Why We Join the National Consensus Against Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws

Every single data-based study of mandatory spay/neuter laws has demonstrated that such laws do not increase spay-neuter compliance rates, nor do they reduce shelter intake, nor are they cost-effective, nor do they save lives. In fact, the opposite is true: in community after community that has passed a mandatory spay/neuter law, shelter killing and intake actually increase because in poor communities, families who cannot afford the money or time to have their pets surgically altered are forced to surrender their pets (or the pets are seized). These pets are quickly replaced in the communities with additional unaltered animals, creating an enhanced cycle of killing. These laws do not work, have never worked in any community, and will not work.

Several points are important here:

1. Mandatory spay/neuter laws do not work: The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) did an extensive study on such laws (in many varieties), and concluded that there is absolutely "no credible evidence" that such laws have ever worked. See http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/mandatory-spay-neuter-laws.aspx. Another national organization, Alley Cat Allies, did a study of its own and concluded that such laws are "counterproductive, costly, and unenforceable." See http://www.alleycat.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=794.

2. Mandatory spay/neuter laws are based on a number of false policy assumptions. Mandatory spay/neuter advocates falsely assume that most people aren't currently spaying and neutering their pets, and that if there were a law requiring spay/neuter, they would do so. Both of these assumptions are false. According to empirical evidence, the overwhelming majority of Americans have already spayed or neutered their pets. In fact, a recent study demonstrated that over 90% of Americans earning $35K or more have already spayed or neutered their pets (see http://www.alleycat.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=650), and at least half of those families earning less than $35K/year have already done so. As a result, the population of Americans who haven't spayed or neutered their pets is relatively small, and it's near-entirely a matter of financial means--- not legal motivation. That's why study after study after study has concluded that the only proven way to increase spay/neuter compliance is through the provision of low-cost and free spay-neuter services, not through regressive laws that focus on punishing poor families rather than empowering responsible behavior. See http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/mandatory-spay-neuter-laws.aspx.

3. There is universal opposition to mandatory spay/neuter laws among national animal-welfare organizations who have spent time to empirically study such laws' effects. Indeed, given the frequent hostility between national animal-welfare organizations, the universal opposition to mandatory spay/neuter laws is telling. The organizations against such laws include: The ASPCA (cited above), Alley Cat Allies (cited above), the American Veterinary Medical Association (http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/may09/090515j.asp), the No Kill Advocacy Center (http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/pdf/mandatorylaws.pdf), Pet Connection (http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/08/24/mandatory-spayneuter-sacrificing-animal-lives-to-ideology/), both the American College of Theriogenologists and the Society for Theriogenology (which are the two groups of veterinarian specialists in spaying and neutering (http://www.theriogenology.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=59), and the Anti-Cruelty Society (http://www.anticruelty.org/site/epage/69344_576.htm), among many, many others. USA Today's veterinary expert has also come out against such laws (see http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/pets/2010-09-12-vetviews10_N.htm).

4. There are a number of significant, negative unintended consequences to mandatory spay/neuter laws:

• According to the experts, the passage of mandatory spay/neuter laws not only doesn't increase spay/neuter compliance rates or responsible pet ownership, it actually reduces the provision of veterinary care to animals because the small group of remaining unaltered-pet owners (who either won't or cannot afford to alter their pets) will avoid getting veterinary care for their animals. According to the American College of Theriogenologists, "[m]aking spay/neuter mandatory . . . may make the public more hesitant to seek veterinary assistance because they are afraid of fines and legal repercussions as a result of failing to spay or neuter their pets. . . . By avoiding veterinary care for their pets, animals will be at increased risk of inadequate routine vaccination (including rabies) and inadequate deworming programs which may in turn result in increased transmission of disease to the public." See http://www.theriogenology.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=59.
• The risk of higher rabies rates (which is nearly always deadly to children) is not purely theoretical. According to the Anti-Cruelty Society, Fort Worth's mandatory spay/neuter law resulted in a significant reduction in rabies vaccinations, and to "an increase in reported rabies cases" in the city. See http://www.anticruelty.org/site/epage/69344_576.htm.
• In addition, San Mateo, California, experienced a 35% decrease in pet licensing registrations after passing such a law, meaning that fewer animals brought to the shelter were able to be reunited with their owners. (Same source.)
• Fort Worth changed its law due to the reduction in rabies vaccinations. Spay/neuter is no longer mandatory due to the ordinance's failure (one can now have an unaltered pet without penalty or payment so long as they attend a free class).

5. The passage of a mandatory spay/neuter law has never led any community to a 90% save rate. And every No Kill community in America does not have a mandatory spay/neuter law.

• The communities in America with the highest shelter save rates are: Reno, NV (90%), Ithaca, NY (95%), Charlottesville, VA (90+%), and San Francisco, CA (86%). None has a mandatory spay/neuter law. The communities with the highest shelter save rate in Texas are Austin (72%), Plano (77%) and Williamson County (77%). None has a mandatory spay/neuter law.
• Los Angeles, CA, recently passed a mandatory spay/neuter law, and its shelter killing and intake increased by 30% following the law's passage. Kansas City, MO, recently passed a breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter law, and intake and killing of those breeds increased by a jaw-dropping 80% according to local experts. Waco, TX, just passed a mandatory spay/neuter law, and even before the law's passage, it has seen a substantial spike in owner surrenders (and shelter killing) due to financial inability to pay.
• San Antonio has a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance, and its shelter kills more than 70% of all impounded animals. In fact, every large city in Texas other than Austin kills more animals than it saves. Austin, this past year, saved 72%.
• Contrary to local talking points in favor of a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance, not every large city in Texas other than Austin has a mandatory spay/neuter law. Houston, for example, does not have a mandatory spay/neuter law. Houston does have an ordinance that requires shelters to either alter pets before adopting them out, or get the adopter to sign a contract agreeing to alter the adopted pets. The ordinance does not reach out and affect owned pets or pets from sources other than animal shelters. Austin's policies are actually much more strict than Houston's. No Austin shelter adopts out unaltered pets, and Austin's pet-trader ordinance requires altering prior to retail pet sales. In addition, as mentioned above, Fort Worth's ordinance is not mandatory; it permits free unaltered pet licensing upon attending a class.

6. Austin's animal-welfare policy and results, without a mandatory spay-neuter law, are not only among the best in Texas, they are among the best in the country for large cities. By implementing proven and cost-effective programs and policies (including low-cost and free spay-neuter services, foster programs, off-site adoptions, etc.), Austin has recently and quickly made dramatic improvements in animal-welfare, and now has among the lowest shelter-killing rates in the United States (Note: This is due in substantial part to Austin Pets Alive.). In 2005, Austin's shelter killed over 14,000 animals. In just a few short years of implementing proven life-saving policies in our community, that number dropped below 6,800 in fiscal-year 2009-10. 2010 was the best life-saving year in Austin's history, and the best of any large city in Texas by a large margin (Houston, Fort Worth and San Antonio kill around 70%). While San Antonio's recent "No Kill" effort, which relied on a mandatory spay/neuter law, has been a miserable failure, Austin's effort, which relies on proven programs and policies, has been a dramatic success. In fact, December 2010 was the highest save-rate on record in Austin, with an 88% save rate of all impounded animals.

7. It doesn't matter whether you call it "mandatory" or not, the effect is the same. A local mandatory spay/neuter advocate has recently stopped saying "mandatory" when advocating for a mandatory spay/neuter law. The name of the ordinance makes no difference. If a government mandates a penalty for failing to alter an animal (in the form of either a fine, a seizure of the animal (or its surrender), or a "fee"), it is commonly referred to as a "mandatory" spay/neuter law in the national animal-welfare community, and based on empirical evidence, we know it will fail.

8. There is no evidence whatsoever that a mandatory spay/neuter law would increase public safety or decrease dog-fighting. Indeed, the opposite is true with regard to rabies and public health, and it is egregiously illogical to think that a criminal who willingly risks felony dog-fighting charges and prison time would somehow be swayed by a unaltered-pet registration fee. In addition, because we know that mandatory spay/neuter laws do not increase spay/neuter compliance rates, we can logically conclude that they will have no impact on dog bites either (even assuming that dog bites are correlated with lack of spay/neuter). In fact, the most preeminent national expert on dog bites and dog-caused deaths concludes that dog-caused deaths are nearly always caused by unsocialized, "backyard" dogs who have never been cared for, loved, or treated responsibly by a loving owner. There is absolutely no logic or evidence to suggest that such an irresponsible owner would be swayed by a fee or fine; again, the empirical evidence demonstrates that the opposite is true: the laws don't change irresponsible behavior.

9. Mandatory spay/neuter laws unfairly target the poor. It has been empirically proven that the lack of financial resources is the primary reason for the failure to alter pets by the small percentage of remaining unaltered-pet homeowners. Persons who cannot afford to alter their pets will be the primary targets for enforcement, therefore. In Kansas City, this resulted in Animal Control authorities doing "sweeps" through poor neighborhoods in which they would literally pull dogs and cats out of the arms of poor children and families. And, contrary to popular belief, there are not enough free spay/neuter resources to provide such services to all unaltered animals. According to estimates of the unaltered pet population by the ASPCA compared to the number of free spay/neuter resources in Austin, for example, it would take an astonishing 31 years to provide free spay/neuter services to the current population of unaltered pets. That means that only 1 in 31 pets could be altered in year one (much less in month 1) if such a law was passed in Austin. The remaining pets would be either surrendered to animal control, or seized, if the pet owner cannot afford the surgery. Such laws pit poor pet owners in an adversarial relationship with law-enforcement officers, dramatically increasing tensions in poor communities. Again, in Kansas City, animal advocates have had to go into communities to teach families about their legal rights in order to protect them from unlawful searches and seizures purportedly resulting from "enforcement" of the mandatory spay/neuter ordinance.

If you've read this far, we thank you. We care deeply about this issue and have studied it for years. We would absolutely, positively, be in favor of a mandatory spay/neuter law if such laws worked. All of our pets are spayed or neutered, and all of our rescues are spayed or neutered before we adopt them out. We have paid to alter the pets of total strangers, and heavily support low-cost and free spay-neuter services. Once made mandatory, however, all results point to dramatic failure, negative unintended consequences, more killing, and higher rabies rates. That we can't support that. We hope you won't either.

A No Kill Austin Is Within Reach!

Happy Holidays & New Year, Animal Lovers!

This year, great stides have been made towards Austin, Texas, joining the ranks of America's "No Kill" cities. Town Lake Animal Center celebrated its highest save rate ever: a full 72% of all animals that entered the shelter left alive this fiscal year! There is still a ways to go before we reach our goal of becoming a "No Kill" city--- defined as saving 90% of all impounded animals--- but it is inescapable that we're headed in the right direction.

Speaking of improvements, how about the amazing Austin Pets Alive!?! Seemingly out of nowhere, Austin Pets Alive has saved nearly 6,000 dogs and cats straight from the "kill list" at Town Lake Animal Center. The organization celebrated landing its own two-building complex this year (at 2807 Manchaca Road in South Austin), officially becoming the largest non-profit animal-rescue group in all of Austin! And to top off their amazing year, they are having an end-of-year adoption blow-out where you can name your own price for dogs and cats over 6 months old. Take a few seconds to watch this fun (and funny) YouTube ad for their sale: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUi5kw25Thk&feature=player_embedded.

The upcoming year will bring some additional major (and, we hope, positive) changes for Austin's homeless pets. The City will shortly be hiring a new animal-shelter director from a set of talented finalists (the City is currently focusing on Tompkins County SPCA Executive Director Abigail Smith), and we'll also find out whether Austin Pets Alive will be partnering with the City to run its adoptions program at the shelter.

And lastly, Town Lake Animal Center and animal-friendly Council Member Laura Morrison issued a public statement today asking animal owners to please keep their dogs secured inside during New Years fireworks celebrations so that they won't escape and end up at the shelter. They also announced that for the month of January, all dogs weighing over 45 pounds can be adopted from TLAC for free! Read more about how you can safeguard your pets during the fireworks (and about the January sale) here: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/health/pets/hpnews_details.cfm?nwsid=2934. Council Member Morrison has been a powerful advocate for Austin's homeless pets ever since she joined the Council, and she just announced that she is running for reelection. Although FixAustin.org does not endorse candidates, you can sign up as a "supporter" of Council Member Morrison, and/or make a donation to her campaign, by vising her campaign website here: http://www.lauraforaustin.com/. The campaign told us that any support would be greatly appreciated, but early support--- before the January 1st reporting deadline--- is especially appreciated.

That's it for now. We'll keep fighting for Austin's homeless and lost pets, and thanks so much for your support!

Warmest regards,

The FixAustin.org Team

FixAustin Endorses Jefferson, Smith, & Hinze for New Shelter Director, Rates Two Others "Unacceptable"

AUSTIN, TX – November 10, 2010 – On Monday, four of five finalists vying to become the new director of Town Lake Animal Center interviewed with City officials, stakeholders, and the public. Today, Austin’s No Kill advocacy organization, FixAustin.org, gave its seal of approval to three of those candidates: Dr. Ellen Jefferson of Austin Pets Alive, Abigail Smith of the Tompkins County SPCA, and Laura Hinze of PAWS Chicago.

“Jefferson, Smith, and Hinze were the clear leaders among the shelter finalists. Because we believe Austin’s animals would be in good hands with each of them, we publicly endorse all three of their candidacies,” said Austin appellate attorney and national No Kill advocate Ryan Clinton, founder of FixAustin.org.

Dr. Ellen Jefferson, the only local candidate with direct insight into the shelter’s operations, founded and led low-cost spay/neuter provider EmanciPet, which recently celebrated its 100,000th low-cost or free spay/neuter in Austin. Dr. Jefferson currently serves as the Executive Director of Austin Pets Alive, a non-profit adoptions group that has saved over 5,000 from Town Lake Animal Center’s “kill list” in just two years.

Abigail Smith is the Executive Director of the Tompkins County SPCA in Ithaca, New York. Her shelter boasts the highest save rate—96%—of any open-admission shelter in the United States, and she is a sought-after national speaker on No Kill programs and policies. Before joining the Tompkins County SPCA, she was the Director of Development and Marketing at the New Hampshire SPCA.

Laura Hinze is the Operations Director at PAWS Chicago, where she manages the shelter’s spay/neuter program, shelter-medicine program, and humane-education program. She manages a paid staff of 15 and an army of volunteers. Among her most innovative programs is one in which persons who might not otherwise be able to spay or neuter their pets can earn free surgeries by providing volunteer hours to PAWS Chicago.

While Jefferson, Smith, and Hinze were endorsed by FixAustin.org, the organization deemed the two other candidates—Linda Haller and Julie Seal—“unacceptable” for the position.

“Linda Haller and Julie Seal seem like fine human beings whose hearts are absolutely in the right place, but we believe they are both very poor fits for the Austin animal-welfare community and its drive to achieve No Kill success,” said Clinton. “In fact, both candidates distanced themselves from No Kill as a community goal, and both said they do not even like the words ‘No Kill,’” Clinton added. “This obviously won’t work for a community aiming towards achieving No Kill.”

The group also pointed to what they say are Haller and Seal’s poor records of performance, and lack of qualifications for the position. Linda Haller, for example, has been a shelter director in three communities but has never achieved a save rate of more than 53%. Austin’s save rate was 72% during the last fiscal year, and the City Council mandated that the shelter achieve a 90% save rate within 18 months.

Julie Seal also has underwhelming credentials for the position, the group said. She has held and left multiple positions in a short period, including spending nine months or less at two shelter-fundraising positions in Arizona and California. She more recently was a fundraiser for an autism-related non-profit, but her position was eliminated. “There is no doubt that Seal is a smart and caring person, but neither her background or animal-welfare interests match Austin’s commitment to No Kill. She has never worked at a No Kill shelter, she expressed no interest in the No Kill movement in America, and she said she didn’t even like the words ‘No Kill.’ She’s far out of line with Austin’s goals or beliefs regarding companion animals.”

The group noted that Abigail Smith, one of their preferred candidates, was unable to participate in the interviews this week due to a serious family emergency. They have urged the City to offer Smith an opportunity to make up the missed interview sessions. “When the shelter director with the highest save rate in America is considering working for you, you’ve got to figure out how to give her a chance. We would be making a huge mistake not to give Smith a chance to interview for the position,” said Clinton.

CRITICAL MEETING: Who Will Be Austin's Next Shelter Director?

Attention Austin animal advocates: Tomorrow, Monday, November 8th, the City of Austin will be releasing the names of the two or three finalists for the new animal-shelter director position, and will be making the finalists available to meet the public from 6pm to 8pm at Austin Energy, 721 Barton Springs Road.

This is perhaps the most important meeting in the history of Austin animal welfare because it will be the public's only opportunity to meet the candidates and give immediate feedback to the City regarding the hiring decision. And it goes without saying that the new shelter director will have an enormous impact on whether Austin reaches its dream of joining the nation's No Kill cities.

How much of an impact will the new hire have? Well, according to a study by the Oakland, California-based No Kill Advocacy Center, a shelter's leadership--- not its budget--- is the #1 factor in how that shelter will perform.

Please be there tomorrow: 6pm, Austin Energy, 721 Barton Springs Road.

The animals of Austin will thank you!

Best,

The FixAustin.org Team

No Kill Works! August 2010: Highest August Save Rate in Austin's History!

Just wanted to send you all a note to share some fantastic news:

As a direct result of Austin, Texas's No Kill Implementation plan, a whopping 77% of all dogs and cats impounded at Town Lake Animal Center left the shelter alive in August 2010. This figure marks the highest August save rate (and lowest kill rate) in the history of Town Lake Animal Center-- by a significant margin.

Of course, there is still hard work to be done, and there is still considerable room to improve. We will be No Kill when we reach a 90% save rate, and there are core No Kill Implementation Plan programs that remain to be implemented.

Nonetheless, today should be a day of celebration and recognition of dramatic improvement. Thank you to Council, the Animal Advisory Commissioners, City Management and TLAC, and the non-profit groups that have helped make this a reality--- Austin Pets Alive, the Austin Humane Society, Animal Trustees of Austin, Emancipet, and the amazing rescue groups in this town.

No Kill works, and it's working in Austin.

Warmest regards,

The FixAustin.org Team