On a Wing and a Prayer

Just a few short years ago, Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control Commission (MADACC) was a terrible place. Volunteers were  banned, rescues were banned, and animals were suffering from a lack of care and a lack of compassion. People were emailing me constantly with horror stories about John MacDowell's leadership as the interim director and about the failings of the facility. Everyone wanted me to write a blog on their personal experiences; and I did write a few.

There is no doubt that things are better now with new leadership, but has true change happened?  No. True change happens when laws are changed that will protect animals no matter who is at the helm.

No matter how much you love the new director of MADACC - the fact remains that she could leave tomorrow. She could take a new job, or get fired or heaven forbid - get hit by a bus.  And guess who would be in charge? John MacDowell.

Nothing has truly changed. There is still breed discrimination in Milwaukee County with neither WHS or MADACC showing any interest in taking an active role in repealing it. There still isn't a law that permits TNR in the City of Milwaukee (despite Wisconsin Humane Society making a public commitment last March to work on a new ordinance). There hasn't been a resolution passed by either Milwaukee County or the City to protect shelter animals. And now the very organizations that are supposed to be "sheltering" animals are asking permission to take ownership of lost pets three days earlier than they previously did. Will some of those animals make it into new homes quicker? Absolutely.  But will some animals die quicker? Absolutely.


There are still really bad shelters in Wisconsin. We all know that.  Unfortunately since we don't have a law that requires Wisconsin shelters to release their statistics to the state, we only get a glimpse of what goes on behind the curtain.  Attempts by the public and advocates around the state get denied when they ask shelters receiving taxpayer money to release their statistics.

A recent Open Records Request to the Wisconsin Humane Society Racine Campus which will receive over $250,000 in municipal government money from the City of Racine in 2016 was answered with this response: "Pursuant to Chapter 19 (19.32), the statute on public records and property does not apply to the Wisconsin Humane Society."

This from an organization whose  CEO made $178,413 and has $23 million in assets,  with 2014 revenues of $7,392,393 (according to the 2014 990)   A CEO who is on the board of Shelter Animals Count- an organization whose mission is to improve shelter transparency. 

A CEO who at the Public Hearing for SB450 on Wednesday February 4th answered Senator Wanggaard's question  "Do we have kill shelters in Wisconsin?" with "I don't know of any shelters in Wisconsin that "euthanize" for time or space." 

 I have written about "Time and Space" before.  One of the common "Smoke and Mirrors" tactics used by many shelter directors in Wisconsin is the statement that their shelter does not "euthanize" for "time or space".  You will see this on their Facebook page or website. This is an attempt to dupe the donor or volunteer into believing that they are a No Kill shelter.

The magic question becomes "If you don't "euthanize" (kill) for time or space what do you "euthanize"  for?"  The answer is usually any animal that the shelter deems "unadoptable" on that particular day.

Typically:

• Dogs and cats with behavior issues including things like litterbox issues, food bowl "aggression", barrier "aggression", leash reactivity and dog "aggression"
• Cats deemed "feral"
• Cats and dogs with ringworm
• Cats with FIV or FELV
• Cats and dogs that are owner surrenders that do not have the protection of the mandatory seven day stray hold.

The chart below shows some of the save/kill rates at some Wisconsin shelters in 2013.

As you can see from the numbers above, animals are very much at risk in Wisconsin.

Good advocates speak out for strong laws that will protect ALL animals in ALL shelters in ALL parts of the state, regardless of who is in charge. Good advocates will cheerlead for other advocates who are struggling with poor directors or a lack of transparency. Good advocates will not undermine their colleagues by supporting changes that will enable poor shelters to kill quicker.

Good laws include those that require shelters to:

• not kill when they have empty cages or when a rescue is willing to take the animal
• post their statistics online and provide transparency in all of their operations
• scan all incoming animals for microchips multiple times including surrendered animals 
• post photos of impounded pets online
• use the US Postal Service to notify owners of found pets
• protect owner-surrendered pets from being killed immediately without a chance for rehabilitation or adoption.

Good laws are NOT laws that empower shelters and stray holding facilities to kill animals faster.

Right now we're riding on a wing and prayer, hoping every day that we will succeed, but without the framework of strong laws to ensure protection for our animals.

 I'll leave you with these very wise words on true change for animals from Nathan Winograd:


"The goal was never mere promises that we would strive to do better as a society. The focus was always on changing the law to eliminate the ability to do otherwise. The suffrage movement did not seek discretionary permission from election officials to vote, an ability that could be taken away. Its goal was winning the right to vote, a right guaranteed in law. The civil rights movement did not seek the discretionary ability to sit at the front of the bus or to eat at the same lunch counters. Its goal was winning the right to do so, a right guaranteed in law. Without legal rights, one’s fate is contingent on who the election official is, who the restaurant owner is, who the mayor is and in the case of animals entering shelters, who the director is."  Nathan Winograd

Putting the Cart Before the Horse

A bill has been currently introduced into  the Wisconsin State Legislature that seeks to reduce the required stray hold for found animals from the current seven days to only four days.  The main intent of this bill (AB487) is to improve the outcome for seized dogs (often called Court Case dogs)  which of course is a very good thing!  Unfortunately,  the Wisconsin Humane Society (WHS) and the Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control Commission (MADACC) who helped draft  the bill have also included a paragraph that reduces the stray hold for all animals (dogs AND cats).  These are two entirely different issues and should be treated as such, not combined together in one bill.

They have also published a set of Frequently Asked Questions to put their spin on the issue and are trying to convince the public that a reduced stray hold is a good thing.  The WHS and MADACC have not taken into consideration how seriously flawed our current system is. They have not taken into consideration that this is a large state and there are issues that need to be addressed everywhere (not just in Milwaukee County). Here are some of the current problems:

• There is no centralized database being used by shelters in Wisconsin for reporting lost and found pets.  (There is a database available, that is completely free to use called Helping Lost Pets, but stray holding facilities are not making use of it). Stray holding facilities can include large shelters, vet clinics, boarding kennels, police departments, town offices, or individual contractors who may hold the dogs in their garage on their property.  These facilities do not cross-communicate making it very difficult for an owner to locate their lost pet.  Unlike car keys, that usually stay where you lose them – dogs and cats can easily wander and cross jurisdictional borders  ending up in a stray holding facility many miles from where they went missing.
• Many Wisconsin stray holding facilities do not post photos of found animals on line, which requires  the owner to visit the facility in person to check. This is often time consuming and costly, and many owners do not even know all of the places they should check. I wrote about this previously here in Annie's Story. 
• Many Wisconsin stray holding facilities have exhorbitant fees and fines to reclaim a lost pet. Owners often need a few more days  to come up with the money to reclaim their pet. It is not uncommon for reclaim fees to be in excess of $200.
• Many Wisconsin stray holding facilities have not embraced the changing demographics of our state and do not offer bilingual assistance to owners who have lost their pets.

For more information on the problems with the current system please click here.  I have also written about this in: Navigating the Maze of Stray Holding Facilities

Instead of working to correct the current broken system and to ensure that owners have every possible opportunity to be reunited with their lost cat or dog, WHS and MADACC have put the cart before the horse.

A few points to consider:

* MADACC had only a 29% return to owner rate for dogs in 2014.  Instead of working to improve that and bring it up into the 50% or better range that other shelters  (such as the Washington D.C. Humane Society) are achieving, their knee jerk reaction is to reduce the stray hold and claim that people aren't looking for their dogs.

* Return to owner rates around the country for cats are low for many reasons - but not because a cat's owner loves them any less than a dog's owner.  It has more to do with the number of feral cats entering shelters, the lack of uniform terminology to describe cat's coat color,  and the number of indoor/outdoor cats that may take a day or two for owners to worry about them.  A reduced stray hold will be especially harmful for scared lost cats and community cats because it will enable the shelters and stray holding facilities to kill them on Day 5 if they are deemed "unadoptable" because they are showing stress in the shelters.  Instead of working to create a new progressive Trap Neuter Vaccinate Return (TNR) ordinance for Milwaukee County, which other counties could follow,  WHS and MADACC have chosen to draft and support a bill that will allow the quicker killing of cats in shelters.  We have many shelters in the state that already have a very high kill rate for cats.  This gives those shelters the power to kill quicker.

* WHS and MADACC's FAQ tries to imply that there is a correlation between length of stray hold and save rates.  Ironically, although no mention has ever been made by WHS or MADACC that they aim to make Milwaukee a No Kill community - they imply that if they had a shorter stray hold, they could do better, like Austin and Kansas City which are true No Kill communities.  In fact, there is no correlation between short stray holds and save rates. You can find plenty of shelters with short stray holds and horrific kill rates.

* WHS and MADACC are saying that shelters don't "have to" comply with the shortened stray hold. They can keep an animal as long as they want. But of course, shelters like Sauk County Humane Society in Baraboo,  whose director believes that "killing is kindness" will kill animals on Day 5.

*WHS and MADACC use the example of a black cat being hard to identify as a reason to not support requiring shelters to post photos of found pets or use a centralized database. Of course, there are some breeds and animals that tend to look alike. But discouraging the use of a centralized database and online photos  by using the "black cat" example is utter nonsense.  Thousands of animals have been reunited with their owners because their picture was recognized on a database, a website or social media.

*WHS and MADACC say that impound facilities have a legal obligation to keep records regarding euthanasia.  Unfortunately, getting these records are next to impossible in Wisconsin from most shelters that are private organizations holding public contracts.  Wisconsin Humane Society's  - Ozaukee and Racine locations are two examples of shelters in Wisconsin who do not make their records publicly available. So making "guesstimates" about Return to Owner and euthanasia numbers are simply that - guesstimates.

It would have been nice to see WHS and MADACC work towards fixing the problems to make sure  ALL Wisconsin shelters and stray holding facilities comply with minimum standards to improve their return to owner rate by doing things like:

* using a centralized database like the free system, www.helpinglostpets.com
* posting photos of impounded animals online
* scanning every animal for a microchip at least twice with two different scanners using best practices for scanning (including not scanning them on or near a metal exam table or metal door)
* putting signs up where the dog or cat was found
* using volunteer pet detective groups to help match lost and found reports and track down dead end microchips
* reducing or eliminating high reclaim fees
* requiring shelters to microchip or provide an ID tag for all adoptable animals (many Wisconsin shelters do not microchip adoptables, where in Illinois it is required by law) and offering low cost or free microchip clinics (including enrollment) to pet owners.

Example of a sign put up by an animal control officer to indicate where a dog has been found. 

Photo courtesy Donna Watson - Help Find Rudy

The ASPCA has also recently come out with some very strong guidelines regarding what shelters should be doing to help reunite lost pets with their families. You can read them by clicking here. 

WHS and MADACC have hijacked the Court Case dog bill to serve their own needs.  This is a shame - a shame for the Court Case dogs and a shame for the lost pets and their owners who need the help and support of an efficient return to owner system in our shelters and stray holding facilities.

Preserving the owner/animal bond should be at the heart and soul of every animal shelter's core mission.  Lost pets don't need a new home. They just need to go home.  Let's work together to fix our broken system.

Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened. ~Anatole France