Australian authorities have sparked a backlash by killing a group of dingoes linked to the death of a young Canadian woman on an island in the country’s east.
The Queensland government said six wild dogs were put down after 19-year-old backpacker Piper James’s body was found on January 19 at a beach on the World Heritage-listed island of K’gari.
The euthanization program has stirred debate about how to manage the local population of dingoes, a sandy-colored canine believed to have first arrived in Australia 4,000 to 5,000 years ago.
An autopsy conducted on James’ body found evidence “consistent with drowning” but also detected injuries corresponding to dingo bites. Police said her body had been discovered 90 minutes after she went for a morning swim.
“Pre-mortem dingo bite marks are not likely to have caused immediate death,” said a spokesperson for the Coroners Court of Queensland.
The coroner’s investigation into the cause of death was expected to take several weeks.
In response, the Queensland government said a pack of 10 dingoes involved would be euthanized after rangers had observed some “aggressive behavior.”
Six of the dingoes had already been euthanized, the state’s environment minister, Andrew Powell, told reporters Sunday.
“Obviously, the operation will continue,” he said.
The traditional owners of K’gari, the Butchulla people, said the state’s failure to consult with them before euthanizing the dingoes — or wongari in their language — was “unexpected and disappointing.”
“Once again, it feels as though economic priorities are being placed above the voices of the people and traditional owners, which is frustrating and difficult to accept,” the Butchulla Aboriginal Corporation said in a statement to Australian media this week.
“They’re just being wild animals”
Wildlife experts said killing the animals was the wrong response and may threaten the island’s dingo population, estimated at just 70-200 animals.
Given their small numbers, killing a pack of 10 animals would harm the population’s genetic diversity, said Mathew Crowther, professor of quantitative conservation biology at the University of Sydney.
“There’s no moral from the dingoes’ point of view. They’re just being wild animals, doing wild things,” Crowther told AFP.
Dingoes tend to lose their fear of people as they interact with tourists, some of whom defy advice against feeding the animals.
“That’s the worst thing you can do to a wild animal,” Crowther said.
“They just relate humans to food, and if you don’t give them food, well, you are food — that’s basically how it is.”
Dingoes are wild, predatory animals and need to be treated with respect, said Bill Bateman, associate professor in the school of molecular and life sciences at Curtin University.
The canines are more likely to attack children or people who are alone, and may be triggered when people turn their backs or run, he said.
“These are important animals, and therefore we need to change the way we deal with them, otherwise we’re just going to keep reacting to these attacks and driving the population of dingoes down,” Bateman told AFP.
Wildlife managers, rangers, Indigenous people and tourism operators need to work together so that humans and dingoes can coexist on the island, he said.
Todd James, the father of Piper, has described on social media how his family’s hearts were “shattered” by her death.
News of the dingoes’ euthanization was “heart-wrenching,” he told Australian media, adding however that he recognized it may be necessary for safety because of the pack’s behavior.
Todd James previously said a “smoke ceremony” for his daughter would be held in Australia, and the family planned to attend, according to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
A dingo is seen on a beach in Austalia on March 26, 2002.
Fairfax Media via Getty Images via Getty Images
Local mayor George Seymour told 9News the last fatal dingo attack on the island was 25 years ago and that there had been “an escalation of aggressive dingo activity” in recent years.
“A big part of what (the rangers) do is to try and separate dingoes from humans, but we’re continuing to have this situation of dingoes, and in some ways it’s inevitable that there will be a fatality, given how many bites and attacks are happening over the years,” Seymour told 9News.
The government’s Ministry of Environment and Tourism issued an alert last month, saying that “heightened dingo activity has been recorded at several locations along the eastern beach” on K’gari.
Three years ago, a pack of dingoes mauled a 23-year-old jogger in an attack police said was almost fatal. The dogs had driven the woman into the surf before a tourist came to her rescue, beating off the dingoes. Police said the man had saved her life.
In 2023, two Australian women were fined about $1,500 for taking selfies and videos of themselves posing with dingoes on the island.
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay (AP) — Uruguay’s senate passed a law decriminalizing euthanasia on Wednesday, putting the South American nation among a handful of other countries where seriously ill patients can legally obtain help to end their lives.
It makes Uruguay the first country in predominantly Catholic Latin America to allow euthanasia via legislation. Colombia and Ecuador have decriminalized the practice through Supreme Court decisions.
Fierce debates and spirited activism around the practice has gripped the region in recent years.
“Public opinion is asking us to take this on,” Sen. Patricia Kramer of Uruguay’s governing leftist coalition told lawmakers in the country’s capital of Montevideo.
A woman shouts, “Murderers” in Spanish after Uruguay’s senate passed a law decriminalizing euthanasia, in Montevideo, Uruguay, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025. (AP Photo/Matilde Campodonico)
The law, which moved forward in fits and starts over the last five years, cleared its final hurdle on Wednesday as 20 out of 31 senators voted in favor. The lower house approved the bill in August with a large majority. All that’s left is for the government to implement the regulations.
During the debate, senators from the ruling Broad Front coalition delivered impassioned defenses of the right to die, comparing the euthanasia movement to the legalization of divorce and same-sex marriage.
“We all believe and feel that life is a right, both in health and in sickness, but it should never be an obligation because others don’t understand such unbearable suffering,” Sen. Daniel Borbonet said after quoting testimony from Uruguayan patients with irreversible medical conditions.
Most opposition to euthanasia in Uruguay came from the Catholic Church. Before the vote, Daniel Sturla, the archbishop of Montevideo, called on Uruguayans “to defend the gift of life and to remember that every person deserves to be cared for, accompanied and supported until the end.”
But secularization has eroded resistance to the practice in this country of 3.5 million people, which bans any mention of God in oaths of office and calls Christmas “Family Day.”
People celebrate after Uruguay’s senate passed a law decriminalizing euthanasia, in Montevideo, Uruguay, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025. (AP Photo/Matilde Campodonico)
Officials hailed the law’s passage as reinforcing Uruguay’s reputation as among the most socially liberal nations in the region. The country was first in the world to legalize marijuana for recreational use and passed pioneering legislation allowing same-sex marriage and abortion over a decade ago.
“This is a historic event, which places Uruguay at the forefront in addressing deeply human and sensitive issues,” said Vice President Carolina Cosse.
The legislation permits euthanasia, performed by a healthcare professional, but not assisted suicide, which involves a patient self-administering a lethal dose of prescribed medication.
Unlike laws in U.S. states, Australia and New Zealand restricting euthanasia to those with a life expectancy of no more than six months or a year, Uruguay sets no time limits. It also not does require a waiting period, and allows anyone suffering from an incurable illness that causes “unbearable suffering” to seek assisted death, even if their diagnosis is not terminal.
Uruguay requires that those seeking euthanasia to be mentally competent.
Although the law does not outright ban euthanasia for those with mental conditions like depression, it requires that patients get two doctors to rule that they are psychologically fit enough to make the decision.
Unlike Belgium, Colombia and the Netherlands, Uruguay will not allow euthanasia for minors.
Uruguay’s senate passed a law decriminalizing euthanasia on Wednesday, putting the South American nation among a handful of other countries where seriously ill patients can legally obtain help to end their lives.
It makes Uruguay the first country in predominantly Catholic Latin America to allow euthanasia via legislation. Colombia and Ecuador have decriminalized the practice through Supreme Court decisions.
In Chile, left-wing President Gabriel Boric recently revived a push for the approval of an euthanasia bill long stalled in the Senate.
After two decades living with Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), Beatriz Gelos was hoping Uruguay’s Senate would finally pass a euthanasia bill on October 15, 2025, ending years of parliamentary back-and-forth and resistance.
EITAN ABRAMOVICH/AFP/Getty
Fierce debates and spirited activism around the practice has gripped the region in recent years.
“Public opinion is asking us to take this on,” Sen. Patricia Kramer of Uruguay’s governing leftist coalition told lawmakers in the country’s capital of Montevideo.
The law, which moved forward in fits and starts over the last five years, cleared its final hurdle on Wednesday as 20 out of 31 senators voted in favor. The lower house approved the bill in August with a large majority. All that’s left is for the government to implement the regulations.
During the debate, senators from the ruling Broad Front coalition delivered impassioned defenses of the right to die, comparing the euthanasia movement to the legalization of divorce and same-sex marriage.
“We all believe and feel that life is a right, both in health and in sickness, but it should never be an obligation because others don’t understand such unbearable suffering,” Sen. Daniel Borbonet said, after quoting testimony from Uruguayan patients with irreversible medical conditions.
Most opposition to euthanasia in Uruguay came from the Catholic Church. Before the vote, Daniel Sturla, the archbishop of Montevideo, called on Uruguayans “to defend the gift of life and to remember that every person deserves to be cared for, accompanied and supported until the end.”
But secularization has eroded resistance to the practice in this country of 3.5 million people, which bans any mention of God in oaths of office and calls Christmas “Family Day.”
Beatriz Gelos, who suffers from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and hopes to end her life through euthanasia, is wheeled to her room at the nursing home where she lives in Montevideo, Uruguay, Oct. 10, 2025.
EITAN ABRAMOVICH/AFP/Getty
Officials hailed the law’s passage as reinforcing Uruguay’s reputation as among the most socially liberal nations in the region. The country was first in the world to legalize marijuana for recreational use and passed pioneering legislation allowing same-sex marriage and abortion over a decade ago. Both laws were passed by secular, socially liberal former President José Mujica, who died aged 89 in May.
“This is a historic event, which places Uruguay at the forefront in addressing deeply human and sensitive issues,” said Vice President Carolina Cosse.
The legislation permits euthanasia, performed by a healthcare professional, but not assisted dying, which involves a patient self-administering a lethal dose of prescribed medication.
Unlike laws in U.S. states, Australia and New Zealand restricting assisted dying to those with a life expectancy of no more than six months or a year, Uruguay sets no time limits. It also does not require a waiting period, and allows anyone suffering from an incurable illness that causes “unbearable suffering” to seek assisted death, even if their diagnosis is not terminal.
Uruguay requires those seeking euthanasia to be mentally competent.
Although the law does not outright ban euthanasia for those with mental conditions like depression, it requires that patients get two doctors to rule that they are psychologically fit enough to make the decision.
Unlike Belgium, Colombia and the Netherlands, Uruguay will not allow euthanasia for minors.
JUST eight years after euthanasia was legalised in Canada, some doctors there say the result is “horrendous” as more and more people are driven to it by a failing health-care system.
Assisted deaths have risen at an alarming rate, while the criteria to be given a lethal injection has been relaxed.
3
Alicia Duncan, left, with her late mother Donna, who was helped to take her own lifeCredit: Supplied
3
Pro-assisted dying supporters at WestminsterCredit: EPA
Now experts warn it would be disastrous to allow a system like Canada’s Medical Assistance In Death (Maid) in the UK, after the families of some of those who opted for it revealed they did so because they could not access medical help.
Professor Leonie Herx, a Canadian palliative medicine consultant based in Calgary, Alberta, described the outcome as “horrific from a medical perspective”.
In 2017, the first full year the legislation was in place, one per cent of deaths in Canada were from euthanasia.
By 2022, it was four per cent, as 13,241 people opted for Maid.
Supporters insist the bill is strictly to help the terminally ill.
Ms Leadbeater said: “I believe that, with the right safeguards in place, people who are already dying and are mentally competent should be given the choice of a shorter, less painful death on their own terms and without placing family and loved ones at risk of prosecution.
“It will not undermine calls for improvements to palliative care. Nor will it conflict with the rights of people with disabilities to be treated equally and have the respect and support they are right to campaign for in order to live fulfilling lives.”
But this is very similar to how Canada’s law was introduced — and now the rules there have softened and the numbers resorting to euthanasia have soared.
My parents held hands as they passed away by assisted dying – we supported ‘beautiful’ decision, it wasn’t a surprise
When Maid was introduced in Canada in 2016, it was limited to the terminally ill.
But following a legal challenge in 2021 it was made available to those whose death was NOT “reasonably foreseeable”.
A further change due to come into force in March 2027 will open up the service to people whose sole medical condition is MENTAL illness.
Doctors in Canada have approved assisted dying after just ZOOM calls, and some politicians want to extend the practice to CHILDREN old enough to make an “informed” choice.
Requests for Maid are now much more frequently approved in Canada than in 2019, when eight per cent of requests were denied.
In 2022, that figure fell to 3.5 per cent, a Health Canada report says.
I believe that, with the right safeguards in place, people who are already dying and are mentally competent should be given the choice of a shorter, less painful death on their own terms and without placing family and loved ones at risk of prosecution
Kim Leadbeater
The report adds that 17 per cent of those who applied cited “isolation or loneliness”, while nearly 36 per cent believed they were a “burden on family, friends or care-givers”.
The number of Canadians ending their lives via Maid — usually given in the form of an injection administered by a physician — has outpaced other nations with similar laws.
And its legislation has grown far looser than those of other countries offering assisted dying, such as Belgium and the Netherlands.
One expert claimed that what has happened in Canada could happen in the UK because both countries have a struggling health system and an ageing population.
Canadian-born Alexander Raikin, a researcher at the Ethics And Public Policy Centre in Washington DC, said: “Euthanasia in Canada was meant to be rare and last resort, but it isn’t. It has become routine.
“Assisted deaths have seen dram-atic rates of growth in all the places that have legalised it, like the Netherlands, Switzerland and Oregon in the US, but in Canada that rate has been quite unprecedented. The similarities between Canada and the UK . . . suggest the UK is likely to follow Canada’s route.
“I don’t think it is a coincidence that this massive surge happens at the same time our health system is collapsing. It should ring alarm bells in Britain.”
In an interview with the Sun on Sunday, Canadian Alicia Duncan told, from her home in Mission, British Columbia, how her “active and happy” mother was given a fast-track death in 2021. She opted for it because she could not get the healthcare she needed.
Alicia, 41, an interior designer, now warns the UK about the perils of following Canada’s lead.
Her mum Donna, a psychiatric nurse, suffered a brain injury in a minor car crash but despite not facing immediate death, and receiving treatment for mental health symptoms, the 61-year-old’s Maid request was granted.
Despite protests by her daughter and long-serving GP, she was helped to take her own life just 48 hours later.
Alica said: “People in Britain should be very worried about this.
3
Now, in the UK, a bill to legalise the early ending of life has been introduced in Parliament by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater
“It won’t stop at terminal illness alone. The UK needs to look at what happened in Canada.
“People think, ‘This will never happen to me’. I never thought my mother, who was active and happy, would have chosen to end her life because of a mental illness, and been helped to do so.
“I would say to Britain, you need to be cautious because once you decide to open this door you don’t get to choose who walks through.
“The moment you legalise euthanasia it starts as a crack then it becomes a wide-open chasm and there is nothing you can do to stop it.”
Since their mother’s death, Alicia and her sister Christie have been denied key details about the circumstances and believe safe-guards to protect vulnerable people were not followed properly.
She added: “I am so angry. People are choosing to die because they can’t access healthcare in a timely manner.
The moment you legalise euthanasia it starts as a crack then it becomes a wide-open chasm and there is nothing you can do to stop it
Alicia Duncan
“My mum was waiting to see a specialist for 18 months and her appointment was the week after she died.
“It’s easier to die in Canada than to access healthcare.”
Ms Carr — who has rare genetic condition arthrogryposis multiplex congenita, which affects her joints and muscles, and uses a wheelchair, warned: “These laws will put lives like mine, marginalised lives, at risk and those risks will be fatal.
“All because of the dangerous assumption some of us are better off dead. Let’s be aware, maybe it’s going to be like Canada, and that is terrifying.”
This week in Canada, a 51-year old gran from Nova Scotia told how doctors offered her Maid while she was in hospital about to undergo a mastectomy for breast cancer.
These laws will put lives like mine, marginalised lives, at risk and those risks will be fatal
Liz Carr
Before she went in for what she hoped was life-saving surgery, the doctor sat her down and asked: “Did you know about Medical Assistance In Dying?”
She was then asked again before undergoing a second mastectomy nine months later, and a third time while in the recovery room after that procedure.
Around three quarters of Brits support assisted dying, a survey this year from advocacy group Dying With Dignity found, while just 14 per cent of us oppose it.
“If I decide my own life is not worth living, please may I ask for help to die.”
But the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, said of the bill: “This approach is both dangerous and sets us in a direction even more dangerous.
All I’m asking is that we be given the dignity of choice. If I decide my own life is not worth living, please may I ask for help to die
Esther Rantzen
“In every place where it’s been done, it has led to a slippery slope.
“The right to end your life could too easily, all too accidentally, turn into a duty to do so.”
‘BRITS, BE WARNED OF PERIL’
By Prof Leonie Herx, Professor of Palliative Medicine at the University of Calgary
IN Canada, a doctor-administered lethal injection has become the solution to almost any suffering, which is horrific from a medical perspective.
Any adult with a disability or chronic illness can get an “assisted death”.
There is no requirement to receive any treatment for even a reversible condition and sometimes it is the only “intervention” provided.
I have seen a person’s worst day become their last.
We are seeing people getting Maid for poverty, social isolation or deprivation.
It is routinely offered to any potentially eligible person as they access a care home, at time of surgery or during hospital admission for a health crisis.
It has altered the practice of medicine here and is leading to the premature death of many vulnerable people.
It has become something it never started as, something no Canadian could have imagined.
The UK should take warning.
Keep medicine invested in helping people restore their health and live well.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is seeking to add kennels to the Palmdale Animal Care Center and make them more accessible to visitors following a Times investigation into rising dog euthanasia rates in the Antelope Valley.
At a meeting of the board Tuesday, Supervisors Kathryn Barger, whose district includes Palmdale and Lancaster, and Hilda Solis brought forward a motion asking that the county’s Department of Animal Care and Control look into building temporary kennels and search for other facilities that could be used to house more dogs.
The urgent motion received unanimous approval.
“Right now, during this crisis in our animal care centers, we must find creative ways to do better, especially up in the Antelope Valley,” Barger said at the meeting. “It is clear that there are many issues here and there is a need for urgent and effective improvements.”
Supervisors also directed staff to review department policies and practices after The Times identified inconsistencies in outreach to rescue organizations about dogs that are most at risk of euthanasia.
A spokesperson for the Department of Animal Care and Control said officials were unavailable Tuesday afternoon to provide a comment.
The Palmdale shelter, which opened in 2016, was meant to relieve overcrowding at the nearby Lancaster shelter and reduce the number of dogs being euthanized there.
But together, the Palmdale and Lancaster shelters’ dog euthanasia rates have nearly doubled in recent years — from about 15% in 2018 to 28% through this August. And they’re on track this year to kill dogs at nearly twice the average rate of the other five county-run facilities, The Times found.
More recent statistics released by the department on the Antelope Valley sites show similar rates. From July through October, the Palmdale shelter euthanized 352 of 1,388 dogs impounded, or 25%. In Lancaster, 470 of 1,500 dogs impounded during that time, or 31%, were put down. Cats are euthanized at even higher rates.
In September, the supervisors requested that the department look into expanding the Palmdale facility, saying its limited housing capacity was inadequate to serve the region.
The Palmdale shelter has 68 dog kennels, but through August this year had taken in more dogs than larger shelters, including Baldwin Park, which has more than 190 dogkennels, and Downey, which has 180.
Barger and Solis’ motion Tuesday said it could cost more than $25 million to expand the Palmdale shelter. The motion requested more cost-effective, short-term solutions to house more dogs, and addressed the shelter’s accessibility problems as well.
In Palmdale, for example, most dogs are kept in an area that the public can visit only with a staff or volunteer escort. People wanting information about dogs available for adoption can view a corkboard pinned with the animals’ photos, but those are often dark or of poor quality. Some dogs in Baldwin Park also require an escort to be seen.
The board requested recommendations Tuesday for allowing visitors to view and access all adoptable dogs in Palmdale and Baldwin Park without an escort.
The Times also reported on cases when the shelters failed to follow department guidelines to enlist help from rescue groups before putting a dog down. In other cases, dogs were euthanized within days of being featured at adoption events or on social media, which some rescuers and volunteers said did not give the public enough time to adopt them.
1
2
1.Bubblegum, left, and Heartful were both euthanized days after an adoption event.(Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control)
In one example, Pie, a tan Siberian Husky, was euthanized at the Palmdale shelter in March, three days after being featured at an adoption event at an Ashley furniture store. Bubblegum and Heartful, two white-and-brown pit bulls who attended the same event, were euthanized a day after that. The reason listed for all three was that they were unable to be placed in a home.
Solis referenced the case of Bowie, a 4-month-old terrier at the Baldwin Park shelter who was put down without any rescue requests, sparking outrage from many rescue groups and the public.
“We have consistently been hearing and reading reports that not only the rates of euthanasia have gone up, but mistakes have also been made leading to unnecessary deaths of potential pets,” Solis said.
On Tuesday, county Supervisor Hilda Solis invoked the memory of Bowie, a 4-month-old terrier who was reportedly put down at the Baldwin Park shelter despite a rescue group’s interest in saving him.
(Los Angeles County Animal Care and Control)
Supervisor Holly Mitchell asked for ideas on how the county could help prevent owners from relinquishing their pets.
“I really would hope that we could be a little more proactive in figuring out what we can do to support our department in proactively asking people, you know, ‘What do you need?’” Mitchell said, adding that people may need food vouchers or help with veterinary expenses.
Marcia Mayeda, director of the county’s Department of Animal Care and Control, said in a June report to the board that severe staffing shortages were hampering efforts to provide basic animal care and bring down euthanasia numbers.
The Palmdale and Lancaster shelters, she said, would need more than triple the number of staff in the next five years to reduce euthanasia.
In Tuesday’s motion, the supervisors requested that animal control and human resources officials evaluate vacant positions at the Antelope Valley shelters and come up with strategies to hire qualified candidates.
When she met a jagged-eared German shepherd puppy named Pickles at the Palmdale Animal Care Center, rescuer Alyssa Benavidez thought the former stray was being overlooked by adopters and wanted to find him a home.
To draw attention to the playful 10-month-old, Benavidez recorded videos of Pickles to post online — in a red bandanna with heart designs, rolling on his back for belly rubs, a red rose rope toy in his mouth.
The shelter, though, did not give her a deadline when she emailed to ask how much time she’d have to work on his exit plan before he would be put down.
A day after her inquiry, on Valentine’s Day, Pickles was euthanized.
Shelter volunteer Alyssa Benavidez managed to rescue German shepherds Cupid, foreground, and Mindy to foster while they await permanent homes. Others were put down before she could save them.
(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)
The Palmdale shelter, the newest of seven run by Los Angeles County, was touted when it opened in 2016 as a state-of-the-art facility that would relieve overcrowding and reduce the number of dogs being euthanized at the nearby Lancaster shelter.
But the two shelters now euthanize more dogs — and at a higher rate — than other county facilities, as well as those operated by Los Angeles, Long Beach and other municipalities, a Times investigation found.
Together, the Palmdale and Lancaster shelters’ dog euthanasia rates have nearly doubled in recent years — from about 15% in 2018 to 28% through this August. They’re on track this year to kill dogs at nearly twice the average rate of the other five county-run facilities.
A lucky pooch is led out of the Palmdale shelter’s kennels to meet a new foster.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
The Palmdale and Lancaster statistics are especially striking compared with those in the city of L.A., which has six shelters with dog euthanasia rates that range from 3% to 11%.
The L.A. County Board of Supervisors has pressed the Department of Animal Care and Control to reduce euthanasia at its shelters. But department director Marcia Mayeda said in a June report to the board that severe staffing shortages were hampering efforts to provide basic animal care and bring down euthanasia numbers.
The Palmdale and Lancaster shelters euthanized 1,576 dogs in the first eight months of this year, accounting for 60% of those put down at the county’s seven shelters.
“We’re so understaffed at both care centers that I can’t say that one is markedly better or worse than the other,” Mayeda said in an interview. “They’re both really suffering.”
Department records show that more dogs are being euthanized across the entire county shelter system because space is limited and there aren’t enough being rescued or adopted to compensate for those coming in.
Visitors look over lists of available animals at Los Angeles County’s Palmdale Animal Care Center. (Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
Fliers describe dogs available for adoption at Palmdale Animal Care Center. (Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
At the Palmdale shelter in particular, limited public access to kennels may be a factor. Most dogs are kept in an area that the public can visit only with a staff or volunteer escort. People wanting information about dogs available for adoption can view a corkboard pinned with the animals’ photos, but those are often dark or of poor quality. The time from when dogs enter the shelter until they’re euthanized for lack of space or interest is briefer than at other shelters, The Times found.
The Times analyzed documents obtained through public records requests on more than 14,600 dogs euthanized since 2018 in the seven shelters operated by the county — which has contracts with 45 cities to provide animal care andcontrol services. The reasons cited for killing the dogs were that they were too sick or injured to treat, or too dangerous to be safely adopted; that there was not sufficient kennel space to house the animals; and that there was no interest from potential adopters.
Some of the many dogs that have been euthanized at the Palmdale shelter amid overcrowding and other issues.
(L.A. County Animal Care and Control)
The Palmdale shelter euthanized 981 of its 3,429 impounded dogs last year, and is on track to reach those numbers again this year: Through August, the shelter had put down 765 of the 2,694 dogs that had entered.
Lancaster has surpassed last year’s figures, having euthanized 811 of 2,895 dogs that came in through August of this year. Last year, it put down 738 of the 3,718 dogs impounded.
The two shelters each took in more than 330 dogs a month on average through August this year, making them the highest-intake county shelters.
Under department policy, euthanasia cannot be performed while the facility is open to the public without explicit permission, unless the animal is injured or suffering. Time stamps on records reviewed by The Times appear to show that euthanasias were performed during those hours for nonmedical reasons at most county shelters.
Palmdale and Lancaster, in particular, consistently entered time stamps that appear to show animals were being put down during public hours — some months, dozens of times — since the shelters reopened for walk-ins in May of last year. The number of euthanasias performed during those hours at the Baldwin Park shelter could not be determined because many of its time stamps were missing from records.
Animal Care and Control Deputy Director Raul Rodriguez said that veterinary staff often update computer records after completing all procedures, so the time stamp may not accurately reflect the time of euthanasia. He said he could not say for certain when the procedures were carried out in specific cases.
Department records also show the two Antelope Valley shelters failed to follow their own department’s process to enlist help from rescue groups before putting a dog down. But the guidelines have been haphazard and have evolved.
For example, it has long been the department’s practice to ask those organizations whether they can take dogs that are most at risk.
But only in January did the department adopt a policy requiring shelters to reach out to rescue groups. And a department spokesperson said it was not until February that shelter staff members were briefed on the new requirement.
Now, Mayeda said, “if there is an error, it would be an anomaly.”
The Times reviewed a number of cases at the Palmdale and Lancaster shelters that showed no indication that rescue requests were made. The paper’s request for complete records of such rescue requests for all of the county shelters is pending.
Mayeda said she could not recall any disciplinary actions against staff at the Palmdale or Lancaster shelters based on not complying with the new policy.
In April, Mayeda instructed shelters to send three requests to rescue agencies before an adoptable dog is put down.
::
Babs and Bugs were two stray Belgian Malinois picked up Jan. 21 and kenneled together at the Palmdale shelter.
The 1-year-old dogs were euthanized less than two weeks later, recorded one minute apart during walk-in hours, to make room for other dogs coming in, according to shelter records.
The shelter did not send out rescue requests, known as “pleas,” for either dog even though Palmdale’s behavior team had approved the two for adoption — with restrictions, according to the records. Bugs was required to go to an adults-only home with no other dogs, Babs to one with no children under high school age.
Raul Rodriguez, deputy director of the Department of Animal Care and Control, attributes Palmdale’s high euthansia rate in part to its high intake of dogs and small size relative to county shelters such as Baldwin Hills’.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Rodriguez, who oversees three northern L.A. County shelters, including Palmdale and Lancaster, said Babs and Bugs were euthanized because they showed behavioral problems during their time in the shelter, lunging at other dogs through their cages and then each other.
Some experts who work with rescue dogs argue it’s unfair to judge a dog’s behavior in a loud, stressful shelter environment, saying it doesn’t reflect how it would do in a loving home.
“To me, the easy way out is to euthanize — and I think that is unacceptable,” said L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger, whose district includes the Antelope Valley.
She added: “I think that we need to hold administration more accountable,” and “rather than react, be more proactive” in saving animals.
Restrictions adopted during the pandemic to reduce overcrowding prioritized the intake of dogs that were sick, injured or dangerous to the public, Rodriguez said. He said euthanasia decisions are made at weekly meetings among top shelter officials, including members of the behavior, medical and management teams. They review a list of dogs and make decisions based on how long they’ve been housed, as well as their behavior and medical history.
He attributed the higher euthanasia ratesat the Palmdale shelter to its small size: It has 68 dog kennels, but through August this year had taken in more dogs than larger shelters, including Baldwin Park, which has more than 190 dogkennels, and Downey, which has 180.
Department officials said more dogs than usual were coming into the Lancaster shelter, which has 176 kennels — blaming the influx partly on the closure earlier in the pandemic of the Mojave shelter about 30 miles away in Kern County. Strays that once would have been taken there are now being brought to Lancaster, they said.
A dog is returned to its kennel at the county’s Lancaster Animal Care Center after a play date with a prospective adopter.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
The number of dog deaths at the Palmdale shelter has angered some local officials, who also complained about a $400,000 increase last fiscal year in county charges to manage shelter and animal control services. The city’s total annual budget for shelter services ended up at $1.4 million.
Palmdale city officials earlier this year hired two animal shelter consulting firms, Animal Arts and Team Shelter USA, to provide recommendations on how to better serve the community, including what it would take to open a new city-owned shelter or pet resource center.
Their report, provided to Palmdale officials in September, has not yet been released publicly.
“It’s hard to stomach, to pay so much money to euthanize,” Palmdale City Councilman Austin Bishop said earlier this year. “The cost is going up every year, and services keep going down.”
::
When it opened, the Palmdale facility — equipped with all indoor kennels, a spaying and neutering clinic, a grooming room and turf play yards outside — was hailed as a model for other shelters.
“I want everyone to know that we’re gonna do 100% adoption. … Our goal is to really have a ‘no kill at all’” shelter, Barger said at the facility’s one-year anniversary event.
Kat Ramsburg greets her new foster dog at the Palmdale Animal Care Center.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
Benavidez, who in addition to working with rescue groups is also a shelter volunteer, said that is far from how things have turned out.
“It’s a death camp there,” she said.
Patricia Saucedo, a longtime Palmdale resident, was one of the shelter’s first volunteers. She now “networks” dogs, posting their photos, videos and personality descriptions online to help find them homes.
She remembers Palmdale’s promise and the expectation that preceded it.
“It really just kind of backfired,” Saucedo said, criticizing the shelter’s design and size. Too many dogs are hidden away behind too many doors, and the shelter is understaffed, she said.
As of June, there were 13 animal control attendants, animal control officers and clerks at the Palmdale shelter and 18 in Lancaster. But county animal welfare officials said in a report that month that the two shelters would need more than triple the number of staff in the next five years to reduce euthanasia.
According to the report, Palmdale would need 39 more staff positions and Lancaster 44. The rest of the county shelters are similarly short-staffed, the report said.
Mayeda, the county animal department’s director, said she did not expect the board to approve all of those positions.
“They asked me what I needed, and this is what we need,” she said, adding that they’ll do their best with what they have. She said that the euthanasia rate in the Antelope Valley is still lower than it was more than a decade ago in 2010.
The county purchased about six acres from Palmdale to build the shelter, but used only a fraction of the land for the $20-million, 25,500-square-foot building, one of the smaller of the seven shelters. Much of the land sits unused.
After The Times began asking questions about the Palmdale shelter’s euthanasia rates, the Board of Supervisors passed a motion, written by Barger, asking that the department look into expanding the facility, saying its limited housing capacity was inadequate to serve the region.
Star was euthanized at the Palmdale shelter right before Patricia Saucedo posted a profile of the terrier online, recommending her as “super sweet, mellow and affectionate.” Shelter records said Star had tried to bite staff members.
Saucedo recalled an early case that, for her, caused concern about euthanasia decisions: Star, a 7-year-old terrier with one ear, was surrendered to Palmdale in June 2018 by her owner.
“This little lady is Palmdale Shelter’s longest resident,” Saucedo wrote on her Facebook page, Paws of Sunshine, about seven weeks later. “Super sweet, mellow and affectionate. She’s a bit shy when you first meet her, but once you spend some time with her and give her some love, you can see what a happy girl she truly is.”
She paired Star’s description with photos and a video of a small, scruffy terrier jumping up onto a bench to sit beside her for chest scratches.
An hour before the post published, Star had been euthanized for her behavior, according to shelter records, which said she was fearful and noted several instances when she tried to bite staff.
Saucedo thought Star had been timid, but not aggressive.
She was stunned that Star was put down, she said, because she seemed so adoptable.
Two of the many dogs of all ages that have landed at the Lancaster Animal Care Center.(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)
::
Some rescue groups, volunteers and animal advocates say the shelter system’s public visiting hours can discourage prospective adopters. Before August, the seven county facilities were open for appointments and walk-ins only a certain number of hours each day. Visitors are now allowed to walk in from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, but shelters are no longer open Sundays or on Wednesday evenings for prospective adopters who work during typical business hours, something Mayeda attributed to staffing shortages.
“The responsibility doesn’t lie just with the animal shelters and the animal rescues,” says Kery German, Palmdale’s public safety supervisor, seen speaking with with City Councilman Austin Bishop. The city now has a low-cost spay and neuter program to help address the boom in the area’s dog population.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
But the operating hours don’t fully explain why euthanasia rates are higher at the Antelope Valley shelters.
Kery German, the city of Palmdale’s public safety supervisor, says some of the difference may be due to the nature of the dog population in the area. She and others who work with shelters said shepherds, huskies, bully breeds and other large dogs that have bigger litters are more popular in rural Antelope Valley communities than in city centers.
Those rural areas also have become dumping grounds for unwanted animals from elsewhere. That, German said, along with irresponsible backyard breeders and owners who don’t have their pets fixed, results in more homeless animals. The city has started a low-cost spay and neuter program to help remedy the problem, and since June last year has altered about 1,400 animals.
“The responsibility doesn’t lie just with the animal shelters and the animal rescues,” she said.
Data from the county’s Department of Animal Care and Control show pit bulls and German shepherds are the most common breeds put down at most county shelters — and they’re euthanized at even higher rates in the Antelope Valley.
In May 2022, a senior animal services department staff member complained to top officials about kill practices in Palmdale and Lancaster, including the euthanization of dogs for what were cited as behavioral reasons, according to an email reviewed by The Times. The staffer did not respond to requests for comment.
“I’ve noted that Palmdale and Lancaster have a disproportionately large amount of euthanasias labeled as behavior,” the senior staffer wrote, adding that they had decided to look more closely at the numbers for those shelters. “I find it to be significantly concerning.”
The staff member wrote that a “large amount of animals” are either never assessed or are approved for public adoption but then euthanized for behavioral reasons. The staffer created a list of 58 animals, a majority of them dogs, euthanized at the two shelters from February through April 2022.
Tundra had been cleared for adoption before he was put down, reportedly because he couldn’t be kenneled with other dogs and the Palmdale shelter was too full to give him his own.
One of those dogs, a gray and white Siberian husky named Tundra, had been approved for public adoption with no restrictions, but Palmdale shelter records indicate he was euthanized due to aggressive behavior, with no requests sent to rescue groups on his behalf.
The department’s behavior team described him as tense around other dogs but friendly with handlers, and medical staff wrote that he did not appear aggressive.
“Fearful tense did ok going slow NO signs of aggression,” a veterinary technician wrote the day he came in.
Rodriguez, the department’s deputy director, said Tundra could not be kenneled with other dogs and the shelter was full, so he was euthanized.
Asked about the staff member’s email, Chief Deputy Director Danny Ubario, Mayeda’s second in command, said that both shelters were at capacity at the time and that dogs were put down for a “combination” of reasons, though the records system only allows a single justification to be entered.
“We did look at it,” Mayeda said of the staffer’s complaint. “I don’t think that there [were] any errors or mischaracterizations or misuse of the system.”
The number of dogs euthanized due to a limited number of kennels has increased in Palmdale and Lancaster. Department records show the Palmdale shelter put down more than 330 dogs last year due to space constraints or because all other options to find them homes had failed — the most at any shelter. The shelter had already surpassed that number as of August this year.
In Lancaster, the number of dogs euthanized for those reasons was on track to more than double — from 231 for all of last year to 422 through August of this year, the records show.
One of them was Blue, an 11-month-old mutt with white socks and pointy ears. In February, networker Danielle Vogt sent an email to the Lancaster shelter about Blue and another pup for whom she hoped to find foster homes.
Blue was euthanized at the Lancaster Animal Care Center.
Increasingly anxious after not hearing back for a week, Vogt decided to foster Blue herself. That’s when she learned Blue had been euthanized a day earlier. No rescue requests had been sent on Blue’s behalf.
Devastated, Vogt alerted Barger’s office. Shelter staff explained the oversight by saying that Vogt had provided the wrong animal ID number in her inquiry.
“We recognize that we can do better based on what transpired with Blue,” Ubario wrote to her, adding that the shelter had put into place a new protocol to better monitor emails.
Kristin Loch, who works at a rescue in the Santa Clarita Valley, said she fields calls daily from owners who need help giving up their dogs.
She typically sends them to county shelters in Castaic or Agoura rather than to the Palmdale location despite the longer drive, because the dogs will have a better chance of leaving the shelter alive, she said.
The Times identified several dogs featured at adoption events or online that were euthanized within days.
Stormy was deemed “unable to place” and euthanized two days after the Palmdale shelter posted the young husky’s photos online.
In February, the Palmdale shelter posted three photos on Instagram of Stormy, a 1½-year-old Siberian husky with black-and-white fur who had entered a month earlier because her owner was moving.
Two days after the post went up, Stormy was euthanized, according to department records. The reason given: unable to place.
::
Since January, county shelters have been required to reach out at least once to rescue organizations for most dogs facing euthanasia. The policy change came after Bowie, a 4-month-old terrier at the Baldwin Park shelter, was put down without any rescue requests, sparking outrage from many rescue groups and the public.
Earlier this year, state Assemblymember Bill Essayli (R-Corona) introduced a bill named after Bowie that would have required California shelters to provide at least a 72-hour public notice on their websites before euthanizing adoptable animals. It did not pass, but Essayli said he plans to reintroduce similar legislation.
The euthanasia of Bowie, 4 months, at the Baldwin Park Animal Care Center drew outrage and inspired county policy changes on reaching out to rescues, as well as state legislation named for the pup.
(Los Angeles County Animal Care and Control)
The inconsistency of the plea system has frustrated some rescue workers, who say the Palmdale shelter doesn’t always indicate which dogs are in most urgent need.
The German shepherd Teo, for example, entered the shelter the first week of January. On Feb. 4, the shelter sent out what was marked a “1st rescue plea” in an email to rescue groups, which suggested others would follow.
Teo was euthanized three days later.
Rodriguez said the dog had been on his second round of medication to combat a contagious upper respiratory infection, and that factored into the decision to put him down.
Benavidez has volunteered at the Palmdale and Lancaster shelters since 2017, walking and playing with animals, introducing dogs to potential adopters, cleaning kennels and preparing food.
She had been monitoring Angel, a 2-year-old black German shepherd, who was kenneled in the back at the Palmdale shelter, in an area that required an escort.
She said she expected to see a rescue plea, but it never came. She later learned he’d been euthanized because there was no longer space for him.
Benavidez wasn’t the only one who’d wanted to save Angel. The personwho turned him in told shelter officials her mother would adopt Angel if he became a candidate for euthanasia, according to department records.
Shelter records don’t mention efforts to contact the woman or her mother, whose names were redacted.
Rodriguez said it was erroneous to assume from the records that no outreach had been made, but also acknowledged that any attempt to reach the family would have been noted.
He added that Angel’s behavior — he had lunged at other dogs and had to be kenneled alone — factored into why a rescue request wasn’t sent for him, even though the behavior team had approved him for adoption.
The Times also found mistakes in several emails from the Palmdale shelter to rescue groups and networkers and on its website — including deadlines listed that had already passed or dogs marked with the wrong identification number or breed.
One email was marked as both a second and third plea, and the deadline to save the dogs had come and gone two days before it was sent out. Another message included a photo of a 1½-year-old black pit bull, but described a 7-year-old Siberian husky.
Rodriguez said the Palmdale shelter has had to rely more on public adoptions because overburdened rescue groups are pulling out fewer dogs than before the pandemic. According to figures provided by the department, groups rescued 303 dogs from Palmdale in 2022, compared with 898 dogs in 2018.
Sixteen kennels at the facility, though freely accessible to the public, are behind a door, next to a sign that says “Dog adoptions,” and visitors may not realize they can enter.
That was the case on a July afternoon, when Kayzanique Palms and her brother came to the shelter hoping to interact with the pups but left thinking they could only see photos of its dogs. They didn’t know until a reporter told them that there were two rows of kennels they could walk through behind the marked door. The rest of the kennels require an escort.
Dog rescuer Alyssa Benavidez shows a frame from her video of Pickles, a 10-month-old German shepherd that was put down at the Palmdale animal shelter.
(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)
Pickles, the German shepherd puppy who was euthanized on Valentine’s Day, was in one of the publicly accessible kennels when Benavidez first saw him. Shelter staff had recommended in his file that he be placed in a home with no other dogs, though Benavidez saw him kenneled with another dog in the shelter with no apparent issues. She remembered worrying that a note like that would deter adopters.
She emailed the kennel sergeant, asking when time would be up for Pickles and another dog as she hastened to find them homes.
In an email exchange reviewed by The Times, the kennel sergeant, Nelson Gonzalez, said that Pickles had already had a rescue plea sent out and that he’d been featured as pet of the week by the Board of Supervisors.
“He didn’t give me a direct answer,” Benavidez said. “They put the dog down the next day.”
Gonzalez did not respond to a request for comment.
In California, the Hayden Act, a set of animal welfare laws approved in 1998, requires that in most cases a shelter must release a dog to a rescue group that has requested it, rather than putting it to sleep. Benavidez said she wasn’t given that opportunity.
A department spokesperson said that because the networker never asked for more time or said she had someone ready to take Pickles home, and because the facility was full, the dog was put down.
“That one really killed me, because I felt like there was something that I could’ve done, but they didn’t really give me a chance,” Benavidez said.
George LeVines, The Times’ deputy director for data and graphics, contributed to this report.
Austin Pets Alive! is a private nonprofit dedicated to eliminating the needless killing of shelter pets. We have been extremely successful because of the strategy we employ to make Austin, and now other cities, No Kill.
Our No Kill strategy is simple and two fold:
We save lives by drawing attention to, and taking pets off, the daily euthanasia list while
Allowing that attention to apply pressure on the city to get the proper resources they need to decrease the euthanasia list themselves.
In 2021, we worked with the city council on an amendment to our city contract that has caused some community and government staff confusion that we hope to dispel with these three points:
1. Foundational to APA! is to pull only from the euthanasia list to have a measurable effect on the kill rate which ultimately helped the city achieve No Kill status in 2011. It is important to note that critical to this strategy, and implied by the creation and use of a euthanasia list to eliminate pets that they do not have the resources to care for, is that the city can manage and care for all the animals not on the euthanasia list.
2. Our long term contract was extraordinarily overdue and in need of an update. The old contract created in 2011 was built on a guesstimate of the size of future years’ euthanasia lists; this contract stayed in effect for years past its expiration date with extension after extension after extension which ultimately led to operational misalignment between AAC and APA!. This was resolved in contract negotiations in 2018, when it was mutually agreed that APA! would continue to focus on the euthanasia list, but always have a 12% minimum, as long as we used TLAC. Even though that was documented in 2018, land issues prevented it being signed and so in 2021, APA! worked with city council to bring the extension-riddled contract in line operationally to match the agreement from 2018. The current contract wasn’t finalized until 2023 due to TLAC land issues.
3. In response to the community demand that AAC do better for the pets that are not on the euthanasia list, the city council has more than doubled the AAC budget between 2008-2023 to allow AAC to reduce the euthanasia list, provide in house medical and behavioral care, as well as community support to meet their stated mission.
Austin was a very different city for vulnerable companion animals just 14 years ago. Some of the animals most at risk were puppies with parvovirus. Each day these tiny lives were needlessly lost because shelters didn’t have programs set up to treat parvo.
Veterinarians learn how to treat parvo in school, so we wondered why animal shelters couldn’t or wouldn’t. If these puppies could often be saved, why wasn’t treatment the norm? To
save these pets and increase lifesaving in Austin, we had to start
somewhere — and keeping parvo puppies from being euthanized seemed like a
good place to start.
The Parvo Puppy ICU, as we know it today, was born in a bathroom in my house around Thanksgiving 2008. At its peak I could spend up to eight hours a day cleaning and treating anywhere from a couple to 25 sick puppies at a time. Thankfully,
my husband was very understanding and willing to put up with the smell
of sick puppies in our bathroom. Even though it wasn’t ideal having the
strong and unforgettable odor of parvo in our home, it was the only way
to protect these pets in need and give them the critical care they
deserved.
We often share the story of the ICU’s humble beginnings because it
reminds us how far we’ve come. Although I was often the only one
cleaning up after that first batch of puppies, APA!’s capacity to care for animals in need continues to grow thanks to the help of friends like you.
Because of our community’s determination to make Austin No Kill, we were able, eleven years ago, to trade the bathroom tile and pop-up crates for linoleum and metal kennels in a location with easy access to our clinic and round-the-clock staff. The need for support didn’t end when we moved to the Parvo Puppy ICU at TLAC.
Today, parvo puppies are still at risk of needless euthanasia in shelters across Texas that haven’t yet adopted No Kill. As we celebrate the 11th anniversary of No Kill in Austin and its continued impact on pets at high risk of euthanasia we know there is still so much work to do to save even more lives and help other shelters do the same. Will you join us today?
This week, we are going back through time to showcase the history of No Kill in Austin and our public-private partnership with the City of Austin.
1998-2001: From the beginning when local attorney Jim Collins created Austin Pets Alive!, it’s mission has been to promote and provide the resources, education and programs needed to eliminate the killing of companion animals in shelters. In order to meet that mission, APA! started as an advocacy organization dedicated to making program and policy changes at the city’s shelter. At this time, the city was euthanizing 85% of the 35,000 animals that entered the shelter on an annual basis. The goal was to make Austin a No Kill City by the year 2000. During this time, the founders coordinated an effective public awareness campaign which led to a doubling of the city shelter’s budget. Additionally, the kill rate was substantially reduced, daily open-adoption hours were introduced, and a volunteer program was created. Despite all of this, No Kill was not reached during this time.
Jim Collins created Austin Pets Alive! article, 1998
2008-2011: Still in line with the mission and reinvigorated with new leadership, APA! shifted its strategy to focus on more direct ways to impact the City of Austin shelter’s euthanasia rate, which by 2007 was at 55% with 25,000 animals entering the shelter on an annual basis. We were still an all volunteer organization with less than $10,000 in the bank and no facility, but that didn’t stop us from thinking big. In 2008, we pulled together as many like-minded people as we possibly could and carved out a business plan that would build the infrastructure to address the needs of the up to 14,000 animals who were dying each year at the city shelter.
2009
One of the first steps in this new strategy was to intervene in the euthanasia process. As is true today, animals came into the city shelter from many different places for various reasons. After pets were taken in, animals surrendered by their owners moved immediately either to the adoption portion of the shelter, to a rescue group (non APA!), or to a euthanasia list. Stray pets were held for three days before the decision was made to euthanize them or attempt to adopt or transfer them to rescue. Long term Austinites might remember when the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) shelter was segregated between animals lucky enough to have survived the last 3 days on the left and those who were too big, dark, scarred, sickly or badly behaved and destined to die on the right behind a locked gate. The public was not allowed to even look at the 75% of campus that was the non-adoption side.
2009
Each day, our team received a list of animals, ranging from 20-100 animals long, that were slated for euthanasia. We were given two hours to try to move those animals to safety by 7 p.m. or they would be dead by 11:30 a.m. the next day.
In those two hours, day after day, 365 days a year, our tough-as-nails volunteer team worked at lightning speed. They posted on Facebook and Craigslist, imploring the community to help by fostering for a short period of time. They texted people they knew that liked labs or poodles to try to find a spare bathroom anywhere to house a pet, who might loosely resemble that breed, until they could make it to an adoption event. Every day, they made an impact on that euthanasia list and cut it down by 10% or as much as 100%. Every week, we could add up each day’s progress to figure out the impact we were making. This eventually translated into a yearly impact metric.
As APA!’s strategy was to intervene in the deaths of the animals at the very last minute, the byproduct was the huge increase in public awareness that these very adoptable animals were dying. The awareness led to public outcry and city council action (very similar to what happened in 1999). That turned out to be an incredibly important part of the puzzle, impacting the euthanasia rate beyond even our direct euthanasia list intervention, and led to Austin becoming No Kill.
By the time our original license agreement to operate TLAC came around in 2011, the community had advocated heavily for change at the city of Austin shelter. The city council passed a 2010 No Kill Implementation Plan, recommended to them by the Austin Animal Advisory Commission after an intense year of public input and strategy sessions. That plan included, most importantly:
a mandate for the city shelter to reach a 90% live release rate
a moratorium on killing while any cages were empty (previously this practice left 50 or more kennels open each morning for “possible” intakes)
a directive for the city shelter to grow a foster program and behavior program
a directive to use Town Lake Animal Center (about to be vacated for the new location in East Austin) as an adoption center
an extra $1,000,000 to add to the city shelter budget to help implement these goals
2010
When the city shelter moved from TLAC to east Austin, we had to work tirelessly to gain the ability to use the old shelter. Council Members Martinez and Morrison worked with all parties involved to outline the requirements of that first agreement. Ultimately, APA! agreed to continue taking 3,000 animals from the euthanasia list at the city shelter annually, when the city’s intake was 19,000, the city’s budget was 7 million dollars and they were still euthanizing 2,000 of the pets, even with us pulling 3,000 to safety. The city of Austin and APA! still had a lot of lifesaving work to do to get Austin to No Kill.
March 11, 2010
2011-2019: A lot has changed in the world of animal sheltering and certainly in the City of Austin during the last decade. The city shelter gained an additional 10 million dollars in their budget and today has a budget of 17 million dollars for an average intake of 18,000. Many of those millions were injected into the city shelter’s medical program despite the fact that APA! had been, since 2011, pulling nearly 100% of the medically challenged animals. Even after millions of tax payer dollars went into medical care for city owned animals at Austin Animal Center (AAC), there were still 1,500+ animals with medical needs listed for euthanasia, down from 3,000+, because the medical practices that AAC employed were more like private practice in their expense and less like the triage APA! used to save lives at a low cost.
In fact, at that stage the animals that were still dying (meaning APA! didn’t have capacity to save them after they were listed on euthanasia list) were almost entirely large breed dogs with and without behavioral challenges. However, almost none of the new AAC funding was directed to help increase fostering or adoptions of those dogs. And almost none of the funding was directed to help pet owners keep their big dogs to prevent intake. There was a brief period of AAC leadership, Tawny Hammond, Lee Ann Shenefiel and Kristen Auerbach, that tried to put more resources into large dogs but they were met with resistance. Because of overall inadequate oversight of the very generous new funding directed by council to “make Austin No Kill”, there continued, and continues, to be a euthanasia list with large breed dogs and medical animals, and there continues to be struggles with large breed dog capacity at AAC. APA! continued to take the “leftover” animals who were listed for euthanasia even though no government funding came to APA! for the care of pets from the city shelter. As AAC management tried to overcome overcrowding, they leaned on APA! to take more and more non-euthanasia list large breed dogs.
2012
Even with all of these partnership issues, APA! started a behavior program directed at saving the dogs with challenging histories of trauma to prevent their euthanasia at AAC unless there was a severe, demonstrated public safety risk. As per our mission, we didn’t focus on trying to relieve space issues for AAC but of course tried to help.
2014
When AAC reached a 95% live release rate, and due to the continual turnover of leadership at AAC which left AAC vulnerable to moving backwards to killing, we focused on building institutional sustainability for No Kill in Austin. No Kill is still very much dependent on the city animal services director’s personal philosophy because there is very little throughout city government to institutionalize it.
Thanks to the ongoing work of Council Member Leslie Pool’s office, a new citywide ordinance to preserve a 95% minimum live release rate and an updated animal code went into effect. In addition, we documented memorandums of understanding (MOU)s to preserve internal practices between AAC and APA! that we hoped would cement No Kill practices in Austin. Austin’s No Kill status was further buoyed by the 2017 Economic Impact Study showing No Kill policy had brought $157M into Austin.
2019-2021: Since 2019, the city has maintained a continual live release rate at or above 95%, in accordance with the ordinance. With the largest budget, per capita and per animal, of any government animal shelter in the nation, AAC has received the financial support to achieve this level of lifesaving. Unfortunately, despite all of this progress, policy changes, and historically high budget, the city has shifted its expectation of maintaining capacity for non-euthanasia list animals to achieve No Kill to APA! with no oversight of existing taxpayer fund usage or financial investment in APA!. This is far outside the scope of the original licensing agreement, signed at a time when 2,000+ animals were still dying and the city’s budget was extremely inadequate for lifesaving. We are proud of our role in making Austin No Kill and advocating for appropriate AAC funding but we have no control or oversight of those funds as a completely private entity. Our fear of losing the use of TLAC has exacerbated that inability to advocate for change in the past.
At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, in early 2020, every shelter in the country emptied their shelters, placing the vast majority of pets in foster homes. This gave the animal welfare industry time to think about the purpose and functions of animal shelters to begin with. APA! pivoted, once again, to focus on keeping human animal families together and launched the Human Animal Support Services (HASS) project. We started HASS because we believe that building the infrastructure to serve community pets and people could dramatically lower the number of pets needing to be institutionalized in the shelter. As APA! and our national arm, American Pets Alive!, worked to implement HASS in most major U.S. cities, we were met within our own city of Austin with some interest but no action to undertake truly solving for why so many animals enter Austin Animal Center every year.
Instead, we, at APA!, have been made painfully aware through multiple crises (the 2021 cold crisis when the city shelter shut down and deferred the public to APA! for help or during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic when the city shelter just stopped all support to community members who needed much more than a website to navigate options during the human crises they faced), that the city expects the public private partnership to continue, for the next 75 years, as simple, quiet overflow for all of the Austin Animal Center problems.
At the same time, the Austin Animal Center is under a high level of scrutiny by the Austin Animal Advisory Commission due to a memo sent by the Austin Animal Center director, claiming that killing of dogs with behavioral histories would need to begin in order to keep capacity at a manageable level, despite a historically low intake of animals. This is unacceptable and we hope the city will use the recommendations from the commission to make lasting change in how the center is managed.
Summer 2021: As of today, the world is rapidly evolving and other cities are passing Austin by as the most progressive for animal welfare. Disheartened by the city’s lack of interest in progressing beyond a No Kill number to build a truly humane community and compounded by the state, and now accepted future, of our facility, we have made the difficult decision to refuse to be the “overflow” for Austin Animal Center any longer or do the rest of the Austin Animal Center’s job for free. We need to go back to a relationship that preserves lifesaving but also drives progress and innovation. Tragically, we are forced to potentially vacate TLAC to gain this but in doing so, we hope Austin will regain its “top” status.
Today: We have let the city know that while we are committed to keeping Austin a No Kill City by taking in animals truly at risk of euthanasia, if there is to be any formal documented agreement with APA! to preserve No Kill status, we will not agree to serve as an overflow facility to animals who are not at risk of euthanasia. And we will not agree to limit the scope of our important and lifesaving work to make the entirety of Texas – and nation – No Kill. It’s still our hope, though now somewhat distant, to have an agreement with the city that allows TLAC to continue as a beacon of hope in this new phase of Austin’s animal history. It is clear that will only happen if the city council directs staff to make it happen.
Soon, we will need your help to advocate for these changes to our contract and to the overall No Kill sustainability plan for Austin. We can’t do this without our supporters now, just as we couldn’t have created this organization without you from the start. I hope this information helps you to understand why so much is happening at once regarding Austin’s No Kill status and why there are no simple decisions for everyone involved.
Thank you,
Ellen Jefferson, DVM President and CEO Austin Pets Alive!/American Pets Alive!
Not far from APA!, our friends at the Bastrop County Animal Shelter reached out to us for emergency help, as their shelter is facing an outbreak of distemper. All their kennels are full and the pets inside are facing euthanasia to make room for incoming pets. This news is devastating, and we want to help.
The Bastrop County Animal Shelter said their greatest need is for us to help them save the lives of 20 dogs. The dogs have tested positive and may come down with signs of distemper. They need a place to stay while recovering – so their foster homes need to have no other dogs or ferrets, or fully-vaccinated adult dogs with healthy immune systems.
These dogs are friendly and adoptable, yet they are facing euthanasia if they cannot find foster homes over the next 48 hours.
Distemper is a contagious disease of dogs, coyotes, raccoons and other wildlife. It can cause fever, lethargy, anorexia, and respiratory illness. The virus is spread in the respiratory secretions and urine of infected animals. It’s easily prevented with routine vaccinations and vaccinated pets are not at great risk (much like COVID). Distemper does not infect domestic cats, people, pocket pets (like hamsters or sugar gliders, but does infect ferrets) or birds.
If you can foster a dog in the next 48 hours, please email [email protected] and someone will respond right away. If you’re not able to foster but still want to help pets in Bastrop, please consider donating to their Amazon wishlist.
We are so grateful for the generosity of the greater Austin community for opening both hearts and homes to the pets from APA!, Bastrop and anywhere there is a need.
Presented by Austin Subaru, this unique annual fundraiser benefits the Parvo Puppy ICU Program at Austin Pets Alive! which has pioneered the path to give puppies with parvo a fighting chance.
Austin Pets Alive!’s Parvo Puppy ICU is the first of its kind in the nation and has saved over 5,500 puppies since its creation in 2008. On average, they continue to save around 600 puppies each year. Even with the pandemic happening, in 2020 this amazing team saved 609 puppies! Parvo, short for the canine parvovirus, is a highly contagious viral illness, and often means immediate and absolute euthanasia for puppies.
This is where APA! comes in. Our Parvo Puppy ICU provides an alternative to euthanasia and gives the puppies who were on death’s doorstep a real chance at life. With proper treatment, parvo takes about a week to cure. Post-parvo, these pups are finally given a chance at adoption to lead a healthy, normal life. We love seeing updates from our adopters who watch as their small parvo puppies grow into big and strong dogs. Check out sweet Bodie’s transformation after he was released from the ICU!
Now you have the chance to help pioneer change for our pups, too! Grab your friends and family and hop in a kayak, canoe, or SUP the weekend of May 7-9 for the 10th Annual Paddle for Puppies.
Unfortunately, due to the recent surge of algae in the water, we’re suggesting pets stay at home this year. No need to fear — you’re still sure to have a paw-some time!
In compliance with CDC guidelines, we will not be paddling as a large group, but instead have extended the paddling experience over three days. The paddle will begin at 4:00 pm at Rowing Dock on May 7 and end at 8:00 pm. May 8-9, the paddle will begin at 8:00 am and end at 12:00 pm at the same location.
Last year was anything but traditional, with Paddle for Puppies being virtual. This year we want to see you! Come out to Lady Bird Lake and have a nice, relaxing time, all while making a splash in our Parvo Puppy Program!
Be sure to buy your tickets now! We’re absolutely paw-sitive you won’t want to miss out on this fun-filled paddling experience!
Special thanks to Austin Subaru for sponsoring Paddle for Puppies for 10 years, and to Rowing Dock for hosting us once again!
All photos used are from the 2019 Paddle for Puppies with accreditation to Austin Subaru.
