt the Nathan Winograd method in full.

LET'S ROLL!

This is it, folks. On Thursday, October 11th at 6pm, the City Council will hear testimony on--- and make a decision on--- the location of our new animal shelter. The fate of hundreds of thousands of sheltered pets is in their hands: will they favor compassion and rebuild the shelter downtown? Or will they favor bureaucracy and skyrises in order to ship our sheltered pets out-of-mind and out-of-sight?

Council Members Martinez and Kim have shown great leadership in proposing an immediate halt to the East Austin move in favor of thoughtful deliberation and consideration of all other possibilities--- including rebuilding on Town Lake. And on the other side, Council Member Dunkerley (surprise, surprise) and Mayor Wynn have now come out in favor of getting rid of the downtown shelter to make room for (and the area prettier for) more condos. That leaves Council Members Cole, Leffingwell, and McCracken to decide the issue on Thursday. We hope you'll contact them early and often this week, by phone and e-mail, to let them know where you stand.

Council Member Cole's e-mail address is: sheryl.cole@ci.austin.tx.us. And her phone number is: 974-2266.

Council Member McCracken's e-mail address is: brewster.mccracken@ci.austin.tx.us. And his phone number is: 974-2256.

Council Member Leffingwell's e-mail address is: lee.leffingwell@ci.austin.tx.us. And his phone number is 974-2260.

If you care about the future of our homeless pets, the time to act is now. Waiting just a few days may leave your voice silenced. Please e-mail and call them today.

Thank you so very much!
The FixAustin.org Team

And Now for the Rest of the (Statesman) Story...

We wanted to share with you a few more comments on the recent Statesman article on shelter relocation.

First, the headline "Should new animal shelter be closer to adopters or strays?" is disingenuous. The proposed Levander Loop location isn't closer to strays because --- as the article says --- the City's own numbers show that 60% of strays come from West of I-35.

The Humane society evidently supports relocating our animal shelter. But when the Humane Society itself was facing relocation, here's what it had to say about the importance of a central location: "The Board looked at several options: be a non-sheltered organization doing humane education and foster care, buy land outside the city limits and start from scratch, or find an existing building with a central location that could be renovated as an animal shelter. They decided it was important for the survival of the organization to continue to house animals and be in a central location. This of course was the most expensive option but the one that would keep the Humane Society in the public focus. " Why does the Humane Society now feel that same logic doesn't apply to the City's shelter?

Emancipet, which is already located at Levander Loop, also supports the move. But they recently issued a press release conceding they were struggling so much to fill their spay/neuter surgery slots at the stationary clinic at Levander Loop, that they might have to reduce staff. The entire release can be found here. And, their website includes a map to Levander Loop with this warning: "IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO PRINT OUT THESE DIRECTIONS AND TAKE THEM WITH YOU! IT IS VERY EASY TO GET LOST AND THE RECEPTIONISTS AREN'T ALWAYS ABLE TO ANSWERTHE PHONES TO HELP YOU IF YOU GET LOST!!!" What does the Emancipet situation say for the suitability of the Levander Loop location for the new animal shelter?

Many people will go anywhere to save a life and adopt a pet. But what percentage of Town Lake's current visitors and adopters fall into that category? Nobody knows. Has any type of study been done to find out? If 22,000 animals come in the door each year, then a mere 5% decrease in adoptions could result in another 1,100 animals dying. Casual visitors may not adopt, but maybe they donate money or tell their friends.

And what about the volunteers who supply 22,000 hours of free labor each year? What about the potty patrol program which tries to get housebroken dogs out each day and which requires volunteers to be at the shelter very early in the morning? What about the brand new trail walking program that both promotes the dogs and gives them much needed exercise and mental stimulation by walking them on the hike and bike trail? What about the after-hours volunteer program? How will a move impact these programs?

Finally, the City has never done a fair analysis to show what could be built at the current site for $12 million dollars. $12M certainly sounds like enough to build a good animal shelter, but we need a professional analysis where the person hasn't been told in advance what the outcome is supposed to be. Without that information, it's hard for me to see how the City can gamble with our pets' lives and our taxpayer money and simply decide to ignore public opposition and build at Levander Loop. Williamson County ignored a lot of advice from animal advocates in building their new regional shelter. And we all know how well that turned out.

(One thing Levander Loop might be suitable for is a temporary location while construction proceeds at TLAC. It is city-owned, there appears to be a large empty gymnasium that might house animals, empty land for exercise areas, and underutilized surgical space on-site.)

If You Care About Austin's Homeless Pets, the Time to Act Is Now

According to today's Austin American-Statesman, the Austin City Council will vote on whether to hire an architect to move Austin's animal shelter from downtown to the eastern outskirts on October 11, 2007. If you, like us, believe that moving our shelter away from the heart of our community---and away from the animals' primary adopters---is both immoral and inconsistent with the compassionate character of our City, the time to voice your opposition to the move is now.

Please take the time to e-mail the Austin City Council right now to tell them not to move our animal shelter to a mostly industrial area on the outskirts of town. You can e-mail the entire council at one time by clicking on this link: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/groupemail.htm. Please also urge your friends, family, colleagues, and neighbors to contact the City Council as well. You can do so by writing them an e-mail, asking them in person, calling them up, or dropping by printed-out FixAustin.org advocacy cards from this link: http://www.fixaustin.org/pub/documents/saveshelter_card_SS_20070528.pdf.

Please act today. Generations of Austin's lost and homeless pets will thank you.