Current Issues

Monday, 7pm: Animal Issues Forum in San Marcos

2012-02-25T03:18:00.002-08:00

This coming Monday, February 27, we will be meeting at 7pm at the San Marcos Public Library to discuss animal issues in Hays County. Everyone is invited to share their ideas for changes that are needed to current laws and practices that affect pets and their people. The forum will be facilitated by Lynda Rife who has facilitated the Austin Animal Issues Forum since 2009.

The recent case of Angel, a dog who was put to death for killing chickens, attracted a lot of media attention and requests that her life be spared. Hays County Commissioner Will Conley has proposed that the ordinance that caused Angel's death be changed and County Commissioners will be meeting again to vote on proposed changes. Monday's forum will provide an opportunity to discuss the proposed ordinance and to generate other ideas and suggestions from Hays County residents.

Serious Latin American disease is more common in Texas than thought

2011-10-07T15:54:00.000-07:00

Austin American Statesman:
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/serious-latin-american-disease-is-more-common-in-1900225.html

A blood-sucking insect that claims thousands of lives in Latin America each year is believed to be a greater threat in Texas than previously thought and has killed dogs and possibly some people in the state, a state health official and University of Texas researcher said this week.

They don't know how many people have been exposed to Chagas disease or might have it because doctors are not required to report the illness to health departments. But state health department official Jim Schuermann and UT researcher Sahotra Sarkar want to change that and hope to make Central Texas doctors aware of the illness.

Central and South Texas are the two highest-risk areas in the state for Chagas, according to Sarkar, a professor of integrative biology and philosophy who has been studying the disease for five years.

"It's nothing people need to panic about," said Schuermann, staff epidemiologist for vector-borne and zoonotic diseases at the Department of State Health Services. "It's not like hundreds of people are dying" in Texas.

Schuermann said he will soon ask the board that oversees the state health department, the State Health Services Council, to require reporting of Chagas. It could take six to eight months for the council to make a ruling, he said.

Chagas disease can sneak up on people like its carriers, the triatomine insects — also called "assassin bugs" or "kissing bugs" — do when they infect mammals, birds and reptiles. The bugs, which are infected from biting rodents or other animals with Chagas, are nocturnal parasites that nest in brush piles, dog houses, rodent nests, chicken coops and cracks in substandard housing. They typically infect humans by biting around the mouth or eyes to suck blood while the person sleeps. The bugs leave infectious feces behind that get rubbed into the person.

The bite can cause an allergic reaction characterized by severe redness, itching, swelling, hives, or, rarely, anaphylactic shock, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Usually, the person recovers after experiencing flu-like symptoms that can include nausea and vomiting, rash and swollen glands. But without treatment, the infection can be lifelong. The CDC said that in 20 to 30 percent of cases, the disease can reappear a decade or two later as difficulty swallowing because of an enlarged esophagus, abdominal pain because of an enlarged colon, or heart disease, including congestive heart failure or sudden cardiac arrest.

"How many heart attacks are Chagas? We really have no way of knowing," Schuermann said. "It is a leading cause of heart disease in Central America."

A blood test can tell whether a person or animal has Chagas, Schuermann said.

"Dogs can look perfectly healthy, and they'll be running around and just die," he said. Some veterinarians send the blood for testing to a lab, such as Texas Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory, which is part of Texas A&M University and can detect Chagas.

The disease can be transmitted from person-to-person by blood transfusions, from mother to child and by transplants. Between 75 and 90 percent of the U.S. blood supply is tested for it, Schuermann said. The Blood and Tissue Center of Central Texas has been testing for Chagas since 2007, spokeswoman Andrea Lloyd said.

The kissing bug is found routinely in Central Texas, and "we are lucky we are not getting more of the transmission here," Sarkar said.

Half of the kissing bugs they've found are infected, he said, and that has raised the worry. A news release Thursday from Doctors Without Borders said that thousands of Latin Americans with Chagas will go untreated because of a shortage of benznidazole, the first-line drug that's used. The organization said up to 10 million people worldwide are infected with Chagas, and 12,500 die each year.

Sarkar was a lead author of a paper published a year ago in the journal Public Library of Science Neglected Tropical Disease that argued that the infection risk in Texas was high enough to warrant required reporting, as Arizona and Massachusetts do.

Because the disease is so little known in the United States, just seven cases have been confirmed nationally, including four in Texas and one each in California, Tennessee and Louisiana, the paper said. However, it said that one research group's estimate that 300,167 Americans might be infected is credible.

maroser@statesman.com; 445-3619

Friday, October 7 Animal Issues Forum

2011-09-28T17:47:00.000-07:00

Animal Issues Forum
Friday, October 7, 2011
12:15 - 1:45 pm
Terrazas Library
E. Cesar Chavez and Waller (just east of I-35)

Agenda

12:15 - 12:30 Announcements and Introductions
12:30 - 12:45 Presentations:
Presentation 1 - Spay Street Program, Luis Herrera, Public Health Educator and Animal Cotrol Officer, Austin Animal Center (confirmed)

Presentation 2 - Creating a New "Community Fund" for:
1. Creative/Innovative Animal Projects
2. Fund Unmet Community Needs

12:45 - 1:15 Q & A and Discussion about presentations

1:15 - 1:45 Brainstorm and Plan for Next Steps:
1. Open or Closed Animal Issues Forums?
2. Focus Groups in the Community?
3. Conduct a Survey about Community Needs?
4. Start Planning a Community Fund?

Please email me at patvt5@gmail.com if you cannot attend the October meeting but have suggestions/ideas for the November Animal Issues Forum.

Thanks.
Pat Valls-Trelles

Canadian Petland Stores to Stop Selling Puppies and Kittens

2011-09-18T13:08:00.000-07:00

Canadian Petland Stores to Stop Selling Puppies and Kittens

September 15, 2011, 12:24PM MT
By Cathy Scott, Best Friends staff writer

Pet store chain decides to follow a humane model and work with animal rescue groups

The Petland chain is phasing out selling puppies and kittens in its stores across Canada, giving hope to those in animal welfare that it is a continuing trend. The decision marks the second Canadian chain in recent weeks to make the humane move, with PJ’s Pets recently stopping its sales of puppies and kittens.

In its announcement, Petland said it was phasing out sales at its 50-some stores in Canada. Petlands in the U.S., however, according to the chain’s corporate office, are not participating.

Elizabeth Oreck, national manager of Best Friends’ puppy mill initiatives, lauds the move. “The fact that Canada is taking such progressive steps to address the puppy mill issue,” she said, “is a really good indication that the world is taking notice of the puppy mill-pet store connection.”

That’s because it is widely believed that overpopulation and abandonment at animal shelters is made worse because of pet stores being supplied by puppy mills, where dogs are bred for profit in inhumane conditions.

“Pet stores in the U.S. have been on the same track,” Elizabeth continues, “and I believe that once the Canadian Petlands demonstrate that a pet store can be successful without supporting puppy mills, their U.S. stores will follow.”

In place of selling pets, the stores plan to instead work with and help animal rescue groups by having adoption events at their locations and even taking in rescued pets at the stores to adopt out.

Petland chief operating officer Robert Brissette, in a statement released to the media, did not acknowledge ethical reasons for phasing out the sales. Instead, he said it was, in part, because of a decline in store sales caused by people shopping online instead of in stores.

“Our business decision to end these sales was a tough one and was based on business fundamentals,” he said. That decision “reflects the fundamental change in the way consumers are sourcing and purchasing puppies, resulting in a decrease of sales within pet stores.”

Lorne Terrault, with Paradise Pet Centre in St. Albert, said he is proud to be at the head of the trend, rallying to make it happen. “It makes me feel great that we were at the start of this," Terrault told CBC Canada, noting that he was motivated by concerns about animal treatment. "We've found, so far, that it hasn't hurt our business. If anything, we're having more people coming in."

Source: http://network.bestfriends.org/17654/news.aspx

Proposed 2011-2012 Animal Services Budget

2011-07-27T17:41:00.000-07:00

Animal Services proposed budget for 2011-12 can be found on pages 225-227 of this pdf:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/11-12/downloads/fy12proposed_budget_vol1.pdf

The Animal Services program’s FY 2011-12 Budget
includes an $816,662 increase for the Animal
Services Implementation Plan. This comprehensive
plan includes 5.50 new full time equivalent (FTE)
positions and several programs to assist in
maintaining live animal outcomes at 90% in the
Austin/Travis County community. In November 2011,
the new Animal Services Center will open for
operation. The FY 2011-12 Budget includes $121,441
for moving expenses, increased temporary and
overtime expenses related to the move and 1.0 FTE
to assist with the operation of the new center.
Revenue in the Animal Services program is expected
to have a net decrease of $65,510 due to the
increased number of adoption fee waivers needed to
maintain the 90% live outcome goal.

Animal Services
City Council approved the Animal Services implementation plan in an effort to increase live animal outcomes. This plan includes a new half-time Rescue/Foster Coordinator position. In addition to personnel, the plan includes funding for spay/neuter for owned cats and at rabies clinics, PARVO prevention, a feral kitten program and the Davenport Adoption Center.

The implementation plan also includes $53,500 for utilities at Town Lake Animal
Center (TLAC).
0.50 FTE $304,347

The Animal Services Implementation Plan also included a moratorium on euthanasia. As a result, Animal Services has experienced increases in costs related to personnel, food, medical and dental supplies, and cleaning supplies. The FY 2011-12 budget includes $278,588 for 5.0 FTEs and $233,727 for these increased costs.
5.00 FTEs $512,315

In the fall of 2011, the new Animal Services Center will open for operation. The FY 2011-12 Budget includes one Animal Care Worker position for the operation of the new shelter. In addition to the increased personnel, one-time increases of $76,240 are included for moving expenses, marketing, increased temporary and overtime expenses related to the move and cat carriers to transport the cats from TLAC to the new shelter.
1.00 FTE $121,441

The Animal Services Program reimburses the Austin Police Department for the detective who investigates animal cruelty violations. To cover APD's increasing cost resulting from salary adjustments for this reimbursed position, $43,238 is being added to the budget. $43,238

Additional funding is included in the FY 2011-12 Budget for increased database
maintenance cost for the Chameleon database in Animal Services. $11,520

Animal advocate supports Kathie Tovo for City Council

2011-06-12T21:03:00.000-07:00

Tracey Whitley, former member of the Animal Advisory Commission and current member of the animal advocacy community, wrote this statement of support for Kathie Tovo for City Council:

Folks--

I want to urge you to vote in the upcoming Council election run-off. I believe that this election is critical and can sway the direction the Council takes in the future and I urge you to vote for Kathie Tovo.

Despite the fear mongering by the home builders association, Mike Levy, and the chamber, Kathie was the clear choice for me and many other folks I work with on community and environmental advocacy issues. Tovo supports public safety across the board. That TV commercial attempting to scare people into thinking Tovo opposes safety, and even suggesting that building WTPA4 would help fire fighting is, frankly, shocking. There is not a shred of truth in it. And, Tovo has served on public planning and clearly understands the difference between "no growth" and "smart growth." Tovo stands for smart growth.

Tovo supports Austin as a No Kill city and she has promised an open door to animal welfare, environmental concerns and issues dealing with the poor and homeless. I believe that this will be a true open door where the insight and perspective of citizens will be heard.

I believe in Tovo so much that I have contributed to her campaign. I believe she can make a difference. I believe she is the better choice. Please vote on Saturday, June 18th. The animals need you. The environment needs you. The homeless need you. Austin needs you to make a change and make a difference.
Best,
Tracey Whitley

Nearly 150 neglected dogs rescued from Bastrop Co. home

2011-05-24T16:49:00.000-07:00

Nearly 150 neglected dogs rescued from Bastrop Co. home
Tuesday, May 24, 2011, 03:42 PM

FROM THE AUSTIN HUMANE SOCIETY:

Over the last several days, Bastrop County Animal Control and the Austin Humane Society have been working collaboratively to rescue almost 150 dogs from a Bastrop County home. Eighty-nine of the dogs were taken from the home on Friday and the remainder were removed today after the owners’ voluntarily surrendered them to Bastrop County Animal Control, stating they were overwhelmed with the number of dogs on their property.

The dogs were living in squalor, among feces, urine and trash. Several of the dogs had severely matted hair, filled with pounds of dirt and feces (photos attached) and all of the dogs were covered in urine and infested with fleas.

“It is astonishing to see these animals in this condition,” says Frances Jonon, AHS Executive Director, “and absolutely heartbreaking to see animals suffering such severe neglect.”

The majority of the dogs are under fifteen pounds and include breeds such as Yorkie, Pomeranian, Chihuahua, Dachshund, Poodle, Jack Russell, Cocker Spaniel, and mixes of these breeds as well as several Australian Cattle Dogs and one Great Pyrenees.

None of the dogs were spayed/neutered or properly vaccinated, and it is clear that they had not received proper veterinary care.

“We are seeing a variety of medical conditions including skin conditions, malnourishment, open sores, weeping eyes and severely matted fur,” says Jonon. “Yet, despite of all they have been through, their tails are wagging and they are ready to give affection.”

This rescue effort has instantly doubled the Austin Humane Society’s animal population, placing a large financial burden on the shelter. We are asking the community to support the animals in any way that they can, either through donations or adoption. In addition to monetary donations, medium, large and extra large wire crates, medium carriers and towels of all sizes are needed and can be dropped off at the shelter at 124 W. Anderson Ln. between 7am and 7pm any day this week.

Heather Bailey, No Kill supporter, endorses Kathie Tovo for City Council

2011-05-23T21:24:00.000-07:00

Statement by Heather Bailey about Kathie Tovo, City Council candidate

Kathie is a woman of her word. She has been a strong supporter of neighborhoods and keeping our schools open. I served on a board with Kathie and have great respect for her. She is intelligent, compassionate, and honest. She delves into issues to make sure she understands them and does the right thing. Kathie is a strong supporter of no kill and has learned a great deal about what it took to get Austin to this point. She will work to keep us moving forward and saving companion animal lives. Kathie also understands the role the rescue groups play in keeping Austin no kill. I feel very comfortable that she will be another advocate on the council.

Jackie Goodman's statement in support of Kathie Tovo for City Council

2011-05-23T16:15:00.000-07:00

Jackie Goodman, animal-friendly Council Member from 1993-2005, on her support for Kathie Tovo in the June 18 run-off election for Austin City Council:

Many have worked hard for years on the Council & in the community, supporting a more sustainable, humane, committed direction for the City in animal welfare policy & program implementation. I'm truly appreciative & grateful for that, nothing can be taken away from anyone's efforts there.

In the current Council Place 3 race I don't see this as one of the issues that divides, as I support a long time friend & recent Planning Commissioner Kathie Tovo.

If Kathie wasn't an animal person though, if she didn't have genuine belief in & commitment to No Kill & another chance, increasing adoptions & affordability/accessibility of spay/neuter programs, didn't respect rescue groups, Boards/Commissions & other community voices - I would not have kept asking her to run these last six years.

Four of many good qualities from my perspective, Kathie is a hard worker who believes a Council Member's role is to serve the public; & that the "whole" is the sum of all its parts: she cares about all those parts. I bet Felix dog (formerly stray), Bartleby & Gracie cats (TLAC, Humane Society) would confirm that, if asked: she cares.

Quorum Report: Puppy mill bill appears to have legs

2011-05-17T09:51:00.000-07:00

Published in Quorum Report www.quorumreport.com:

May 16, 2011 6:14 PM

PUPPY MILL BILL APPEARS TO HAVE LEGS
Whitmire looking to clean up bill as it heads to Senate floor

The Senate sponsor of the so-called “puppy mill bill” is negotiating with interested parties, including an opposing senator, in the wake of a contentious hearing last week.

Sen. John Whitmire (D-Houston) convened a meeting this afternoon with Sen. Dan Patrick (R-Houston) and others to work on HB 1451 by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston). The Senate Criminal Justice Committee reported the bill Friday 5-0, with Patrick and Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Southside Place) both absent, apparently due to scheduling conflicts.

Floor amendments reportedly may be forthcoming, and perhaps even a floor substitute, according to sources familiar with the legislation. Nevetheless, Whitmire, the committee chairman, has vowed to pass a bill to address the inhumane treatment of dogs and cats bred and hoarded for sale by unscrupulous, clandestine operators.

Competitive Place 3 campaign for Austin City Council

2011-05-08T16:14:00.000-07:00

By attending the No Kill Coalition's candidates' forum on Sunday, May 1st, it was hard to discern a major difference in support for No Kill among the candidates for Place 3, the only competitive race in Austin's City Council election on Saturday, May 14. All three candidates for Place 3 pledged support for City Council's No Kill goal. The candidates' responses to the questionnaire sent out by FixAustin also showed that all three Place 3 contenders support No Kill.

Yet a number of Austin Pets Alive leaders are expressing personal support for Randi Shade. The Austin American Statesman endorsed incumbent Council Member Shade. Council Member Mike Martinez has also indicated his support for her. The Austin Chronicle, on the other hand, endorsed Kathie Tovo. The Sierra Club and environmental activists have also endorsed Ms. Tovo.

With the Austin community at large split on Place 3, it's possible that, if it turns out to be a close race, animal advocates may be able to make a difference...unless we split in the same manner as the rest of the community. It would be interesting to hear more from animal advocates on why they support one candidate or another. The fact that Austin Pets Alive leaders have endorsed Council Member Shade is likely to cause some APA followers, but not all, to vote with their leaders. But as we know, the Austin animal community is not just APA. Although APA has been more visible and active politically than other animal welfare organization, we have diverse views on a number of key issues that affect animals.

If you have not been paying attention to the Place 3 race, maybe you can take some time between now and next Saturday to look at the candidates' positions and make your opinions known. Whoever is elected in Place 3 will be sitting on City Council when the Council makes one of the most important decisions affecting the lives of homeless pets that will be made this decade - what to do about the current shelter facility once the shelter moves to Levander Loop. It deserves a little bit of your time and attention in the next 6 days.

Pat Valls-Trelles

House passes HB 1451, puppy mill bill

2011-04-27T10:25:00.000-07:00

House Passes Puppy Mill Bill
By Jordan Smith, 4:01PM, Tue. Apr. 26, Austin Chronicle
http://www.austinchronicle.com/blogs/news/2011-04-26/house-passes-puppy-mill-bill/

After being held up twice by Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview, the Texas House finally voted this afternoon in favor of a bill that would outlaw puppy mills.

The bill, House Bill 1451, by Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, earned bipartisan support in an effort to outlaw the large-scale inhumane breeding of dogs and cats. The bill requires breeders keeping 11 or more intact females to be inspected and licensed; the measure would require animals to be kept in cages of sufficient size, to be given exercise, food and water. A modest proposal indeed.
Still, Simpson – whose Longview district is home to some egregious cases of animal abuse (and whose mayor has come out in support of Thompson's measure) – argued on the House floor today that this bill just represented an expansion of government along the lines of Washington, D.C. attempts to "regulate light bulbs." Simpson says he is "very much in support of our animal cruelty laws" and that those should be "vigorously" enforced, but that this law represents a burden on breeders who operate in an ethical and humane manner. The bill only "burdens those who are keeping the law, responsible breeders."

Of course, what Simpson fails to note is that animal cruelty laws only kick in once animals have been abused and suffering – and in the case of puppy mills, often after the sickly and abused animals have been sold to consumers. The idea here is simple: Keep abuse from happening and keep consumers from being injured. Indeed, Thompson noted that the cost to taxpayers to round up and care for sick animals born in puppy mills can be great – in Longview, the city spent roughly $150,000 on a recent raid where many animals ended up having to be euthanized because they were so sick.

Despite Simpson's ongoing attempts to defeat the bill – maneuvering to pull it from the Local & Consent Calendar earned him the ire of several lawmakers, some of whom pulled their names as co-sponsors from Simpson bills – the House passed the measure today on a vote of 95-44 with two members present not voting.

April 29 Animal Issues Forum

2011-04-23T15:55:00.000-07:00

This coming Friday, April 29, we will have an Animal Issues Forum at
Terrazas Library on Cesar Chavez from 11:45 AM - 1:15 PM. Confirmed
speakers are Council Member Chris Riley, Austin Animal Center Chief
Abigail Smith and former Houston State Rep. Debra Danburg.

An important topic to discuss with Council Member Riley and all
Council Members and candidates running in the May election is what the
city is planning for the Adoption Center that is supposed to open at
the current animal shelter site when the city moves the main shelter
to East Austin. We have heard very little public discussion about
this and it's time to ask current Council Members and candidates what
is going on in this arena. Friday, April 29 Animal Issues forum will
be an opportunity to share information on this topic.

Also we'll hear from Abigail Smith about her first six weeks as the
Animal Center's Chief of Animal Services, about items on the agenda
for the next Animal Advisory Commission and any information she may be
able to share about the upcoming budget deliberations. (You may have
heard about the budget hearings the city has already scheduled.)

Also on the agenda for April 29 will be the status of current
legislation relating to animals in the Texas House and Senate. As I
write this, HB 1451, the large scale commercial breeder bill, has not
passed the House, but is on the calendar for Tuesday. Former state
representative Debra Danburg has agreed to speak and share some of her
insights about the workings of the Legislature as it relates to animal
issues. HB 3450, the Companion Animal Protection Act, has not yet
been scheduled for a hearing so it seems unlikely to pass, but we'll
have information on the status of that bill as well. There are
numerous other bills sponsored by THLN, by HSUS and by TFACS moving
forward and we'll have updates on those as well.

Please let me know if you plan to attend so I can plan for handouts,
if any, that need to be copied. And if you cannot attend but are
interested in what is going on with the Adoption Center, with the city
budget, or with state legislation, please let me know if there is a
question I can try to get answered.

HB 1451, large scale breeder bill, on House Local and Consent calendar

2011-04-14T14:57:00.000-07:00

Thursday, April 14

HB 1451, the large scale commercial dog breeder bill, was on the House Local and Consent calendar today. The Quorum Report had lots of coverage about what happened. Check it out under "Daily Buzz" at
http://www.quorumreport.com

Tuesday, April 5: hearing on SB 939, cockfighting bill

2011-04-05T08:38:00.000-07:00

The following information about today's hearing on SBB 939, the cockfighting bill is from the Texas Humane Legislation Network's Action Alert:

Hearing By the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice
Scheduled for
SB 939 (Lucio)
Cockfighting Bill
To strengthen current cockfighting laws.
Companion Bill to HB 1043 (Christian)

Please attend the hearing and sign a card in SUPPORT of this bill. Please, no calls or emails to the committee at this time.

Hearing information:
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
1:30 pm
Capitol Extension
Room E1.016

About the Bill:
Cockfighting is a state jail felony and has been illegal in Texas since 1907. However, it is not illegal to own or operate a facility for cockfighting; possess birds with intent to fight; own cockfighting equipment; or attend a cockfight. These loopholes are exploited by cockfighters and hinder law enforcement's ability to crack down on these operations. This bill will eliminate these loopholes and providing law enforcement with the tools necessary to investigate and prosecute cockfighting activities.

The bill will make each of these supporting activities an offense and will categorize cockfighting as an organized criminal activity, allowing the seizure of cockfighting equipment as contraband. In particular, it will make the following activities a crime:

participating in the earnings of or operating a facility used for cockfighting;
using or permitting another to use property for cockfighting;
manufacturing, buying, selling, possessing cockfighting equipment;
owning, possessing or training a cock with the intent that it be used for cockfighting; or
attending as a spectator an exhibition of cockfighting.

Please sign a card in SUPPORT of SB 939 at the hearing. Thank you for your support!

TEXAS HUMANE LEGISLATION NETWORK
Promoting the humane treatment of animals through
legislation, education and advocacy.
Visit us at www.thln.org

April 8 Aimal Issues Forum: State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez and City Council Member Randi Shade

2011-04-01T13:12:00.000-07:00

The April 8 Animal Issues Forum will feature State Representative Eddie Rodriguez and City Council Member Randi Shade. In addition to these two speakers, Abigail Smith, the new Town Lake Animal Shelter Director, will also be in attendance and has agreed to say a few words and take questions.

The forum will be from 11:30 am - 1:15 pm at Terrazas Library on Cesar Chavez. The agenda is as follows:
11:30 - 11:45 Informal networking
11:45 - 12:15 State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez
12:15 - 12:45 City Council Member Randi Shade
12:45 - 12:50 Introduce and Welcome Abigail Smith, brief remarks
12:50 - 1:15 Open dialog, any topic

If you haven't done so already, please check out the Facebook page for Animal Issues Forum and RSVP there.

HB 716, allowing sale of seats on helicopter hunts for feral hogs and coyotes

2011-03-30T16:08:00.000-07:00

HOUSE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION bill analysis 3/30/2011 HB 716
S. Miller, Christian, Deshotel
(CSHB 716 by Deshotel)

SUBJECT:
Allowing sale of seats on helicopter hunts for feral hogs and coyotes
COMMITTEE:
Culture, Recreation, and Tourism — committee substitute recommended
VOTE:
7 ayes — Guillen, Elkins, Deshotel, T. King, Kuempel, Larson, Price
0 nays
2 absent — Dukes, T. Smith
WITNESSES:
For — (Registered, but did not testify: Marida Favia del Core Borromeo, Exotic Wildlife Association; Seth Terry, Texas Farm Bureau)
Against — Patt Nordyke, Texas Federation of Animal Care Societies); (Registered, but did not testify: Nicole Paquette, The Humane Society of the United States)
On — Scott Vaca, Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, Law Enforcement
BACKGROUND:
Under Parks and Wildlife Code, sec. 62.003, no person may hunt any wild bird or wild animal other than an alligator, frog, or turtle from any type of aircraft or airborne device, motor vehicle, powerboat, or sailboat, or from any other floating device, except for animals and birds not classified as migratory that are hunted within the boundaries of private property or upon private water.
Under current law, an aerial hunting company may obtain a permit from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) to use an aircraft to manage wildlife or exotic animals. The permit to aerial hunt is specific to nuisance animals such as feral hogs, bobcats, coyotes, and exotics and can only be used for management purposes, not for sport. The fee for this type of permit is $210 per year. In turn, the aerial hunting company contracts with landowners, who file an authorization to manage exotic animals by aircraft with TPWD.
This permit is allowed under federal law, which provides that no person may hunt or harass any animal or bird from an aircraft unless they have a state permit. In addition, a landowner authorization must be signed by the landowner and the aerial permittee, and the aerial permittee must report
HB 716
House Research Organization
page 2
- 26 -
the management activity to the United States Fish and Wildlife Department annually.
DIGEST:
CSHB 716 would prohibit the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission from adopting a proclamation or regulation that would ban a landowner from acting as a contractor or participating as a hunter or observer in a helicopter hunt for depredating feral hogs or coyotes.
The bill also would require the commission to amend its rules to comply with the legislation as soon as practical after CSHB 716 took effect on September 1, 2011.
SUPPORTERS
SAY:
CSHB 716 would allow a landowner to sell seats on a helicopter hunt for feral hogs or coyotes. Currently, a landowner can pay a company to hunt the hogs, but this can be costly for the landowner. The bill would allow landowners to defray the costs of controlling these nuisance animals and to help address the feral hog problem during a state budget crisis, when TPWD might be forced to limit its operations.
It is estimated that 1.5 million feral hogs are in Texas. Feral hogs are a prolific species that may have two litters per year, with up to 12 piglets in a litter. The problem of feral hogs has spread from rural areas to the suburbs and highways. Feral hogs devastate agriculture by trampling crops, tearing down fences, spreading diseases to livestock, and eating seeds and livestock feed. Direct damage from feral hogs has been estimated at $400 million annually. Sympathy for feral hogs is misplaced, because they are omnivores that prey on lambs, kid goats, newborn fawns, ground nesting birds, and endangered sea turtles.
The bill would pose no safety concerns because numerous state and federal regulations govern the safe operation of all aircraft and TPWD regulations ensure the proper conduct of aerial hunts. The helicopter companies and their pilots have additional financial and personal safety incentives to screen those selected to be gunners on a hunt. Interested participants must be able to demonstrate that they have the expertise to handle weaponry properly. Those posing any danger to the pilot or the helicopter would be grounded promptly.
According to the Texas Department of Agriculture, more than 75 percent of the state has suitable terrain and vegetative cover for aerial gunning operations. Aerial hunting remains the most effective method to control
HB 716
House Research Organization
page 3
- 27 -
populations of feral hogs and coyotes, which move quickly and cannot be trapped easily. While TPWD is working on a promising program to poison feral hogs, budget limitations could stall that effort.
Concerns about the rotting carcasses of feral hogs killed by aerial hunts are unfounded. While efforts to remove the carcasses can be made, it remains best practice to leave feral hogs where they fall. Diseases from wild hogs do not pose a significant threat to humans, even though their maladies can be passed easily to livestock and wildlife.
TPWD helped revise CSHB 716 to ensure that the change would not legalize ―sport hunting‖ and would meet the United States Fish and Wildlife Department standards. In addition, lawmakers could amend the bill to repeal the sections of the Texas Administrative Code that punish anyone ―who pays, barters, or exchanges anything of value to participate as a gunner or observer‖ and prohibit the use of an aerial hunt permit for sport hunting. Any ambiguity could be addressed further in the rulemaking process by the Parks and Wildlife Commission. The commission is well aware of the need for effective control of nuisance species.
OPPONENTS
SAY:
Shooting guns from helicopters to hunt feral hogs would pose serious safety risks. Low-flying helicopters can encounter wind shears, power lines, trees, or other land formations while pursuing feral hogs, leading to possible air crashes. Pursuit with low-flying aircraft is inherently cruel and could lead to misplaced shots, wounded animals, and animals left to suffer and die under unacceptable conditions. A moving helicopter provides an unstable aiming platform. Since it is difficult to aim precisely and kill a running feral hog, the rate of wounded and crippled animals is likely to be significant, and wounded animals could cause even more damage. Furthermore, feral hogs tend to occupy low-lying areas and depressions where brush is dense, presenting a difficult target for aerial shooting.
Aside from the safety risks, hunting feral hogs from a helicopter would be a nuisance to nearby residential areas due to the noise from helicopters and gunfire. The practice also could raise issues with carcass removal. Some hogs weigh hundreds of pounds, making it difficult to dispose properly of the carcass. Since the meat cannot be used, the hunter does not have much incentive to retrieve the carcass. If the carcass is not handled properly, health and safety issues could arise, particularly if a carcass was left to decompose near a water source, causing contamination. Since the hunting typically occurs on private property, there are no clear regulations.
HB 716
House Research Organization
page 4
- 28 -
Operating and maintaining a helicopter is expensive, so it is possible that this bill would not produce the financial bonanzas for landowners that many have predicted. Nonetheless, hunting from helicopters is an inhumane solution to the problem of feral hogs. Killing even feral hogs or coyotes from a helicopter should not be considered a sport, and selling seats on the craft would further blur the distinction between sport and slaughter.
OTHER
OPPONENTS
SAY:
As drafted, CSHB 716 would walk a very narrow line between predator management and sport hunting and may not meet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife standards. In addition, the bill would not address the sections of the Texas Administrative Code that restrict sport hunting.
The provision allowing the sale of seats to hunt coyotes should be removed. State law already allows these animals to be hunted from the air, but there is no evidence that coyotes create the same level of destruction to crops and land as do feral hogs.
NOTES:
The author is expected to offer a floor amendment that would amend the Texas Administrative Code provisions prohibiting the exchange of money or other valuable items to be a gunner or observer and to use an aerial permit for sports hunting.
The committee substitute differs from the original version of the bill by allowing landowners to contract with hunters to hunt coyotes as well as feral hogs from helicopters.
During the 2009 regular session, the House by 125-12 passed HB 836 by S. Miller, which would have allowed those with a proper permit to participate in helicopter hunts for feral hogs. The bill died in the Senate Natural Resources Committee after being re-referred from the Senate Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.

HB 1451 referred to Licensing and Administrative Procedures

2011-03-03T17:05:00.000-08:00

HB 1451
Relating to the licensing and regulation of commercial dog and cat breeders; providing penalties.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1451

HB 716 heard 3/2/11, left pending in committee

2011-03-03T16:01:00.000-08:00

82R4968 SLB-D

By: Miller of Erath H.B. No. 716

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the taking of certain feral hogs using a helicopter.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 43.109, Parks and Wildlife Code, is
amended by adding Subsection (c) to read as follows:
(c) A proclamation or regulation of the commission adopted
under this subchapter may not prohibit a person or the person's
agent or lessee who holds a landowner's authorization and a permit
under this subchapter from using a helicopter to take depredating
feral hogs.
SECTION 2. As soon as practicable after the effective date
of this Act, the Parks and Wildlife Commission shall amend rules as
necessary to comply with Section 43.109(c), Parks and Wildlife
Code, as added by this Act.
SECTION 3. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011.

Council Member Laura Morrison to speak at March 4th Animal Issues Forum

2011-02-25T18:07:00.000-08:00

City Council Member Laura Morrison, who was instrumental in the passage of the No Kill Implementation Plan on March 11, 2010, will be speaking at the March 4th Animal Issues Forum that will take place at City Hall in the Council Chambers. The forum will go from 11:45 am - 1:15 pm and the agenda is as follows;

11:45 - 12:15 Filip Gecic, Interim Director - update on No Kill Implementation Plan
12:15 - 12:45 Council Member Laura Morrison
12:45 - 1:15 To be determined

Filip Gecic will pass out copies of the updated No Kill Implementation Plan. To ensure you get a copy, please email me at patvt5@gmail.com

There is free parking in the underground garage below City Hall. Please bring your parking ticket inside to be validated.

Please forward this information to anyone who might be interested.

Pat Valls-Trelles

Statesman: Deer forum in Northwest Hills draws 125 residents

2011-01-21T15:37:00.000-08:00

Deer forum in Northwest Hills draws 125 residents
Some wary of how city might reduce deer population
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/deer-forum-in-northwest-hills-draws-125-residents-1199551.html?cxtype=ynews_rss

Ricardo B. Brazziell/AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Published: 11:49 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 20, 2011

What was billed as an educational meeting Thursday night about a city ordinance prohibiting the intentional feeding of deer quickly turned into a fact-finding mission for some Northwest Hills residents about the possible harvesting of neighborhood deer.

But Shannon Jones, assistant director of the Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department, repeatedly said the city's main focus was to educate residents about the ordinance and enforce it.

"We have not made any decisions," Jones said in response to a woman's question about whether the city was considering trapping deer and harvesting them for meat. "We are still studying this," he said, adding the City Council will make a decision on what to do about the overpopulation of deer in the neighborhood.

Some among the 125 people at the meeting at Doss Elementary School said they didn't trust the city's handling of the deer issue.

"Even though (Jones) said it, we want to see it in writing," said Teresa Sansone Ferguson, one of the organizers of the new DeerAustin group that is opposed to deer harvesting.

In November, Plateau Land and Wildlife Management, a Dripping Springs consulting firm hired by the city for $7,500 to count deer in the 78731 ZIP code, told city officials that a population of 400 or more deer in the area was at a crisis level.

The firm suggested removing deer by trapping, transporting and processing the deer for meat or using sharpshooters.

Many residents say they love the deer and believe they contribute to the beauty of the neighborhood. Others are fed up with deer tearing up the gardens and landscaping.

What has become clear is that a February 2009 ordinance that makes feeding deer a Class C misdeameanor — punishable by a fine of no more than $125 — is not working. Enforcing the law has been problematic because staffers from the city's Rodent and Vector Control Department must witness people feeding deer. So far, only five people — three of them in the 78731 ZIP code — have been cited, and two of the cases were settled in mediation.

Paul Trulove, who lives on Rockledge Drive, complained Thursday night that a neighbor on his street is responsible for "building a herd" by putting out hundreds of pounds of corn every month. "He's moved his operation to the backyard and feeding at night. People are doing it where they're diffcult to catch," he said.

Jones urged residents to file complaints in Municipal Court when they see people feeding deer.

It was evident that groups like DeerAustin and the Northwest Austin Civic Association are at odds over the issue. The association is polling its 400 dues-paying members on the association's recommendation that the city "engage in a program to reduce the deer population by the most humane method possible." The association will present its vote to the city next month.

"We have no agenda," said Richard Anton, the association's president. "All we're doing is trying to find out what our members want to recommend to the city."

Robin Abbott of DeerAustin said she wants the city to include her group in the process. Jones assured her that any interested neighborhood group or association will be kept informed as the city continues to study the deer issue.

rgandara@statesman.com; 445-3632

Statesman: New era can begin at Austin's animal shelter

2011-01-19T16:06:00.000-08:00

New era can begin at Austin's animal shelter
Statesman Editorial Board

Austin's new director of animal services, Abigail Smith, is the right person to advance the city's no-kill goal for its Town Lake Animal Center. Smith, hired by City Manager Marc Ott, starts the job March 15.

Austin's shelter is in transition as it shifts its focus from euthanizing stray cats and dogs as one of its methods to control the area's animal population to more humane measures such as adoption. Smith will oversee the operation of the city's planned $12 million animal center in East Austin, which is scheduled to open next year.

Though it will be more spacious, it will have no more capacity than the cramped, dark downtown shelter. That presents a formidable challenge, given the City Council's action last March to make Austin's shelter a no-kill facility. That designation means having 90 percent of the animals that come into the shelter leave alive, and the council set up a two-year timeline to reach that goal. We urge the council to maintain Town Lake as an adoption center once the new animal shelter opens.

Smith, who will earn a salary of $115,003 and oversee a $6 million budget, is highly regarded by animal welfare advocates nationally for her work as executive director of the Tompkins County SPCA in Ithaca, N.Y. That center has operated as a no-kill shelter for a decade. While there, she worked with nearby Cornell University to carry out a shelter medicine program, strengthened partnerships with animal rescue groups and secured funding for a special program for feral cats, Ott said.

She was one of five finalists who participated in interviews and a meet-and-greet forum in Austin; city staffers and community members also visited her in Ithaca.

Smith has shown herself to be a good communicator and solid fundraiser, skills that will serve her and this community well. To better manage the city and county pet population, she must talk to communities across income, ethnic and other lines. She will need the help of business leaders and community organizers in making policies to address the root causes of pet abandonment and the best way to reduce the city's and county's populations of stray animals. There has been a lack of clarity, vision and message from others who held the job in the past, and that has fostered a culture of stagnation at the center and in the community.

One issue that continues to come up in a sluggish economy is whether renters abandon their pets because they cannot afford pricey pet fees charged by apartments. So if there is a way to ease those fees or come up with other solutions, fewer pets might be abandoned. Smith should lead that discussion and seek remedies.

Another problem blamed on our ailing economy is Central Texas' booming stray cat population. If owners are dumping their cats on the streets because they no longer can afford to care for them, that, too, needs attention.

While we're on the topic, let's give kudos to the Spay Austin Coalition and other groups that are engaged in trapping, fixing and returning stray cats to the streets. They are making a difference, as are Austin Pets Alive, the Austin Humane Society, Emancipet and Animal Trustees of Austin, by working to control pet populations through humane ways, including aggressive adoption efforts and spay and neuter services.

We look forward to a new era at the animal shelter with Smith at the helm. But she can't do it alone, and we urge the community to work with her to move Austin into the growing ranks of no-kill cities across the country.

City announces selection of Abigail Smith as Austin's new animal shelter director

2011-01-14T09:06:00.001-08:00

City Manager selects Abigail Smith as Chief Animal Services Officer

City Manager Marc Ott announced today, Jan. 14, the appointment of Abigail Smith, Executive Director of the Tompkins County SPCA in Ithaca, N.Y., as Austin’s new Chief Animal Services Officer.
She will begin her duties in Austin March 15.
Smith is recognized nationally for her work on animal welfare issues, presenting at numerous conferences. In August 2010, she spoke at the national No Kill Conference on the topic “90% Club: Sustaining No Kill in an Open Admissions Shelter.” The City of Austin has set the 90 percent live outcome goal.
“Abigail has a wealth of knowledge and experience to bring to Austin,” City Manager Ott said. “As a renowned expert in no-kill, she understands what Austin needs to do to reach its goal of becoming the first major metropolitan no-kill city. We are excited to have her join the City of Austin family and lead this very critical priority for our community.”
Smith served as Executive Director for the past four years at the Tompkins County SPCA which has operated as an open-admission, no-kill shelter for the past decade. While leading the agency, Smith focused on three major initiatives: animal control contracts, fundraising and spay/neuter programs.
Smith worked with Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine Program to implement a comprehensive shelter medicine program; created and strengthened collaborative partnerships, including those with civic organizations and animal rescue groups; expanded humane education programs; and secured funding for the Trap Neuter Release Program for feral cats.
Before her position in Ithaca, Smith served as Director of Development/Marketing and Manager of the Volunteer Program for the New Hampshire SPCA from 2004-2007.
She is a current member of the Society of Animal Welfare Administrators, the National Animal Control Association, the New York Animal Protection Federation and the Ithaca Rotary Club. She’s earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy, Pre-Medicine and English from Hamline University in St. Paul, Minn.
Smith was chosen after a nationwide search and an extensive interview/evaluation process that included a meet-and-greet forum with the public and a site visit to Ithaca by City staff and community stakeholders.
In March 2010 the City Council approved the No-Kill Implementation Plan for Austin. Since Oct. 1, 2010, the City of Austin Animal Services Office is actively working on the plan with the support of its partners and community. The City is making great strides in reaching the goal of 90 percent live outcomes, reaching 88 percent in December.
Filip Gecic, who served as Acting Animal Services Officer, did not apply for the position.

88% Live Outcome Rate in December at Town Lake Animal Center

2011-01-07T15:51:00.000-08:00

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Mayor and Council

FROM: Filip Gecic, Interim Chief Animal Services Officer

CC: Marc A. Ott, City Manager
H.G. (Bert) Lumbreras, Assistant City Manager
Animal Advisory Commission

DATE: January 7, 2011

SUBJECT: Animal Services Intake Rate

On October 1, 2010 the Town Lake Animal Center closed the night drop-off boxes as a recommendation from the Animal Advisory Commission. Since then the Animal Center has taken in 652 fewer dogs as compared to last year.
At the time TLAC closed the night drop-off boxes there were concerns expressed that there would be an increase in the number of loose dog calls. That has not been the case. For the three-month period, the number of loose dog calls have been down 100 to 200 calls each month.
We have a full quarter of data that reflects that the closure of the night drop-off boxes is successfully working to help the City reduce the animal intake rates thus increasing the overall live outcome rate.

The live outcome rate for the Town Lake Animal Center in December is 88% which is nearing the goal of 90% live outcome rate also known as a “No-Kill” city. This is during the slower winter season, but we are hopeful that this trend will continue.

The Animal Services Office is actively working on the City’s “No-Kill” implementation plan and with the support of our partners and community we are making great strides to reaching our goal.

Should you need further information, please contact my office at 972-6057.

Local Issues Presented at December 15 Animal Issues Forum

2010-12-20T11:02:00.000-08:00

Local Issues Presented at December 15 Animal Issues Forum
Notes by Adette Quintana

First Speaker - Patricia Fraga City of Austin:

Spay street Program has been expanded. Now covers 10 zip codes. Spay Street partners with Emancipet.

Door hangers and handouts are passed out within these communities. These give citizens information about free services available to their pets (rabies vaccination, microchip, spay/neuter, new collar) as well as instructions on how to get these services. They also explain how spay/neuter benefits pets.

This outreach is done by city staff and Emancipet.

*Volunteers needed to hand out flyers and hang door hangers in these communities

Asha Thune (Emancipet) explained that Emancipet has $30K. This fund covers citizens who's pets are picked up and brought in via door to door visits. These are people who otherwise would NOT reach out and have their pet spayed/neutered, etc

The City fund is $25K. The fund covers citizens who DO reach out via information they have received from flyers, word of mouth,door hangers, etc.

Both the City and Emancipet are under the Spay Street Program and all surgeries are done at Emancipet.

Second Speaker: Kathleen Hamilton- Public Awareness Committee

Gave us an update on the Public Awareness Committee progress

*The first project was to reach 'low hanging fruit'. The committee now has a logo and education materials to hand out. They have been participating in local pet events (we are currently at the Armadillo Christmas Bazaar) handing these out and spreading the word about the help we need from Austin's citizens in order to become a No Kill city.

*A generalized marketing plan has been developed. This will include broader education materials, more events, more Spanish materials, improving the TLAC website (links, Spanish, clearer language, and making the site easier to navigate). This plan will be developed via working with the City.

*The committee is also working on a 24month Pet Event Calendar

*A month of celebration is being planned to celebrate the March 11th anniversary leading up to March 11th, 2011.

Third Speaker - Tara Stermer www.TrainingbyTara.com

Tara has started a mobile community outreach program. This involves going into low income communities and offering free clinics training programs. The purpose of the mobile outreach is to educate and train. Informative and helpful pet information will be handed out at these clinics. Information on proper confinement, spay/neuter, basic agility are all part of this wonderful program. Collars and leashes are also handed out.

Luis Herrera helped out with translating.

The first outreach was a great success. One person was out with their dog when Tara and her crew arrived. Right away kiddos ran into their homes and brought out their dogs.

*Volunteers are needed to help out with this program.

The next mobile outreach is scheduled for January 9th. The location will be announced. Visit www.TrainingByTara.com for more info.

State Issues Presented at December 15 Animal Issues Forum

2010-12-20T09:39:00.000-08:00

Austin Animal Issues Forum
Dec. 15, 2010 Meeting
State News Summary

Monica Hardy, Executive Director, Texas Humane Legislation Network (THLN),
ed@thln.org:

The Large-Scale Commercial Breeder Bill has been submitted to Legislative Council in
preparation for officially filing it for the 2011 session which begins January 11.
THLN has been working closely with the Texas Veterinary Medical Association
(TVMA) and the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) in advance of
the session, to come up with a bill that can hopefully pass this time. The TVMA killed a similar bill (HB 3180) in the 2009 session, and the TDLR will be the state agency through which the licensing program will be administered.

The 2011 bill will require any dog or cat breeding facility with 11 or more intact
females, where the intent is to sell the puppies/kittens, to undergo an initial inspection to become licensed, and then an annual inspection after that. Minimum standards of care will have to be demonstrated for licensing, such as adequate water, exercise, nutritious food, and veterinary care.

Facility inspection will be by the TDLR or by third party inspectors contracted through the TDLR. "Third party inspector” means any of the following with whom the
department has contracted to enforce or assist with the enforcement of this chapter and the rules adopted under this chapter, including inspections and investigations: (A)another state agency; (B) a local law enforcement agency or fire department; (C) a local animal control agency; or (D) an employee of any of the above-named agencies. All the details on exactly how the program will operate will be hammered out in the rulemaking process which will occur after the bill passes.
Another aspect of the bill is that it will require facilities with more than 50 intact females
to obtain a special approval waiver and demonstrate that they have sufficient staff to
adequately take care of the numbers of animals present.
The 2009 version of the bill included a lemon law provision, which would have provided
a way for consumers to recoup medical expenses in the case of a sick animal. The 2011
bill has dropped that provision.
THLN has worked hard to get bipartisan support for the bill. Both the Republican and
Democratic Party Platforms now have language specifically in support of animal welfare
and the prevention of animal cruelty. The House sponsor for the bill is Rep. Senfronia
Thompson, same as 2009. We are still working on a Senate sponsor.
Page 2 of 3
Two important things that everyone can do to support pro-animal protection bills: Attend
committee hearings on the bills when they occur during the session. THLN will send out
action alert emails letting everyone know when and where the hearings will be. The most
important thing when attending a hearing is to sign the card that you are in favor of the
pro-animal protection bill or you are against a bill that would weaken animal protection.
You do not need to stay for the entire hearing. Secondly, something everyone can do
RIGHT NOW is to meet with your state senator and state representative before the
session begins. They’ll have more time to listen to you and will be more likely to
remember you when animal welfare bills start coming up for a vote. If you can’t meet
with them, please at least start emailing or calling.
THLN is in the process of organizing a Lobby Day to be held in mid or late February.
Patt Nordyke, Executive Director, Texas Federation of Animal Care Societies (TFACS),
pnordyke@austin.rr.com:
TFACS is working on two bills: Pets in Protective Orders, and Spay/Neuter (S/N). This
will be the third attempt for the Pets in Protective Orders bill. In the last (2009) session,
there were 131 House votes and 27 Senate votes in favor of it so clearly it should have
passed, but unfortunately it fell victim to some last-minute session shenanigans and
didn’t quite make it.
The Pets in Protective Orders bill seeks to have pets included in domestic violence
protective orders. Sometimes the abused person in a household will not leave for fear
that the companion animal(s) left behind will then be abused. This bill seeks to remedy
this situation.
The S/N bill is not a “mandatory” s/n bill because anyone can keep their animals intact by
paying a $50/yr annual licensing fee per intact animal.
Exemptions to the proposed bill include service animals; animals younger than six
months; purebred animals displayed at competitive exhibitions to determine physical
conformation to established breed standards; animals used for lawful hunting by owners
holding valid Texas hunting licenses; and animals certified by veterinarians for health
reasons.
Texas is the only state to include non-surgical sterilization in state law. This is probably
where we will be headed eventually.
Senator Seliger was the sponsor of the anti-tethering bill that TFACS tried to get passed
in 2009 (the bill didn’t make it). Unfortunately, Seliger is now the chairman of the
Redistricting Committee and will have no time to sponsor the bill again. Redistricting
and the state budget will both be hugely important in the 2011 session and will just
overwhelm a lot of things.
Page 3 of 3
Tara Stermer, Canine Aggression & Behavior Specialist, Training by Tara,
thepacktrack@gmail.com:
There is breed ban legislation in the works. Breed bans absolutely do not work.
Education is the key. People mistakenly think breed bans are needed because of isolated
cases they hear about that involve chained, unsocialized dogs. There was a recent
incident in Tyler, Tx where a 2 year old child was killed when he wandered too near a
chained dog in his grandfather’s yard. There were 29 other chained dogs on the property.
Cynthia Kent, a former Smith County judge, is proposing the legislation. The Tyler
newspaper seems to be driving the whole thing.
Hopefully the fiscal note that would have to accompany any breed ban bill (fiscal notes
are required for all bills) will reflect that it will be prohibitively expensive to carry out. A
Best Friends enforcement estimate for such a bill is $31M for the entire state or $1M for
Travis County alone.
Denver is the only place where there is a widespread breed ban. Any dog whose
appearance remotely reminds an officer of the pit bull breed or a mix of that breed (either
correctly or incorrectly) can automatically be deemed a pit bull by the police and seized
and euthanized. Bully breed ID is visual only and is virtually impossible to do correctly.
“Pit bull” is actually a group of dogs. AKC recognizes American Staffordshire Terriers
and Bull Staffordshire Terriers, but does not recognize Pit Bull Terriers as a breed.
One version of the bill involves a 3rd degree felony for owning a “pit bull”. Another
version says that a pit bull owner would have to erect an 8 foot fence, with 2 feet buried
underground.
There is a petition against breed-specific/breed-discriminatory legislation at the bottom of
the Love-A-Bull home web page at http://love-a-bull.org/. The website also lists other
actions that people can take to fight BSL.
Employees at Dell Children’s Hospital say that the most common dog breed they see that
has bitten a child is a lab mix. Community programs are the answer, not breed bans.

Austin Chronicle coverage of Abigail Smith "Meet and Greet"

2010-12-16T08:28:00.000-08:00

Fit To No-Kill?
BY JOSH ROSENBLATT
Austin Chronicle

On Tuesday, the fifth and final candidate for the city's chief animal services officer position, Abigail Smith, faced the firing squad that is the Austin animal-rights community and lived to tell the tale. It probably helped that Smith has nearly four years' experience running a "no-kill" animal shelter. Remember, in March, animal rights activists convinced City Council to approve an ordinance making Austin a no-kill city and directing staff to figure out how to make that happen by September 2011. Asked on Tuesday how she would manage the task if she were shelter director, Smith said she'd do exactly what she's done at the Tompkins County SPCA in Ithaca, N.Y., since 2007 – improve programming for volunteers, foster-homes, off-site adoptions, and spay/neuter surgeries – but on a larger scale. Make that a much larger scale, actually: At last count, Tompkins County had a population of 102,000. Austin? Nearly 800,000. In 2009, the Town Lake Animal Center took in about 23,000 animals. Tompkins? Just shy of 3,000. In other words, if Smith does get the job, she's going to have to shake off some of her small-town sensibilities in order to survive. In her closing statement Tuesday, Smith displayed the slightest hint of provincial naivete, saying that she was hoping to convince the various animal groups in Austin to "work together" in a "coordinated, collaborated effort" to reach the city's no-kill goals. Anyone who has paid attention to animal issues these last few years knows that fulfilling such a wish will probably take a Christmas miracle. Assistant City Manager Bert Lumbreras is expected to make a recommendation to City Manager Marc Ott after reviewing the candidates' applications; no timeline is set for a final decision.

November 3rd Public Awareness Committee Meeting Notes

2010-12-01T14:46:00.000-08:00

Public Awareness Committee Meeting Notes

Wednesday, November 3rd

I Marketing
A. Discuss our progress in our marketing/branding campaign

Mosak Advertising and Insights www.mosak.com is working on marketing material for us. They are doing all the work pro bono. Mosak will also include an estimate on printing expenses.

Included in their work is a website, ad buy, tri fold brochures, and poster

B. Logo, Marketing Company, T-Shirts, Stickers, Postcards, Flyers, Website, Website address
We have a logo donated by an anonymous artist.

Piret has printed T-shirts with the logo.

Gina ordered post cards to hand out to the public at events as well as stores around Austin

Trish mentioned the great impact bumper stickers have. Committee will work on this

Website address is www.AustinNoKill.org . Committee discussed a link on TLAC’s website to this web address for more Public Awareness info as well as volunteer opportunities.

ACTION ITEM # 2 – Meghan Turner suggested that the No Kill logo would be on TLAC’s home page and would link to a portal page that would then link to other pages. Ms. Fraga said she has to check about the logo. Piret Sari-Tate agreed to send the logo electronically to Ms. Fraga who will check on whether it can be approved to be on home page.

II Funds
A. Our funds are $0
B. Donations fund request plan
C. Friends of TLAC/Umbrella non-profit group

Committee members have been using their own funds for printing and booth expenses.

ACTION ITEM #1: We agreed to submit our work (marketing and public relations materials) to Patricia Fraga, City of Austin staff member liaison to committee for approval and use by the City. Ms. Fraga will compare to the city plan for use of $53,000 out of the General Fund and let us know if the two plans can be merged. If the $53,000 cannot be used, we can then discuss possible action regarding request for Donations Funds.

III Year of the Companion Animal
A. Proposal sent to AAC

Committee needs to work on the plan for Year of the Companion Animal.

Need a way to get earned media. We are looking at the declaration as a media splash to get attention and coverage for all Austin animal current events over the next year.

ACTION ITEM # 3: Brad Beam will research the council’s schedule for next year and bring a proposal to the AAC. We will plan the press conference for a “non-Council” Thursday. Ms. Fraga volunteered to research and plan the press conference.

IV Public Relations Society
A. Media Strategy, Press List, Press Releases, etc
B. Volunteers from PRSA?

Gina has contacted the Public Relations Society in an effort to obtain pro bono public relations work.

Main task will be to create a 24month calendar of events to create a campaign which coincides with national animal campaigns such as Spay/Neuter month, adopt a dog month, National Pit Bull Awareness Month

We will also invite members of Public Relations Society to join our Public Awareness Committee

V Public Events (pet related and other)
A. Volunteers to research events, booth costs, etc

Adette has agreed to research public events (pet related and non-pet related) to host public awareness booths. Examples include Farmers Markets and Pet Festivals around Austin. She will need volunteers to help with organizing and participating in these events.

Ms. Fraga asked if anyone might be interested in participating in Pet of the Week. Pat Valls-Trelles suggested Adette Quintana (who was at the meeting and agreed) as well as Tara Stermer who was not at the meeting. Ms. Fraga was interested in both.

VI Flyers at local establishments
A. Amy's Ice Cream has agreed to do this
B. others?

Members will contact local businesses for permission to display our flyers/postcards.

Public Awareness Committee Report to AAC Nov. 10

2010-12-01T14:23:00.000-08:00

Public Awareness Committee Report
November 10, 2010

The Committee had t-shirts made. We sold them at our booth on Pit Bull Awareness Day. At that event, we talked to many people about Austin’s more toward becoming a No-Kill city.

We have post cards that we will be handing out at events and leaving at local businesses. Amy’s Ice Cream has agreed to allow post cards/brochures in their stores. We are contacting other retail businesses, asking to leave materials in their establishments.

The committee secured the web address (URL) www.AustinNoKill.org. The Web site will consist only of a single page with the logo and four links: one to the adoption page of the TLAC web site, one to the foster page of the TLAC web site, one to the volunteer page of the TLAC web site and one to the donate page of the TLAC web site.

We presented the proposal to have the Mayor and City Council declare that 2011 is The Year of The Companion Animal. We plan to have a press conference shortly after Jan. 1 to publicize this declaration.

The committee secured the pro bono service of MOSAK Marketing. The company will develop a marketing plan, design brochures and print advertisements. They have offered to design a web site. They will also investigate the potential for donated space for print advertising.

We will have a booth at the “Day of Action” event at the Austin Pets Alive shelter on Nov. 20. We will sell t-shirts, distribute marketing materials and talk to people about the move toward No-Kill.

The committee is researching having booths at other events, expanding beyond events that are dog-centered.

Amy’s Ice Cream has agreed to allow brochures in their stores. We are contacting other retail businesses, asking to leave brochures in their establishments.

Efforts to recruit Committees members with professional backgrounds in marketing, advertising and public relations continue. The Austin chapter of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) has agreed to ask their membership

Agenda for Public Awareness Committee - Dec. 1 Meeting

2010-12-01T14:19:00.000-08:00

DECEMBER PUBLIC AWARENESS MEETING AGENDA

I. Our Mission and Purpose

II. Portal Page and Website
A. Pet Finder
B. Update from Trisha
C. Committee Website
III. Year of the Companion Animal Update
IV. Marketing Material Update
V. Public Events Promotions
A. Healthy Pets Healthy People and Pit Bull Awareness Day
B. Radio Show Spot
C. Upcoming Pet Events/Non-Pet Events
VI. Public Awareness in Schools
VII. Flyers at local businesses
A. Need Volunteers to contact local businesses- template email and list
B. Need Volunteers to distribute flyers

Wed, Dec 1 in the Bull Pen @ City Hall. Free parking in parking structure. Be sure to bring your ticket inside for validation

Deer Survey presentation to City Council PHHS committee

2010-11-18T10:59:00.000-08:00

The Public Health and Human Services Committee heard a presentation from the city's consultant on the deer population in Northwest Austin. The 27 minute presentation is on the city's website at:
http://austintx.swagit.com/player.php?refid=11162010-45

Agenda Item:
Receive Staff Update regarding deer survey. (David Lurie, Director, Health & Human Services Department, and Shannon Jones, Assistant Director of Public Health and Keith Olenick, Senior Wildlife Biologist, Plateau Land and Wildlife Management)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

City consultant recommends killing deer in NW Austin

2010-11-18T09:33:00.000-08:00

KXAN coverage of city consultant recommendation to kill deer in NW Austin
watch video news coverage here:
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/deer-study-in-northwest-austin

Deer study in Northwest Austin
Lethal measures to control population recommended
Updated: Wednesday, 17 Nov 2010, 10:22 PM CST
Published : Wednesday, 17 Nov 2010, 10:14 PM CST

Doug Shupe
AUSTIN (KXAN) -
The deer population in Austin's Northwest Hills neighborhood is at a "crisis state," according to a newly released report prepared for the City of Austin Health Department.

A consultant company called Plateau Land and Wildlife Management conducted the research in the 78731 zipcode. The survey found about 400 deer living in an area suitable for about 100 and recommended drastically reducing the population.

Some residents say growth and new development have forced deer into their yards because they have nowhere else to go. But some blame people for feeding the deer despite a city ban on it.

"I like to see them in the neighborhood," said Charlotte Flynn.

Flynn has lived in the 7800 block of West Rim for 40 years. Watching the deer at dark reminds her of the times she fed them with her husband before he died.

"It was just part of our evening. After he got sick it was always his joy, if he was well enough, to come out and watch me feed the deer," said Flynn.

But increased populations of people and deer have led to growing concerns about deer and vehicle collisions, confrontations with people or pets, economic damage to vehicles and landscaping, and health issues like Lyme Disease.

"They're a nuisance here absolutely a nuisance," said resident William Deginder.

Deginder says deer populations have exploded since he moved to the neighborhood in the early 80's

"The longer I stay the more I see," he said.

So the city asked for a deer study in Northwest Hills. Once complete, it found very high deer populations and recommended reducing deer density through two lethal methods--trap, transport and process to donate their meat or the use of sharpshooters in larger, open space areas.

The report did not recommend the non-lethal method of capture and release. There's mixed feelings about the report's recommendations and also a difference of opinion on whether the deer population should be lowered at all.

"Something has to be done," said Deginder.

"I think we're missing a wonderful opportunity to share nature," said Flynn.

The city has not made a decision yet on what to do about the deer. The Northwest Austin Civic Association will call a special meeting on November 29th and eventually vote on a recommendation to present to the city.

City considering sharpshooting or trapping deer in Northwest Austin

2010-11-18T09:27:00.000-08:00

KVUE news coverage of sharpshooting deer in Northwest Austin (watch video here):
http://www.kvue.com/home/To-shoot-or-not-to-shoot-controlling--108792884.html

Text of news story on KVUE website:

by ANDREW HORANSKY/ KVUE News
kvue.com
Posted on November 17, 2010 at 6:36 PM

A local consulting firm called Plateau Land and Wildlife Management recently conducted a census in Northwest Hills. It was not a count of people, but of deer.

“We found that we have a severe population problem there,” said Plateau President David Braun. “There are four times as many deer as is natural.”

Funded by the City of Austin at a cost of $7,500, Plateau counted about 400 deer, and recommended removing up to 300 of them. The firm then presented two options for controlling the population: trapping the deer, or using sharpshooters.

In trapping, huge nets surround the deer and can catch more than one at a time. The process, however, can traumatize the animal. Braun says sharpshooting is not only quicker, but possibly cheaper.

“I think people instinctively want to find the safest way, the most humane way,” Braun said. “Until they have studied it, they cannot imagine that this is going to be the conclusion.”

In the meantime, some residents say the deer problem has never been worse. They have gobbled up plants and caused countless accidents, and yet not everyone can agree on sharpshooters.

“I understand why some people may think it’s a good idea; we have too many deer around here,” Alexandra Evans says. “But, having kids, I just think the idea is pretty scary.”

The neighborhood association will ultimately vote on using traps versus sharpshooters.

Notes from October 20 Rescue Committee Meeting

2010-11-10T15:27:00.000-08:00

The November meeting of the Rescue Committee created by the March 2010 No Kill Resolution will be on Wednesday, November 17 at 6:30 pm at the Town Lake Animal Center. The notes from the last meeting are below:

Rescue Committee October 20, 2010
Actions/decisions

Notetaking: Kathleen Hamilton

Meeting frequency: Decision: Confirmed the 3rd Wednesday of each month as the standing meeting date for the committee.

Rolling 24 month calendar: Action: Send to Brad Beam brad.beam@gmail.com information on animal related events that should be included on the calendar, which is being developed by the Public Awareness Committee.

Donation Funds: Awaiting reply to Brad’s email to the AAC asking for clarification on process for finalizing decisions on Donations Funds. Actions: When reply received from AAC, committee will formulate a recommendation concerning what percentage of funds from the Emergency Care $30,000 balance should be used for heartworm treatment.

Homeless Pets Need You flyer: Action: Send recommendations for changes to Adette Quintana, Public Awareness Committee; adettesark@yahoo.com

Shelter Walker Function: Actions: Send input on what info rescuers might want from this activity to Kathleen Hamilton zenhamk@aol.com, who will compile it. Contact Kathryn Sharp if you want to try out this activity to see how it might work. Kathleen will also talk with Joanna Johnson, TLAC volunteer coordinator, to see whether this job function might be included in potential jobs offered to TLAC volunteers. Idea left on table: Contact Triple Crown Academy to explore requiring people going through their program to have to spend certain amount of time performing the shelter walker function.

Creation of subcommittees to carry out work of the Rescue Committee: Actions Co-chairs will develop proposals for the subcommittees which might be established. Subcommittee on recruiting rescues created (Brad, Pat, Meghan, Nancy). Contact Brad brad.beam@gmail.com if you wish to participate on this committee.

Placement Partner Guidelines: Action: Establishment of Placement Guidelines Subcommittee (Christy, Toni, Marnie, Cheryl, Kathy, Julia). Contact Julia julia_jad@hotmail.com if you wish to serve on this subcommittee. Ideas left on table: Start with fosters who become rescues. Survey the rescues participating with TLAC and those not participating to see what their objections to the placement guidelines are (and what they like). Have presentations made by current partners to help people understand what is involved in being a rescue. Create incentives for being a rescue partner.

staff goal for Council action on RFP and hiring new director

2010-10-19T16:06:00.000-07:00

The video for today's Public Health and Human Services Committee meeting is now available at:
http://austintx.swagit.com/player.php?refid=10192010-30

City staff made a presentation and projected February 28, 2011 as the date for Council action on the RFP.

Council Member Morrison asked David Lurie, Director of Health and Human Services about the projected timeline for hiring a new director and he replied they are thinking of having someone on board by January 1, 2011.

RFP on agenda for October 19 PHHS meeting

2010-10-19T10:24:00.000-07:00

MEETING AGENDA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON Tuesday, October,19th , 2010 AT 3:00 P.M. AT CITY HALL, 301 WEST SECOND STREET, BOARD AND COMMISSIONS, ROOM 1101, AUSTIN, TEXAS
1.
Call Meeting to Order
2.
Review and approval of minutes for the committee meeting held Tuesday, September 21st, 2010.
3.
Citizen Communications.
4.
Discussion on the status of RFPs for Animal Adoption Services. ( David Lurie , Director of Health and Human Services and Byron Johnson, Purchasing Officer)
5.
Status Report on Implementation Plan to Reduce Animal Intake and Increase Live Animal Outcomes and Take Appropriate Action (Filip Gecic, Acting Animal Services Officer)
6.
Discussion and Possible Action on $380,650 in Un-Allocated FY 2009-10 Social Service Funding. (David Lurie, Director, Health & Human Services Department, and Vince Cobalis, Assistant Director of Human Services)
7.
Consider agenda items for next meeting, scheduled for 3:00 pm on Tuesday, November, 16th, 2010 or at the call of the committee chair.
8.
Adjourn
The

November 6: Barkitecture 2010, noon - 4pm

2010-10-11T15:50:00.000-07:00

http://www.austinbarkitecture.com/

Barkitecture 2010
November 6, noon - 4pm
2nd Street District, Austin, TX

Since its inception in 2005, Barkitecture has become an Austin favorite! Hosted by Animal Lovers of Austin, Inc. and the 2nd Street District, this architectural dog-centric fundraiser showcases doghouses created by some of Austin’s best and brightest architects, designers and builders. Attendees will have the opportunity to bid on these unique doghouses, play at the 'pup-stop', learn more about adoption opportunities from local area rescue groups, and enjoy a winter-inspired Fashound Show.

Every year, local artist Jaime Cervantes donates his time and talents to create a limited-edition poster for Barkitecture. This year's (see below) is better than ever and will be on sale for $25 at the Barkitecture event with all proceeds going to this year's sponsored rescue groups.

Woman and Min Pin Attacked by Four Dogs on West 48th Street

2010-09-17T08:47:00.000-07:00

http://www.kvue.com/news/Woman-and-dog-attacked-by-four-dogs-in-Shoal-Creek-neighborhood-103091749.html
by JENNIE HUERTA / KVUE News
kvue.com
Posted on September 16, 2010 at 5:49 PM

A woman was walking her leashed dog along West 48th Street on Tuesday when she says four large dogs came at her at once.

The four dogs were unleashed and not wearing collars. It took several people to break up the ruckus that left the woman and her dog hurt.

Tracy Vaught’s miniature pinscher Pipsqueak proved to be no match for the two mastiffs, cow dog and pit bull that came at him while he was out for a walk on his leash last Tuesday.

“Those dogs raced, at the speed of the wind, and attacked,” Vaught says. “It wasn't like we were in their territory. They just came in and attacked.”

The four dogs, named Puck, Luna, Pluto and Spot are now quarantined at Town Lake Animal Center. One of them bit Vaught on the back side and bit Pipsqueak all over, but not before neighbors got into the fray.

“One man came out with a plastic guitar, and he's trying to beat the dogs away, and the dogs are not relenting,” Vaught said. “And somewhere in all of this, the owner showed up. They didn't respond to his voice commands. He literally had to carry the hundred-pound mastiff to his house.”

The dogs' owner, Victor Angelica, believes people's panic made the situation worse. He believes his dogs were just trying to play.

“The fact that there was a neighbor hitting my dogs with a guitar, and they were not attacking anybody when I got outside, tells me that they were not being aggressive,” Angelica said. “I know how they play.”

Paul Streetman, who saw the whole thing, disagrees.

Streetman says, “This was a full-on attack. This woman was screaming for her life. The dogs had taken her small miniature pinscher and had it in its mouth, and were thrashing it back and forth like a rag doll. She got bit bad in the process, by a large bull mastiff. It was a very scary and disturbing event to witness.”

Angelica's dogs had been in a fence, required by the City of Austin. He believes his cow dog Spot opened the gate to his backyard. Angelica will get his dogs back on Monday, to some neighbors', including Vaught’s, disappointment.

“I don't think that anyone around a neighborhood that is full of elderly neighbors and children and people walking their baby strollers needs to have dangerous animals,” Vaught said.

Vaught, an animal lover herself, says she doesn't want to see Angelica's dogs put down -- just controlled.

Angelica says he's planning to pay Vaught for her expenses, totaling about $1100. If an Austin Animal Control Officer had seen the dogs unrestrained, Angelica could have been fined up to $500 per dog, for breaking the city's leash law. So far, the City of Austin has not ruled the dogs dangerous. That involves a court proceeding. All of the dogs are vaccinated, but Angelica cannot take them home until he pays impound fees totaling more than $500.

Angelica says he’s looking for another place to live, perhaps in a less densely populated area.

Austin City Council approves $757,000 increase in budget for Animal Services

2010-09-14T15:58:00.000-07:00

Animal Services
The Animal Services program’s FY 2011 Budget
includes a $757,000 increase for the "No Kill Implementation Plan." This
plan includes 5.50 new full time
equivalent positions and several programs to
assist in increasing live animal outcomes to 90
percent in the Austin/Travis County community.

The 5.50 new positions include: 2 full time Vet
Technicians, a half-time Veterinarian, 1 full time Animal Behaviorist, 1 full time Public Health Educator
and 1 full time Animal Care Customer Services Representative Senior. In addition to
increased personnel, the plan includes funding for an offsite adoption program,
foster care program, spay street program, an emergency care fund and a public
awareness campaign.

Two new fees will be implemented in FY 2011 as
part of the Implementation Plan, an animal intake
fee and a wildlife relocation fee. These fees will
generate $22,500 in additional revenue. Other
revenue in the Animal Services program is
expected to have a net increase $25,052 based
on historical trends.

The FY 2011 Budget also includes a $50,000
increase as part of the Austin/Travis County
Interlocal agreement for the County portion of the
spay/neuter program.

Castrar/Esterilizar a su mascota!

2010-09-01T13:20:00.000-07:00

http://www.ahimsatx.org/nnl/docs/BePartOfSp.htm

Castrar/Esterilizar a su mascota!

Una mascota castrada/esterilizada ...
es mas saludable
vive mas tiempo
obedece mejor y es mas facil de entrenar
es mas tranquila y
tiene menor tendecia a vagar, escaparse o pelearse con otros animales
NO tiene cria!
Invierta en el futoro de su mascota ... es un precio pequeno que pagar por toda una vida de amor y carino

Los Dueños de Perros Deben Proveer

2010-09-01T13:18:00.001-07:00

Los Dueños de Perros Deben Proveer

Suficiente comida fresca para el tamaño y edad

Agua fresca y limpia disponible a todos momentos

Para perros de patio, tener albergue disponible contra el mal tiempo

Si el perro esta amarrado, lacadena debe ser tres veces el tamaño de el perro y con un collar comodo

Si esta en jaula, el perro debera poderse parar doblar y moverse comodamente

Si esta en jaula, ejercisio adecuado

Cuidado veterinario para prevenir enfermedades y rabia

Contener el perro en su patio limpio y en condiciones sanitarias

Licensias, chapas y edentificasion en el collar

La Esterilización de los Perros y los Gatos

2010-09-01T13:16:00.000-07:00

perros
http://www.tuperro.com.mx/01_06_03_repro_esterilizar.html

gatos
http://blogmascotas.com/porque-es-importante-esterilizar-a-los-gatos-machos-i/

Documental revela cruda y triste realidad de perros realengos en Puerto Rico

2010-09-01T12:39:00.000-07:00

Si alguna vez te has condolido por la situación de los perros abandonados, ¡ésta es tu oportunidad de hacer algo al respecto!

http://www.primerahora.com/documentalrevelacrudaytristerealidaddeperrosrealengosenlaisla-tusmascotas-especial-nota-415934.html

Pit Bull Committee Meeting Agenda for 8/31/2010

2010-08-31T15:31:00.000-07:00

Pit Bull Task Force/Committee
Agenda for 8/31/10 meeting; TLAC, 6 – 7:30 pm
1. Sign-In/Welcome/Introductions around the room (5 mins)
2. Clarification of committee mission and goals (10 mins)
3. Overview of Committee Structure and Expectations (10 mins)
4. Review key issues that emerged from last meeting (See below) and identify top three priorities (20 mins)
5. Brainstorm ideas and outline strategy to address top three priorities (20 mins)
6. Formulate next steps and set regular meeting time/day (20 mins)
7. Adjourn

Key Issues that Emerged from Last Meeting
Strengths
Love-A-Bull as a free resource 13 votes
-Trainings 1 vote
-Community get togethers 3 votes
Trail dog program 6 votes
Love-A-Bull’s program objectives meeting goals 5 votes
Education efforts; Love-A-Bull 4 votes
Raising awareness with groups 4 votes
- Education programs
- Marketing
- Business plan for dog (pit bull)
Facebook groups- cross postings 2 votes
Billboards, posters, Facebook (Shelter Pet Project) 1 vote
Shelter adopts out pit bull types rather than not 1 vote
Love-A-Bull / Shelter relationship 1 vote
- Fosters
- Strategic
- Working relationship with other groups, nationally and locally
Grassroots education 1 vote
Representation from all groups especially after implementation plan
Respected/renamed nationwide
Community groups, schools, gang prevention units, rescues
Problem of breed identification (How to use terms to let public know pit bull is good)
-Adoption (housing) banning dangerous dogs

Opportunity
Hire behaviorist who knows about pit bulls 22 votes
Positive news stories 19 votes
Post-adoption training 11 votes
Free spay neuter 8 votes
Incentives for rescues to take pit bulls 7 votes
Evaluation public on breeds 6 votes
- At schools
PSA’s, general education 5 votes
Neighborhood association outreach 5 votes
Utilize spay/neuter funding identified in implementation plan for Emancipate designated for pit bull use 5 votes
Spay/Neuter Incentives 5 votes
Hold Love-A-Bull event @ TLAC 5 votes
Outreach to high risk neighborhoods 4 votes
Donation fund 3 votes
Outreach to all neighborhoods 3 votes
Outreach to businesses 2 votes
More funding 2 votes
Enhance computer to identify mix breeds 2 votes
Fund-raiser event (picnic?) to show dogs in different light 2 votes
Talk to neighborhood groups (turnout is low, though) 1 vote
Enhanced opportunities for non pit bull rescues to rescue pit bulls 1 vote
Get other areas of the City involved 1 vote
Speak/ do activities at churches 1 vote
- Churches with youth groups (kids could train with volunteers dogs)
Partner with other organizations for outreach
Crime Meetings
Training fliers from Love-A-Bull
Educate shelter workers/volunteers
Use meet up groups to do outreach areas

Weakness
No pit bull rescue group 14 votes
Advertising – Not enough 11 votes
Restrictiveness of apartment complexes 7 votes
-Insurance companies
Breed misidentification 5 votes
Lack of city support to adopt pit bull’s 5 votes
Expand outreach to East Austin/Other “well off” parts of City of Austin 4 votes
Education
Bad publicity 4 votes
Tendency of over-identification 3 votes
Lack of knowledge on the issues 3 votes
Redevelopment Project 2 votes
Mission Statement 1 vote
Efforts specifically general towards pit bulls
- Spay/ Neuter 1 vote
Education and outreach to children 1 vote
Identification issues 1 vote
Pet of the Week
- No images
- No pit-bulls 1 vote
Only one advocacy group – Love-A-Bull
Information focuses on negatives of pit bulls
Low manpower to set up training/outreach (volunteers)
Perception problem with pit bulls
Lack of dialogue between neighborhood groups (including but not limited to Neighborhood groups, associations, Property Managers, Owners, Landowners, Mueller

Challenges
Better utilization of volunteers 13 votes
- Utilize for maximum benefit to shelter
- Saves money
- Lack of coordination, education, training
Educating public 8 votes
Money 6 votes
Media (bad) 6 votes
Housing 6 votes
Media-Bias 5 votes
Difficulty in having a focused message 4 votes
Reputation/ Long held beliefs 4 votes
Housing/ Apartment Issues 4 votes
More off-site adoption events 3 votes
Locating pit-friendly insurance 2 votes
More Spay/Neuter 2 votes
Not enough people 2 votes
Misidentification 2 votes
Prejudice 1 vote
Misinformation 1 vote
More support needed from decision makers in community 1 vote
Image 1 vote
Need more volunteers 1 vote
Exposure 1 vote
Momentum (maintaining it)
Better protection for puppies
No kill equation needs No. 11
Clarify breed ban/ no kill
Continued challenge to overcome public perception
- Catalyst for change
Failure of city staff to understand and promote foster-to-adopt program
History of breed/dog fighting

Groups represented at the Pit Bull Task Force include:

Love-A-Bull
TLAC Volunteers
Confident Canines
Austin Pets Alive- Healthy Dogs, Healthy People
Training by TARA
Branding
APA/ APA Volunteers
Animal Issues Forum
LAB
Vision Hills Sanctuary
Animal Trustees

Tue. Aug 31 at City Hall: Animal Issues Forum

2010-08-18T13:13:00.000-07:00

The next Animal Issues Forum will be held on Tuesday, August 31 at City Hall during the lunch break, from 11:45 am to 1:15 pm.

The forum will start with the showing of the film "Shelter", a short (17 minutes), locally-produced documentary about the City of Austin's efforts to become "No Kill" city. "Shelter" was filmed for a class at the University of Texas by Kelly Sloan (radio-television-film student) and Lauren Dooley (public policy student). The producers will be present at the screening and will participate in a discussion with Q&A after the film. Rob Graham, a member of Austin's Animal Advisory Commission, will talk about what the AAC has already done and what it has planned to reach No Kill.

Della Lindquist, an Emancipet volunteer, will talk about outreach efforts in Montopolis and other neighborhoods that have high numbers of homeless animals and her work with the City of Austin's Spay Street Program and that program's "neighborhood captains" including an effort to recruit Spanish speaking volunteers.

Monica Hardy, the new Executive Director of the Texas Humane Legislative Network, will also be speaking about THLN's conference, September 24-26 in Austin, and her new duties as ED of THLN during the legislative session that starts in January 2011.

The forum is free and open to the public. Parking in Austin City Hall's underground garage is free as well. (Bring parking ticket inside to be validated.)

Please forward to anyone who might be interested in attending. Thanks.

Pat Valls-Trelles
Animal Issues Forum
www.animalissuesforum.org

Travis County Park Ranger shoots 2-year-old boxer-mix

2010-08-11T09:08:00.000-07:00

http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/dog-recovering-after-being-shot-by-park-ranger
Dog recovering after ranger shot him
Owner says shooting unjustified
Updated: Tuesday, 10 Aug 2010, 6:28 PM CDT
Published : Tuesday, 10 Aug 2010, 5:40 PM CDT

Reagan Hackleman
AUSTIN (KXAN) - Bronx, a 2-year-old boxer-mix, is doing much better today than he was on Monday.

“He’s real sore, real tender, but the swelling is actually less pronounced today,” said Dr. Matt Schuessler of the Pale Face Veterinary Clinic.

Stuck inside Bronx’s head is shrapnel from a bullet fired by a Travis County Park Ranger .

“I was kind of shocked that, that kind of action was taken,” said Schuessler.

Before Bronx was brought to Schuessler’s, he was with his owner, Stacey Hines, at Pace Bend Park in Western Travis County.

“The dogs were taking a break from swimming,” said Hines.

Hines admitted the dogs weren’t wearing their leashes, which is the law at all Travis County Parks, when a Travis County Park Ranger pulled up.

“As I’m trying to get out of the water to go talk to him, the dogs run up and start barking at him,” Hines said.

What happened next left Hines and her friend in shock.

“He [the park ranger] immediately freaked out and ran directly into the lake. I was like, 'What is he doing?' All the dogs are barking at him, and he turned around and opened fire,” said Kenna Bobinger, who was at the park with Hines.

Both Hines and Bobinger said a 4-year-old child was nearby when the ranger pulled the trigger.

The chief of the Travis County Park Rangers, Dan Chapman, said while a child might have been in the area, at no time was that child in danger.

In a report yet to be filed, the chief said his ranger was afraid for his life and said the dogs were in “attack mode.”

The vet begged to differ.

“I’ve only known probably one or two boxers to be really super-aggressive. For the most part they’ll just lick you to death. They’re really good children-type dogs,” said Schuessler.

Schuessler said those who might find themselves confronted by a dog they are uncomfortable with to simply calm down and try and leave the area where the dog or dogs are.

Bronx, who was rescued from the Town Lake Animal Center by his owners, could have permanent vision problems because of the shooting. And meanwhile, no disciplinary actions have been taken against the ranger who pulled the trigger.

According to Chapman, the ranger involved has numerous years of law enforcement experience, including a stint with the U.S. Border Patrol.

Chapman said rangers do not go through any formal training when it comes to handling dogs.

Edison Fries an Elephant to Prove His Point

2010-08-10T11:25:00.000-07:00

Jan. 4, 1903: Edison Fries an Elephant to Prove His Point
By Tony Long 01.04.08
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/01/dayintech_0104

Topsy the elephant was electrocuted at Luna Park Zoo on Coney Island in 1903. Captured on film by Thomas Edison, the event was one of a string of animal electrocutions Edison staged to discredit a new form of electricity: alternating current.

1903: Thomas Edison stages his highly publicized electrocution of an elephant in order to demonstrate the dangers of alternating current, which, if it posed any immediate danger at all, was to Edison's own direct current.

Edison had established direct current at the standard for electricity distribution and was living large off the patent royalties, royalties he was in no mood to lose when George Westinghouse and Nicola Tesla showed up with alternating current.

Edison's aggressive campaign to discredit the new current took the macabre form of a series of animal electrocutions using AC (a killing process he referred to snidely as getting "Westinghoused"). Stray dogs and cats were the most easily obtained, but he also zapped a few cattle and horses.

Edison got his big chance, though, when the Luna Park Zoo at Coney Island decided that Topsy, a cranky female elephant who had squashed three handlers in three years (including one idiot who tried feeding her a lighted cigarette), had to go.

Park officials originally considered hanging Topsy but the SPCA objected on humanitarian grounds, so someone suggesting having the pachyderm "ride the lightning," a practice that had been used in the American penal system since 1890 to dispatch the condemned. Edison was happy to oblige.

This portion of Edison's film Electrocuting an Elephant is taken from a German television show.
When the day came, Topsy was restrained using a ship's hawser fastened on one end to a donkey engine and on the other to a post. Wooden sandals with copper electrodes were attached to her feet and a copper wire run to Edison's electric light plant, where his technicians awaited the go-ahead.

In order to make sure that Topsy emerged from this spectacle more than just singed and angry, she was fed cyanide-laced carrots moments before a 6,600-volt AC charge slammed through her body. Officials needn't have worried. Topsy was killed instantly and Edison, in his mind anyway, had proved his point.

A crowd put at 1,500 witnessed Topsy's execution, which was filmed by Edison and released later that year as Electrocuting an Elephant.

In the end, though, all Edison had to show for his efforts was a string of dead animals, including the unfortunate Topsy, and a current that quickly fell out of favor as AC demonstrated its superiority in less lethal ways to become the standard.

(Source: Various)

Read More http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/01/dayintech_0104#ixzz0wEFCdf8c

Agenda for August 11 Animal Advisory Commission meeting

2010-08-08T17:07:00.000-07:00

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/edims/document.cfm?id=140475

ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2010
6:00 PM
WALLER CREEK CENTER
625 E. 10TH STREET, RM. 105
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL
The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a threeminute
allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. AAC Public Hearing & Special Meeting held on June 2, 2010
b. AAC Special Meeting held on June 9, 2010
c. AAC Regular Meeting held on July 14, 2010
3. OLD BUSINESS
a. Review and Discussion of the Draft Mission of Animal Services
4. NEW BUSINESS
 Approve Revised Bylaws As Directed By City Council In Action Taken On July 29, 2010,
Concerning Officer Terms.
 Election of Board Officers (Chair, Co-Chair and Parliamentarian)
 Report from Donations Funds Sub-Committee Meeting
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
6. STAFF BRIEFINGS
 2011 Proposed Budget
 Animal Services Center Briefing
 Status report on Implementation Plan to reduce Animal Intake and Increase Live Animal
Outcomes.
 Staff Briefing On Any Issues Related To Animals In Travis County
 Update, discussion Of Task Forces and Public Awareness Campaign
7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
8. ADJOURNMENT
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or
alternative formats, please give notice at least 4 days before the meeting date. Please call Gricelda Diaz at Health & Human Services Department,
Animal Services Division at 512: 972-5805, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711

33% increase in cats killed per day

2010-08-04T05:47:00.000-07:00

In June 2010, there were 20 cats per day put down by lethal injection at the Town Lake Animal Center, a 33% increase over the 15 cats per day put down by lethal injection in June 2009.
http://www.cityofaustin.org/health/pets/downloads/ops_0610.pdf

Agenda for August 3rd Animal Issues Forum

2010-07-29T08:30:00.000-07:00

Animal Issues Forum - Tuesday, August 3
6:30 pm - 8:30 pm
Terrazas Library, 1105 E. Cesar Chavez

6:30 - 7:00 Animal Events in August-September
Speakers will provide information about the upcoming animal events: Ringling Brothers Circus Protest (August 18-22); Puppy Mill Awareness Day (September 19); Texas Humane Legislation Network Conference (September 24-26) and Austin No Kill Workshop (September 28).

7:00 - 7:30 Outreach to Spanish speakers and Latino(a) community
Bobbie Garza-Hernandez (formerly Enriquez) has been providing communications services on large scale public and private projects through Enriquez & Associates (renamed Pink Consulting) since mid 1997. A major portion of her service has focused on the development and implementation of large scale community outreach initiatives, with emphasis in minority communities.

7:30 - 8:00 Update on Austin's No Kill Initiatives
Status of RFP, Donations Fund, City of Austin budget process, search for new director, the Public Awareness Task Force, the Rescue Task Force and the Pit Bull Task Force and the Animal Advisory Commission.

8:00 - 8:30 Small group discussions on above topics

CALENDAR OF AUSTIN ANIMAL-RELATED EVENTS

2010-07-29T08:20:00.000-07:00

July 29 Public Awareness Task Force
August 3 Animal Issues Forum - 6:30 pm Terrazas Library
August 10 Pit Bull Task Force
August 11 Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting
August 14 Pints for Pits
August 18 - 22 Ringling Brothers Circus Protest
September 19 Puppy Mill Awareness Day
September 24-26 Texas Humane Legislation Network Conference
September 28 Maddie's Fund No Kill Conference

2010-07-18T08:25:00.000-07:00

July 26 AAC Donations Fund Committee Meeting
July 27 Rescue Task Force
July 29 Public Awareness Task Force
August 3 Animal Issues Forum
August 10 Pit Bull Task Force
August 11 Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting
August 14 Pints for Pits
August ___ - ___ Ringling Brothers Circus Protest
September 19 Puppy Mill Awareness Day
September 24-26 Texas Humane Legislation Network Conference
September 28 Maddie's Fund No Kill Conference

KXAN coverage of Petland closure

2010-07-15T08:33:00.000-07:00

Petland to close as city moves on ban
Embattled store defends animal-sale practices
Updated: Wednesday, 14 Jul 2010, 5:49 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 14 Jul 2010, 11:50 AM CDT

Karen Brooks
AUSTIN (KXAN) - The large chain retail store Petland is closing this Sunday after being under fire for more than two years from protestors who accused the large chain store of selling pets from puppy and kitten mills, a city official said Tuesday.

Store owners have denied the accusations, saying they only get their animals from USDA-approved breeders. They told KXAN on Wednesday that they decided to close the store mainly because they thought the city had passed a ban on retail sails of dogs and cats. The city hasn't passed it yet, but it's widely considered to be inevitable, which the owner said would kill his store.

"It's very unfair," said owner Ben Guerra. "A lot of people are saying that the protestoers have won. I don't think anyone's winning, especially when 20 people are being left without a job."

Protestors said they weren't trying to close the place down, but were hoping Petland would just halt that aspect of their business - or turn away from sales to other options.

"We're not jumping for joy that theyr'e going out of business," said protester Sharon Yancy. "We would have preferred a humane option."

All the pets are gone from the store and have been transferred to other Petland stores, none of which are in Austin.

The move comes as the advisory commission considers a citywide ban on retail kitten and puppy sales because those stores often get the animals from out-of-state mills - which are notorious for subjecting animals to inhumane conditions, said David Lundstedt, vice chairman of the city's Animal Advisory Commission.

The board meets tonight to discuss that ordinance. Once the commission decides to pass it, the ordinance would need the approval of the entire city council.

Two years ago, just before Petland opened, the city banned the mass sale of "intact" puppies and kittens - those that had not been spayed or neutered - and said Petland was a specific target of that ordinance.

Petland, which has stores all over the world, is being sued by the Humane Society , which said it has investigated where the chain has purchased its pets.

Protestors have been demonstrating in front of Petland every Saturday for the past two years against puppy sales at its stores.

While one protestor said it is a bittersweet victory for them, the protestors never wanted or meant for the entire pet store to go out of business, saying they just wanted the store to change its rules for how it handled its pet sales.

Protestors will be at Petland Saturday, making it the last protest the day just before it shuts its doors.

Victory for Petland protesters: Petland to close

2010-07-15T08:27:00.000-07:00

http://www.kvue.com/news/No-retail-pet-sales-in-Austin-98471124.html

by SHELTON GREEN / KVUE News

kvue.com

Posted on July 14, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Updated yesterday at 10:52 PM

Wednesday evening, with a unanimous vote, the City of Austin took one more step to becoming a no-kill city when it comes to animal shelters.

The Austin Animal Advisory Commission approved a proposal to ask the Austin City Council to create a ban on the retail sales of companion animals like kittens and puppies at stores.

The only store in Austin selling kittens and puppies is Petland in south Austin. Now the Southpark Meadows store will close its doors for good on Sunday, July 18th.

"You know it's going to be inevitable. There's no point in just prolonging this, the store is going to eventually have to close down," said Ben Guerra, the manager at Petland.

"We've tried to implement this no kill plan but we're not there yet, we are not no kill, we're working on it. We've got a lot of work to do. It's going to be an 18-month to two year process," added Lundstedt.

"The people that are protesting are trying to say this is a victory. How is it a victory when 19-people of our staff are being left without jobs?," questioned Guerra.

The Austin City Council is expected to tackle the issue between now and October.

The Animal Advisory Commission says that Petland was buying animals from puppy mills across the country and selling them in Austin without them being spayed or neutered, an accusation Ben Guerra denied.

"Every time animals go into the Town Lake Animal Center and have to be killed, that's tax dollars that don't have to be spent," said David Lundstedt, a member of the Austin Animal Advisory Commission.

RFP for Comprehensive Adoption Program posted by City of Austin

2010-06-08T12:49:00.000-07:00

The City has posted two Requests for Proposals for Animal Services to the City's website. The two RFPs can be accessed through the Purchasing Department link at:
https://www.ci.austin.tx.us/vss/Advantage
Click on Public Access
Click on Business Opportunities
Click on Search for Solicitations

RFP for Comprehensive Adoption Program posted to City website

2010-06-07T10:46:00.000-07:00

June 22 Animal Issues Forum - 11:45 - 1:15

2010-06-05T08:41:00.000-07:00

Animal Issues Forum
DATE: June 22, 2010
TIME: 11:45 am - 1:15 pm
LOCATION: Town Lake Animal Center
AGENDA: To be determined but will include:
1. Report on Animal Advisory Commission meeting (Wed., June 9).
2. Report on City Budget Meeting (Tues. June 15)
3. Report on Pit Bull Task Force, Public Awareness Task Force and Rescue Task Force.
4. Report on upcoming activities related to
     a. the Donations Fund,
     b. the city budget process and
     c. the Request for Proposal process for the Comprehensive Adoption Program.

UPDATE: June 15, 6pm City Budget Office Public Forum

2010-06-04T11:00:00.000-07:00

City of Austin Budget Input Forum
June 15, 2010 6:00-9:00 p.m.
Austin Convention Center, 500 E. Cesar Chavez St.

* Tell us what should be kept or cut from the City of Austin 2010-2011

Budget and your future priorities.

* Find out the budget forecast.

* Meet department representatives.

* Cast votes for your priorities.

* Share your comments.
FREE PARKING
Austin Convention Center garages
Fifth and Red River street
Second and Brazos streets

June 8, 6pm, City Budget Office Public Forum

2010-06-04T10:21:00.000-07:00

City Budget Office hosts a Public Forum 6/8 @ 6-9pm

City of Austin Budget Input Forum
June 8, 2010 6:00-9:00 p.m.
Austin Convention Center, 500 E. Cesar Chavez St.
* Tell us what should be kept or cut from the City of Austin 2010-2011
Budget and your future priorities.
* Find out the budget forecast.
* Meet department representatives.
* Cast votes for your priorities.
* Share your comments.

FREE PARKING
Austin Convention Center garages
Fifth and Red River streets
Second and Brazos streets

Dorinda Pulliam leaving Town Lake Animal Center position

2010-05-15T09:18:00.000-07:00

From Austin Chronicle's City Hustle column:

… It came out this week that Dorinda Pulliam, the Town Lake Animal Center director, is leaving her post to work on “high level Departmental and City Corporate projects” before retiring in January 2010, according to a city memo. Pulliam “is being assigned to assist with special projects in other divisions within the department and other corporate level projects,” reads the memo from H&HS director David Lurie. The announcement comes at a critical time for Austin animal services, with the recent adoption of “no-kill” guidelines, last week's groundbreaking for the city's new animal center in East Austin, and a heated debate between advocates and staff over when to vaccinate incoming strays. Her assistant director slot at Animal Services will be filled on an interim basis by Bruce Mills.

Amid distemper outbreak, groups say animal shelter too slow to vaccinate dogs

2010-05-15T08:47:00.000-07:00

Not all animals were vaccinated upon arrival until recently, critics say, allowing distemper to spread more easily.
By Mary Ann Roser AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

After losing their dog of 16 years in March 2009, the Torpey family of Austin went to the Town Lake Animal Center to adopt another pet six weeks ago. They saw Ivan, a 3-month-old German shepherd/Labrador puppy, on March 30 and fell in love.
But less than 36 hours after they took him home, Ivan was lethargic and sneezing, said Leanne Torpey, 43. She took him to the vet, and Ivan was hospitalized. He later went home, but when he did not improve, Torpey took him back, and the vet diagnosed two infections, parvovirus and giardia. Ivan had lost five of his 18 pounds. In late April, he also was diagnosed with distemper, a highly contagious respiratory illness that can kill.
Torpey thinks Ivan caught the disease at the shelter, which has struggled this year to overcome a canine distemper outbreak. Shelter records show that staff delayed neutering Ivan for two weeks, until March 29, because he was lethargic and had a "heavy green" discharge from his eyes and nose, adding fuel to Torpey's belief that Ivan contracted distemper at the shelter.
Shelter officials, including Executive Director Dorinda Pulliam and veterinarian Dr. Linda Czisny, have insisted for weeks that all animals are vaccinated when they come into the shelter. That is a policy the shelter has followed for nine years, they said, with one key exception being when animals arrive too late in the day. Then they are vaccinated the next day, they said.
"We've been very committed to our vaccination protocol for a long time," said Pulliam, who is leaving the shelter for another job in the department . "It's been very effective, and we're very pleased with the result."
But others say the shelter has been too lax in vaccinating animals this year, leading to unnecessary deaths.
Larry Tucker, chairman of the Animal Advisory Commission, which advises the Austin City Council on animal welfare, said the shelter caused needless suffering and deaths because staff did not vaccinate all animals upon arrival, a standard practice at shelters. Dr. Ellen Jefferson, a veterinarian and president of Austin Pets Alive, a nonprofit that rescues animals from the shelter that are deemed unadoptable and slated to be euthanized, said last month that her organization took in 70 dogs in March and April that showed signs of respiratory illness and possible distemper.
"This issue at the shelter is, in my opinion, a crisis that must be addressed immediately," Tucker wrote in an e-mail to Travis County Judge Sam Biscoe. "Vaccinations are NOT being given immediately upon intake."
The Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department, which oversees the shelter, said it has tested 16 dogs for distemper this year, and of those, nine tests came back positive, five were negative and two results are pending. The first confirmed cases came in early April, Czisny said.
Sick animals come into the shelter and spread distemper, sometimes before symptoms appear, shelter officials said. Shelter staff members isolate sick animals, but they don't often test for distemper because of the cost: $69.25 per test, according to Carole Barasch, spokeswoman for the department.
The shelter can house as many as 650 animals during peak season, which starts about now, Pulliam said. Barasch provided a list of vaccination dates for animals now housed at the shelter, which shows that some of the animals were not inoculated upon arrival.
Though dogs and cats that have been there since mid-April generally were vaccinated the day they arrived, that was not the case for those that arrived in February, March and early April. Most of those animals were vaccinated at least a day later, and a few were vaccinated many days later. For example, a dog brought in March 26 wasn't vaccinated until May 4; another dog waited from March 24 to April 18 to be inoculated. One cat went unvaccinated from Feb. 25 to May 2.
"There's going to be times when something happens," Pulliam said, such as when 50 animals come in at once as part of an animal cruelty investigation.
Of the animals now at the shelter, Czisny said that the shelter vaccinated 99 percent of dogs and 95 percent of cats upon intake and that the animals that were not vaccinated either were too young, arrived after hours or had health issues. She said that in the recent past, animals that were deemed unsafe were not vaccinated, "but as of April 1, two people were assigned to vaccinate, and that has allowed them to work as a team to vaccinate the unsafe/scared animals."
Czisny also said in an e-mail that during the first three months of the year, animals sometimes were vaccinated after they were placed with other animals, a condition that experts say allows diseases to spread more easily.
Tucker said he has repeatedly asked for detailed records showing when animals were vaccinated at the shelter but has been ignored.
Jefferson, the Austin Pets Alive president, provided a report from her nonprofit organization showing that of the 55 animals it received from the shelter between March 31 and April 19, 60 percent had received vaccines the same day, 29 percent had received them late and 11 percent had not been vaccinated. Between Jan. 1 and April 19, her organization treated 63 dogs for distemper and lost 13 to the disease, Jefferson's report says.
"It looks like they started doing (vaccinations of every animal) on the 29th of April," Jefferson said. "I think they're getting it under control, but we could have done that at the beginning of March."
Czisny said Jefferson's statistics "only reflect the at-risk population that APA pulls. It does not reflect the entire population during those dates — the overall population would have a much higher percentage of animals vaccinated."
Shelter officials said they also isolate sick animals to reduce the spread of disease. "Dogs with more complicated respiratory infections are generally tested to confirm that they are not shedding distemper (virus) before being placed back in to adoption," Czisny said. "Dogs may also be adopted out while under treatment for respiratory infection if the adopter chooses to take them, and therefore they would not be tested."
Torpey said her family spent $4,500 trying to keep Ivan alive. She said her daughters, Robyn, 18, and Lindsey, 16, tried to comfort the dog in late April when he cried and howled by holding him and keeping him in a dark room. But on May 3, when he foamed at the mouth, they took him back to the vet.
"Everyone was crying, the vet team, everyone," Leanne Torpey said. "They loved him, too."
She went back to the shelter to let them know Ivan was dead.
"Town Lake's response to me was they don't test (dogs for distemper) until they show they are really sick. I slapped a picture of Ivan in front of them," she said. "I said it's cruel and abusive what they do to animals there."
Her family is adopting a new dog, she said, but not from the shelter.
maroser@statesman.com; 445-3619

Statesman article on Lee Mannix

2010-05-04T09:18:00.000-07:00

Lee Mannix, noted dog trainer, killed in car accident

Austin behaviorist used understanding with dogs and trained their people.By Chris Garcia AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Updated: 11:04 p.m. Monday, May 3, 2010
Sporting Wrangler jeans, cracked boots and a weathered T-shirt, a plug of Copenhagen tobacco puffing out one cheek, Lee Mannix was a Texas good ol' boy with a distinctly outdoorsy gift: He could talk to the animals.
Mannix, an internationally respected dog behaviorist whose clients included musician Jimmie Dale Gilmore and author Kinky Friedman, made his name with the Lee Mannix Center for Canine Behavior in South Austin, which he founded in 2002. Dogs adored him; their often harried masters, many of whom regarded Mannix a miracle worker, revered him.
Mannix, 40, was killed in a single-vehicle accident Sunday in Hays County. His brother Kevin was in the vehicle and was treated at University Medical Center Brackenridge. He was expected to be released Monday night.
"There are very few people who have the touch, and Lee certainly had it," said Friedman, who co-founded the Utopia Animal Rescue Ranch. "His ability to relate to animals was second to none. He could take a dog that everybody's having trouble with and thinks is ferocious and untameable, and two or three weeks later it's a totally different dog. Lee came in as an equal, and the dogs just loved him."
Raised in Odessa and Houston, Mannix, born in 1969, was a teenage scrapper who tracked down trouble like a bird dog. Wearing a mohawk, he ran away from a broken home, got arrested four times, drank too much.
"I was going down a bad road," he told the American-Statesman last summer. Moving in with his best friend's family straightened him out.
After a terrifying run-in with a German shepherd when he was 8 — the wound required 130 stitches — Mannix avoided dogs until he was 20. When he moved to Austin in the late 1990s, a friend gave him a dog. The pair got along just like that. A poetry lover, Mannix named the ridgeback Langston after poet Langston Hughes.
Mannix worked at the Austin Humane Society and DogBoy's Positive Power Kennels in Pflugerville. While he lived briefly in Colorado, Mannix, then 27, was one of the youngest executive directors of the area Humane Society.
Mannix spent 13 years studying with British dog trainers John Rogerson and the late John Fisher, prime authorities in dog training and therapy. He considered himself a scientific trainer and canine behaviorist, not a method trainer
People would often bring their unruly pups to Mannix, who specialized in canine aggression problems, as a last resort. If no one else could fix their dog's severe behavior, Mannix usually could. And if he couldn't, he was candid enough to tell owners it was time to put the dog down.
"I can get a dog to do anything I want it to do. The thing is training the owner to do it," Mannix said last summer. "So I don't train dogs per se; I train owners to understand their dog's behavior and get it right."
Word of mouth keeps the Mannix Center abuzz with pooch problem-solving. Last year, Mannix told the American-Statesman that he received about 100 new client inquiries a day. The center will resume normal business hours today under the leadership of Shari Elkins , lead trainer and behavior consultant, who's worked with Mannix for 12 years.
"Lee was sort of known as a magician, so that part's gone," Elkins said. "But with our team we can keep helping dogs like no one else."
Mannix's absence will be palpable. He exuded a dusty country-boy demeanor, a rough-hewn charisma that illuminated a huge radius. His salty tongue and facility for off-color anecdotes were offset by a horizon-wide smile and incandescent optimism. He loved to cook, swig beer and hunt and fish with his best buddies — dogs Grady, Creek and Floyd — near his Wimberley farmhouse. He turned a canine tooth from one of his first dogs, Hadley, into a silver-capped charm. His burly left arm was embossed with a loud tattoo: "The Irish Dogfather."
"There are lots of important people out there, politicians and the like," Friedman said. "But I think Lee Mannix was significant. And there is a distinction there.
"He's the kind of guy who has opened the gates of heaven wider."
A list of survivors was not yet available. Services are pending. Memorial donations may be made to the Schrodi Memorial Training Fund: http://www.schrodifund.org/.
cgarcia@statesman.com; 445-3649

Local Community Mourns Loss of "Dogfather" Lee Mannix

2010-05-03T10:27:00.000-07:00

Local Community Mourns Loss of "Dogfather" Lee Mannix
Austin, TX

May 3, 2010 - Lee Mannix, owner of the Lee Mannix Center for Canine Behavior (LMCCB), tragically passed away yesterday evening from injuries sustained from a car accident. His brother Kevin Mannix who was also in the vehicle is in stable condition.

"We are all in shock and disbelief at this loss," said Shari Elkins, spokesperson for LMCCB. "Lee was an exceptional trainer with an amazing heart."

Mannix, 40, was a pack behaviorist who consulted on dog behavior and specialized in aggression issues. He was dedicated to a teaching philosophy based on improving relationships between people and their pets. He was widely regarded as the last stop for many dogs with aggression and other severe behavior problems, and over the year Lee touched the lives of thousands of dogs and their humans.

Mannix was known for his incredible talent, his easy smile, and his deep generosity.

The training center will resume normal business hours on Tuesday, May 4th. The trainers and staff, led by Shari Elkins CPDT-KA, are continuing Lee's mission to help dogs.

Memorial donations in Lee's honor can be made to the Schrodi Training Fund (http://www.schrodifund.org/).
Service information to be announced.

Plugerville's animals need your help

2010-04-14T17:33:00.000-07:00

A new organization in Pflugerville that is advocating for improved conditions at the animal shelter - Plugerville Pfurry Pfriends - spoke at the City Council meeting on Wednesday, April 13. The Mayor and Council Members were clearly impressed with the tone and professional demeanor of the presenters. They offered advice on how to raise funds for a new animal shelter but did not commit to find money in the budget to improve the shelter. They did talk about the summer budget process, indicating the citizens of Pflugerville need to monitor the budget process and continue to speak out to get additional funds. Sheila Smith of Shadow Cat Rescue also spoke of the urgent and immediate need to enclose the shelter so animals are not exposed to the elements. There is also a need for a budgeted position so that the shelter can be open to the public and volunteers on a regular basis. The current situation is you have to call the Police Department and have someone walk over to let you in. For more information go to:
http://www.shelterreform.com/pflugerville.htm

video about ATA by Julia Hilder

2010-03-09T15:19:00.000-08:00

Great job by Julia Hilder:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6sffuIlERY&feature=youtube_gdata

Item 62 on planning for the new Animal Shelter, October 11, 2007

2010-02-25T08:27:00.000-08:00

WE'LL TAKE UP ITEM NO. 62 NOW, WHICH IS AN ITEM FROM COUNCIL APPROVING RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE LOCATION FOR THE NEW ANIMAL CENTER, AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH PLANNING FOR THE FACILITY.
source: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/2007/council_10112007.htm

LEFFINGWELL: I WOULD JUST -- I THINK WE NEED TO ADD FORMALLY A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT SAYING THAT THE TOWN LAKE SITE WILL REMAIN OPEN AS AN ADOPTION CENTER, SO I'D LIKE TO OFFER,000 AS A FRIENDLY..................,000 --THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MAYOR PRO TEM'S MOTION.

THAT'S FINE. IT MAY BE OUR FIRST SATELLITE CENTER IF WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE THE FUNDS TO CONTINUE THE EXPANSION.

MAYOR WYNN: YOU MEAN THE ACTUAL DAVENPORT BUILDING, THAT IS THE NEWER BUILDING THAT -- SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE EXISTING FACILITY. SO WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION AND SECOND ON THE TABLE. THAT IS DESIGNATING THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT CAMPUS AS THE SITE -- DIRECTING CITY MANAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PLANNING FOR THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT CAMPUS TO BE THE SITE FOR THE NEW SHELTER. ALSO INSTRUCTING HER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PLANNING AND THE PROCESS WHEREBY THE -- WHAT WE CALL THE DAVENPORT BUILDING AT THE EXISTING FACILITY REMAIN OPEN AS -- AND LEASE AN -- AS AN ADDITIONAL ADOPTION FACILITY. I ALSO AS THE SECOND -- I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO THIS OR NOT, MR. SMITH, BUT I'D LIKE FOR US ALSO, AS THE COUNCIL TAKES THIS ACTION, TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO THEN START PLANNING FOR -- AFTER THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING 50 SOME ODD-YEAR-OLD SHELT FACILITY THERE ALONG LADY BIRD LAKE, THAT WE STATE OUR INTENT FOR THAT NOT ONLY TO REMAIN DEDICATED PARKLAND, WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE CASE REGARDLESS, BUT THAT WE ASK THE CITY MANAGER TO WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS AT WEST AUSTIN YOUTH ASSOCIATION AND IDENTIFY EXPANDED UTAH EXPAND -- EXPANDED YOUTH FACILITIES FOR THAT LAND, EITHER ADDITIONAL YOUTH BALL FACILITIES OR WORST CASE IS SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR THOSE FAMILIES WHO USE THOSE FACILITIES. MR. SMITH --

MARTINEZ: THANKS, MAYOR. I WANT TO PUBLICLY STATE THAT I'M NOT GOING TO BE VOTING FOR THE MOTION, BUT I THINK THAT SOME GREAT IDEAS WERE THROWN OUT, BUT WHAT I THINK WE SAW WAS WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS. WE HAD ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER COME UP AND SAY, YEAH, I THINK THAT COULD WORK. I THINK WE OWE IT TO OUR TAXPAYERS, WE OWE IT TO OURSELVES, WE OWE IT TO THE CITIZENS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE DEFINITIVE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS. I WAS GIVEN A PRETTY DEFINITIVE LIST TODAY, FINALLY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. WE -- YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF CREATING AN ADOPTION SHELTER IS REALLY FEASIBLE. IS IT ACTUALLY DOABLE? ARE WE GOING TO BE BUSING ANIMALS BACK AND FORTH EVERY DAY TO ADOPT THEM OUT? I MEAN, THESE ARE BASIC QUESTIONS THAT I DON'T THINK ANY OF US HAVE REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT. WE'VE THROWN THIS AMENDMENT OUT. SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER TAKING THE NECESSARY TIME TO ANSWER ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS, ESPECIALLY TO THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE JUST BEEN ADDED. IF YOU WANT TO VOTE UP OR DOWN OR MOVING THIS THING TO LEVANDER LOOP, THEN I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR, STAFF HAS GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS AND THEY'VE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE OVER THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF PRESENTING THAT, BUT EVEN WITH THAT THIS IS NOT FROM ME -- FIRST OF ALL, IT'S NOT EMOTIONAL. IT'S NOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED AN ANIMAL SHELTER. I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. BUT IT'S ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE PROCESS IS RIGHT THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT. AND WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE MAKING THE DECISION WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION AT HAND. I DON'T THINK WE ARE. I THINK THAT -- [APPLAUSE] BUT THE OTHER -- THE OTHER POINT THAT I WANT TO MAKE REAL CLEAR IS WE'RE NOT DONE. THIS IS STILL GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND POTENTIALLY BACK HERE AGAIN FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO KEEP RAISING THESE QUESTIONS UNTIL I GET SOME ANSWERS AS TO WHY EVERY SITE THAT WAS EVEN CONSIDERED WAS CONSIDERED IN EAST AUSTIN. I CAN POINT TO BUTLER PARK RIGHT ACROSS THE RIVER, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL LITTLE PARK, BUT IT'S PLENTY BIG ENOUGH TO BUILD WHATEVER WE NEED. WE USE PARKLAND ON THIS SIDE OF THE LAKE. WHY CAN'T WE USE PARKLAND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LAKE. WHY CAN'T WE AT LEAST CONSIDER IT AND TALK ABOUT IT. [CHEERING] [APPLAUSE] WE HAVE AN ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION THAT'S GIVEN US A RECOMMENDATION TO NOT MOVE THIS SHELTER AT THIS CURRENT TIME. WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION, I BELIEVE, IN FRONT OF US TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS, AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING THIS COUNCIL TO DO, IS CONSIDER THOSE OPTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH PUTTING THIS ON LEVANDER LOOP IN EAST AUSTIN. [CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

LEFFINGWELL: JUST IN ONE OF YOUR COMMENTS, COUNCIL MEMBER MARTINEZ, ABOUT IT BEING FEASIBLE OR NOT ACCORDING TO STAFF'S STATEMENT TO KEEP THE ADOPTION CENTER OPEN AT TOWN LAKE. THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT I MADE AND THAT WAS ACCEPTED WAS THAT IS A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL OF THE LEVANDER LOOP SITE. SO IF IT CAN'T BE DONE, THEN THE MOTION IS NOT VALID, IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK HERE.... HERE.

Martindale dogs have been rescued! We (they) need your help!

2010-01-13T20:37:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,
Great news! The three Martindale, TX dogs have been rescued! But there is still an urgent need for: (1) donations to cover medical expenses; (2) vans/minivans and large crates for transport; and (3) foster homes to care for the dogs until they are adopted.
FOUR WAYS YOU CAN HELP
(1) VETERINARY EXPENSES. To help with medical care for the dogs, please visit the following page, click the PayPal icon, and make a donation. Anything helps, no matter how much!
http://www.animalissuesforum.org/CaldwellCountydogs/
(2) VANS/MINIVANS AND LARGE CRATES. Vans/minivans and large crates are needed to help with the next phase of the dogs' relocation. If you can lend your van/minivan and/or large crate for transport, please contact Chris Schulman at chris.schulman@austinpetsalive.org or Pat Valls-Trelles at patvt5@gmail.com .
(3) FOSTER HOMES. To offer a foster home, please contact Chris Schulman at chris.schulman@austinpetsalive.org or Pat Valls-Trelles at patvt5@gmail.com . The dogs' rescuers report that they are VERY SWEET and absolutely starved for affection. It should also be noted that they have been on a chain for an extended period of time, so there may be special needs involved in their care and rehabilitation.
(4) SPREAD THE NEWS. Please forward this message to every kind-hearted person on your contact list!
For additional background, KXAN's previous story on the dogs can be viewed here:
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/Dogs-kept-out-in-the-cold
These dogs have suffered so much and for so long, it is truly a miracle that they have been rescued and now have a second chance at a better life. Huge kudos and many thanks to all the heroic people who have stepped up to make this happen, and to all who are offering help with their care and transition.
Thank you for your compassion!
Lyndon Poole

Three Dogs on Chains in the City of Martindale

2010-01-11T14:12:00.000-08:00

For the last three nights, as temperatures in Central Texas plunged into the teens and sometimes as low as 11 degrees, three dogs spent their days and nights tethered by chains in an empty field with only minimal shelter from the cold.
One of the dogs was on a chain that was too short to reach any of the three dog houses that were nearby.

Despite numerous appeals from concerned citizens, Martindale Police Chief Jeff Caldwell says that “nothing can be done.” In spite of a Texas law that says dogs must have shelter, Chief Caldwell says that a dog house in 11 degree weather, even if a dog can’t reach it, is adequate shelter.

Pictures of the dogs are at:
http://www.animalissuesforum.org/CaldwellCountydogs

Thousands of exotic animals seized in Arlington

2009-12-17T05:44:00.000-08:00

NEWS: Thousands of exotic animals seized in Arlington
Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:50 pm (PST)

Thousands of exotic animals seized in Arlington:
http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Thousands-of-exotic-animals-seized-in-Arlington-79323622.html
http://digg.com/d31CwFp?e
by DEBBIE DENMON / WFAA-TV
Posted on December 15, 2009 at 12:29 PM
ARLINGTON — It's being called the biggest animal seizure of its kind
in the country. Authorities moved in to take custody of a many as
20,000 creatures from an exotic pet distributor Tuesday morning.

Arlington Animal Services served a civil seizure warrant on U.S.
Global Exotics, a multi-million dollar business that acquires these
creatures from all around the world — then sells them for premium
prices.

The collection includes snakes, wallabys, tarantulas, turtles and hedgehogs.

"We're finding huge amounts of dead animals in with the living ones,"

said Jay Sabatucci of Arlington Animal Services. "We're finding

turtles who are basically in a toxic soup of water and other dead

turtles."

The Humane Society of North Texas and the SPCA of Texas are among the

organizations helping city officials try to collect and catalog the

menagerie from the U.S. Global Exotics facility in the 1000 block of

Oakmead Drive. Veterinarians from around the country and even one from

Great Britain were flown in to provide their expertise into evaluation

and treatment of the more exotic animals.

"We have consulted with some experts," Sabatucci said. "Some of the

methods of keeping the animals are not within guidelines. There are

animals in there literally starving to death, not being fed. There are

animals in conditions where the environment is either too cold or too

warm for them."

U.S. Global Exotics will likely be shut down all day Tuesday as the

seizure continues. No criminal charges have been filed against the

firm, which — according to its Web site — has been importing and

exporting exotic animals for 11 years.

The Web site claims that U.S. Global Exotics is licensed by U.S.

Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and by

the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

"I'm a dog man myself, so it's hard for me to understand how someone

would like something exotic like a wallaby or a tree sloth," Sabatucci

said. "But there are people who wish to have these types of animals,

and they will pay top dollar to have them."

Officials said the seized animals would first be removed to an

undisclosed location to evaluate their conditions. If a court awards

the animals to the city, the survivors will be shipped to places where

they will be properly cared for.

E-mail ddenmon@wfaa.com

Agenda for Wed. Dec. 16 AAC regular meeting

2009-12-13T19:29:00.000-08:00

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/agenda/2009/downloads/animal_121609.pdf

ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2009
6:00 PM
AUSTIN ENERGY BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR ASSEMBLY ROOM
721 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD
AUSTIN, TEXAS

AGENDA

CALL TO ORDER

1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL
The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

3. OLD BUSINESS
None

4. NEW BUSINESS
a. Discussion of potential Bylaws amendment related to change of time and location of regular monthly meeting.
b. Discussion of posting of Animal Advisory Commission agenda & receiving of backup material.
c. Report of FY11 Donation Fund Subcommittee Meeting
d. Discussion of Implementation Plan
e. Update on AAC Scope

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None

6. STAFF BRIEFINGS
None

7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

8. ADJOURNMENT

The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 4 days before the meeting date. Please call Gricelda Diaz at Health & Human Services Department, Animal Services Division at 512: 972-5805, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.

agenda for Wed. Dec 16 AAC meeting

2009-12-13T19:23:00.000-08:00

ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2009

6:00 PM

AUSTIN ENERGY BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR ASSEMBLY ROOM

721 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD

AUSTIN, TEXAS

AGENDA

CALL TO ORDER

1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL

The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

3. OLD BUSINESS

None

4. NEW BUSINESS

a. Discussion of potential Bylaws amendment related to change of time and location of regular monthly meeting.

b. Discussion of posting of Animal Advisory Commission agenda & receiving of backup material.

c. Report of FY11 Donation Fund Subcommittee Meeting

d. Discussion of Implementation Plan

e. Update on AAC Scope

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

None

6. STAFF BRIEFINGS

None

7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

8. ADJOURNMENT

The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 4 days before the meeting date. Please call Gricelda Diaz at Health & Human Services Department, Animal Services Division at 512: 972-5805, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.

from South Carolina to Syracuse, N.Y. - dogs rescued from euth

2009-12-12T08:32:00.000-08:00

Animal rescuer airlifts York County strays
http://www.heraldonline.com/120/story/1803548.html#

By Jason Foster - jfoster@heraldonline.com Ted DuPuis doesn't want animals to die just because no one wants them, so the 25-year-old Pennsylvania man has made it his mission to save as many as he can from being euthanized.
Since August, DuPuis has taken to the skies to rescue animals from Southern states where animal overpopulation has led to high euthanasia rates. He flies them back up North, where spay and neuter laws have kept the pet population under control, so they can be adopted into new homes.
Today, DuPuis' Cloud Nine Rescue Flights will transport 17 dogs from the Rock Hill area to Syracuse, N.Y. It's his fourth trip to rescue animals from York County.
“I'm willing to do it as often as it takes,” said DuPuis, an engineer by trade. “I want to see as many animal lives saved as possible.”
The program works like this: Local representatives from the Animal Adoption League identify unwanted animals in danger of being euthanized and find shelters up North that will take them in to be adopted. DuPuis then provides the animals' transportation to their new environment. He's taken as many as 22 animals on a single flight.
“I can't say enough good things about it,” said Kylie Troy of Charlotte, volunteer transport coordinator for the adoption league. “Without him, we would really have a hard time moving them up North.”
The flights are provided for free, meaning the nonprofit relies on donations to reach its goal of 40 flights per year. Each flight costs upwards of $2,000 for plane rental, gas and other needs. DuPuis doesn't take a salary.
In addition to transporting animals, Cloud Nine also works with organizations to transport children and adults for medical treatment.
“It's a lot of work on a number of different fronts,” DuPuis said of organizing the transports.
Cloud Nine and other similar programs provide a valuable service, said Chris Peninger, supervisor of York County Animal Control.
“We do have a huge issue here with animal overpopulation,” she said. “Animals fill up shelters in our area very, very quickly.
York County Animal Control takes in an average of about 800 animals per month. Last month, rescues and adoptions totaled just 148, while 446 animals were euthanized.
“It's a very different way to get animals out of shelters and into homes,” Peninger said of rescue flights.
These programs are a “win-win-win” for everyone involved, she said: The local shelters win because it frees up room, the shelters up North win because they can offer pets for adoption, and the pets win because they avoid being put down.
“It doesn't get much better than that.”
Jason Foster 803-329-4066

Dorinda Pulliam quoted in article on feral cats in Christian Science Monitor

2009-12-01T09:12:00.000-08:00

Excerpt from Christian Science Monitor article:
“No one is going to snap their fingers and make these feral cats disappear; there has to be a program to deal with it,” adds Dorinda Pulliam, director of the Town Lake Animal Shelter in Austin, Texas.
Ms. Pulliam oversees an active TNR program that has sterilized 10,000 cats in the past two years. Whether such programs actually reduce populations is hotly disputed. She declined to estimate how many feral cats roam Austin, but said the numbers entering the shelter are declining.

Could that be because coyotes are eating them? Pulliam says she doubts that. But some residents suggest that Austin, which has a coyote control program, stop killing coyotes and let those predators take care of Austin’s feral cats.

Full article
http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/12/01/outdoor-cats-are-easy-prey-for-coyotes/

Outdoor cats are easy prey for coyotes
Cats are known as hunters but when coyotes come on the scene, cats who go outdoors become the prey.
By Mark Clayton
Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor/ December 1, 2009 edition

Print thisBuzz up!Email and shareRepublishGet e-mail alertsRSS

David Ponton/NEWSCOM
Coyotes like this one have turned to cats as a major food source – up to 42 percent of their diet in Tucson, Ariz., a study found. The study has exposed fault lines between cat lovers and bird lovers, who think cats should be kept indoors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cat lover Lisa Harris used to let her seven felines roam outdoors – until she saw a coyote waltzing across her front yard. Since then, Dr. Harris, a wildlife biologist who lives in Tucson, Ariz., has kept her cats indoors 24/7.

Long seen as miniature backyard hunters preying on everything from rabbits, birds, and mice to lizards, house cats have in some areas become the hunted, new research indicates.

In a new study of coyotes living among people in the heart of Tucson, cats were the coyotes’ most common meal, making up 42 percent of their diet, university researchers reported in the Journal of Wildlife Management. Among scores of confrontations between coyotes and cats, cats were killed more than half the time.

Birding organizations such as the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), which estimates that free-roaming cats kill more than 100 million birds each year, were quick to encourage cat owners to keep cats inside.

That’s something many cat owners are loath to do. It’s long been known that coyotes attack pets, but there’s also a sense that cats can scamper up a tree if they sense danger, says Harris.

That vastly understates the danger, she says. “A coyote can jump a six-foot fence and take a small dog or cat and be back in a flash – do it right in front of you.”

Past research has indicated that the number of pets lost to wild predators is relatively small. But the new study, combined with the expansion of coyotes into suburban and urban areas nationwide, has researchers suggesting the threat to pets, especially cats, is much greater than realized.

“The number of cats killed by coyotes in the West and nationwide is a lot higher than many people think,” says Paul Krausman, a coauthor of the study and professor of wildlife conservation at the University of Montana. “Humans are setting a banquet out for them – leaving out dog and cat food – and even their small dogs and cats.”

The study also raises questions about the wisdom of “trap, neuter, and release” (TNR) programs used by a number of cities to deal with rapidly growing feral cat populations, says George Fenwick, president of ABC.

In a press release, ABC called TNR programs “well-meaning but misguided,” adding that releasing neutered feral cats back into the wild was “providing an all-you-can-eat buffet for coyotes.”

That has feral cat program managers arching their backs a bit.

“The bird people are always exaggerating the danger cats pose,” says Carol Ameer, treasurer of the San Diego-based Feral Cat Coalition. “What we’ve found is that TNR works and eliminates a source of food for coyotes.”

“No one is going to snap their fingers and make these feral cats disappear; there has to be a program to deal with it,” adds Dorinda Pulliam, director of the Town Lake Animal Shelter in Austin, Texas.

Ms. Pulliam oversees an active TNR program that has sterilized 10,000 cats in the past two years. Whether such programs actually reduce populations is hotly disputed. She declined to estimate how many feral cats roam Austin, but said the numbers entering the shelter are declining.

Could that be because coyotes are eating them? Pulliam says she doubts that. But some residents suggest that Austin, which has a coyote control program, stop killing coyotes and let those predators take care of Austin’s feral cats.

Austin bird lover Susan Schaffel comments: “People around here leave their cat food on the back porch so Puss in Boots can roam all day long killing birds, and then call the city when a coyote eats the cat food – and then their cat.”

Harris thinks the solution is to keep cats indoors. “I’m always amazed at how people can’t imagine changing their cats’ lives because they say it might affect their happiness,” she says. “But I think it’s better for your best friend to stay indoors and live a long life than to be eaten alive.”

Editor’s note: For more articles about the environment, see the Monitor’s main environment page, which offers information on many topics. Also, check out our Bright Green blog archive and our RSS feed.

AAC Meeting Schedule for Implementation Plan Topics

2009-11-25T06:00:00.000-08:00

Nov 30th:
AAC Recommendation III: Structural Changes to Enhance Lifesaving
A: Revise Mission of Animal Services

Dec 7th:
AAC Recommendation I: Increase Live Outcomes
A1:Offsite Adoptions

Dec 14th:
AAC Recommendation I: Increase Live Outcomes
A2-6: Increased Capacity for Adoption
make-ready, behavioral, empty kennel usage, Davenport building use after shelter move, and increased public awareness.

Dec 21st:
AAC Recommendation I: Increase Live Outcomes
B: Large Scale Foster Program

Dec 28th:
AAC Recommendation II: Decrease Shelter Intake
A: Reduce Euthanasia of Owned Animals
Increased Return to Owners, Increased owner awareness of possible euthanasia, increased owner safety net services

Jan 4th:
AAC Recommendation II: Decrease Shelter Intake
B: Reduce Feral Cat Euthanasia
Increased feral cat spay/neuter, increased community care, and increased re-release rates

Jan 11th:
AAC Recommendation II: Decrease Shelter Intake
C: High Volume, Free and Low Cost Spay/Neuter
Increased services available to the community

Jan 18th:
AAC Recommendation III: Structural Changes to Enhance Lifesaving
C: Public Involvement and Candor
Increased Public Relations on all aspects of sheltering

Jan 25th:
AAC Recommendation III: Structural Changes to Enhance Lifesaving
D: Explore Outsourcing Possibilities
Increased community involvement to reduce costs and increase lifesaving

Feb 1st:
Finalize draft of implementation plan.

More information can be found at the TLAC website "In the Community" page…

Elkhart, Indiana needs Nathan Winograd

2009-11-24T09:58:00.000-08:00

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34117457/ns/us_news-the_elkhart_project

ELKHART, Ind.— Each day at five, staff members of the Humane Society of Elkhart County close the animal shelter and hold a meeting. And each day, like clockwork, they begin hearing a “thump, thump, thump” from outside.
That is the sound of pets being abandoned by owners who either do not want them or cannot care for them anymore.
Among the recent arrivals left in “drop boxes” — kennels that are accessible through doors on the outside of the facility — are Sweet Pea, a Chihuahua being nursed back to health from near starvation, a cocker spaniel named Cookie and a “family” of three pets left together — a dog, a cat and rat.
These animals add to the usual traffic of strays, rabid raccoons and animals rescued from abuse. When the drop boxes are full, the Humane Society finds pets tied up at the door, or — as was the case with a domesticated ferret — running around in the parking lot. Recently a whole litter of kittens was left in the Humane Society dumpster.

With as many as 600 or 700 animals arriving each month — sometimes 30 animals in a single day — the facility, which has space for only 266, is in crisis mode.
'Unsavory position'

The numbers are “staggering” and resources are stretched, said Ann Reel, the Humane Society of Elkhart County’s executive director.
“Since the economy has been like this, even rescuers have been down,” she said, referring to nonprofits that provide temporary homes until animals can be adopted. “(Now) we’re in the unsavory position of having to euthanize because we just can’t turn animals around fast enough.”
In one month alone, the shelter had to euthanize 600 animals, she said. Carissa Ray/msnbc.comJack O'Lantern, an orange tabby cat, was thrown from a car in front of the Humane Society of Elkhart County's shelter over Halloween weekend.

The Humane Society staff believes the poor economy is behind the high rate of abandonment — forcing people to give up pets when they run out of money to feed them or lose their homes and move into apartments or in with relatives. It’s impossible to know for sure because many people drop off their pets anonymously in the drop boxes and don’t fill out the forms that would help the Humane Society staff understand the animal’s health background and breeding. Since October 2008, the shelter has handled 5,783 animals, 42 percent of which were abandoned anonymously.
“For the most part, people just cram the animal in the door, get in their car and speed away as fast as possible,” said Reel. “Occasionally we have someone walk through the front door and say ‘I’ve been laid off my job, we’re moving into an apartment, we can’t find anyone to take them,’ and do it responsibly.”
Looming cuts?

The number of cats dropped off is especially high, perhaps because people have been reluctant to spend money to spay or neuter their cats under current economic conditions.
The Humane Society is struggling to meet the increased demand. Its budget for free spaying and neutering of cats was shot by April. The pet assistance program, which provides free pet food to help owners who are struggling financially, had 444 requests this year, about two-thirds of them first-time requests. This program is important because it keeps pets with their owners, avoiding unnecessary abandonment.
About half of the Humane Society’s $700,000 annual budget is provided by the county and cities, under a contract for animal control. But the organization is anticipating cuts in the next round of government budgets and, like many nonprofits, is casting about for new fundraising ideas, and trying to expand its donor base.Carissa Ray/msnbc.comA dog sits quietly at the Humane Society of Elkhart County while awaiting adoption.

Meanwhile, Reel brought in a fatigue specialist to work with the staff of 16.
“We are overwhelmed in trying to decide who stays and who will have to be eliminated,” she said, referring to animals that have to be euthanized. “It takes a toll on our staff. It is not a pleasant job. “
The staff also grapple with a year caring for and cleaning up after all these creatures — many which are in terrible condition by the time they are dropped off, with severe such maladies as ringworm, fleas and mange. That requires careful handling, and a lot of bleach to prevent the spread of disease.
When people ask Reel, “How can I help?” she tells them to “adopt, donate or send bleach.”

Las Vegas enacts mandatory spay/neuter law

2009-11-23T15:35:00.000-08:00

Las Vegas enacts mandatory spay/neuter law
Nov 23, 2009

DVM NEWSMAGAZINE

Las Vegas -- Las Vegas residents will have to make sure they aren’t keeping intact pets without a special permit starting this spring or they will have to pay hefty fines.

Las Vegas City Council approved an ordinance to mandate spay and neutering of all cats and dogs by the age of four months after hours of deliberation Nov. 18. Some questions arose over whether four months was too young an age to require sterilization and whether mandatory sterilization programs are really effective in reducing unwanted pet populations. Still, the measure passed 5-2 and will take effect April 1.
Exceptions are included in the ordinance that exempt animals medically unfit to undergo the operation or specially trained service animals. Breeders who have specific permits also will be exempt from the law, but violators will face misdemeanor charges and a $225 first-time offense fine. Fines for the second and third offenses are $500 and $1,000, respectively. Owners who can show proof of sterilization within thirty days of an offense can get their fines reduced by 80 percent, according to the legislation.
A portion of the fines collected through enforcement of the new law will be used to set up a fund to provide public assistance for pet owners who can’t afford to pay for spay/neuter procedures.
North Las Vegas passed a similar law in January 2008 and Clark County, Nev., also is considering a mandatory spay/neuter law. A statewide mandatory spay/neuter law has failed more than once in California, and cities like New Orleans and Chicago have considered, but never passed, similar laws.
Letters will sent to new pet owners about the law’s requirements, and pet stores must turn over new pet owner information to authorities each quarter to help achieve full compliance.

Sheryl Crow takes up cause of wild horses in West

2009-11-21T21:49:00.000-08:00

Sheryl Crow takes up cause of wild horses in West

RENO, Nev. — Sheryl Crow is joining others in calling on the federal government to halt wild horse roundups in the West, branding them as inhumane and unnecessary.

The Grammy Award-winning singer is asking President Barack Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to scrap a proposed roundup of 2,500 mustangs in northern Nevada.
Crow campaigned for Obama last year and performed at his inauguration. She opposes Salazar's plan to move thousands of wild horses to preserves in the Midwest and East to protect horse herds and the rangelands that support them.
U.S. Bureau of Land Management officials say they plan to remove 11,500 wild horses and burros from the range over each of the next three years because booming numbers of the animals are damaging the range.
http://www.austin360.com/music/content/shared-gen/ap/Recordings/US_People_Sheryl_Crow.html

Agenda for Wed. 11/18 AAC Meeting

2009-11-17T10:26:00.000-08:00

ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2009
5:30 PM
AUSTIN ENERGY BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR ASSEMBLY ROOM
721 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD

1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL
The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda.

2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES

3.OLD BUSINESS
Report of FY11 Donation Fund Subcommittee Meeting
Disease Control & Cleaning Protocols
Available City & County Buildings

4. NEW BUSINESS
Discussion of Council Resolution to expand scope of the Animal Advisory Commission.
Discussion of potential Bylaws amendment related to change of time and location of regular monthly meeting.
Discussion of posting of Animal Advisory Commission agenda & receiving of backup material.
Discuss Implementation Plan Process

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None

6. STAFF BRIEFINGS
None

7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

8.ADJOURNMENT
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 4 days before the meeting date. Please call Gricelda Diaz at Health & Human Services Department, Animal Services Division at 512: 972-5805, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.

Austin Chronicle on Item 40 debate

2009-11-12T05:16:00.000-08:00

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/column?oid=oid%3A912880

City Hall Hustle: Call Us Ambiguous

City legal once again yanks council's chain – will they finally yank back?
BY WELLS DUNBAR

Once, the Hustle asked City Attorney David Smith the color of the sky. Six weeks later, we received an opinion from the Texas Attorney General defining the answer as privileged information.
All right, that's a little bit of a stretch – emphasis on little – but currently relevant, as the city attorney's office, and its operations and reporting, are again in the limelight following its opinion on a relatively straightforward City Council resolution last week, which seemed to suggest that council has no business directing city programs.

The action in question, Item 40, directs the city manager to work with the Animal Advisory Commission in developing an implementation plan for the commission's recommendations regarding the Town Lake Animal Center – things like a larger adoption program and low-cost spay/neuter programs. But council discussion hinged on the worry – propagated by our old friends at city legal – that council was conceivably overstepping its powers in giving direction to City Manager Marc Ott, specifically by directing that city staff work with the commission. Bill Spelman drew out the issue, asking Ott if the direction gave him "any heartburn." Ott replied
him "any heartburn." Ott replied that after speaking with the city attorney's office, he had concerns that the resolution "may blur the lines" between "the policymaking responsibilities of council and the manager's responsibilities for the administrative services and management of the organization. ... It's a little ambiguous."
Ambiguity was in the air all week, as city legal had been corresponding with Item 40 sponsor Laura Morrison. Legal, natch, declined to share its advice with the Hustle without an AG opinion, but Morrison's office forwarded an e-mail from Assistant City Attorney Cary Grace. Sent the day of the meeting, it read: "The underlying AAC report does not clearly differentiate between policy recommendations and programmatic and personnel issues. For this reason, language requiring an 'implementation plan' blurs the line between council-manager authority."
Back in chambers, discussion centered on the concept of "programmatic" powers to develop and implement programs. Grace told council that pinpointing "what is programmatic versus what is policy is sometimes easy, sometimes not." Deciding which is "less of a legal discussion and more of a policy and administrative discussion." But seconds earlier, Grace seemed to vest those powers solely with Ott, saying "in essence, it depends on how the manager manages as to whether or not he believes a particular directive to be programmatic."
"The word 'programmatic' was problematic," Morrison told me afterward, noting "the word 'program' is not in the city charter, with regard to the city manager." Taking a more bullish approach to council's powers, she points to charter language – that "all powers of the city shall be vested" in council – as supporting her claim it's "absolutely within the council's authority and responsibility" to develop programs. Moreover, she says, "It almost seemed to be suggested by our legal department that it was the city manager's responsibility and authority to make the decision as to ... what was under his authority or the council's authority. I think that that was possibly suggested by some of what was said, and that is a position I would certainly disagree with."
Item 40 passed; as all it does is develop an implementation plan, Mayor Lee Leffingwell voiced the consensus it's "basically a direction to go forward and develop a final product," one that will be further vetted by council. But some on the dais chafed at the discussion they'd just witnessed. "What is going on up here?" Randi Shade asked, saying the debate over the item's direction to Ott was "splitting hairs." And astutely, she wagered "the reason why there is this angst" is because staff and the differing animal constituencies "have not worked as well together as they could in the past." Reached later, Shade could "think of countless examples" where Ott worked with stakeholder groups on issues. And she feared the discussion obfuscated the larger issue of animal welfare.
Mike Martinez was characteristically blunt, saying: "If the city charter doesn't allow us to direct the city manager to sit down and work with people, then we have a serious problem with our charter. It just blows me away. ... It's very simple: the council reserves the right and the authority to direct the city manager to implement programs, to create programs, and even be specific. "I'll be supporting this motion," he concluded, "and if we need to do a charter amendment in a few years, I'll support that too."
By coincidence, the day after the meeting, the city auditor issued a response to a question previously posed by Morrison: How common is Austin's city attorney arrangement, under which the office reports to the city manager (as opposed to, say, the council)? Of the nation's 50 largest cities, only 19 have Austin's council-manager form of government, and of those 19, only three city attorneys – Austin's included – report to the city manager. After last week's constitutional crisis in miniature, those numbers should be on everyone's minds in City Hall.
Deliver your opinion on Twitter: @CityHallHustle.

AAC Recommendations to City Council to Reduce Killing of Homeless Animals

2009-11-09T10:23:00.000-08:00

City of Austin Animal Advisory Commission
Report to Council Regarding Recommendations

Dear Mayor and Council Members,

On January 15, 2009, you passed a resolution observing that the “City of Austin has a long-standing goal of ending the euthanization of adoptable pets at its animal shelter, but we have much to do to meet this goal,” and directing us “to evaluate and make recommendations on policies and programs proven to be effective at reducing the killing of homeless animals, including, but not limited to, policies and programs related to reducing the intake, and increasing live outcomes of shelter animals.” We have dedicated five Commission meetings to implementing your directive, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this very important subject.

Report Summary:

It is our conclusion, that with a renewed focus on and dedication to life-saving solutions, Austin’s Town Lake Animal Center could save as many as—or more than—ninety percent of animals that enter the shelter within eighteen months. Austin is a progressive community of animal lovers who overwhelmingly support our city’s lost and homeless pets. The City of Austin, along with non-profit organizations like Emancipet, the Austin Humane Society, Austin Pets Alive!, Animal Trustees of Austin, FixAustin.org, the ASPCA and countless others, have dedicated tremendous resources towards improving the outlook for homeless dogs and cats. If the City’s shelter rigorously implements the proven programs and policies we detail in this letter, Austin can and should quickly join the ranks of America’s “No Kill” communities.

I. RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCREASE LIVE OUTCOMES

A. Comprehensive Adoption Program

Town Lake Animal Center should immediately design and implement a comprehensive program to increase adoptions of impounded animals. This program should include:

1. Off-site adoption locations throughout the City and County staffed seven days a week in high-traffic areas. This is a core life-saving program of highest importance to reducing Austin’s kill rate and can be expected to save several thousand additional lives each year;

2. Mechanisms (such as a partnership with EmanciPET) to increase the capacity of the shelter to make more impounded animals available and ready for adoption;

3. Employing training techniques to solve treatable behavioral issues in impounded cats and dogs;

4. Ending the option of killing any healthy and non-aggressive animal while cages or kennels are unused;

5. Developing a plan to maximize the utility and usage of the Davenport Building and existing shelter structures in compliance with the Council’s October 2007 directive; and,

6. Implementing a public-awareness campaign to educate the public about the adoptable and lovable nature of shelter animals (including establishing long and short-term media partnerships).

Each of these programs, if implemented, should be anticipated to increase the number of impounded dogs and cats adopted from Austin’s animal shelter. To maximize live outcomes and avoid budgetary increases, staff should train and trust volunteers to conduct core life-saving programs like off-site adoptions, behavioral training, and public relations. Staff should also work with non-profit groups like EmanciPET and Animal Trustees of Austin to find ways to become more efficient in making animals ready for adoption.

B. Large-Scale Volunteer Foster Program

Austin’s animal shelter should design and implement a large-scale volunteer foster program to immediately increase shelter capacity in order to save more lives. In a progressive community like Austin, it is an achievable goal that no healthy kitten or puppy should be euthanized as a result of being too young for adoption. The shelter management should train and trust volunteers to play a core life-saving role in fostering dogs and cats. A foster program on the scale of other communities should be our goal. Volunteers in Charlottesville, Virginia, fostered 1,700 animals in 2007 in a community of roughly 100,000 residents. Said another way, about one animal was fostered for every 60 residents in the community. If TLAC implemented a foster program to the same scale, over 11,500 animals would be fostered—more than the number of animals predicted to be euthanized at the shelter this year. Foster programs can be cost-effective and revenue-neutral because fosters pay for food and shelter and the City retains adoption fees (and avoids disposal costs) for every additional life saved.

II. RECOMMENDATIONS TO DECREASE SHELTER INTAKE

A. Reduce the Euthanasia of Owned Animals

One of the key ways to reduce shelter killing is to increase the number of already-owned animals being returned to their homes. The shelter should do this in three ways:

1. Replicate the policies of cities (like Reno, Nevada) that have significantly higher return-to-owner rates and implement policies designed to train Animal Control and Austin Police Department officers to identify additional opportunities to return animals to their homes. Efforts should include outfitting officers with microchip scanners, and engaging the community where a dog or cat is found. Microchip scanners can be placed in all fire stations so lost pets can be identified and returned to owners. All available efforts should be made to return already-owned animals (whether indicated by condition of animal or presence of collar) to their owners.

2. Prepare an owner-surrender disclaimer to ensure that an owner surrendering his animal to TLAC fully understand the chances of the animal being adopted or killed. The disclaimer should clearly indicate the number of animals killed in the prior year, and shelter staff should read the disclaimer to persons contemplating surrendering their pet.

3. Provide resources, such as a Pet Safety Net Hotline and owner counseling, to provide alternative solutions to owners contemplating pet surrender. The shelter should partner with the City’s 311 service, the Statesman Inside Line, the ASPCA, and/or the Denver Hotline to help owners solve routine problems before they lead to owner surrenders.

B. Reduce Feral-Cat Euthanasia

There is no reason to kill a healthy, feral cat in the City’s animal shelter. Other communities throughout the United States have demonstrated success in dramatically reducing feral-cat intake through aggressive trap-neuter-release programs. The shelter should partner with rescue groups, other non-profits, and volunteers to implement and fund the program. In addition, the City should help rescue groups maintain feral cat colonies by setting up food donation sites, educating the public, and coordinating the purchasing and distribution of food.

C. High-Volume, Free and Low-Cost Spay/Neuter

The City shelter should maintain its efforts to help EmanciPET and Animal Trustees of Austin provide free and low-cost spay/neuter services. It is estimated that eighty percent of Austin’s pet owners already spay and neuter their pets, and cost is the primary reason other owners do not do so. The City should continue its efforts to promote spay/neuter in order to continue reducing shelter intake. Shelter staff should also work with the veterinary community to design partner programs to reduce shelter intake.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRUCTURAL CHANGES TO ENHANCE LIFESAVING

We recognize that saving the lives of our community’s lost and homeless pets is about more than specific programs. It is also about the overall objectives and management of animal-services tasks. Accordingly, we also recommend that the City of Austin:

A. Revise the Mission of Animal Services

The City Council should revise the goals and objectives of Austin’s Animal Services to reflect Council’s clear directive to reduce the killing of lost and homeless pets by increasing live outcomes and reducing shelter intake. The Council should formally adopt a goal of saving 90% of impounded animals, a goal that has proven reachable in communities all across the United States. In addition, additional performance measurements should be included in TLAC’s monthly and annual reports. For example, reports should include the number of animals adopted at TLAC off-site adoptions, the number of animals fostered in TLAC’s foster program, and the number of animals transferred to each partner program that rescues ten or more animals annually.

B. Ensure a Compassionate Management and Staff

The City Manager should ensure that the Animal Services Department is fully onboard with the Council’s new directive to make Austin a “No Kill” City by saving 90% of impounded animals. Shelter management and staff should clearly identify and implement the Council’s goals of increasing live outcomes and reducing shelter intake. Any employees of the shelter who reject the Council’s directives either through disagreement or lack of effort should be removed or reassigned.

C. Public Involvement and Candor

In order for Austin to become a “No Kill” City, Austin’s shelter must engage the pubic, trust the public, and repeatedly ask for its assistance. This includes galvanizing adopters and volunteers and asking for donations and fosters. Rather than seeking to blame the public for the pet “problem,” the shelter should ask the public to be the “solution.” In addition, the shelter should aim to be candid with the public at all times, including being honest about the shelter’s kill rate. Finally, the shelter should completely revamp its website, providing (1) much more information about each animal in its care (including where a stray animal was picked up, personality traits if known, etc.), (2) candor about the number of animals killed at the shelter, and (3) opportunities to help reduce the unnecessary killing of sheltered animals.

D. Explore Outsourcing Possibilities

The City Manager should explore the possibility of outsourcing. Private partners, rescue groups, and non-profits should be permitted to bid on services (such as adoption, veterinary care, etc.) that they may be able to perform at substantially reduced costs.

IV. CONCLUSION

We sincerely thank you, the Austin City Council, for giving us the opportunity to provide our recommendations for the implementation of policies and programs that will increase live outcomes and reduce shelter intake at Town Lake Animal Center. We firmly believe that with the right policies and programs in place, Austin can and should quickly become a national leader in animal sheltering—saving the lives of 90% or more of our community’s impounded dogs and cats.

Come to City Hall on November 10, 6:30 pm

2009-11-05T17:44:00.000-08:00

A LOT has been going on this month - 2 Council Resolutions (including the one today about implementing the AAC recommendations), an exciting Community Action meeting on October 27, groundbreaking Statesman editorials about No Kill, unfortunate break-ins at ATA's clinic, a lawsuit about sick and healthy animals housed in the same building at TLAC, use of voucher program instead of AHS Clinic in December for feral cats, discussions about use of the current shelter for an Adoption Center and, of course, the ambitious and exciting Austin Pets Alive proposal for partnership with the City to save more animals who are currently caught in the "bottleneck" at TLAC.

We need to talk about all of these issues and how to take advantage of the great energy going on right now to make the best thing possible happen for our city's homeless pets.

Thanks to sponsorship from Council Member Cole and help from her staff member, Tara, we have a great meeting room - the staff bullpen - which should allow us to discuss the above issues for two hours - 6:30 - 8:30 pm.

KXAN: Austin moves toward no-kill animal city

2009-11-05T17:37:00.000-08:00

KXAN video:
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/austin_moves_toward_no_kill_animal_city

Austin moves toward no-kill animal city
City could reach 90 percent save rate in 18 months
Updated: Thursday, 05 Nov 2009, 2:32 PM CST
Matt Flener

AUSTIN (KXAN) - Austin's City Council took a major step Thursday to make Austin a "no-kill" city for animals.
The council told City Manager Marc Ott to save more dogs and cats from death at the Town Lake Animal Shelter, and the action puts more pressure on city staff, after not reaching its "no-kill" goal in 2002.
The city's Animal Advisory Commission sent a report to the council earlier this year saying the council should adopt a policy of saving 90 percent of impounded animals at the shelter.
Shelter employees put to death nearly 10,000 animals in 2008.
The Animal Advisory Commission said the City of Austin should consider public and private partnerships with various pet organizations and rescue groups around the city.
The recommendations also include directives to staff adoption centers around the city seven days a week and providing more low-cost spay and neuter services.
Another recommendation includes giving police officers microchip scanners and placing those in fire stations as well.
Animal shelter staff would also be required to tell owners dropping off their pets about the high possibility of adoption or death.

Fox News: City Council votes 7-0 in favor of No Kill resolution

2009-11-05T17:33:00.000-08:00

Fox News video:
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpp/news/local/110509-city-looks-to-pass-no-kill-resolution

City Council Passes "No Kill" Resolution

Updated: Thursday, 05 Nov 2009, 5:42 PM CST
Published : Thursday, 05 Nov 2009, 10:15 AM CST

Austin, TX (myFOXaustin.com) - The City Council passed a resolution Thursday that will mandate Town Lake Animal Center to implement the policies and programs recommended by the Animal Advisory Commission to make Austin a "No Kill" city. The recommendations brought forth to the counci will give a clear plan to achieve a 90% save rate at Town Lake Animal Shelter within 18 months by changing some existing policies and implementing new programs.
The Animal Advisory Commission reported to the Mayor and City Council back in January their final recommendations in the hopes of reducing the killing of homeless animals and reducing the intake of animals at shelters.
Some of the recommedations include:
1.Off-site adoption throughout the City and County staffed 7 days a week in high traffic areas.
2.Partnerships with EmanciPet to help increase the capicity of the shelter to make more impounded animals ready for adoption.
3.Employing training techniques to help resolve treatable behaviorial issues in adoptable cats and dogs.
4.End the killing of any healthy or non-aggressive dog while kennels or cages are unused.
5.Developing a plan to maximize the utility and usage of the Davenport Building and existing shelter structures in compliance with the Council’s October 2007 directive
6.Implementing a public-awareness campaign to educate the public about the adoptable and lovable nature of shelter animals.

In addition to these recommendations, the Commission also used case examples from various cities throughout the U.S. to show how they worked within their policies and progrmas to become “No Kill” communities. Organizations such as EmanciPet, Austin Humane Society, Fixaustin.org, AustinPetsAlive and ASPCA all are pushing for Austin to quickly join the ranks of America's "No Kill" communities.

Austin's four-legged friends await moral progress

2009-11-04T19:35:00.000-08:00

EDITORIAL: AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, November 05, 2009
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/11/05/1105pets_edit.html

A favorite expression of animal welfare groups in Austin is one attributed to spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi: "One can measure the greatness and the moral progress of a nation by looking at how it treats its animals."

Today, the Austin City Council will be tested on its moral progress regarding dogs and cats as it decides whether to pass a resolution adopting recommendations that would provide for better treatment of animals.

The Austin Animal Advisory Commission is recommending a comprehensive adoption and foster care program for animals that end up at the Town Lake Animal Center. Approving the recommendations would move Austin closer to its goal of becoming a no-kill city.
For more than a decade, different councils have talked about, but not followed through on, making the shelter a no-kill facility. The deadline for that goal — 2002 — has come and gone.
The choice before the council is to do nothing and therefore allow the shelter to continue to rely on euthanizing animals to control Travis County's animal population or adopt the reasonable and affordable recommendations of the animal commission, whose members are appointed by the City Council.
Ten thousand animals were euthanized last year at the Town Lake Animal Center. We're ready for some moral progress.

Council resolution could make Town Lake Animal Shelter a 'no kill' facility

2009-11-04T16:22:00.000-08:00

View KVUE news story video at:
http://www.kvue.com/news/local/Council-resolution-could-make-town-lake-animal-shelter-a-no-kill-facility-68969892.html

by QUITA CULPEPPER / KVUE News

Posted on November 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Updated yesterday at 5:22 PM
The Town Lake Animal Shelter was supposed to become a "no kill" facility by 2002 -- that didn't happen.
Now, a new resolution being heard by the Austin City Council on Thursday would have City Manager Marc Ott work with the Austin Animal Advisory Commission.
The goal is to find new policies and procedures to drastically reduce the number of healthy dogs and cats killed at the shelter.
According to the commission, many strays picked up by the city are put down after three days -- animals given up by their owners may be euthanized immediately.
Scores of puppies and kittens with minor health concerns are also put to sleep.
Close to 10,000 animals were put to sleep at the shelter in 2008.
One recommendation would be to establish a comprehensive adoption program -- for example, having locations throughout the city and county staffed seven days a week.
The commission also recommends ending the option of killing healthy and non-aggressive animals while cages and kennels go unused.
Commission members also want the city to create a large scale volunteer foster program -- the goal being as more dogs are put in foster care, shelter capacity would increase.
The council resolution directs the City Manager's Office to present a plan to save more animals at the shelter by March 2010.

Council resolution could make Town Lake Animal Shelter a 'no kill' facility

2009-11-04T16:08:00.000-08:00

by QUITA CULPEPPER / KVUE News

Posted on November 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Updated yesterday at 5:22 PM
The Town Lake Animal Shelter was supposed to become a "no kill" facility by 2002 -- that didn't happen.
Now, a new resolution being heard by the Austin City Council on Thursday would have City Manager Marc Ott work with the Austin Animal Advisory Commission.
The goal is to find new policies and procedures to drastically reduce the number of healthy dogs and cats killed at the shelter.
According to the commission, many strays picked up by the city are put down after three days -- animals given up by their owners may be euthanized immediately.
Scores of puppies and kittens with minor health concerns are also put to sleep.
Close to 10,000 animals were put to sleep at the shelter in 2008.
One recommendation would be to establish a comprehensive adoption program -- for example, having locations throughout the city and county staffed seven days a week.
The commission also recommends ending the option of killing healthy and non-aggressive animals while cages and kennels go unused.
Commission members also want the city to create a large scale volunteer foster program -- the goal being as more dogs are put in foster care, shelter capacity would increase.
The council resolution directs the City Manager's Office to present a plan to save more animals at the shelter by March 2010.

Community Action Meeting on October 27

2009-10-28T04:45:00.000-07:00

Coverage of the meeting on Fox.
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpp/news/local/102709_Groups_Urge_Changes_to_Animal_Shelter

Unfortunately, Fox did not mention the unanimous vote by 125+ participants in favor of:
1. asking City Council to adopt the Animal Advisory Commission recommendations on ways to increase live outcomes.
2. asking the City to approve the Austin Pets Alive proposal for a partnership with the City to increase live outcomes.

Pat Valls-Trelles

Creature Consciousness

2009-10-19T17:20:00.000-07:00

Animal studies tests the boundary between human and animal—and between academic and advocate

http://chronicle.com/article/Creature-Consciousness/48804/

By Jennifer Howard
Critics of zoos usually compare them to prisons. Ralph R. Acampora, an associate professor of philosophy at Hofstra University, thinks zoo confinement is closer to pornography. "Both participants in pornography and inhabitants of zoos are slaves to other people's desire for viewing, for sight," he explains. All "have their real nature concealed through their exposure," with zoo animals "reduced to their shapes or colors or stereotypical behaviors."
Acampora's line of thought blends theoretical inquiry with strongly held ethical concerns about how we humans interact with nonhuman animals. He and other philosophers devoted to applied ethics—traditionally a marginalized enterprise, at least in American philosophy departments—are part of a growing number of humanities and social-science scholars involved in the field of animal studies. Bringing together many different species of academic research, animal studies has become a force to be reckoned with in philosophy, literary and cultural studies, history, and other fields with a traditionally humanistic bent.
"All too human": For these scholars, the phrase sums up the limitations of their disciplines. Why, they ask, should it be all about us, when we are only one link in the great chain of being? "Humans are animals, too, and a lot of our existence is shaped by our evolutionary history, our biology, our circadian rhythms, the very narrow climate bandwidth in which we flourish," says Cary Wolfe, a professor of English at Rice University and one of the leading theorists in animal studies.
Spurred on by a shift in consciousness that has been going on for several decades, beginning with the environmental and social-justice movements of the 1960s and 70s, scholars like Wolfe and Acampora are finding new ways to tackle "the question of the animal"—or, more accurately, the flock of questions that circle around the term "animal." These scholars want to break down the categories and distinctions that have defined how we think about our relationship to everything that is not us. Some of them see it as nothing less than a revolution in how to think and how to live.
Related Content
Moral in Tooth and Claw
A Theory of Critters
Animals Reconsidered
Presses, Journals, and Meetings Buzz With Animal Studies
"What you have is a whole new set of theoretical paradigms that cut across what were previously separate and discrete ontological domains," Wolfe says. "The question is, How does the nature of thought itself have to change? How does the nature of reading have to change in the face of this new object of study?"
Taken far enough, animal studies demolishes what Wolfe calls "the fundamental mechanism of humanism": the insistence on putting the human subject at the center of things. Humans' pride of place is reinforced by the separation of "human" and "animal" into separate, even opposed, categories. That model has prevailed, at least in the West, since the Enlightenment.
Dismantling that model takes animal-studies scholars in different directions depending on their home disciplines and the mix of theory and advocacy that they bring to their work. For historians and sociologists, it might mean investigating the roles assigned to animals in 19th-century Britain, for instance, or the use of canines as forced labor in today's dogfighting rings. For scholars with literary, cultural-studies, or philosophy pedigrees, animal-studies work clusters around questions of category and subjectivity—how to move beyond the anthropocentric outlook and anthropomorphizing tendencies of humanism in theory and in practice. Environmentalists and legal scholars have their own ecological or ethical or jurisprudential agendas focused on animals. (For scientists, of course, the phrase "animal studies" usually invokes laboratory experiments involving animals.) If there's one thread that ties together practitioners of animal studies, it's that the old ways of thinking about humans and (other) animals must be discarded or transcended.
Some animal-focused scholars in the humanities and social sciences describe what they do as "human-animal studies," but that term preserves the idea of a divide between "us" (humans) and "them" (all other beings). One school of thought considers animal studies a subset of posthumanism, a movement associated with Donna Haraway's 1985 essay, "A Cyborg Manifesto," which used the metaphor of the human-machine hybrid to push feminism away from its reliance on essentialist arguments.
From a posthumanist perspective, there's no reason that the questions raised by animal studies "have to be limited to carbon-based life forms," says Wolfe, whose forthcoming book, What Is Posthumanism? (University of Minnesota Press, December), explores what might be achieved by rejecting such "classic humanist divisions of self and other, mind and body, society and nature, human and animal, organic and technological," according to the publisher's description.
The book is part of the Posthumanities series Wolfe edits for the University of Minnesota Press, which in 2007 published Haraway's book When Species Meet. (Read an interview with Haraway, Page B12.)
Such boundary crossing is characteristic of animal studies. Many of its scholars, especially in philosophy and literary and cultural studies, feel a debt to Jacques Derrida. The French philosopher's essay "The Animal That Therefore I Am (More to Follow)" is "arguably the single most important event in the brief history of animal studies," Wolfe wrote in a 2009 article for the journal PMLA. In the essay, Derrida writes: "There is no animal in the general singular, separated from man by a single indivisible limit. We have to envisage the existence of 'living creatures' whose plurality cannot be assembled within the single figure of an animality that is simply opposed to humanity." (Based on lectures given by Derrida in France in 1997, the article appeared in Critical Inquiry in 2002, translated by David Wills, who has also contributed a book, Dorsality, to Wolfe's Posthumanities series.)
Derrida's work "has almost single-handedly made the question interesting for people in lots of disciplines," says Matthew Calarco, an assistant professor of philosophy at California State University at Fullerton and the author of Zoologies: The Question of the Animal From Heidegger to Derrida (Columbia University Press, 2008).
Animal studies holds a special appeal for philosophers, like Calarco, who want to pursue ethics. Even with Derrida in his corner, a philosopher with an ethical bent begins at a professional disadvantage. "In the United States, the most powerful departments with the most prestige focus on M&E—metaphysics and epistemology," says Calarco. Subfields of applied ethics such as animal ethics or environmental ethics are considered minor subspecialties, he says. "If you want to write about anything hands-on, it's just considered weak."
So a philosopher like Calarco often looks to scholars in other fields as interlocutors. "If you're going in the animal direction, there's been a rich set of conversations going on throughout the humanities," he says. "Sociology, anthropology, comparative literature, religious studies—those are the ones where I see the most overlap."
Even in philosophy, though, the climate for such investigations is warming. Calarco has noted a new tendency within both the analytic and the Continental traditions, the two big strands of the field, "to start questioning a certain anthropocentric bias." In the past five or six years, for instance, people including Graham Harman, a professor of philosophy at the American University in Cairo, and Ray Brassier, a professor of philosophy at the American University of Beirut, have gotten interested in object-oriented philosophy and what Calarco calls object-object relationships. Harman, for instance, is engaged in what is sometimes referred to as speculative realism. In his book Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics (re.press, 2009), he writes that he "would even propose a new philosophical discipline called 'speculative psychology' devoted to ferreting out the specific psychic reality of earthworms, dust, armies, chalk, and stone." Such thinking (or rethinking) is congenial to animal-studies scholars who want to break apart the idea of the human subject as the center of things.
Thinkers on both the analytic and Continental sides "are beginning to say that this primacy we give to the human-mind relationship to the world needs to be displaced," Calarco says. "There's a kind of implicit anthropomorphism that dominates philosophy, and that is being attacked from different angles."
For Hofstra's Ralph Acampora, the goal is "trying to build a bigger sense of 'we.'" Instead of anthropomorphizing animals, he wants "to zoomorphize humans." He's interested in "a philosophy of body, what it means to be the sort of creature that's vulnerable to sickness and disease and death." Thinking about how we share such fundamental circumstances with other animals, Acampora says, is "where people's moral intuitions kick in."
Acampora is the author of Corporal Compassion: Animal Ethics and Philosophy of Body (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006), and he has edited a collection of essays, Zootopian Visions of Animal Encounter: Farewell to Noah (Lexington Books, forthcoming in 2010), which focuses on the issues that zoos raise.
Like many scholars who feel the pull of animal studies, Acampora sees it as a way to combine an interest in theoretical questions with personal principles about how to live. As a child, he recalls, he grew up with many animals in the house. In college, he became involved in animal-rights advocacy. That intensified during his time as a graduate student at Emory University, where he protested research on primates. He helped organize a national animal-rights march on Washington in 1990.
"A good portion of animal studies does have an advocacy background," Acampora says. That can create tensions between scholars who embrace advocacy and those who believe in more dispassionate intellectual inquiry.
Acampora feels comfortable among the advocates. "I no longer feel embarrassed or apologetic about having commitments," he says. "Scholarship is not just concept chess." He says he remains open to opposing arguments but points out that "nobody puts a child psychologist in the doghouse for being a child advocate."
Leaving aside the problem of advocacy, there's no agreement on how to approach "the animal question" intellectually, either. For a scholar like Harriet Ritvo, a professor of history at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, animal studies means different things to different disciplines.
"There really is a difference between the way historians tend to approach this kind of topic and the way people in literary and cultural studies and philosophy do," she says. "Animal studies is more in the province of literary-cultural studies. Historians, myself included, participate in it, but we don't own the label in quite the same way."
A philosopher or a cultural-studies scholar might be more inclined to tackle categories: what "the animal" means. "Grouping all animals as one kind of 'other' in a sense reifies the stark division between people and everything else," Ritvo says. "Historians are addicted to particulars." Her book The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age (Harvard University Press, 1987), was an early example of a historian delving into "the animal question" as it played out in a multitude of ways in a specific time and place.
In the book, Ritvo connects Victorian Britons' concerns about social roles and status to their thinking about animals, including rhetoric about stock-breeding, hunting, the humane treatment of animals, and menageries and zoos. "In each case she demonstrates the ways in which animals produced and reinforced the boundaries between social classes and racial groups," according to a review in the journal Environmental History. Hence the breeding of prize cattle "reinforced the traditional hierarchies of rural society," while anti-cruelty legislation "was used to define and control working- and lower-class behavior," the review said.
That kind of work has really taken off among historians in the last 10 to 15 years, Ritvo says. "When I started writing this kind of thing, people thought it was funny. Now they don't. It has become, in many disciplines, one of a range of subjects that you can take up."
At the curricular level, courses with some kind of animal-studies emphasis are popping up almost everywhere, in law schools and in literature departments. But students cannot yet get a Ph.D. in animal studies.
Michigan State University is edging closer. It has had an animal-studies graduate specialization for about a year now. Linda Kalof, a professor of sociology, founded and directs the program. "We are the first doctoral specialization in animal studies anywhere in the world," she says. "We focus primarily on the question of how animals figure in human lives and how humans figure in animal lives, from a social-science and humanities perspective." The program attracts faculty members and students from beyond those areas, too. Professors from the school of veterinary medicine and from the law school take part, as do students from zoology and animal science as well as sociology, anthropology, and American studies.
From the outset, Kalof wanted the program to include a range of disciplines and politics. The toughest part, she says, was convincing people from the agricultural school that the program wasn't all about animal-rights advocacy.
"We have all ideologies represented," Kalof observes: scholars who support experimentation on animals and those who lobby against it, for instance. "We advocate all views because we think that conversation needs to be held in an intellectual environment and not on the blogs of particular individuals railing against PETA or against factory farming."
That leads to some complex conversations in the classroom. One of Kalof's research topics is the exploitation of dogs as labor—in dogfighting rings, for instance. But she remembers one student who grew up around cockfighting in Mexico and who was able to give his classmates a sense of a cultural tradition that supports such uses of animals.
Kalof may have succeeded in achieving a balance among advocacy and other perspectives in her program, but she thinks that any attempt to define animal studies more formally—through a scholarly society, for instance—runs the risk of excluding those who are not animal advocates. "I would very much like to see a professional society that is truly interdisciplinary and would not exclude folks on ideological preferences or eating preferences," she says. "The advocacy component may be the very thing that ghettoizes animal studies in the end."
Special sections or program committees within scholarly societies have been one means by which animal studies has been developing as a discipline. The American Sociological Association, for instance, has an Animals and Society section, whose mission is "to encourage and support the development of theory, research, and teaching about the complex relationships that exist between humans and other animals." Here, too, one hears a note of advocacy: "In the process, it is anticipated that the light we shed on these issues will increase the well-being of both humans and other animals."
As animals studies draws more scholars, the question of where to house it—what kind of institutional presence it ought to have—becomes more pressing. Measured by research activity, including book series and journals that explore human-nonhuman interactions from different angles, animal studies "is doing quite well," says Kenneth Shapiro, editor of the journal Society and Animals, which has been published since the early 1990s. "Where we're not doing so well," he says, is in developing "an institutional structure or an institutional presence for the field." Shapiro is executive director of the Animals and Society Institute, an independent organization whose mission is "advancing the status of animals in public policy and promoting the study of human-animal relationships."
The group has been talking with a handful of universities about setting up a more academic-focused institute where scholars interested in animal studies could find resources and support. Once established, the center "could spawn some kind of professional organization that's a resource for these scholars," says Shapiro.
One of the field's strengths—its truly interdisciplinary nature—is a double-edged sword, institutionally and intellectually. Its appeal relies in part on transcending disciplines, but universities are traditionally organized by discipline.
"Certainly the game would be easier if we were in, say, sociology," Shapiro says. "This is more creative, more challenging. That's what the field is. You could search for one field that would be the best home for it, but you'd lose a great deal." He hopes that animal studies will follow the path to acceptance taken by women's studies and black studies.
Other scholars, though, see risks along that road. "There's a danger of a kind of genericization and a kind of ghettoization," says Cary Wolfe. He would not like to see animal studies become "just another flavor of the month."
Matthew Calarco also believes that the risk of being sidelined is real. In a sense, the field still "doesn't know if it exists," he says. "There certainly are no jobs in it, and there are no full-blown departments." Calarco worries that "there's a general trend for it to become another one of these minority studies. I hate that phrase, but I don't know what else to call it."
The idea of finding a comfortable home within academe does not really fit with the most revolutionary goals of animal studies anyway. Take the "question of the animal" seriously, and "it starts to destabilize traditional boundaries of consideration—who counts and why we think they count," Calarco explains. "When you start thinking along these lines and you push and you push and you push, ethics is going to explode."
Taken far enough, animal studies ultimately points to "a revision of our most basic social institutions and our most fundamental intellectual assumptions," Calarco says. "There are no guideposts. You're on very experimental terrain."n
Jennifer Howard is a staff reporter for The Chronicle.

Draft resolution re AAC scope, 10/22/09

2009-10-18T22:21:00.000-07:00

Resolution NO.

WHEREAS, the City of Austin’s boards and commissions serve as conduits to stakeholder groups, citizens and the City Council to discuss and strategize about City of Austin policies; and

WHEREAS, Texas State Health and Safety Code §823.005 requires the establishment of an animal advisory committee in municipalities that operate an animal shelter; and

WHEREAS, the Animal Advisory Commission was established to serve the City Council as an advisory resource on animal welfare policies; and

WHEREAS, respectful partnerships between the City of Austin, private citizens, and private agencies can result in significant beneficial animal welfare outcomes; NOW THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Austin:

The City Manager is hereby directed to prepare an ordinance amending Chapter 2-1-102 of the City Code that changes subsection (E) to:

The Commission shall:
advise the City Council on animal welfare policies, except on issues that remain within the City Manager’s sole purview, such as staffing;
advise the City Council on budget priorities identified by the Commission and the community;
promote collaboration between the City and private citizens, institutions, and agencies interested in or conducting activities relating to animal welfare in the city;
identify and implement proactive, creative approaches to engage and facilitate communication within the animal welfare community; and
foster and assist the development of animal welfare programs in the city.

The City Manager is further directed to amend Chapter 2-1-102 of the City Code that adds subsection (F):

The Commission may study, advise, and report on policy recommendations it deems effective to promote animal welfare outcomes consistent with City goals and objectives as outlined by City Council and the City Manager.

Spay/neuter and live outcomes resolution, 9/24/09

2009-10-18T22:12:00.000-07:00

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/edims/document.cfm?id=131028

RESOLUTION NO. 20090924-070
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted the goal of becoming a no-kill city, and
WHEREAS, increasing the capacity for spay neuter services at Town Lake
Animal Center for animals leaving the shelter would help to achieve that goal; and
WHEREAS, spaying and neutering pets reduces the number of stray animals in
future, reducing costs at the Town Lake Animal Center and reducing the need for
future use of euthanasia in roughly a one-to-one ratio,
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:
The City Manager is hereby directed to develop a plan to increase the frequency
and number of spay/neuter surgery services to:
1. provide service seven days a week without decreasing the number of
surgeries done during the existing service days, and
2. thereby increase the number of spay and neuter surgeries by 2000 surgeries
per year, as well as live outcomes consistent with the plan suggested in
budget question response #79, Fiscal Year 2010.
To present the plan to City Council by November 5, 2009, including any necessary
budget amendments.
ADOPTED: September 24 . 2009 ATTEST:
Shirley AJ Gentry
City Clerk

Budget Question # 79 (CM Spelman)

2009-10-18T22:09:00.000-07:00

2009-2010 PROPOSED BUDGET
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
DEPARTMENT: Health & Human Services
REQUEST NO.: 79
REQUESTED BY: Spelman
DATE REQUESTED: 7/30/09
REQUEST:
• What is the maximum number of spays or neuters that the TLAC vets (not the MASH unit) can do in a day?
• What is the average number of spays/neuters that the TLAC vet does in a day?
• Is it possible to increase the number of in-house spaying/neutering that the City does, potentially to the level of doing all RTOs/adoptees/rescue transfers? If so, what would that cost?
RESPONSE:
1) The maximum number of surgeries that can be scheduled per day is 20 animals. Limitations include cage space for recovery, only one surgery table, and one prep area. The prep area is used for treatments, emergencies, and medical work-ups after the surgery schedule has been completed.
2) The average number of surgeries per day for FY 2008 was 17.
3) In-house sterilizations could be increased by providing staffing for surgeries to be performed on Saturdays and Sundays, fully utilizing the surgery suite capacity. This would provide approximately 2,000 additional surgery slots and would increase total capacity from 3,600 to about 5,600 surgeries. The costs for this enhancement would be:
2 part-time vet tech leads @ 20 hours each - $33,700
16 hours of vet time - $26,890
Total Cost - $60,590
To sterilize all live outcome types, we would need capacity for approximately 11,000 surgeries. We could achieve this by implementing the above option and contracting for the remainder of the surgeries. The estimated cost for these additional surgeries would be $270,000 (5,400 surgeries@ average of $50 per surgery.) Total cost of these two options would be $330,590.

Statesman comes out strong for No Kill

2009-09-29T16:33:00.000-07:00

COMMENTARY: ALBERTA PHILLIPS
To make Austin a no-kill city, Town Lake Animal Center must increase adoptions
Alberta Phillips,
AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Every day the Town Lake Animal Center kills cats and dogs largely to make space for new arrivals. It does not pause its euthanasia machine on weekends or holidays, though it limits the killing when the center is closed to animals that are sick or suffering. Nearly half — about 48 percent — of animals that are put down are classified as "unnecessary euthanasia."
Those are mostly healthy pups and kitties whose only offense was that no one came to claim or adopt them. No group rescued them. During the past year, the center euthanized 6,362 animals of which 3,036 were unnecessary.

That is too many. Given Austin's goal of becoming a no-kill city, I thought there would be a vigorous effort on adoption. But I was disappointed to learn that the city will continue to rely heavily on the status quo — spaying, neutering and putting down animals — to manage Austin and Travis County's pet population rather than ramping up adoption efforts.
As I reported previously, the city-run animal center has made tremendous progress in reducing its kill rate to about 32 percent. About two-thirds leave alive either through adoption or rescue groups. Just two years ago, the kill rate was 52 percent, meaning that animals had less than a 50-50 chance of leaving the place alive. Last week, the Austin City Council, led by Council Members Bill Spelman and Mike Martinez passed a resolution to expand spay and neuter services to weekends in a move that would treat 2,000 more dogs and cats.
A good move, but it won't in the short run reduce the center's kill rate. Clearly, the city needs a more vigorous adoption initiative. But those in charge of running the animal center have no plans to do that.

I asked Dorinda Pulliam why the center does not invest more in adoption efforts or why it does not divert money used to kill dogs and cats to the rescue groups that put them up for adoption? She is assistant director of the Austin-Travis County Health and Human Services Department that oversees the animal center.

"I'm not sure how to answer that," she said. "I think we have a good program. To give them money to take animals ... it's part of their mission to help us."

She talked about Austin's model animal programs, about not relying on government to fix the whole problem, and about striking a balance in which nonprofit rescue groups and Austin residents step up to fill more of the gap. But that avoids the question of why the center will not divert more of its $5.5 million budget (from our tax dollars and fees) to adoption efforts. Doing so would immediately affect the kill rate. And isn't that the goal?

It's a point not lost on Spelman, who said the center falls short when it comes to adoption. The center, Spelman said, should take pets to the people, showing them on weekends at public places around town to increase their chances of being adopted. That is a good idea. It is especially important, he said, because the animal center will lose visibility when it moves from its downtown location to a site in East Austin.

On the day that I recently visited the animal center, 15 dogs were on the kill list. There was a female pit bull mix and her male offspring. He jumped, yelped and played while she looked from the kennel with a cocked head in a stare my boxer gives when he is confused about my commands.

Twenty-four hours later, all but three of the 15 dogs had been put down. The three lucky ones were rescued by Austin Pets Alive.
I still remember them — some were still playful despite their ordeal. Others were listless or curled in fetal positions and obviously depressed. Twelve were injected with a lethal dose of phenobarbitol.

Local attorney and former Travis County Judge Bill Aleshire said the county and city have been too slow in reaching the no-kill goal, which has been talked about since 1997, when he was a member of the Travis County Commissioners Court.
"This heartless situation does not have to exist," he told me. "The city and county have plenty of money to implement a no-kill policy. They just chose to spend that money on bureaucracy instead."

To be fair, the animal center, which gets funding from the city and county, has dramatically improved its adoption rate since 1997. But its own figures prove how vital adoption is in decreasing the kill rate, along with spay and neuter services. In 1997, the center completed adoption for 8 percent of its animals. It put down 69 percent of center animals that year. This year, the center's adoption rate is 22 percent and its kill rate has dropped to 32 percent.
If Austin is going to be serious about reaching its no-kill goal, then it must get serious about adoption.

aphillips@statesman.com; 445-3655

Agenda for Tues. Sept. 29 Animal Issues Forum

2009-09-26T16:35:00.000-07:00

1. What's happening and what's coming up at Austin City Council?
a. Animal Welfare Summit
b. Adoption Center
c. S/N resolution and City Manager's plan (due November 5)

2. What's happening and what's coming up at the Animal Advisory Commission?
a. Donations Fund (October, November and December meetings)
b. Health and Safety Code (staff response to AAC question about using other city buildings to house sick animals)

3. What's happening with non-profit animal organizations?
Still working on this. Email me at patvt5 at gmail dot com if you have "happenings" you'd like to talk about or hear about.

City Council Adopts Resolution to Increase Spay/Neuter Services

2009-09-24T15:54:00.000-07:00

At today's City Council meeting (9/24/09), Council Member Spelman (sponsor) and Council Member Morrison (co-sponsor) proposed a resolution directing the City Manager to develop a plan to increase the number of spay/neuter surgeries by 2000 surgeries per year. Mayor Pro Tem Martinez added an amendment related to increasing live outcomes. The amended resolution passed.

The draft of the original resolution (without the amendment) and the fiscal memo are posted on the City website and read as follows:

WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted the goal of becoming a no-kill city, and
WHEREAS, increasing the capacity for spay neuter services at Town Lake Animal Center for animals leaving the shelter would help to achieve that goal,
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:
The City Manager is hereby directed to develop a plan to increase the frequency and number of spay/neuter surgery services to:
1. provide service seven days a week without decreasing the number of surgeries done during the existing service days, and

2. thereby increase the number of spay and neuter surgeries by 2000 surgeries per year, consistent with the plan suggested in budget question response #79, Fiscal Year 2010.
To present the plan to City Council by November 5, 2009, including any necessary budget amendments.

TO: Marc Ott, City Manager
FROM: Ed Van Eenoo, Budget Officer
DATE: September 24, 2009
SUBJECT: Fiscal Memo for Item #70

Item #70 on the September 24, 2009 Council Agenda is to approve a resolution directing the City Manager to develop a plan to increase the frequency and number of spay/neuter surgery services and present the plan to Council by November 5, 2009, including any necessary budget amendments.
At this time, this item has no fiscal or staffing impact. Staff from the Health and Human Services Department (HHSD) will be available to work on this item. Upon completion of plan, the details, including any fiscal or staffing impact, will be reported to Council.

Class at Southwestern U. "Going to the Dogs"

2009-09-23T12:15:00.000-07:00

Dogs teach students about real world
Southwestern University offers unique class
Updated: Thursday, 17 Sep 2009, 9:04 AM CDTPublished : Thursday, 17 Sep 2009, 5:35 AM CDT
Kate Weidaw
GEORGETOWN, Texas (KXAN) - A class at Southwestern University in Georgetown has gone to the dogs.
That's because the dogs are teaching freshman about life outside of the classroom.
"The idea of these classes is to segway between high school and college," said Dr. Laura Hobgood-Oster, professor of religion and environmental studies at Southwestern University.
The freshman seminar Hobgood-Oster is talking about is called "Going to the Dogs," and for this class, students are literally going to the dogs at the Georgetown Animal Shelter.
"You get to interact with the dogs," said Southwestern University freshman Hannah Brock. "It's not just sitting in a classroom."
Students are required to spend at least one hour a week volunteering, in addition to learning about dogs in the classroom. It might make some wonder, "What's the connection between dogs and freshman adjusting to life in college?"
"On the surface, it may seem like a trivial topic, but if you think about what dogs are, they have been associated with humans for the last 10- or 15,000 years," said Dr. Jimmy Smith, a professor of kinesiology at Southwestern University.
Smith and Laura Hobgood-Oster have been teaching the class for eight years and believe dogs can teach students a lot about the real world - like a dog that had to be surrendered due to a domestic violence case.
"They begin to see how we are interconnected and see what happens to humans, happens to dogs," said Smith.
Students are able to see the hardship of giving something up because you cannot afford it.
"Every family this guy ever knew is gone," said Smith.
And this class is about finding solutions for homeless dogs, like a great pyrenees that was surrendered by its owner.
"Hopefully a livestock dog group will be able to take that dog out of the shelter to open a run for another dog," said Hobgood-Oster.
And lets face it . Who can complain about a class that gives lots of love by just showing up?
The class also uses dogs to incorporate lessons on culture, environment and religion.

Agenda for Tuesday, September 29 Animal Issues Forum

2009-09-20T12:36:00.000-07:00

The agenda for the for the Tuesday, September 29 Animal Issues Forum has not been finalized, but here are some of the possible agenda items we have to choose from:

1. Do we need another Animal Welfare Summit?
City staff is planning another all-day Animal Welfare Summit to get community input on animal welfare programs in Austin. Do you think we need an all-day Animal Welfare Summit? If so, why? If not, why not? The Animal Advisory Commission (AAC) has not been included in planning the agenda for the Animal Welfare Summit. Does this make sense?

2. Adoption Center
What's happening with plans for an Adoption Center on Lady Bird Lake when the city-run shelter moves to Levander Loop? Mayor Lee Leffingwell (when he was Council Member Leffingwell) sponsored a resolution to keep the current shelter location site open as an Adoption Center. What has been done so far and what is being done to move forward on the Adoption Center?

3. Staff's proposed budget for next year's Donations Fund:
City staff have proposed a budget for expenditures out of the Donations Fund for next year. (Fiscal year 2010 begins October 1.) Thanks to Council Member Shade and the entire City Council's vote in favor of a resolution directing the AAC to review and make recommendations to Council, the AAC will review the City staff's proposal at its next meeting October 21. If you'd like to give your input to the AAC before or at the October 21 meeting, come to the Animal Issues Forum on September 29 to learn more about and discuss the staff's proposed budget. (You can also give input without coming to the forum, but you'll have less information.)

4. Health and Safety Code issues and lawsuit
At the September AAC meeting, there was a long discussion about the cleaning and other protocols relating that have an impact on the health (or lack thereof) of animals at TLAC. The AAC recommended looking into other City buildings that could be used to house sick animals. The AAC also discussed a lawsuit filed by Austin attorney Seth Smith, who made a presentation at the meeting describing the violations of the Health and Safety Code that he included in his lawsuit.

5. Coalition for a No Kill Austin
Austin Pets Alive has proposed the creation of a Coalition for a No Kill Austin. What's happening with that? Do you think it's a good idea? If so, how can you get involved?

Please send me your comments, if you have any. Thanks.
Pat Valls-Trelles
patvt5@gmail.com

Agenda for Monday, August 24 Animal Issues Forum

2009-08-21T11:17:00.000-07:00

Terrazas Public Library
1105 East César Chávez St.

6:30 - 6:45 Announcements
6:45 - 7:15 APD and Animal Cruelty Investigations
7:15 - 7:45 Pet Trader Ordinance (relates to Petland, but not exclusively)
7:45 - 8:15 Donations Fund
8:15 - 8:30 Announcements and Wrap Up

Please forward to anyone you think might be interested.
Pat Valls-Trelles
Animal Issues Forum
http://bit.ly/animalissuesforum

Dogs blamed for bacteria count at Bull Creek Park

2009-08-05T15:01:00.000-07:00

Debra Bailey, a task force member who formed a volunteer group last year to regularly clean up dog waste at the park, said sewage spills and other trash left in the creek could also be to blame for high bacteria levels. The city should look at other options before closing the dog park or requiring leashes, such as better enforcement and signs related to picking up dog waste, she said.
"They are blaming the dogs and not addressing other issues," she said.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/08/05/0805bullcreek.html

Bacteria counts force temporary closure of Bull Creek dog park
Area of Bull Creek District Park will soon require leashes, then will be off-limits over the winter while new vegetation is planted.
By Sarah CoppolaAMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Beth Hoeferkamp regularly brings her dogs Henry and Frieda to the off-leash dog area at Bull Creek District Park.
Come October, she might have to find another spot for her dogs to roam free.
The City of Austin Parks Department plans to close the dog park area for six to eight months to restore vegetation near the creek and because of high E. coli bacteria levels in the creek, a potential health problem for people and pets. Officials blame the bacteria — found during regular water sampling since 2007 — on dog waste at the heavily used park, one of 12 off-leash parks in Austin.
"It would be a shame to see the park close, but if it's necessary for the water quality, I guess it has to be done," Hoeferkamp said.
In March 2008, the city put up signs at the park about the environmental dangers of dog waste, but problems persisted, parks Director Sara Hensley said.
So the department also plans to require leashes at the park beginning Sept. 8. Starting in October, the city would close the off-leash dog area to plant more grasses, shrubs and trees — vegetation that helps keep pollutants from draining into the creek. City officials haven't determined yet whether leashes would be required when the park reopens in the spring.
Heavy use of the park has worn down existing vegetation there, city officials say, and the drought has led to low, slow-moving waters in the creek where bacteria can thrive.
The vegetation work would cost up to $200,000 and would be done at the same time as improvements to a low-water crossing at the park, said Mike Kelly, a civil engineer in the Watershed Protection Department. Officials haven't decided yet if they will close areas of the 48-acre park outside the off-leash dog area, he said.
Parks and watershed protection officials will brief the Environmental and Parks and Recreation boards on Aug. 19 and Aug. 25. The public is invited to attend those meetings, and the city will hold another yet-to-be-scheduled public hearing later this month.
Austin's leash ordinance requires dogs to be on a leash no longer than six feet on public land. The maximum fine for violating that rule is $500.
The parks department and a task force formed earlier this year are trying to find other spaces that could be turned into off-leash parks, Hensley said.
Debra Bailey, a task force member who formed a volunteer group last year to regularly clean up dog waste at the park, said sewage spills and other trash left in the creek could also be to blame for high bacteria levels. The city should look at other options before closing the dog park or requiring leashes, such as better enforcement and signs related to picking up dog waste, she said.
"They are blaming the dogs and not addressing other issues," she said.
There were two sewage spills into a tributary of the creek in recent years: 50,000 gallons in August 2007 and 30,000 gallons last month.
Both were caused by blockages in a sewer line in the area and were fully cleaned up, Austin Water Utility spokesman Kevin Buchman said.
Chris Herrington, an environmental engineer in the Watershed Protection Department, said sewage didn't cause the high bacteria levels in the creek, because the water samples did not show high levels of caffeine, nitrogen or phosphorous, which he said are usually present in wastewater.
scoppola@statesman.com; 912-2939

Austin Pets Alive's Plan for City of Austin Partnership

2009-07-28T08:15:00.000-07:00

Tonight is the evening session of the Animal Issues Forum. It will be at Terrazas library at 6:30 pm.

I'm looking forward to hearing what people have to say about Austin Pets Alive's Plan for a Partnership with the City of Austin for 2009-2010.

You can read the proposal at this link:
http://www.animalissuesforum.org/APA/APA!Proposal.doc

I think it's an exciting endeavor that APA has initiated and I hope people will come out to hear more about it and lend their support.

Pat Valls-Trelles

July 28 and July 30 Animal Issues Forums

2009-07-26T13:46:00.000-07:00

Here's an upate and a question about the agenda for the two sessions of the Animal Issues Forum coming up on:
1) Tuesday, July 28 at 6:30 pm at Terrazas library
2) Thursday, July 30 at 11:30 am at City Hall.

At the Tuesday evening forum, Dr. Ellen Jefferson will be presenting the proposal Austin Pets Alive has made to the City for a partnership for increasing live outcomes for dogs and cats. I hope that people are interested in hearing about this and will attend.

We will also have a discussion about the Donations Fund and follow up on the discussion we started last time with Chandra and Gretchen about the Companion Animal Protection Act which they heard about at the No Kill Conference they attended in May.

At the Thursday session we will have a discussion about those same topics, except Dr. Jefferson will not be presenting herself, but will have someone fill in for her. We'll still discuss Austin Pets Alive's proposal though.

I have a question prompted by the Taylor shelter situation and their end to use of the carbon monoxide gas chamber: I'd like to see if anyone else is interested in discussing possible legislation for next session to ban use of carbon monoxide gas chambers in Texas. If there is interest and time, we could discuss this month, or possibly next month. Please let me know if you have any thoughts on this.

It's not necessary to RSVP for either of the sessions, but if you're planning to attend and have not already let me know (thanks to those of you who have), I'd appreciate getting an idea in advance of who's coming.

Thanks.

Pat Valls-TrellesAnimal Issues Forum
http://bit.ly/animalissuesforum