June 12, 2009
Re: Proposed Reduction of Free Pet Sterilization and Vaccination Services
Dear City Manager Ott and City Council:
As you look at the many challenges facing you for the City budget, I am writing to strongly urge you to keep the free pet sterilization and vaccination program fully funded as a core part of the City’s general fund budget. These services are a critical part of the foundation on which Austin’s animal welfare organizations are building our efforts to end the unnecessary killing of homeless pets in Austin. To be blunt, I do not believe Austin can be successful in becoming what our industry refers to as “a humane community” without this program.
In fact, the long track record of proven success of Austin’s free sterilization and vaccination program was one of the key factors that led the ASPCA to select our city as a target community for the ASPCA Mission: Orange project. The partnership between Emancipet and the City of Austin in providing this critical service makes Austin a leader in animal welfare, and the program is one that many communities around the nation are working to emulate.
The reason for our steadfast support of this free sterilization program is that targeted spay/neuter programs like this one are proven to reduce intake, save lives, reduce sheltering costs, and protect people from dog bites and zoonotic diseases such as rabies. Every single animal advocate or leader of a national animal welfare agency in our nation cites spay/neuter as one of the most fundamental and important programs for ending euthanasia.
The problem with even a temporary reduction in funding for the free sterilization program is that animal reproduction causes exponential population growth. If we reduce spay/neuter services for even one year, Austin will never regain the ground lost. In particular, the animals in our targeted communities (high intake, low income) that would have been spayed or neutered during that year WILL reproduce, and a portion of their offspring WILL end up at the City’s shelter. When that happens, it will either increase your sheltering costs (by $141.95 per animal for an average stay at your shelter), or if you cannot accommodate the extra intake, it will increase euthanasia rates, which is tragic and avoidable.
We understand the difficult position you are in, as we have worked with other City governments around the nation as they struggle with similar budget shortfalls and the cuts that must be made. I believe that Austin has become a model for animal welfare in large part because the level of City funding for animal welfare has now reached an adequate level and has garnered us the successes we have seen in the past few years. Any reductions to animal welfare programs in Austin will set us back and are certainly not recommended.
However, we do understand that some reductions may simply be necessary in these difficult times. If that is the case, we at the ASPCA believe that the City’s proposed reduction to the feral cat medical care/sterilization program or possibly the free microchip program, while painful, would be less damaging and would have far less of an impact on live outcomes and euthanasia than the reductions to the free sterilization and vaccination program.
Please let me know if I can be of assistance in any way, and thank you for your consideration of this important issue.
Karen L. Medicus
Senior Director ASPCA Mission: Orange
358-7005
karenm@aspca.org
www.aspca.org
