Today, an article appeared on the Sydney Morning Herald stating, that the information presented by Saving Pets on the outcomes for pets in Brisbane City, at Lost Dogs Home’s shelters “turned out to be false”. I want to take a moment to address this.
The Lost Dogs Home took over running the Brisbane City Council’s two pounds (Warra on the northside and Willawong on the southside) from October 1st 2011. They did so after huge protests from the local community, but they assured everyone that not only would the city be saving money, but that the kill rate would come down under LDH management.
In fact, the organisation went as far as to suggest they would be meeting;
… a target of finding homes for 100 per cent of healthy cats and dogs that come through the Brisbane shelters within three years.
The information presented was never ‘false’ – it was given comprehensively and individual pets were presented as per Council records.
The data obtained under the FOI was the intakes and outcomes for pets impounded by council (private surrenders were not included in these reports, as those animals went straight to the shelter). I excluded from calculations any pets whose outcome was ‘unknown’ in order to be fair to the shelter.
The data from the FOI’s can be reviewed here;
– FOI Brisbane records – full animal records
– A breakdown of dog breeds killed at the LDH
It’s worth noting at the time the FOI for the full monthly breakdown for 2011/12 and 2012/13 (in September 2013) was obtained, the ‘official’ Lost Dogs Home figures for the year (July 2012 – June 2013) were not available.
Both the Lost Dogs Home and Brisbane City were approached for their full ‘official’ figures and they refused, stating they wouldn’t become available until the Lost Dogs Home Annual Report “sometime in November”. Figures wouldn’t be released until December.
Or more succinctly – by the time data is formally released by the Lost Dogs Home, it is a full six months ‘out of date’, despite monthly figures being available, well… monthly.
Despite both Council and the organisation vehemently defending their performance as best practice, official data would show Brisbane killed two dogs killed for every one dog they adopted. For cats there was an indisputable bloodbath, with more than 1,000 cats killed in a single year.
Well, again, no ‘official’ figures are available, and we can assume based on previous years, they won’t be available much before christmas.
But a few stats were scattered amongst the article…
Brisbane City Council Lifestyle Chairman Krista Adams said cat-killing rates at the municipality’s two shelters in Bracken Ridge and Willawong, dropped by 10 per cent this financial year during budget information sessions at City Hall on Monday…. While still high at 60 per cent, the cat euthanasia rate has dropped by 16 per cent in two years…
Based on last year’s figures, the shelter killed about 70% of cats – or 7/10.
This year they killed 6/10 – or about 950 cats.
Or this many…
So you know… no big thing.
Once you’ve finished celebrating that result, check this one out.
Dog euthanasia rates also dropped marginally, down to 17 per cent in 2013/14 from 20 per cent in 2012/13.
Re-homing rates of pound dogs grew to 400 in the 2013/14 financial year, up from 342 in 2012/13.
That is a 3% drop from the previous year.
We know that last year, 342 dogs were adopted, while nearly twice as many (743) were killed.
Is a 3% decrease in killing anything to celebrate? Really?
Are these results worth championing in the media? Really?
The City of Brisbane is paying the Lost Dogs Home nearly $1 million dollars a year to process about 5,000 pets (3,500 dogs/1500 cats). Or in other words, about $200 per pet.
Last year, they completed just 500 adoptions, while nearly 2,000 animals were killed.
The City spent $400,000 on dead pets.
Cr Adams said while the council was aiming to continue reducing dog and cat euthanasia rates and increase rehoming rates, a zero kill rate was impossible.
It almost certainly is, under the current administration.
If the City of Brisbane is willing to pay their pound contractor for processing pets – and to continue to pay $200 per animal, even if that animal ends up in an incinerator – then yes, a zero kill rate is a improbability.
If the Lost Dogs Home is willing to continue to accept payment of $200 per pet, for pets it has no intention of saving – then yes, a zero kill rate is an improbability.
These two factors practically ensure a zero kill rate – or even a shelter which is a safe place for pets – is impossible.
“On their contractual obligations, they (Lost Dogs Home) have delivered very, very well over the last three years.”
The killing is rubber stamped to continue.
See also: Brisbane two dogs killed for every one dog adopted
A disaster unfolds in Brisbane
The last defence, obscuration
Every dog is an-individual every dog should matter
Please share this we have to make the killing stop
Disgusting – institutionalised killing – I don’t know how the LDH staff can live with themselves!!