Humane Society of Huron Valley (HSHV)

In June, 2007, the Humane Society of Huron Valley (HSHV) announced a capital campaign to raise $7.5 million for the construction a new facility.  This is a tragic error that will have long-term detrimental consequences for the companion animals of Washtenaw County.  HSHV's mistake in planning this new facility was to look at other animal control shelters for guidance -- and failing to look at the bigger picture of whether those shelters provide a viable model for the future.

The animal welfare paradigm has changed dramatically over the past 20 years -- and HSHV has failed to change with it.  In enlightened communities, no longer is animal control equated with animal welfare -- and HSHV remains an animal control organization -- and this new facility will lock them into that archaic role for many more years.

Animal control is the legal responsibility of Washtenaw County.  Rather than constructing a new facility,  HSHV should turn its animal control activities back to the County NOW -- and re-orient its efforts toward protecting and preserving the animals it represents.

What HSHV should not be doing

• Killing.  Over the past 15 years about half of the dogs and cats received by HSHV have ended up dead -- about 40% for dogs, about 60% for cats (about 25% of each being puppies and kittens!!) -- in numbers, one killing about every 35 minutes of a normal work week.  Worse, that hasn't changed significantly over those 15 years -- there is no observable trend indicating that HSHV's efforts to reduce the killing have been effective.

  Don't be misled into thinking that HSHV does this killing more "kindly" than would the County.  Euthanasia and its procedures and methods are tightly regulated by the state -- and is done no differently whether by HSHV, a vet clinic or the County.

  Killing is an animal control function -- the business of government (in this case Washtenaw County) -- not a Humane Society.  In an age when 75% of households with dogs and over 50% of households with cats now consider them "family members" (latest APPMA survey), this practice is simply unconscionable.  Modern animal welfare organizations let government do the killing -- and then work diligently -- with the community -- to reduce the need to kill.  (For a fuller treatment of this issue, see Ed Duvin's 1990 paper, Speciesism: Alive and Well.)

• Cruelty investigations.  This too is an animal control function.  The investigation and enforcement of existing laws is the business of government -- not something to be privatized to outsiders simply because the beneficiaries of those laws happen to be animals and not people.

• Centralized Adoption.  Now this is an animal welfare function -- but of limited effectiveness (and needlessly inefficient and expensive) concentrated in a central facility.  HSHV dog/cat adoptions account for less than 15% of such adoptions in Washtenaw County.  Some adoptions are done by vet clinics, breeders and pet stores -- but the vast majority are done person-to-person -- and these adoptions are not even on HSHV's radar screen.  Modern animal welfare organizations employ aggressive out-reach to aid and facilitate all adoptions and conduct community-based programs to ensure their sterilization so as to control the over-population which is the root cause of all the killing.

• Centralized Education.  This could be "animal welfare" -- and I assume an important function of the planned facility.  But bringing people to a facility to be "educated" is just "preaching to the choir".  What HSHV is really teaching -- every day with its animal control activities -- is that animals are disposable -- just bring us that cat or dog you no longer want and we'll take it off your hands.  That's another reason that modern animal welfare organizations have turned their animal control activities back to their local governments.

• Vet clinic.  And this is neither "control" or "welfare" -- but a free-standing profit center in direct competition with the many veterinarians in the region who are simply trying to make a living for their families.  These vets are a vital part of our community -- it's simply impossible to have community-based animal welfare programs without their full cooperation and support -- and one does not win that cooperation and support by competing with them.

What HSHV should be doing.

HSHV should be concentrating its time and resources on mobilizing the community to solve the central problem that's causing the killing -- too many dogs and cats for too few homes.  So long as this over-population exists, the killing will continue.

Note that the emphasis is on "mobilizing the community" -- because HSHV cannot solve this problem alone.  HSHV's role must be that of a "facilitator" -- not a "service provider".

There are only two humane ways to solve this problem -- increase the number of homes (and/or pets/home) and limit the population through sterilization.  Both of these activities require aggressive out-reach into and involving the community to be effective -- see Examples of modern animal welfare programs below.

Why HSHV can't do both animal control and welfare

The evidence says they can't:

• HSHV still kills about half of the dogs and cats it receives, even after many years of trying to reduce that number

• Every community that has chosen to emphasize animal welfare has first had to give up animal control, i.e., turn those activities back to their local government (whose obligation it is).  Only then have they been able to effectively advocate for the animals.

And there are reasons:

• Precedence.  Animal control activities take precedence over animal welfare objectives because of the daily workload animal control requires as well the government oversight resulting from the fact that it's paying (albeit under-paying) for those activities.

• Funding.  Supporting a large facility trying to do both functions places fundraising demands on HSHV that are antithetical to effective animal welfare programs, e.g., if one is serious about reducing dog/cat over-population, one offers free sterilizations -- not low-cost (and only on certain days).

• Attitude.  The mere existence of a large facility causes the people manning the facility to come to feel that the community should come to them rather than they to the community as effective animal welfare programs require.

• Culture.  Large organizations like HSHV tend to come to the expectation that they can do (or should do, or must do) everything in their realm of interest -- which is the opposite mindset from what animal welfare programs require.

• Fear.  Since a major portion of HSHV facility and staff are currently devoted to animal control activities, solving the over-population problem can be seen/felt as putting themselves "out of business".

Why it would be better for the County to do animal control.

There are several reasons -- for both the animals and the community:

• Responsibility.  Animal control is the County's job -- their responsibility.

• Capability.  The County can do animal control as well -- possibly better -- certainly more efficiently, less expensively and better managed.  HSHV currently has a "professional" board (assembled to facilitate new facility fundraising).  That has frequently not been the case in the past -- nor will it in the future (when the current board disassembles).  HSHV has a long history of arbitrary personnel and program changes.  The County operates under strict personnel guidelines and constraints -- and conducts its programs under strict written policies and procedures.

• Openness of information.  The County, being a public entity, has legal requirements for openness of information -- HSHV has no such requirements.  Although the current board is stressing openness (see board minutes and financial reports recently added to the HSHV website), there is no assurance that openness will continue (and based on past performance, it will not).  Freed of animal control, HSHV can be an effective watchdog on the County, ensuring proper treatment of the animals.  If HSHV retains the animal control function, there is no "watchdog" and the community must rely on HSHV's "good intentions" (which have varied dramatically in the past and can be expected to do so in the future).

• Openness to animals.  The County would have an "open door" policy -- accepting all animals brought to them (because if they didn't, they'd have to deal with the consequences -- those rejected coming back to them as dumped "strays").  While HSHV has at times had an open-door policy, that appears (from people reports and HSHV intake numbers) to have changed recently -- probably in anticipation of their capital campaign.  It's easy for HSHV to show reduced euthanasia numbers by rejecting those animals they perceive to be unadoptable.

Examples of modern animal welfare programs

Aggressive sterilization programs provide the greatest and fastest impact: 

Education.  Most people in the community understand the need to sterilize their pets.  More would if they came to understand that each new birth from their pets results (albeit indirectly) in the death of another pet -- the new birth simply displaces another pet in the over-all pet population.  This understanding needs to be aggressively promulgated throughout the community -- not through "classes" -- but by "spreading the word" -- media, hand-outs, posters, person-to-person, etc.

Free sterilization.  There are many people who simply can't afford to sterilize their pets -- the young, elderly, unemployed, those on social security disability.  Only free sterilization -- made as easy and convenient to them as possible -- will get these pets sterilized -- and even then may require pressure and/or help from caring neighbors, rental managers, vet clinics, etc.

As many owners of businesses, malls, apartment complexes, trailer parks, will attest, "trap and kill" doesn't work -- within a year or two their population of unowned cats is right back where it was.  The problem is that it's impossible to trap them all -- and the few survivors quickly re-populate the area up to the limits of their food supply.  That's where managed trap-neuter-release (TNR) may provide a solution. 

Managed TNR.  Here a caregiver with unowned cats living on their property provides them with daily food and water.  As the cats become accustomed to this feeding routine, they become easy to trap (whereupon they're sterilized, ear-tipped and returned to their colony).  Eventually even the most wary will come to feed -- and the caregiver, aided by the tipped ears, can be certain they've trapped and sterilized all.  Further, the colony tends to protect its territory -- newcomers are discouraged from joining the colony -- but even when an occasional one is allowed to join, the caregiver, following their daily routine, can easily identify, trap and sterilize them.

The objective of managed TNR is to eliminate the population of unowned cats through attrition.  Managed TNR is now accepted by HSUS and most national animal organizations as the only viable way to attack the problem of unowned cats.  Of course, the sterilizations need to be free -- the cats are not even theirs -- and everything possible needs to be done to aid and assist the caregivers -- and to encourage new caregivers.

County shelter.  Most important is a County-run shelter.  This would encourage the formation of other rescue groups (beyond HSHV, Mosaic, some of the vet clinics).  Each group has its own audience, region of influence, methods and rules for adoption, means of sheltering, etc.  A pet waiting in a County facility (or for that matter, HSHV's) to be killed, doesn't much care who rescues them -- only that they got a reprieve -- and hopefully a new home.  And the more groups trying to save these pets from being killed, the higher the likelihood that they won't be -- that they will find a new home.

Rental properties.  Work with the owners of rental properties to loosen up their rules (and costs) for having pets -- perhaps a fund or blanket insurance policy, county-wide, to cover any pet damage to their properties.

Adoption rules.  Loosen up adoption rules -- while everyone would prefer to see pets adopted only into the best and permanent homes, I'm sure the pets would choose most any home over death.

What community members can do

Initiate.  Initiate any of these modern animal welfare programs on your own -- even if only in your local vicinity -- regardless of HSHV.  These kinds of programs can be done only by you.  All HSHV can do is provide you with support and assistance -- which would be welcomed -- but certainly not necessary.

Influence.  Contact HSHV board members and management to try to influence them to change their direction.  And if you disagree with their direction, withhold your support until such time as they show some willingness to change.

March 2008 Update