MY NOTES FROM THE ANIMAL WELFARE TASK FORCE MEETING OF 9/20/2012
PLEASE NOTE: THESE ARE MY NOTES FROM THE MEETING, THEY ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL MINUTES. MY COMMENTS ARE IN ITALICS.
Due to the poor acoustics in the room, and a very loud fan, not everything could be heard clearly (until I moved, anyway). So these notes are what I considered the highlights of the meeting. I have tried to go in the order of the agenda, but very often discussion of one subject jumped to another and then back again.
First, the TF made agendas and copies of a presentation by Andrew Lippstone (Gov’s office rep) available to the public attending (they were also sent to us via e-mail Monday 9/24).
After the August minutes were approved, Mr. Lippstone gave a review of the current, fragmented system of animal control, including some fiscal notes. Mr. Lippstone’s presentation reviewed the current legislation, noting that there are many different names for animal control officers, including different definitions, and these should be better defined and clarified. Mr. Petit De Mange (KC Administrator) asked that the authority of these agents also be defined, including their limitations – because a “sworn officer” is different from a “dog warden.” Other clarification needed: “adequately trained” (referring to dog wardens in Title 9).
There was some discussion concerning the Dog Control Panel; Mr. Usilton of the KCSPCA said the Panel has not been convened since 200? (could not hear the year). There was also a question as to who convenes the panel.
NOTE: I have some experience with this – it’s how I got involved in this – and it is my opinion that the Panel has not been convened because the KCSPCA does not tell the owner that THEY must request the Panel hearing IN WRITING; that begins the 21 day countdown to empanel or give the dog back to the owner NOT declared dangerous. After my friend hired a lawyer, she learned that she had to ask for the hearing, and requested the Panel be convened. A week later she had her dog back.
Mr. Lippstone’s presentation covered rabies compliance and investigations, including the fact that the KCSPCA is paid by the State to investigate animal-to-human bites. The Department of Agriclture noted that it costs around $41K and time (not full-time) of two employees to investigate CAPA complaints.
Mr. Petit de Mange asked for clarification concerning shelter/retail outlet/commercial kennel; the definitions are there, but it is not clear whether or not the counties have the authority to inspect shelters as well as the kennels. Secretary Kee said the counties did not have that authority. Mr. Petit de Mange said that should be clarified in the law.
Representative Jacques said he had been doing research, and thought companion animals should be defined more clearly, similar to other states, that include dogs, cats, gerbils, etc. in their definitions and laws. Those cateogries included companion animals, exotic animals, farm animals, including domestic pigs, and wildlife. If the category can be defined, the state agency that should have responsibility could be identified better.
NOTE: The one piece that Mr. Lippstone seemed to have missed was the mandatory spay/neuter prior to adoption from shelters. I have sent an e-mail to members of the TF asking about that.
The TF then considered the following topics, with staff writing suggestions under the different categories. I have attached the document created by Carling Ryan, staff for the TF, based on the lists she made on Thursday in response to the TF members comments.
Below I have noted some of the discussions that took place under each category.
Dog Control
Why NOT Cats? Why NOT ANIMAL control. There was discussion concerning the fact that it has been dog control since the 1930s, because dogs can do more damage to humans than a cat. John Rago, City of Wilmington, said they added “animal” to their contract with DE SPCA. Anne Cavanaugh of DE SPCA felt that animal control was necessary, and funding should be made available for animals other than dogs. Mike Petit de Mange noted that by law the counties have responsibility for dog control, not animal control. He felt that there had to be a clear understanding of where the money was coming from; what do we pay for as a State? Do the citizens pay for the cost? Oversight of the animal control officers was mentioned here, and Representative Willis said there should be a clear process for complaints to be heard.
There was discussion concerning the boundaries of animal cruelty and humane treatment definitions vs. dog control. Mr. Rago (Wilmington) and Ms. Cavanaugh both noted that the City of Wilmington contract is for ANIMAL control, not just dog control. This was considered to be something that should be under “Consolidation” – Ms. Ranji (Public member, formerly of the Governor’s office and wrote some of the current animal welfare legislation) – noted that she was researching current “best practices” around the country. There was also considerable discussion concerning rabies vaccination and dog licensing. Ms. Dwyer noted that although licensing was one of NCC’s revenue streams for dog control, it only brought in about $26K a year. Mr. Petit de Mange noted that under KC’s current “flat fee” contract, dog licensing costs the County $82K a year. He felt that there should be a more efficient, streamlined way of doing this; using rabies vaccination certificates was one way that is being used in other places. Rep. Jacques suggested using the veterinarians for this, since they are already vaccinating animals. Hal Godwin (Sussex) said that the county is very rural, and many residents will have their dogs innoculated against rabies, but don’t license them. Sussex has not raised the fee for licensing dogs, because they feel even fewer dogs will be licensed if they do. He felt a way to encourage participation in licensing was needed. Hetti Brown (Public member, state director for Humane Society of the US) and Ms. Cavanaugh noted that there is a formula to determine the number of “owned” pets in a population. Mr. Godwin reiterated that Sussex is an agricultural area. Another member (could not see or hear which) asked if it has been explained to the public WHY we need this?
There was discussion concerning the Dept. of Agriculture’s data base of vaccinations; Secretary Kee said it would be difficult to use to identify owners, because some of the certificates are not filled out completely. He did have accurate figures on how many animals have been through the Spay/Neuter program (available to low-income pet owners and rescue groups). However, many of the cats that are done through this progam and small rescue groups are not “owned.”
There was discussion concerning animal bites and rabies and who to call. Secretary Kee said that when a bite happens, if the victim knows the owner, they check for a license and call the vet or the Dept. of Ag. The problem is with unknown dogs – there is no way to check. Mr. Godwin said that Dog Control is a function of rabies concerns, and is handled through Public Health. Animal Welfare is just another layer of that.
Animal Control Officers
Mr. Lippstone noted that a definition of all the different titles in the legislations should be added. Ms. Dwyer noted again that the 16 KCSPCA officers sworn in by NCC were sworn with ALL of the titles in the legislation. Mr. Lippstone also said that the TF should look for a subset of officers similar to animal control officers in DE law in regards to training. DNREC’s officers were suggested by Mr. Usilton and Ms. Ranji. Ms. Brown said that a certification program should be considered. It was also noted that since fines and penalties are handled by the courts, this also should be noted in consolidation of services. Rep. Jacques noted that it should be defined who has authority to inspect kennels, and do animal cruelty investigations. Mr. Petit de Mange noted that the limits of that authority should be defined. He also noted that registration with DELJIS was not required by any of the legislation; does everyone really need access to DELJIS? He felt it should be authorized, supervisory officers. Mr. Usilton said that all of their officers have access to DELJIS, and they worked with the complainant and the Attorney General’s Office. Ms. Brown asked what professional relationships are in place to cover limitations? Ms. Dwyer noted that there had to be redundancy at some level to ensure coverage. Someone else asked about coordination with DNREC – re Parks and Beaches – where does it all fit it? It was asked if agreements were needed for support officers, such as police. Ms. Cavanaugh said that it varies tremendously. It was noted that, for example, in Child Welfare, certain officers are assigned to be the responder. It was noted again by Mr. Lippstone and Mr. Petit De Mange that definitions for “equipped” and “adequately trained” needed to be addressed. It was also said that oversight was needed – who ensures that it all gets done. Mr. Usilton offered a packet of training materials used by the KCSPCA.
I must comment – Mr. Usilton and board members told KCLC Commissioner Jody Sweeney that there had been NO training since 2009. The excuse – no money. Ms. Brown of HSUS has told me that she is working with the KCSPCA to develop training for animal cruelty investigations. So I find it bizarre that Mr. Usilton should suddenly have “training” information to share with the TF.)
Shelter Standards
When inspections and investigations were discussed, Secretary Kee said that both were “complaint driven” – that there are no regular inspections. He also stated that there have only been about 5 complaints in the last year-to-year and a half.
We find this strange – Carol Furr’s initial complaint in 2011, Canine Nation, the multiple complaints our group brought to him in January 2012, Carol Furr’s continuing log of conditions in 2012, and the complaints of Migdalia Santiago, Brandi Butler and Patty Baker – not only is that more than 5, to my knowledge the only responses were to Canine Nation, who then registered their objection to the findings; and a January meeting between several of our group and Secretary Kee. We were told there would be a follow up meeting; not only did we not hear again from him, he never responded to any e-mails sent to him either.
It was suggested that there should be penalties for non-compliance with the Shelter Standards. Mr. Rago asked for a definition of shelters vs. kennels. Mr. Usilton said that shelters are exempt from County oversight for kennels in Title 9. Ms. Ranji said that needed to be looked at again – the point being, protection of animals in both shelters and kennels. Mr. Usilton said that animal housing standards were animal welfare. Definitions of shelter standards, kennels – commercial, retail and private. It was suggested that “puppy mills” be added to this list (I thought “puppy mills” were a derogatory reference to commercial kennels that are not managed with animal health and welfare as a priority).
Inspections for shelters – should they be licensed? Annual inspections? Mr. Usilton said that shelter licensing was a formal process. If there are State mandates for a non-profit agency, the State should have to fund all shelters to the same level. One of the members suggested looking at “doggie daycares.”
Mr. Usilton stated that he had just argued with the Attorney General’s Office over euthanizing a dog. Senator Blevins noted that the law does NOT say a shelter cannot euthanize a dog. Mr. Usilton then gestured to Anne Gryczon (Safe Haven) and said “Anne says I can’t.” Ms. Gryczon noted that her shelter was “no kill” and did not believe in euthanizing as a general solution. (I still don’t know what Mr. Usilton’s point was, or why he used a classic deflection technique to change the subject. I suspect no one else knows what he was talking about, either.)
At one point, someone (Secretary Kee, I believe) asked if the (CAPA) law was causing hardship, and asked the shelters to say how much money CAPA was costing them. Faithful Friends, DEL SPCA and Safe Haven all said it was not costing them any more to operate that before – they all do what the law requires and always had been doing so. DE Humane said that it might be costing some money, but it was hard to tell and the problem might be due to the economy. KCSPCA asserted that it was costing them $225,000 (??? Could not hear clearly, may not be correct) to comply with CAPA, and that they expected to handle 20,000 animals this year. Despite that most of the shelters did not feel this was an issue, it was noted that costs caused by CAPA should be looked at.
Consolidation
It was suggested that a central data base for lost animals should be established. Ms. Ranji suggested identifying funding streams. It was also suggested that animal cruelty investigations be looked at – from complaint through prosecution – to see which agencies were involved. Animals in need/injured should be addressed – no one takes responsibility. Which agency has jurisdiction/responsibility? Who pays? Ms. Cavanaugh said that DE SPCA does this already. The organization has always done this and pays for it themselves.
Mr. Rago said that there should be a philosphy on how to deal with these issues. He said that pets are often “family members” and made the analogy with children’s services – it was not effective until the government services were coordinated and supplemented by outside contracts and the counties. One of the TF members agreed – the bureaucracy was there, just all over the place. Secretary Kee said that he respected that, but no everyone would buy into it – these are animals, not children. And, in this economy, is there money for that?
Cats:
Should cats be handled under animal control? Senator Blevins pointed out other issues: for example, trapping other people’s cats and removing them, either to transport them elsewhere or to kill them, is illegal and animal cruelty. There was discussion of TNR (Trap Neuter Release) and companion animals vs. colony cats (i.e., owned vs. stray/feral). How should barn cats be handled? Should cats be licensed? Ms. Gryczon felt there should be support for cat colony caretakers; it was noted this would require more funding. It was noted that TNR could take up a whole meeting.
The meeting was only scheduled to take an hour and was running over at this time.
Mr. Petit de Mange asked if the public would get a chance to comment on the framed issues. He also suggested that 2 public meetings should be held – one now/soon, and one when the TF has drafted its recommendations. Senator Blevins said only one was required, and it would be held in Dover; she asked if anyone else thought 2 should be held. There was not real response, but she said it could be taken under consideration.
(Not only was I surprised at the lack of interest in public outreach, I have e-mailed a number of the TF members in support of Mr. Petit de Mange’s suggestion.)
At the end of the meeting, the public present were allowed 3 minutes each to comment:
1) Phyllis Franks – Ms. Franks had contacted a number of people regarding an animal cruelty case that was not handled well, with fatal results for the dog involved (euthanasia due to unknown animal bites).
2) I made a statement concerning the make-up of the TF and all the meetings being held in NCC; I also noted that oversight of the animal control officers was a must in regard to their performance, and that someone needed to take responsibility for their actions (copy attached). I noted that in January 2012 we had recommended in writing that a central panel to hear complaints be formed.
3) Carol Furr made a statement regarding the lack of oversight on shelter standards and the lack of response to complaints (attached). Her statement also reiterated the need for a central panel.
4) Doug Beatty commented on the stance of the Governor’s office that no oversight of private non-profit organizations operating under color of law is possible.
The meeting was adjourned.
The list of issues under each category as written and sent out by Carling Ryan, TF staff.
Dog Control
o Questions/Issues to consider
Should dog control be moved to the State level?
Who is or should be responsible for dog control?
Why is it just “dog” control and not “animal” control?
There is no funding for other animals (besides dogs)
There is public confusion due to separate locations of laws relating to dog control
How do shelter standards fall under dog control?
No central location for complaints
What does dog control encompass?
More information about dog control as a public service
Protecting humans
Where does animal welfare fit?
o Information needed for discussion:
Copies of current contracts with counties and municipalities
Amount currently spent on animal control
Animal Control Officers
o Questions/Issues to consider:
Who should oversee the work of Animal Control Officers?
Should there be standardized training requirements? If so, what training is
needed?
Better define types of officers
Look at other examples of training for officers under Delaware law
Certification of officers
Define their responsibilities and their limitations, including DELJIS
Animal Cruelty Officers
Redundancy, coordination of separate authorities
What defines properly equipped/adequately trained officers?
Oversight
Shelter Standards
o Questions/Issues to consider:
Should we make changes to the law’s requirements?
Should penalties for non-compliance be added?
Kennel Standards/definitions
Puppy Mills oversight
Shelter licensing inspection
“Doggy daycares”
Enforcement
Different definitions of “Animal Shelter” in the code
Costs/funding
o Information needed for discussion:
Review of current law requirements
Number of investigations conducted and their outcomes
Consolidation/Coordination of Services
o Questions/Issues to consider:
Should animal welfare responsibilities be consolidated at the State level?
Which government roles could be consolidated
Animal control
Animal cruelty investigations
Shelter standards investigations
Spay/neuter program
Emergency response
Rabies control
Dangerous dog panel
Lost animal registry
Funding streams
Dog licensing
Fines
Agency jurisdiction/issues for which no one will take responsibility
One central agency
Cost constraints
Cats
o Questions/Issues to consider:
Should cats be included in animal control?
Trapping of cats by individuals who have cats enter their property
TNR programs/policies
Resources for cats
Definition of types of cats, companion vs. neighborhood
Should they be licensed?
Support for care of cats
Should cats be more visible in the code?
Add owned cats to victims of dangerous dogs
Abandoned cats
Lack of space for cats in shelters
STATEMENT FOR THE ANIMALWELFARE TASK FORCE MEETING
SEPTEMBER 20, 2012
My name is Carol Furr and I live in Kent County. I became concerned about animal welfare and was once a member of the KCSPCA board. While on the board, I witnessed conditions at the shelter – of both animals and the facility - that were not only in violation of the shelter standards, they bordered on animal cruelty. After being reprimanded and dismissed by the board president, I brought my photos and my concerns to Secretary Kee and Senator Blevins. This was just the beginning of a year-long effort to get someone to listen, to get someone to intervene, to get help for the animals at the KCSPCA.
I have continued to document conditions of animals at the shelter and at the PetSmart adoption center. I have sent this log to elected officials and the Department of Agriculture. I received 2 e-mails telling me to keep up the good work. Nothing else happened.
But this is not just about one shelter. There is no oversight of the shelter standards law under Title 3. There are no penalties in the law for violations of the standards. Complaints to the Department of Agriculture lead nowhere. There are 5 shelters in Delaware that should be inspected on a surprise basis all through the year. So I ask this Task Force to consider adding Statewide inspection and enforcement to the shelter standards law. There are complaints that should be heard and investigated. These tasks – hearing complaints, inspection and enforcement - should be performed by a statewide, unbiased panel.
This was suggested to every legislator and county official in January of this year. Maybe now that we have a Task Force, this idea can actually move forward.
STATEMENT FOR THE ANIMALWELFARE TASK FORCE MEETING
SEPTEMBER 20, 2012
My name is Cathy Samardza and I live in Kent County. First, I must express my disappointment – and that of others posting in public forums on the internet - that the membership of this TF is so unbalanced. So many NCC members to so few Kent and Sussex members sends the message to lower county residents that their opinions do not matter. Having all the meetings in NCC during the day just hammers that home. Add to that the fact that the Governor’s “public member” appointees are all NCC residents, and there is also no representation for the many small rescues doing so much of the TNR in the State. I have been told – by 2 members of this Task Force - that this is how it is in Delaware. That doesn’t make it right.
I understand, after reading the minutes from the last meeting, that this Task Force will be looking at training and oversight of animal control officers. Please keep in mind that training must be about more than animal cruelty investigations, and there should be statewide protocol as well as oversight. Enforcement is huge issue – whether you are talking about animal welfare or control. It is not only about animals – it is about people. And not just the people who are guilty of animal cruelty. There are Delaware citizens and pet owners who have been abused by the current system and how it is carried out. It is unbelievable that agents given enforcement authority by the State either directly or through the counties are not accountable to anyone except their direct employers. In addition, the current legislation has no one clear definition of animal control officer. I have pointed out those inconsistencies in writing, and given the document to members of this Task Force. A statewide, unbiased panel should provide enforcement oversight, as well as hear complaints against animal control officers. Subsequent to enforcement is arrest and prosecution. All agencies involved, including the DOJ, must be on the same page.
The legislature recently dealt with a similar issue with the sheriffs’ offices. Representative Schwartzkopf was quoted as saying "It's not a good position to be in, to have no authority over a person who carries a gun. It's scary." He further said "the deputy is not a police officer....." Animal control officers are not police officers. They don’t carry guns, but they carry batons, which are weapons. They are being allowed to swear out warrants for arrest without witnessing the violation. And no one has authority over them? We know how this played out for Delaware sheriffs. But in this case, we have been told that there is nothing anyone can do about animal control officers overstepping their authority and violating citizen’s civil rights. Not “we don’t believe the reports,” but “we can’t interfere with private non-profit organization personnel.” Sorry, the correct response should have been “Let’s fix this.”
So I say to you now, let’s fix this.
