ANIMAL LAW:

REDUCING EUTHANASIA

IN CITY SHELTERS

By Suzana Gartner

DEFINITIONAL CONFUSION

NO KILL

A term for a method of animal sheltering that

does not sanction any method of killing of

adoptable companion animals

And only to relieve irremediable suffering or

destroy behaviorally vicious animals

DEFINITIONAL CONFUSION

Euthanasia

Dictionary: Taking the life of one for whom no

reasonable alternative exists in as painless and

compassionate a fashion as possible for the good of

the one whose life it is

In sheltering, ending a

companion animal’s life

for various other reasons.

INTRODUCTION:

1) Overview

2) Best Practice Models

3) Legislation and Policy

4) ACAP Model

5) Consensus

BEST PRACTICES SHELTERING MODELS:

1. Responsible Pet Ownership Model

2. No Kill Equation Model

CALGARY ANIMAL SERVICES 2011

RESULTS

Funded entirely by animal related revenues

Primarily from licensing

Receives no tax revenue.

High license compliance

90% dogs licensed

45% cats licensed

Low euthanasia rates

Highest return-to owner-rate in North America.

PRINCIPLES OF PRINCIPLES OF RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP:

1. License and provide permanent identification for pets;

2. Spay or neuter pets; 3. Provide training, physical care, socialization

and medical attention for companion pets; 4. Do not allow pets to become a threat or

nuisance in the community; and 5. Ethical procurement of companion animals.

PRINCIPLES OF NO KILL EQUATION MODEL

Feral Cat TNR

Program

High-Volume, Low-

Cost Spay/Neuter

Rescue Groups

Foster Care

Comprehensive

Adoption Programs

Pet Retention

.Public Relations/Community Involvement

Volunteers

Proactive Redemptions

A Compassionate Director

DISTINCTIONS IN ADMISSIONS POLICIES:

Open Admission Shelters

No Kill Equation Model

(Toronto Animal Services)

vs.

Limited Admission Shelters

Responsible Pet Ownership Model

(Toronto Humane Society)

LIMITATIONS OF BOTH MODELS

No Kill Equation Model relies on private philanthropy instead of licensing fees and relies on a shelter that operates as open admission.

Too specific legislation and not enough flexibility for adaptive policy changes.

Responsible PetOwnership Model relies too heavily on shelter policy and lacks strong bylaw protection.

Relies on shelter that operates as limited admission.

CHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTER 349 349 349 -ANIMALS

OF CITY OF OF CITY OF TORONTOTORONTO MUNICIPAL CODE

1) REGULATES THE OWNERSHIP OF ANIMALS, INCLUDING

LICENSING, NUMBER OF PERMISSIBLE ANIMALS, RESTRICTED

ANIMALS AND THE REQUISITE STANDARD OF CARE.

2) THE BYLAW ALSO GOVERNS THE AUTHORITY IN REGARDS TO

IMPOUNDED AND SEIZED ANIMALS.

3) CURRENTLY, THIS BYLAW IS UNDER REVIEW.

JURISDICTION TO PASS BYLAWS:

The Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, CHAPTER 25

Sections:

10 (2) (9) and

103 (1).

City of Toronto Act,S.O. 2006, CHAPTER 11

Sections:

8 (2) (9) and

106 and 107.

THE MUNICIPAL ACTTHE MUNICIPAL ACT, 2001

S.OS.O. 2001, CHAPTER 25

10 (2) A single-tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting the

following matters:

9. Animals.

Impounding animals

103. (1) If a municipality passes a by-law regulating or prohibiting

with respect to the being at large or trespassing of animals, it may

provide for,

(a) the seizure and impounding of animals being at large or

trespassing contrary to the by-law; and

(b) the sale of impounded animals…..

THE CITY OF TORONTO ACT , 2006 S.O. 2006, CHAPTER 11

8. CITY BYBY-YYY LAWS

(2)(2) THE CITY MAY PASS BYTHE CITY MAY PASS BY-THE CITY MAY PASS BY LAWS RESPECTING THE FOLLOWING

MATTERS:

9. 9. ANIMALS.

IMPOUNDING ANIMALS

106.6. IF THE CITY PASSES A BYIF THE CITY PASSES A BY-IF THE CITY PASSES A BY LAW REGULATING OR

PROHIBITING WITH RESPECT TO THE BEING AT LARGE OR

TRESPASSING OF ANIMALS….

MUZZLING OF DOGS

107. 7. (1)(1)(1) IF THE CITY REQUIRES THE MUZZLING OF A DOG UNDER

ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, CITY COUNCIL SHALL, UPON THE

REQUEST OF THE OWNER OF THE DOG, HOLD A HEARING….

MODEL MUNICIPAL BYLAWSMODEL MUNICIPAL BYLAWS:

1) Companion Animal Protection Act;

2) Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw;

3) Canadian Federation of Humane Society “Model “Bylaw.

RECOMMENDED MUNICIPAL BYLAW: ACAP 1) PREAMBLE;

2) ANIMAL CARE STANDARDS;

3) EUTHANASIA GUIDELINES;

4) COMMUNITY RULES;

5) FERAL CAT TNR;

6) PROCEDURAL RULES:

7) PET RETENTION;

8) FUNDING

PRINCIPLES OF THE ACAP MODELPRINCIPLES OF THE ACAP MODEL:

1)1) PREVENTIONNN;

2) 2) PROACTIVE PROGRAMSSSS;

3) 3) FERAL CAT TTT TNR;

4) 4) IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSSSS;

5) 5) LICENSING GG AND AND STERILIZATIONNN ;

6) 6) BYLAWWWW AND AND POLICY;

7) 7) OWNER SURRENDERSSSS;

8) 8) CONSENSUSSSS.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES:

Impound rates

Return to owner rates

Euthanasia rates

Aggressive animal incidents

Animals licensed

By-law infractions

Financial performance

Evaluation of Policies

Continuous Improvement

CONSENSUS BUILDINGCONSENSUS BUILDING:

KEY STAKEHOLDERSKEY STAKEHOLDERS:

1) 1) REGULATORYREGULATORY ––– THE CITY OF TORONTO, ANIMAL 1) 1) REGULATORYREGULATORYREGULATORY THE CITY OF TORONTO, ANIMAL THE CITY OF TORONTO, ANIMAL SERVICES, THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO;

2) 2) HUMANEHUMANE ––– TORONTO HUMANE SOCIETY (OSPCA), 2) 2) HUMANEHUMANEHUMANE TORONTO HUMANE SOCIETY (OSPCA), TORONTO HUMANE SOCIETY (OSPCA), ANIMAL RESCUES,

3) 3) MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS ––TORONTO VETS, 3) O

MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS –TORONTO VETS, TORONTO VETS, TORONTO VETS, 3) 3) MEDICAL/SERVICE PROVIDERS OOOVMA, BREEDERS, TRAINERS, PET STORES; AND

44) 4) ANIMAL ADVOCATESANIMAL ADVOCATES-ANIMAL ADVOCATES-POLITICIANS, ANIMAL 44) ANIMAL ADVOCATESANIMAL ADVOCATESANIMAL ADVOCATESWELFARE GROUPS.

ROOT OF THE PROBLEM:

1) 1) IRRESPONSIBLE PET

OWNERSHIP;

2) COMPANION ANIMAL

OVERPOPULATIONNN.

RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP

COMPANION ANIMAL POPULATION

Suzana Gartneris a Canadian Lawyer who focusses on Animal Law and Dispute Resolution.

For further information:SuzanaGartner.com

Gartner KostanzaGartner’s Animal Law practice

The Dispute Resolution Specialists Gartner’s Alternative Dispute Resolution practice