HomeMy WebLinkAbout40-Animal Control
o
,.
~ACTIO~ FOR ~I~
1!!r
~o
Post Office Box 2796
San Beroordino, CA 92406
(714) 886-0124
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
MAYOR WILCOX and COMMON COUNCIL
Margo Tannenbaum. Action for Animals
October 6. 1986
CITY ANIMAL SHELTER - ENHANCED ADOPTIONS
We wish to submit proposals for enhancing general adoptions at the city animal
shelter. The proposed program would utilize volunteer workers and include
the support of the business community and local veterinarians. It is possible
that the city may need to subsidize the program somewhat. especially In it's
start up phase and until local business support can be arranged.
We would like to present the proposals to the Ways and Means Committee for
review as soon as possible.
Thank you very much.
LMT: ksr
LjD
" cCN OF SAN BERNARlOo - REQUOT FOR COUNCIL Ao:)ON
From: Paul E. Turner, Director
Dept: Anima 1 Control
Dete: October 1, 1986
Subject:
Seniors and Pets Adoption Program
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
At the July 7,1986 meeting of the Mayor and Common Council, a discussion developed
regarding the .possibility of developing a program of increased adoptions specifically
aimed toward limited income, elderly and/or disabled persons. The idea evolved
during a public hearing on the fees charged by the Animal Control/Shelter operation.
Staff was instructed to investigate and report back on alternative programs to en-
hance adoptions.
Recommended motion:
That the Seniors and Pets Adoption Program be approved and the Director of Animal
Control be instructed to proceed and instltute said program.
(,~
Signature
Contact person:
PAUL E. TURNER
Phone:
5275
N/A
N/A
Supporting data attached:
Yes
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
_ "'m .,&-
1
-
....-=.-.. ..
. .... ........,.-..""
" C~Y OF SAN BERNARStNO - 'REQ~ST FOR COUNCIL A&ION
STAFF REPORT
As reported in a preliminary report dated July 30, 1986, programs offering
pets to the general public, at no cost or reduced costs ,are' potentially
counterproductive from the standpoint of effective animal control, Some
agencies have programs aimed toward p'lacing pets with elderly and vary in
degree of commitment. Two examples:
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has an
extensive program called "Pets and Older People". This program offers persons
65 years of age and above, dogs and/or cats free-of-charge, free spay or
neuter, surgery, all vaccinations at no charge, delivery of free food, free
licenses, on-going free medical care, supplies, obedience training at no
charge and even free transportation for the pet (and owner) to and, from the
SPCA facil ity to recei ve these ser,vi ces. The SPCA cannot detai 1 the cost
of the program , but they" say it is supported by contri buti ons, not, govern-
ment subsidy.
On the other hand, San Bernardino County has a program called "Seniors Adopt-
A-Pet". It provides for ,dogs and/or cats free of charge to persons 65 and
above. The animal is vaccinated against rabies (this must be done by a vet-
erinarian) and vaccinated against common. diseases, at no charge to the adoptor.
The adoptor must pay (required by law) a,spay/neuter deposit. The County has,'
an agreement with the San 'Bernardino Valley Humane Society that dogs adopted
in this program will be surgically neutered at a flat rate of $22, cats $13.
At the time of the adoption, County personnel makes an appointment for the sur~
gery, and forwards the deposit collected directly to the Humane Society.
Non-governmental Humane Society or Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals g~nera11y offer the more costly types ,of adoption programs, primarily
because they' are positive image programs which receive wide public financial
support. Most governmental operations offer limited programs, such as the
'County~s program as it does not require additional personnel or funding. '
In discussions with Ms. Anne Rhodes, Superintendent of Community Services, rela-
tive to enhancing adoptions for the elderly, it too was her concern that care
must be exercised in not creating problems for those on ,limited incomes. Ms.
Rhodes says many of the seniors who utilize the Senior Citizens Center are on
small monthly pensions, or governmental benefits. Some of these people could
be placed in financial trouble if a pet they owned became seriously injured
or ill requiring extensive medical care~ We'agreed, potential (senior) adoptors
should be'''screened'' or "counseled" as to what on-going resources would be
necessary should they choose to adopt a pet.
In consideration of these factors and in view of ' the resources available to the
City of San Bernardino, we propose the following Seniors and' Pets Adoption
Program: '
1. In cooperation with the Community Services Division develop and
provide a cOl1lDunication.s link between the Senior citizen community
and the Animal Shelter promoting pet adoptions. Provide a method
II t.. ,~
.-
"0 0 0 -.~,-_. .."... '. ... -- ti
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Page - 2
.. for the seniors to express their needs and desires (what type,
size, age, breed, sex, pet they would like).
2. Shelter staff or volunteers would provide information (counseling)
to the potential adoptor so as to insure the persons are well in-
formed regarding the ,responsibilities which may arise in the future.
3. Provide a "pet locator" service. Once the senior cOl1ll1unicates his/her
desires, shelter personnel will attempt to locate a suitable pet.
4. The dogs and/or,cats will be vaccinated against common diseases pecu-
liar to its species and offered to the senior, at no-charge.
5. In cooperation'with the San Bernardino Valley Humane Society, arrange-
ments will be developed to collect a -reduced spay/neuter deposit and
shelter staff will make the appointment for surgery at the time of
adoption.
6. Shelter staff will provide on-going educational assistance to the
pet adoptors assisting with behavioral and/or training problems.
7. A proposal to reduce dog license fee fifty percent (to $2.50 per year)
for senior citizens is included in the proposed new Animal Control
Ordinances, presently under revision. This will also reduce the finan-
cial burden of pet ownership for seniors. '
This program would not require additional personnel or' funding and yet could make
pets available to elderly persons who have heretofore found the costs prohibitive.
-4
,-
~
IU
,
C?''t' OF SAN BERNARD~O - REQUIt)T FOR COUNCIL AC"")'N
,
/-'
. ," {./
From: PAUL E. TURNER, Director
Subject:
Dog and Cat Adoption
Dept: Animal Control
Date: September 30, 1986
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On July 7, 1986 Mayor and Council 'approved an increase in the adoption fees for
dogs from $15 to $20 and cats from $10 to $15 with instructions to staff to
report back October 6, 1986 on what affect, if any, the increase in fees had
on the number of adoptions.
ftecommended motion:
That the adoption fees be reduced to $15 for dogs and $10 for cats and
the City Attorney be instructed to amend the Municipal, Code accordingly.
<-L -----
Signature
Contact person:
Paul E. Turner
Phone:
5275
N/A
N/A
Supporting data attached:
Yes
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Agenda /tem No. 40
41
t.,HI.
- '. 411
.. -.. '-
:0, _,I.
ciC){ OF SAN BERNARoOIo - REQUQT FOR COUNCIL AcQO'
STAFF REPORT
In order to determine what impact, if any, the increase in adoption fees
for dogs and cats had on the number of adoptions; it was necessary to
compare the last 3 months (July, August and September) adoption statistics
to the same 3-month period in previous years.
However, because of the County "pull-out" last year, comparing actual
numbers of adoptions would not give a true picture of the cause of any
change in'the number of adoptions. Simply stated, we are handling 46.9%
fewer dogs and 10.7% fewer'cats since the County pulled out in September, 1985.
It was necessary to convert the number of adoptions into percentages to
determine any change when compared to the numbers being ,received.
, "
During the months of July, August and September, over the"past".\years (1982,
1983, 1984 and 1985) 1~.6% of dogs, received were eventually adopted to a
new home. Similarly, only 3.8% of ,cats received were eventually adopted.
Since the increase in adoption fees (dogs-from $15 to '$20; tats-from $10 to
$15) the percentage of adoptions for dogs dropped to 10.7% and 3% for cats.
Translated into numbers of dogs and cats adopted and based upon a total
estimate of 15,000 dogs, 7,OQO cats annually; the increased fees appear to
have reduced adoptions by approximately 435 dogs and 56 cats per ,year.
Should the adoption fees for dogs and cats be rolled back to $15 and $10
respectfully, the'reduced revenue theoretically would be offset by licensing
the increased number of adopted dogs.
"
7W2S4
o
o
o
o
COUNCIL ACTION CORRESPONDENCE
To Paul Turner, Director Subject
Animal Control Department Report on Enhanced Adoption
Oat. August 7, 1986 Programs at Animal Shelter
Meeting Oat. August 4, 1986 Agenda Item No. 21
Action
The report on enhanced adoption programs was_continued to
October 6.. 1986, at which time another report will be provided
by the Animal Control Department, showing if the recent increase
in adoption fees had had an effect on the number of adoptions.
SC:pn
,"
....
cc: ~.\ \ Q. ~~
-"'llHAUNA CLARK
City Clerk
L/!J
CO OF SAN BERNARDOO - REQUOT FOR COUNCIL ACOON
'From:
Honorable Mayor and Council
Subject: Prel iminary Report - Enhanced
Adoption Programs at Animal Shelter
Dept: Animal Control
DIIt8: July 30, 1986
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
At the July 7, 1986 meeting of the Mayor and Common Council, staff was
directed to report on alternative programs for enhanced adoptions of dogs
and cats from the city shelter, by August 4, 1986.
Recommended motion:
That this matter be continued to the regularly scheduled meeting of
October 6, 1986.
Signatu re
Contact person:
Pau 1 E. Turner
Phone:
383-5275
N/A
N/A
Supporting data attached:
yes
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
/
75.0262
Agenda Item No..
.
---",
'cfi'tt OF SAN BERNAREAo - REQU~T FOR COUNciL AeQON
STAFF REPORT
This matter was discussed, briefly, by the Animal Advisory Commission at their
July 18, 1986 meeting and a special meeting was held on July 24, 1986 with
other concerned individuals and groups.
At the July 24 meeting, three area veterinarians, four Animal Advisory Commis-
sioners, four representatives of local animal welfare/rights groups and other
concerned individuals met to discuss this subject.
It was, unanimously agreed, the concept of enhanced adoption programs, especially
those targeted for the elderly, and/or disabled, ,is an encouraging undertaking.
However, it was felt that only through a "total commitment" would such a program(s)
be effective, for the adoptor, the pet and the city.
A program offering pets at reduced cost or no cost, in itself, could possibly be
detrimental and counter-productive. Often, persons adopting pets are unaware of
the (often high) on-going costs of pet-ownership i.e., feeding, veterinary care,
Ii cens ing and necessary "maintenance'! equi pment (collars, food bowl s, she Iter,
litter and litter trays,) After discovering the costs, the animals could be
returned to the shelter or possibly abandoned.
It is essential, before the shelter undertakes any enhanced adoption program,
that it include the following: a screening or application process whereby
interested individuals are required to, at least, complete a questionaire which
would forewarn them of the commitment required in dog/cat pet ownership.
An educational program (possibly tied into the screening/application process)
whereby interested individuals would receive initial (and on-going) information
relative to care, training and maintenance of their adopted pets.
A spay/neuter enforcementl,p,rograDl. Current state law requi res a spay/neuter
deposit (refundable) be collected on all dogs and cats sold (or given away) by
any public pound or shelter. After a-certain period, those deposits are considered
unclaimed. A small percentage of persons who adopt animals do not get the
animal surgically altered and we have no program in af~ect to follow-up for
compliance. It is felt, enforcing the intent of the law is crucial to the long
term effect any adoption program will have.
Provide a "support program." By soliciting throughout the community, various
veterinarians, pet shops, grooming parlors and to include local humane organizations
who would commit to providing services, equipment and other related support to
potential adoptors at reduced or no cost.
Several other humane societies/animal shelters have been identified as having
programs designed to assist the elderly adopt pets and we have contacted them
requesting information.
75.0264
CI9t OF SAN BERNARDAO - REQUQT FOR COUNCIL AcQoN
STAFF REPORT
Page 2.
We have yet to identify any programs (at shelters) designed to promote.
adoptions to disabled persons. However, we will be working with our Parks and
Recreation/Community Services Department personnel to discuss development of
a program.
Mayor and Council has directed animal control staff to,report back on October 6,
1986, with what effect (if any) the recent increase in adoption fees had.on
the number of adoptions.
Continuance of this matter to that meeting will allow us sufficient time to
investigate, document, analyze and develop program proposals for enhanced adoptions.
75-0264