Animal Shelter Advisory Committee to Further Push Community Sheltering

The Animal Shelter Advisory Committee will consider the next push to keep unwanted pets out of the City Animal Shelter.  It's the ratcheting up of "community sheltering," underway since the shelter started managed intake in 2019.  The ASAC background packet actually states, what citizens have known and complained about:

"more dogs are loose this year compared to prior years" 

The packet shows shelter intake for the year was 2,901 pets.    That's down from 8,074 in FY 2014 and 4,264 for FY 2021.

The background packet did not show the number of owner surrendered pets in shelter statistics for the fiscal year ended 9-30-23.  However, the "community sheltering" agenda item mentions owner surrenders.   

One factor contributing to increased dogs at large for field services is the owner surrender process.

Four years ago the shelter began choking off pet intake:

The City no longer takes owner surrendered pets due to things like owner illness or death.  (ASAC approved 4-19-19)

Back to tomorrow's background packet on community sheltering:

The two most common requests we get from owners wishing to rehome their pets are (1) reactivity/aggression in the home and (2) restrictive housing practices prohibiting certain breeds or sizes.

A difficult part of pet ownership is euthanizing a pet with a bite history, reactivity, aggression, or otherwise unsafe behavior in the home. We ask citizens to have such pets humanely euthanized with the veterinarian of their choice but we suspect such owners often turn these dogs loose in the neighborhoods.

Animal Shelter Chief Morgan Chegwidden told City Council numerous times that public safety is their top priority.  

The shelter likely has interaction with citizens struggling with an aggressive pet, especially one "with a bite history."  If they are asking citizens to use a vet to euthanize their aggressive pet the city is aware of that situation. 

The city stopped providing "low cost" pet euthanization for citizens in 2019.

The City no longer will euthanize a pet for a resident of San Angelo. (ASAC approved 8-15-19)

The expense of euthanization may contribute to owners turning loose their aggressive dog in the neighborhood.

Back to the other reason for owner surrender requests:

Regarding housing restrictions, we advocate for private landlords, corporate-held apartments, and the public housing authority to offer truly pet-friendly housing opportunities with no restriction on breed or size.

I have not heard City Council or the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee take up this topic.  The city does have animal ordinances the Shelter is responsible for enforcing.  The packet offered an odd take the city's mandatory spay-neuter ordinance and microchip requirement.

An unintended consequence of Animal Services Officers enforcing local ordinances governing pet ownership has criminalized pet ownership for a large volume of San Angeloans. Requiring spay/neuter and microchip for all dogs and cats over four months of age is certainly appropriate and a best-case scenario. However, imposing this on marginalized citizens makes pet ownership a crime, and such individuals are cited and fined leading them to consider rehoming their pets.

First, City Council has not taken this view of the mandatory spay/neuter and microchip ordinances.  When Council adopted the ordinances city staff stated their would be fewer stray animals in the streets, not more.

Second, one would have to write citations in greater numbers than Animal Control for it to impact a large volume of San Angeloans.  

Third, if they were really concerned they would mobilize low cost spay-neuter programs to assist these marginalized citizens.  The city's exclusive partner Concho Valley PAWS stopped its low cost spay/neuter vouchers for four months over the last year.

Animal Services is budgeted for one Animal Services Officer supervisor and four Animal Services Officers. With frequent vacancies and a lengthy certification process, we struggle to provide a round-the-clock response. The same, small team responds to calls during regular hours and then takes a rotation of after-hours emergency calls thus overtaxing an under-resourced system. Staff advocates for funding for additional staffing, equipment, and overtime to keep up with community demands.

This explains why animal related calls for San Angelo Police Department have soared since the shelter began choking off intake.

Lifesaving in animal welfare is a community ethic and it impacts daily life. When your animal care workers are taxed to the limit, San Angelo shows up. That is the very definition of community-supported sheltering.

The animal care community in San Angelo is taxed to the limit, driven by eight years of the City Animal Shelter doing less and less while its budget rose 66%.

Animal Services spent $750,000 in FY ended  2015.  The budget for the coming fiscal year ended 2024 is over $1.25 million.  That's a $500,000 or 66% increase.

Local animal rescues don't have near the resources to keep up with the city's propensity to continue restricting or stop providing Animal Services (under the guise of Pets Alive).  I don't see how large volumes of San Angeloans can afford to pick up the slack if they can't afford to microchip, spay/neuter or euthanize their pet.

San Angelo, a third world community for animals. 

Update:  City Manager Daniel Valenzuela said the Animal Shelter could no longer do "no kill" in the aftermath of the roach infestation and horrific hoarding conditions.  Valenzuela's direction was pets would have finite stays in the shelter, after which they would be adopted, transferred or euthanized.  City Council approved a maximum number of pets allowed to be housed at the shelter.  

Since that change the shelter has continued operating under Pets Alive policies without citing the organization.  The community shelter agenda item is known as Human Animal Support Services at Pets Alive.

Leaving pets on the streets, as the City has done for over four years, means more loose animals running around.  El Paso knows.  San Angelo should have.

Update 10-19-23:  Many people attended the ASAC meeting today, however not enough committee members did.  The meeting was not held due to lack of quorum and those who took the time to participate in local governance were not heard.

Update 10-26-23:  More loose dogs, more dog-on-dog attacks.

This is a predictable consequence of shutting off intake, a multi-year effort by the Animal Shelter and City Council.  Last November Council approved a hard stop on dog intake.  The City wants to continue pushing responsibility for loose dogs on to residents.