|
|
Ed Boks was the Executive Director of the Maricopa County Department Animal Care and Control in Phoenix, Arizona until December 2003 and the Executive Director of New York City's Department of Animal Care and Control until December 2005. He is currently the General Manager at Los Angeles Animal Services.
After 20 years of working in both the animal welfare and control fields, I came to assume, as I suspect many do, that there are two distinct schools of thought or disciplines in our industry, with more differences than commonalities. These two distinct methodologies have come to be known as humane/animal welfare programs and animal control programs. Usually, these two methodologies are contrasted with each other. An unintended consequence of contrasting these two programs is that over the years something of an animosity seems to have developed between these two branches of the same tree.
Thanks to such organizations as the National Animal Control Association (NACA), the American Humane Association (AHA), the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the Society of Animal Welfare Administrators (SAWA), the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) and others, much of this animosity has substantially subsided over recent years. The two schools of thought slowly learned from each other that there are more similarities between our separate missions than there are differences.
The recent societal awakening to the realities of the human/animal bond and the intrinsic value of all living creatures has given birth to a national movement called "no-kill." Although the values espoused by this new movement offer nothing new to most of us in the animal control field, it is ironic that the term "no-kill" seems to offend so many of my colleagues.
I submit that we in the animal control field should not shun or resent this new movement. On the contrary, we should embrace it. This movement belongs to us as much as it belongs to anyone. No-kill is nothing more than a manifestation of our own industry's evolution from regulatory rabies control programs to progressive animal care and control programs, with an ancillary rabies-monitoring component. Just as we were successful in substantially reducing the risk of rabies in our communities, so I believe, we can be key players in substantially reducing euthanasia of healthy adoptable pets.
Who can honestly argue with the concept of "no-kill"? Yes, we humanely euthanize animals because we are unable to adopt them all. But isn't the vision of no-kill what we all work for each and every day? Imagine for a moment the day when your organization won't have to humanely euthanize another healthy adoptable animal. Don't tell me no-kill isn't our vision too!
We have got to stop thinking in terms of "our organizations" and start thinking in terms of our communities. When you think in terms of community you will find that your animal control program is uniquely positioned to own your local no-kill movement. Let me explain. With all due respect to all the local no-kill shelters in America today, their reach is limited. Please, don't misunderstand, I applaud and appreciate all the no-kill organizations. But there is a big difference between a 3,000 square foot no-kill shelter and a 9,000 square mile no-kill county. Animal control programs can effectively raise the vision of no-kill to a community initiative.
Maricopa County is 9,200 square miles containing 24 of the fastest growing towns and cities in the United States, home to 3 million residents. Our vision is to create a no-kill community in which every citizen not only understands the no-kill ethic but also participates in achieving this goal.
But to truly become a no-kill community requires every local humane society, animal welfare, rescue and no-kill organization to marshal their resources to assist the one organization where the killing occurs.
Our challenge is to not just participate in, or even coordinate with, a community based no-kill initiative. We in animal control should take the lead! Animal control is where the killing occurs. Who really wants to end it more than we do? Our organizations provide the only real measure against which all the humane societies, animal welfare, no-kill and rescue organizations can even begin to determine their effectiveness. I humbly submit that before any donor or grantor gives $1 to any local humane/animal welfare organization that they should investigate what that organization does to reduce the killing in our animal control shelters.
As community leaders, we must rise above the rhetoric of "us versus them." All local organizations must roll up their sleeves and apply their resources where they will make a difference. Albert Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. I believe no-kill is an achievable goal. But it won't occur if our animal control and animal welfare organizations continue to do business as usual. No-kill is achievable only if we work together to implement bold new strategies and interventions that get results.
|
|
