New ideas in animal services from Calgary
Read Time:5 Minute, 39 Second
How’s this for a cool idea – an animal services department that actually provides services for your animals! What a radical notion.
How about benefits like a stray pet drive-home service that keeps animals out the shelter … how about someone trained in community relations and conflict resolution to help you resolve any pet-related problems with your neighbors … how about a free spay/neuter service for members of the public who can’t afford retail vet services … and how about a fund to pay local vets when a shelter animal needs medical care? But wait, there’s more … public and school education programs … and let’s throw in a rewards program for discounts with regional vendors on items ranging from pet food, to car-repair services, to yoga classes so you can recoup the cash you forked out for the price of a dog or cat license. All that is in addition to the basics of a well-run shelter system, volunteer-based programs, adoption services and animal-socialization programs.
Welcome, people, to the new look of animal services. It’s not happening in a privileged enclave for the wealthy like the Hamptons in New York or Montecito in California. It’s happening in a major metropolitan area just to the north of us … Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Calgary is a city larger than San Jose, California, and just a bit smaller than Dallas, Texas. It is as diverse as any city in the U.S.
Bill Bruce, director of Animal Services and Bylaws in Calgary, has approached ending the killing of shelter animals with a top-down, integrated community-policy approach.
Mr. Bruce is no magician, and he is certainly not a firebrand. He is as polite and unassuming a Canadian as you’ll find, but he does have a plan that he has executed to perfection, creating an animal services department that is a model for North America and beyond. Better still is the fact that it has been designed to be handed off to the next person in line, just like any well-run city services department. Sound boring? Not to all those animals whose lives have been saved.
Take cats, for instance. The return-to-owner rate for cats in the U.S. is a miserable 2 percent. In Calgary, 49 percent of cats are returned to their owners and 29 percent are adopted. That’s a 78 percent save rate. In this country, the save rate for cats by all methods … return to owner, adoption, transfer to rescue … is around 35 percent. While Calgary’s cat stats are far better than all but a few U.S. communities and certainly better than any U.S. city of comparable size, Calgary has not yet reached the 85 to 90 percent save rate for kitties regarded by most as the no-kill threshold, but Calgary’s live-release rate is climbing rapidly as cat-licensing compliance continues to climb and more and more kitties are returned to their families.
An amazing 90 percent of dogs are returned to their owners in Calgary, 9 percent of impounded dogs are adopted and only 5 percent are put down.
More impressive still is the fact that Calgary accomplishes this with no taxpayer dollars at all, which protects animal services and the animals from political wrangling over budget cuts and economic trends.
The department is funded entirely by pet-licensing fees and animal-regulation enforcement fines. A pet license is $30 for a fixed dog and $52 for an unaltered canine, and registration can be done online, in person and even at the bank. The fine for not licensing a dog is $250 to encourage compliance.
Bill Bruce believes in getting out in front of the problem. Unlike the complaint-driven, shelter-centric model of most U.S. animal control agencies, Calgary favors a proactive community-relations and enforcement model. The mission statement reads: “To encourage a safe, healthy, vibrant community for people and their pets, through the development, education and compliance of bylaws that reflect community values.” Calgary’s animal control officers are trained in community relations. They focus on public education about responsible pet ownership, pet-licensing compliance and addressing as many animal issues as possible out in the community before the animals become shelter problems. Bill has turned the dog catcher into a genuinely helpful community animal care resource.
Consequently, even though the population of the Calgary service area is comparable to that of a fairly large American city, the number of animals coming into the custody of animal services is low … about 5,000 animals impounded in Calgary in 2009 compared to over 30,000 in Dallas and over 17,000 in San Jose*. Keeping animals out of the shelter and in homes in the first place seems to me to be a better way to invest resources than trying to solve the puzzle after the animals have landed in already-crowded shelters.
The Calgary model is not without its detractors, however. What’s not to like? The main issues that some in the no-kill movement have is that they believe licensing compliance is a deterrent to multiple-pet households, and one of the strategies of no-kill is to encourage people to adopt as many pets as possible. Some have expressed particular alarm regarding cat licensing for fear that it will lead to licensing requirements for feral cats and fines and fees for community cat caregivers, who look after dozens or even hundreds of cats. Cat licensing is generally a taboo subject in No More Homeless Pets circles because, in U.S. cities and states anyway, putting that power in the hands of unsympathetic politicians and bureaucrats is a scary proposition.
The Calgary cat-licensing regulation is designed to specifically exclude ferals by limiting licensing only to cats who cohabit in a home. As Bill says, “Just because you occasionally give the neighbors’ kids a sandwich when their parents are away for the day doesn’t make them your kids.” To date, Calgary’s cat-licensing campaign has not adversely affected community cats or their caregivers.
Many regard the Calgary model as the future of municipal animal services operations, but getting there for most American cities will require turning the existing animal control paradigm that presides in the U.S. on ’its head.
Personally, I’d like to see a U.S. city identify a couple of zip codes and implement a pilot project, involving a few animal control officers who have done some understudy work in Calgary, which afterwards will compare before-and-after stats to make the case for the sweeping change that will be needed to put a Calgary-style program into effect in a major U.S. city.
Thanks to Best Friends Animal Society
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
Thanks for sharing useful tips on animal services Calgary.
It will never happen here, people would regard the license fee as a tax. It is a brilliant idea.
I’ve learned that Calgary did a lot to poll the community before implementing the cat licensing and educated the public about the many benefits. I mean REALLY educate!
Calgary really encourages and demonstrates that pets are valuable members of the family and it’s worth providing them with identification so they can be returned if they get lost. They thoroughly explain and show what the license fees are being used for – to fund animal services and not go into the city’s coffers. Services include various programs, spaying/neutering & vetting adoptable animals, providing free emergency vet care for stray animals (which could be your pet), and free s/n for pets of low-income families.
Pet licensing should not be implemented in a city unless all the barriers are removed and there are policies in place to protect animals, but encourage responsible ownership.
Pet limit barrier: London, Ontario (Canada) brought in cat licensing, but failed to remove their pet limit ordinance. Responsible cat owners who are over their pet limit and registered for licenses are being fined! (Their animal services are provided by a private company, but animal advocates want to see the city not renew the contract and to offer free spay/neuter services, etc, like Calgary does.)
MSN barrier: Cities should also not have MSN (mandatory spay/neuter ordinances). MSN is a barrier to getting as many pets licensed as possible. Yes, it should cost more to license an intact animal, pet owners need to be educated about the benefits, and free s/n should be available to qualified low-income pet owners – paid for with money from license sales.
BSL barrier: BSL (breed-specific legislation or Pitt Bull bans) is another barrier to getting people to license their dogs. Calgary looked at the research and found that BSL did NOT make communities safer; they educate children in school about preventing dog bites and communicate info to the public about responsible pet ownership. All dog bites are not the same; they are evaluated on an individual basis following their set criteria. Temperament testing is done by properly qualified people under the right circumstances, not the way it’s done in most shelters.
Incentive program: Calgary educates about the advantages of licenses and pet identification mentioned in the article above, as well as provide responsible pet owners with an extra incentive – a rewards savings card good for discounts off a wide variety of things from local businesses! The savings available more than offsets the cost of licenses.
TNR is a necessary part of the no kill equation & the only successful method people are willing to assist with. Calgary has TNR (Trap-Neuter-Return) for feral (community) cats through the MEOW Foundation. The city could do more to educate and get more people involved with TNR if they had information on the city website about it. In all the other cities that have achieved no kill with open admission shelters, they actively promote TNR. Some cities have also stopped loaning out live traps and stopped accepting feral cats at their shelters; instead, they refer people to the group or people responsible for TNR to learn about it. This could be an area Calgary needs to work on.
ID all pets: Some cities that find lost pets may fine the owners if the pets are microchipped or otherwise identified, but not wearing city tags. I believe Calgary will not do this as long as the pets they pick up have a current license on file. I don’t know if they conduct microchip clinics, but that is another way to help return more pets to their owners.
Help people find lost pets: The huge majority of cities, Calgary included, could offer better info to pet owners searching for their lost pets. There is great info online about using unique behavior-based info to help pet owners recover their lost pets. I know of one city that is training volunteer pet detectives to offer assistance, but there may be more. At the very least, it’s strongly recommended that cities, shelters, rescue groups, vets, etc, let pet owners know about the websites with free info so they can learn how to search for their pets themselves if assistance isn’t available.
(Recommended sites include the non-profit Missing Pet Partnership.org, http://www.missingpetpartnership.org;
their blog by founder Kat Albrecht, http://katalbrecht.com/blog/;
and Cats in the Bag.org, http://www.catsinthebag.org/
(Missing Animal Response, or MAR, is listed as one of the things that can help reduce shelter kill rates. Reuniting pets with their families also helps keep pets from taking up precious space in rescue groups & foster homes. See http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/pdf/MAR.pdf)
Very impressive!
Just for the record, Calgary is the second wealthiest city in Canada according to at least one ranking. It is a youthful, vibrant city built and fueled primarily by the oil industry. I am delighted to know that animal services innovation is happening there, but not surprised. Recently backyard chickens were also approved.
An amazing story. I can’t see an American city adopting such a program, not in a time when it’s cool to hate your fellow man.
This is absolutely marvelous. I congratulate the authors of this program. Finally a process that might actually work in reuniting our animals with their masters and saving millions of little lives. Bravo for posting this R.J.