City Plans Animal Rights Mediation

March 25, 2010 • By Danielle Strickler,
Print This Post
Email This Post

HARRISONBURG, Va. — The Rockingham/Harrisonburg SPCA, an activist group, Citizens for Animal Welfare, and the Shenandoah Valley Spay and Neuter Clinic plan to discuss their differences about animal rights through a mediation session proposed by the city.

Mayor Kai Degner sent a letter to the SPCA, the SVSNC, Citizens for Animal Welfare and Rockingham County inviting each group to participate in a voluntary mediation session with a professional mediator to resolve differences.

“The opportunity here is to get people in a room and have a safe, constructive conversation about their perspectives of what’s been happening,” Degner said.

Degner said every group has agreed to mediation, except for Rockingham County, which plans to discuss it at its Wednesday meeting. Each group has agreed to share the cost of the mediator.

“I think we have a lot of people concerned about animals,” Degner said. “I think we have an opportunity to ensure the animals get a loving home rather than be euthanized.”

According to the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Sciences, the Rockingham/Harrisonburg SPCA has the highest euthanization rate in Virginia. Although this number is down from 2004 the SPCA still had a 65 percent euthanasia rate in 2008. The Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA had a death rate of only 12 percent in 2008.

“The SPCA has outdated policies and blames the public for the deaths, and lack of funding,” said Kate Mansfield, head of the SVSNC.

The SPCA declined to comment.

The SVSNC hopes to educate the public on how to better care for their animals and to work with families who may not be able to take care of their pets.

“As a clinic, we have already offered a food pantry for families in this economic time who may not have the means to buy food for their pet,” Mansfield said. “There are shelters all across the state that have made this model successful on very little money, and have accomplished a lot, because they have a mission and a goal.”

With possible new funding, the SVSNC is proposing to build a new, larger animal shelter.

“What the city wants to do is find the best operation possible that cares for animals,” Degner said.

If the SVSNC could start a new shelter, members said it would follow a life saving model that has been successful in other pounds and shelters throughout the state. The model would reduce the intake of animals by helping people get their animals neutered. Mansfield says that any animal brought into the shelter would be automatically neutered and given vaccinations.

According to the number of animals in the shelter compared to the number of people actively looking to adopt, Mansfield said she would not be afraid of running out of room. The new shelter based out of the SVSNC would also offer foster care for the animals, until an adoptive home is found.

“I am confident by this time next year if we get the money from the city and county, that the death rate will not be the highest next year,” Mansfield said.

The new shelter would also have shelter veterinarians on hand who are trained for shelter cases. If an animal is ill or injured, Mansfield said it would be cared for. The model will also use subsidized surgery. If the family cannot afford to get the pet fixed, instead of giving the pet up, the shelter will offer spay or neuter surgery to be made in payments.

“You can’t kill animals and not do anything to stop reproduction. If you get an animal from our shelter, it will already be fixed.” Mansfield said.

Contact Danielle Strickler at strickdj@jmu.edu

Filed Under News

Share |

Comments

2 Responses to “City Plans Animal Rights Mediation”

Animal Lover on April 7th, 2010 5:08 pm

As someone who has spent many hours at the Rockingham- Harrisonburg SPCA, I found this article heartbreaking. I’m curious if you have ever spent any time at the SPCA? As someone who gives their time to make sure these animals are taken care of and find the right home it is quite unnerving to hear my work being looked at negatively. Perhaps an article on how the SPCA works and what someone would actually find there is in order?
I came back to JMU from spring break to find many employees at the SPCA hurt and confused. I found it selfish how the SVSNC is so quick to put down the SPCA and their attempt at something good. I think both groups would want to encourage each other in their love of animals and the goal of finding new homes for these animals.
Until they have seen the hard work and love that goes into making sure everything can be done to relocate and take care of the animals brought to the SPCA, I don’t think they should be so adamant about tearing down the SPCA and their reputation. Turning animals needing homes into a competition is not at all amusing. I think the focus of the SVSNC should be more on the animals and not harming a fellow group with the same goals.
Katrina Kiefer on May 12th, 2010 10:22 am

I think it’s very important to understand that not all SPCA’s are equal, nor do they all embrace the same principals at each shelter. It’s important to be prudent when throwing the term “SPCA” around without attaching WHICH SPCA facility one is discussing.

As a volunteer at the Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA I can understand how upsetting it might be for a volunteer to find their home SPCA under attack. PETA hates our Executive Director with a vengeance and attempted to block her appointment. Why? Because they don’t believe in a no kill philosophy and she does. So again, not all SPCA shelters are equal, though they should be. There is ALWAYS room for improvement of some kind whether it’s care, training or working harder to lower the kill rate.

It is outrageous that any SPCA organization anywhere saving only 45% of the animals brought in still calls itself the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. A 65% kill rate is reprehensible. More than that, it’s disgusting and has nothing to do with the staff and volunteers. It’s your Director and your Board and they ought to be ashamed. The Richmond SPCA is NOT a no kill shelter and yet they manage to save close to 85% of their animals.

In actuality, the Charlottesville SPCA had a save rate of 88% in 2008, not 85%. 3% might seem like a small number until you realize that 3% of 5,000 animals translates to150 additional innocent lives saved. The right numbers represent 93% of incoming dogs saved and 85% of cats. Total intake at the shelter from all sources: Lost, surrendered, and rescues from other organizations was 4,432 animals for both dogs and cats, and the shelter began the year with 558 animals in care. 3,099 of animals were adopted out, 582 that were lost were returned to their owners/guardians, 152 were transferred to other organizations for adoption. And lest you think we have a huge facility, we don’t.

Of healthy animals, 0 were euthanized, of treatable-rehabilitatable animals, 0 were euthanized, of treatable-manageable animals, 0 were euthanized. All of these numbers include animals that may have had a request from the owner that the animal be put down. 135 dogs and 369 cats considered untreatable & unhealthy were euthanized. 11 dogs and 122 cats either died of their wounds or illness or escaped from the shelter. At the end of the year there were 93 dogs in shelter care and 424 cats. The short answer is of the over 5,000 animals in CASPCA care for 2008, 504 HAD to be euthanized, or 12%. Let’s put all those animals in the Rockingham/Harrisonburg SPCA.

Using CASPCA’s numbers as an example, that means 12% of animals euthanized by RH SPCA would have been put down due to ill health, leaving 53%, let’s repeat that, 53% of healthy/treatable animals killed by RH SPCA. Why? I suspect, like all high kill shelters, a perceived lack of space and resources was the cause.

Hard numbers: If the RH SPCA was responsible for the care of 5,000 animals in 2008, they would have killed 2,650 healthy and/or treatable animals. TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FIFTY. How many of those might have had families on vacation who simply didn’t get home in time to save their animals?

Instead of feeling protective about your SPCA, why not encourage change? It’s entirely possible for RH SPCA to completely turn their numbers around, IF they want to. In 2004 CASPCA had a kill rate close to 40%, under the leadership of Susanne Kogut and an outstanding board, in 2006, only two short years later, that number dropped to under 10%. Just two years. You can do it, you can be the catalyst for change. Start with the people at Maddie’s Fund, http://www.maddiesfund.org, and go from there.