Council Hears PAWS Infomercial

Last month City Council asked city staff to bring back recommendations to deal with San Angelo's loose dog crisis.   

Today that staff "stepped aside" so Council could hear from Concho Valley PAWS Executive Director Jenie Wilson.  PAWS is contractually obligated to provide a number of services to the City Animal Shelter.  It's provided adoption services since 2017 and veterinary medical care for shelter pets through several different arrangements.

Wilson offered up the sparest of data, most came from city budget documents.

One might expect to see more information given PAWS is seven years into a contract relationship with the Animal Shelter (with four years of veterinary medical care delivery).  The city donated its veterinary surgical equipment to PAWS.  It would be interesting to see statistics on its use, spay/neuter and otherwise, for shelter pets, PAWS non-shelter pets and the general public.

Early in her presentation Wilson referred to city euthanasia statistics, saying roughly 80% of animals were killed for space prior to 2016.  City data does not support her assertion.

She stressed things had changed since COVID, yet produced no data showing those changes locally and over time.  Jenie had the opportunity to talk about shelter adoptions in fiscal year 2023 and clarify things for Council and the public.  That did not happen.  City data showed adoptions down 49 percent.

Wilson threw up five strawmen that conflated PAWS with the Shelter, even though she stated earlier they are two different organizations:

Strawman #1:  PAWS allows pets to leave the shelter unaltered.  

Fact:  The city allows pets to leave the shelter unaltered.  The City Attorney talked about the process of issuing citations to pet owners who retrieved a shelter animal and failed later to have it spayed/neutered.

Strawman #2:  Concho Valley PAWS puts pets at risk by offering free adoptions

Fact:  People surrender their pet to the shelter because they can't afford it, then look to adopt a new one.  Wilson cited this earlier in her presentation to Council

Strawman #3:  PAWS doesn't allow other rescues to save shelter pets

Fact:  The exclusive relationship between the Animal Shelter and PAWS has driven other rescues away from working with the shelter.  Some helped in September 2022 during the roach infestation/horrific hoarding crisis, but that door is now closed.

Strawman #4:  Donor dollars pay staff salaries

Fact:  Money is fungible.  A few sentences on a slide does not constitute a financial audit confirming such a statement.  PAWS Executive Director is highly paid relative to other area rescues, some all volunteer.

Strawman #5:  PAWS policies have led to closing shelter intake

Fact:  PAWS supported Pets Alive and Best Friends Animal Society programming and completed RFP's specifying the implementation of such programming.  PAWS representatives served on the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee which voted over time for managed intake to the point that neither "death and moving to assisted living" were valid reasons for an owner to surrender their pet.

At the end of her presentation Wilson made recommendations to address the loose dog crisis.  Most were outside her contracted responsibility for adoptions and veterinary care, further confusing the public about roles and boundaries.  They included:

1. Educate pet owners
2. Hiring another Animal Control Officer (specific position for enforcing spay/neuter)
3. No breeders permits for dog breeds that dominate shelter population
4. Join PAWS efforts to increase citizen access to affordable spay/neuter services

After Wilson's thirty five minute presentation Council members asked questions.   Most members were complimentary of the presentation and the work performed by both Morgan and Jenie.  

Council asked staff for a prioritized list of recommendations and associated budget amounts and got what?  Not that.  

I saw the city utilizing PAWS as their public mouthpiece, a common occurrence.  People confused about the delineation between PAWS and the Animal Shelter remain confused.

The effusive praise for Morgan and Jenie seemed odd given the state of crisis just one month ago.  It also felt out of step given their leadership and programming left citizens needing to surrender their pet few to no options. 

Five years of choking off shelter intake sent unwanted pets away from the shelter and into the streets. 

I see nothing changing in that regard, even with the "atta ladies" and pats on the back. 

Council spent and hour on the crisis in January and another hour and twenty minutes on it in February.  How long before it comes back?  

Update 2-21-24:   Concho Valley Homepage did a story on the growing dog crisis, the one the Shelter and partner PAWS helped grow over the last five years.

Councilman Tom Thompson went from someone concerned about what constitutes proper fencing to restrain dogs to worrying about an Animal Control Officer because they had to "deal with his wife," who has been bitten twice by uncontained dogs while running in her neighborhood.

Update 2-23-24:  Mayor Gunter asked staff to increase communications on pet requirements.  A new video is out.  Shelter Chief Morgan Chegwidden said "we exist to help the most vulnerable pets and people..."  Data shows the shelter helps large, long stay dogs to the exclusion the increasing number running city streets.  The city is five years into "Let them roam unaltered."