The following was published on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, August 10, 2002.
A letter in response from the NYC Health Department follows.
Problems at the Pound
By CAROL VINZANT
If you can judge a society by how it treats its animals, New York is in sorry shape. The city's animal-welfare system, one of the worst in the country, is bound to get worse with this year's budget cuts.
The 16 percent cut at the Center for Animal Care and Control, more colloquially known as the city dog pound, may not seem draconian but the the agency is already drastically underfunded. The city will spend $7.2 million on the agency this year, less than $1 per New Yorker, while the Humane Society of the United States recommends spending $4 per resident for an effective animal control program.
We get what we pay for. In June, the city comptroller confirmed what animal rights activists have been saying for years: the shelter agency "accidentally and needlessly" euthanizes the animals it is charged to protect. Euthanasia is a necessary part of urban animal management, but New York City puts down far too many animals. Last year some 50,600 cats and dogs entered the control center, and 36,500 were put to sleep. We're killing 72 percent of the animals that end up in the city shelter, an average of 100 a day.
Money won't solve all the agency's problems. The comptroller found that animals were subjected to abuse and neglect, and employees who mistreated animals were rarely dismissed. The agency is also notoriously hostile to volunteers, even those willing to take in otherwise doomed dogs and cats.
But money would surely help: the budget cuts approved by the Bloomberg administration mean shelters can't stay open 24 hours.
In times when social service programs are getting cut, it's hard to argue that more general tax dollars should go to puppies and kittens. But the city's unwanted animals could easily be supported by animal lovers paying more for dog licenses. The city's license program has been so ineptly managed that only one in 15 dogs are actually registered and the fees are ludicrously inadequate. The basic license for a neutered dog is $8.50 and $11.50 for an unneutered dog. This is nothing compared with the $1,000 or so it takes each year to care for a dog.
Raising the basic license fee substantially is a sensible way to make up for part of the budget cut. The reason people don't register their dogs is not because the fee is high, but because the process is so arduous and there is no real enforcement. The key to better animal control is to make licensing easier, along with creating a better enforcement system that levies heavy fines on owners caught with unlicensed dogs.
Currently the people who have it the worst are responsible dog owners who neuter their pets. The health department requires owners to show their dogs are neutered with either medical records (which don't exist for many rescued animals) or, bizarrely, an affidavit stamped by a notary public, which was required until recently even for license renewals. One solution is to have veterinarians, who already dispense rabies shots and tags, do the same with licenses.
The city must also increase the surcharge for unneutered animals. The surcharge is now a lame $3, less than what it costs for a decent-sized rawhide bone. Not long ago, Los Angeles, for example, raised its license fee for unneutered dogs to a much more realistic $100. New York should do the same. Unneutered pets cause the overpopulation problem, and unneutered male dogs can be particularly aggressive in dog runs and on crowded citysidewalks.
Raising the license fee would not be a big burden for responsible dog owners, many of whom spend lots of time and money caring for the city's strays. Many dog owners take it upon themselves when they find a stray dog to get it to the vet and find it a home to save it from almost certain death at the city pound. Instead of having one functioning, humane animal shelter, New Yorkers have had to set up their own ad hoc animal shelters in storefronts, apartments and basements all over the city.
The city is spending millions of dollars on animal control, killing tens of thousands of animals a year. Sensible public policy would make it easier to license animals, impose heavy fines on owners who don't get licenses and require that those who refuse to neuter their dogs pay for that privilege.
Carol Vinzant is the volunteer manager of the Tompkins Square dog run.
Better Animal Welfare
August 16, 2002
To the Editor:
Re "Problems at the Pound," by Carol Vinzant (Op-Ed, Aug.10):
New York City's animal welfare system would certainly be better off if more animals were adopted from city shelters and if services were improved over all. Toward this end, a new board of directors has been appointed for the Center for Animal Care and Control, renewed partnerships with the animal care community are being pursued, and an outreach campaign to increase adoptions is under way.
Yes, significantly increasing dog licensing fees set by the state - a request we have made to the State Legislature - could help pay for needed improvements in the city's animal care programs.
These steps, together with responsible dog ownership, which includes spaying and neutering, vaccinations and licensing, are needed to address the problem of unwanted and stray animals.
JAMES GIBSON
Asst. Commissioner for Veterinary and Pest Control Services
Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene
New York, Aug. 14, 2002
A letter in response from the NYC Health Department follows.
Problems at the Pound
By CAROL VINZANT
If you can judge a society by how it treats its animals, New York is in sorry shape. The city's animal-welfare system, one of the worst in the country, is bound to get worse with this year's budget cuts.
The 16 percent cut at the Center for Animal Care and Control, more colloquially known as the city dog pound, may not seem draconian but the the agency is already drastically underfunded. The city will spend $7.2 million on the agency this year, less than $1 per New Yorker, while the Humane Society of the United States recommends spending $4 per resident for an effective animal control program.
We get what we pay for. In June, the city comptroller confirmed what animal rights activists have been saying for years: the shelter agency "accidentally and needlessly" euthanizes the animals it is charged to protect. Euthanasia is a necessary part of urban animal management, but New York City puts down far too many animals. Last year some 50,600 cats and dogs entered the control center, and 36,500 were put to sleep. We're killing 72 percent of the animals that end up in the city shelter, an average of 100 a day.
Money won't solve all the agency's problems. The comptroller found that animals were subjected to abuse and neglect, and employees who mistreated animals were rarely dismissed. The agency is also notoriously hostile to volunteers, even those willing to take in otherwise doomed dogs and cats.
But money would surely help: the budget cuts approved by the Bloomberg administration mean shelters can't stay open 24 hours.
In times when social service programs are getting cut, it's hard to argue that more general tax dollars should go to puppies and kittens. But the city's unwanted animals could easily be supported by animal lovers paying more for dog licenses. The city's license program has been so ineptly managed that only one in 15 dogs are actually registered and the fees are ludicrously inadequate. The basic license for a neutered dog is $8.50 and $11.50 for an unneutered dog. This is nothing compared with the $1,000 or so it takes each year to care for a dog.
Raising the basic license fee substantially is a sensible way to make up for part of the budget cut. The reason people don't register their dogs is not because the fee is high, but because the process is so arduous and there is no real enforcement. The key to better animal control is to make licensing easier, along with creating a better enforcement system that levies heavy fines on owners caught with unlicensed dogs.
Currently the people who have it the worst are responsible dog owners who neuter their pets. The health department requires owners to show their dogs are neutered with either medical records (which don't exist for many rescued animals) or, bizarrely, an affidavit stamped by a notary public, which was required until recently even for license renewals. One solution is to have veterinarians, who already dispense rabies shots and tags, do the same with licenses.
The city must also increase the surcharge for unneutered animals. The surcharge is now a lame $3, less than what it costs for a decent-sized rawhide bone. Not long ago, Los Angeles, for example, raised its license fee for unneutered dogs to a much more realistic $100. New York should do the same. Unneutered pets cause the overpopulation problem, and unneutered male dogs can be particularly aggressive in dog runs and on crowded citysidewalks.
Raising the license fee would not be a big burden for responsible dog owners, many of whom spend lots of time and money caring for the city's strays. Many dog owners take it upon themselves when they find a stray dog to get it to the vet and find it a home to save it from almost certain death at the city pound. Instead of having one functioning, humane animal shelter, New Yorkers have had to set up their own ad hoc animal shelters in storefronts, apartments and basements all over the city.
The city is spending millions of dollars on animal control, killing tens of thousands of animals a year. Sensible public policy would make it easier to license animals, impose heavy fines on owners who don't get licenses and require that those who refuse to neuter their dogs pay for that privilege.
Carol Vinzant is the volunteer manager of the Tompkins Square dog run.
Better Animal Welfare
August 16, 2002
To the Editor:
Re "Problems at the Pound," by Carol Vinzant (Op-Ed, Aug.10):
New York City's animal welfare system would certainly be better off if more animals were adopted from city shelters and if services were improved over all. Toward this end, a new board of directors has been appointed for the Center for Animal Care and Control, renewed partnerships with the animal care community are being pursued, and an outreach campaign to increase adoptions is under way.
Yes, significantly increasing dog licensing fees set by the state - a request we have made to the State Legislature - could help pay for needed improvements in the city's animal care programs.
These steps, together with responsible dog ownership, which includes spaying and neutering, vaccinations and licensing, are needed to address the problem of unwanted and stray animals.
JAMES GIBSON
Asst. Commissioner for Veterinary and Pest Control Services
Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene
New York, Aug. 14, 2002
