March 5, 2008
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – An animal control facility that’s paid for by the city of Birmingham and Jefferson County has come under fire in recent weeks over its role in the city, which it contends is to protect people from animals.
Local animal shelter workers want to see procedural changes pertaining to adoptions and the organization’s for-profit status.
It’s like any other shelter, filled nearly to the brim with all types of animals; of course most of them are dogs and cats.
But the Birmingham Jefferson Animal Control Service shelter operates by a different mantra than you might think.
“The purpose of any animal control program is to protect the public from nuisance animals, dangerous, diseased animals, that sort of thing,” said BJACS President Steve Smith. “The purpose of any humane organization is just the opposite. They’re there to protect pets from people.”
His opinion is not shared by shelter and rescue groups in the area. Specifically, rescue worker Jana Maynard who helps find forever homes through 2-by-2 Animal Rescue.
“My biggest concern of the BJC shelter is it is a for profit shelter and any time something is for profit, it is about making money and when you are trying to make money you’re putting that in front of the well-being of the animals coming through,” said Maynard.
But Smith contends that notions like Maynard’s are a misinterpretation of his program’s role.
“There’s just a misunderstanding,” he said. “A lot of people don’t know the difference between a humane society and an animal control program. And they expect control programs to operate like a humane society.”
Smith said the animals his group takes in are different from those taken in by humane societies.
“We get animals that are neglected, abused, abandoned, they’re sick, injured, they’re in every possible condition you can imagine, as to where most animals in a humane shelter are brought in sitting beside somebody in a car,” he said.
According to Smith, only five percent of the animals brought to his facility have any identification, and only half are adoptable.
“(There’s) no rabies tag, no ID tag, so that puts us at a severe handicap as far as getting it back to the owner,” he said.
As for the un-adoptable animals, “they’re sick, injured or they’re aggressive,” he explained.
Still, Maynard said she’d like to see improvements in the area of adoptions. Currently, only one employee is responsible for those services, and if she isn’t there no animals can be adopted.
“Whereas maybe another shelter or rescue would take more time with an animal, trying to find its home or owner, they’re trying to make money however they can with these animals,” Maynard said, also equating the shelter to a clearing house for animals.
“I would love to see their hours be increased and their adoption days increased,” Maynard said. “I would love to see them make an effort to update their facility so they have rooms where people could come in and meet the animals.”
But Smith said if there was a need for someone to be available during every hour the shelter was open, they’d hire someone.
“It’s just that there aren’t enough people that are interested in adopting a shelter pet,” said Smith. “We wish we didn’t have to euthanize a single animal.”
With a $1 million budget each year provided by the city and county, finances aren’t as big a problem as they are for other animal groups; they’re not rolling in excess cash either.
And, as Smith explained, the shelter has weekly TV and radio advertisements, a mobile adoption unit and low cost spay-neuter programs, all in the name of easing the adoption process for potential pet owners.
Still, the issue of how city and county run animal control facilities should be run – at least in Birmingham – centers on protecting people first. State law mandates that every city provide this service, so for now BJACS has its hands tied.
Mayor Larry Langford gave his opinion on the subject.
“Look, I’m a pet owner and I’m a pet lover,” he said. “But the fact of the matter is someone is going to have to be paid to maintain and operate this. Now if these groups are interested in doing it free, then bring them all together and let’s see how interested they really are.”
If you’d like to comment and see what others have to say, go to the news section of zootoo.com. Send us story ideas by e-mailing or calling us.
Matt Van Hoven is a reporter/editor for Pet Pulse on ZootooTV. He can be reached at news@zootoo.com or 201-210-5452, ext. 1019.
Comments
4 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
8 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
Exactly. We are co-located next to our County Animal Control Office which is a kill facility. We are a no-kill facility and many people get the two organizations confused.
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
Let's face it....for profit or not for profit...it is still a business that in order to keep operating must meet it's financial obligations.
11 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
11 months ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
9 months ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
The goal should be to protect the peopl and help the animals at the same time. Other local goverments do this - so can this one!
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
1 year ago
Reply
I do not find such a clear cut difference between animal control and shelter work. Yes, you have to delineate between animals that can be saved and adopted out and those that can not...a very hard thing to do. But to have only one staff member and few resources for adoption and control in the interest of cost cutting tells me the City should be looking into running the facility itself, taking the overhead and profit that company is taking and putting it into the services that are being cut in the name of profit.
Some things really should not be privatized.
9 months ago
Reply
Indeed, they would make more money adopting out animals than euthanizing them if the truth was being fully told here.
1 year ago
1 year ago
Reply