BC 2010 08 16 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 16, 2010 (Regular Meeting) Page 77 programs, policies and services in place. Clearly Cabarrus County is not forced to kill eighty percent of the animals brought to animal control. It is a choice. It is a choice to continue the status quo and redirect responsibility of the high kill rates on anyone but the people that have the power to make the change to reverse these numbers. If we made one small step by opening the doors to pet seekers, these numbers would increase right away and lives that will be lost in the next gas chamber scheduling would be fewer. We cannot expect the Humane Society which is only open sixteen hours a week, with limited volunteers, donations and only eight dog runs and twenty -five cat cages to get these animals out of the shelter. It is time for the shelter to take responsibility and act. Let us not make the fact that we do not have a larger facility become now another excuse for the slaying of perfectly adoptable animals today. There are many benefits to adopting from a shelter rather than another source. The community will not respond however, until the killing stops. Just as it happened in other "no kill" communities, once a commitment is made, and a community outreach begins, people support the public shelter by adopting, volunteering and donating. It is imperative that the Board signal that commitment by adopting the Cabarrus County Companion Animal Protection Act and bring in an outside expert to assess Animal Control, identify opportunities and make recommendations. I would like to submit some signatures we have gathered from the community so far. Over a thousand people are raising this concern and have signed this petition and hundreds are signing more each day. Simply put, this is the ethical and right thing to do. Again, thank you Commissioner Carruth and the rest of the Board for educating yourselves in the "no kill" equation. We commend you for stepping up and I hope the rest of the Board will join with a sense of urgency and compassion. Statistics show it can be done and there is no reason Cabarrus County cannot adopt a "no kill" equation. Note: The aforementioned petition was not submitted to the Clerk. Jeff Daniels, resident of 2875 Eagle View Place in Concord, read the following statement: I am very excited and very thankful for the opportunity to serve my community. Know that I will be committed to providing as much assistance as possible to ensure our success in our endeavors. Thank you for taking our pleas to end the killing seriously. It is obvious that you do care about the issues and that you are concerned about the regress of policies and procedures that we do have in place right now. The killing of over eighty percent of our animals is certainly nothing to be proud of but this can change and it can change quickly with your help. Fortunately for us, there is a solution. Nathan Winograd in the "no kill" advocacy center has ended the killing in several communities across the country. Two decades ago, the concept of a "no kill" community was little more than a dream. Today it is a reality in many cities and counties nationwide and the numbers continue to grow. And the first step is a decision. It is a commitment to reject the kill oriented failures of the past. "No kill" starts as an act of will. The next step involves putting in place the infrastructure to save lives. Tompkins County, New York, much like Cabarrus County here in size and in population is celebrating their seventh year of saving over ninety percent of the animals they take in. The "no kill" equation has been successful in Reno, Nevada, Shelby County, Kentucky and has even spurred the commitment of the entire country of New Zealand. There is no secret to end the killing, simply follow the "no kill" equation. We must put in place a shelter director who will commit to and embrace the "no kill" equation and reject excuses for killing animals as a method of animal control. This will be the most important factor of all when it comes to becoming a successful "no kill" community. When you hear from shelter apologists that there are just too many bad owners and too many pets, know that there is not a peer review study anywhere that supports those arguments. The fact is, even in the face of an economic downturn, if you will, pet owners have actually increased spending on their pets, not decreased their spending. They have made cut backs in other areas to ensure the continued quality of life for the animals to the tune of fifty billion