Animal crusader takes on overcrowded animal shelters

California pet lovers prepare to do battle, again, over a bill that calls for mandatory spaying and neutering. At stake is nothing less than the lives of hundreds of thousands of cats and dogs.

Thursday March 31st, 2011

  • Share on Facebook
Square_140_mancuso
<p>Once Judy Mancuso concluded <br />there was no way to find homes <br />for all the pets in this country, she <br />crafted a spay/neuter bill. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>

The bill that would make fixing your pets the law in California was actually born far away in a New Orleans shelter. That's where Judie Mancuso, who'd flown down from her home in Laguna Beach to aid the post-Hurricane Katrina animal rescue effort, concluded that enough was enough.

"When I walked into that shelter and saw that every animal in there was unaltered--animals who'd been running loose on the streets!--I thought, we have a huge crisis on our hands," she says. "I knew my next goal would be to put together a statewide spay/neuter bill."

Not being a resident of Louisiana, she settled for introducing the bill in her own state of California, and hopes other states will follow suit.

Chucking the "pinky in a dam" approach

Mancuso's activism began long before then. In 1990, a TV special on pet overpopulation turned her from a carefree, meat-eating high-tech professional into a vegan animal rescuer. "It showed all these healthy, beautiful, wonderful animals going to the euthanasia table," she recalls. "I was just blown away. I couldn't believe that's how we dealt with the problem."

She started raising money for shelters, fostering animals, trapping feral cats, and staffing adoption events. Just prior to her fateful trip to New Orleans, she'd even quit her information technology job to devote herself full-time to animal rescue work. She and her husband, Rolf Wicklund, had already decided to forgo kids for the cause.

But it felt a bit like sticking her pinky in a dam that was constantly springing more holes--an estimated 800,000 holes a year, according to one estimate of how many dogs and cats are abandoned in California each year. Roughly half those animals are euthanized.

"Every time we'd make some headway and save a couple animals, someone would dump more," says Mancuso wearily. "The litters just kept coming through the door. Oh my god, kitten season...!"

Crafting a new rescue strategy

While setting up yet another adoption event with fellow volunteers to place still more homeless animals, the talk kept circling back to the same question: Why aren't more people spaying and neutering their pets? Since Mancuso had observed, time and again, that many owners can't be bothered, she decided it was time for a new strategy.

When she got back to California, Mancuso asked Ed Bok, general manager of Animal Services in Los Angeles, to work with her on crafting a mandatory spay/neuter bill. He agreed, and the two started making the rounds, visiting animal care and control officers, veterinarians, police officers, breeders, and service dog groups for help in turning the idea into AB 1634, or the California Healthy Pets Act.

The American Kennel Club objects

When Assemblyman Lloyd Levine introduced the bill to the California assembly in February of 2007, it churned up a political storm the likes of which the capitol hadn't seen since the debate on gay marriage.

"It's amazing how motivated people are, both for and against," Assemblyman Anthony Adams told the Capitol Weekly last summer, at the height of the frenzy. "I've never been lobbied this hard on anything."

On the con side were many breeders and the American Kennel Club. Not only does the AKC object to taking the spay/neuter decision out of the owners' hands, says their spokesperson, Lisa Peterson, they doubt such a law would work. She argues that backyard breeders won't comply with the law, and reputable breeders will end up getting penalized.

"The animals that show up in shelters come from a wide variety of situations, from dogs who've been relinquished by their owners to feral cats that are brought in," says Peterson. "To come up with one solution that only targets one segment of the pet owning population--the responsible owners--doesn't seem like a good plan."

Although many animal welfare groups back the bill, at least a few will sit out this legislative round. San Mateo County has one of the oldest mandatory spay-neuter ordinances in the state--of 20 cities in the county, five have required spaying and neutering since the early '90s--but the head of the local humane society, Scott Delucchi, says he won't be lobbying for the bill.

"We've tried things on our own that we think are far more effective in getting people to alter their pets," he says, "such as educational outreach and low-cost spay/neuter services." He adds that when people are forced to fix their pets, they can become more angry than enlightened. "In some ways, the ordinance hurts us."

Santa Cruz makes a compelling case

Proponents counter by holding up Santa Cruz as an example of what the law could be. The county has had a spay/neuter ordinance in place since 2006 and the local SPCA says its euthanasia rate has dropped 64 percent since then. "We've had a tremendous decrease in the number of animals coming in," says Tricia Geisreiter, a spokesperson for the Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority.

Lake County, Santa Barbara County, and L.A. County have all recently passed similar ordinances. Officials there say it's too soon to tell if it's making a dent in the overpopulation problem. But they do note that the program is proceeding smoothly, with none of the big brother elements that critics fear.

"We're not knocking on the doors of responsible owners saying, let's see your papers," says Paula Werner, program manager of Lake County Animal Care and Control. "But if you're a bad breeder who doesn't take care of your animals, you bet we'll be on your doorstep."

Supporters also dismiss fears that the law would mean the demise of the beloved mutt. At best, they say, the law would cut down on 'oops' matings and on litters coming into the shelter. But it's not going to stop them completely.

"There are still going to be plenty of dogs and cats in California," reassures Michael Markarian, executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States, one of the bill's supporters.

A second push to pass the bill

The bill squeaked through the assembly in June of 2007, passing by a single vote. But the following month, Levine pulled the bill when it seemed like members of a Senate committee would vote it down. But he didn't give up on it.

In January of 2008, Levine reintroduced the bill to the State assembly. It faces a vote in April before the same committee; if passed, it will move on to the full Senate.

Mancuso's confident that the second go around will be the charm. "We have tons of support, especially when the state's experiencing a $14 billion deficit and we're offering a bill that saves taxpayers' money," she says.

If the bill passes and succeeds, Mancuso and her supporters believe other states would be close behind with their own spay/neuter laws. "As California goes, so goes the country. We think it could be pathbreaking animal welfare reform," says HSUS's Markarian.

In the meantime, Mancuso's still meeting with legislators to craft a version that will pass. She celebrated the annual Spay Day, on February 26, at a signing ceremony that will make spay/neuter mandatory in the city of Los Angeles; the rest of L.A. county has already signed on.

The same vision that ignited her rescue work, feeds her resolve now. She's just tired of seeing healthy cats and dogs killed for lack of a home. "It's going to be an honor to make this bill happen," she says.

________________________________________________________

BackTalk. Are you for or against California's spay/neuter bill? Please let us know what you think.

Related Content on DogTime.com
  • Why spaying/neutering is important

    March 31st, 2011

    Many folks hesitate to spay or neuter their pet, fearing that it's painful and wondering what the actual benfits are. Here is a discussion of the procedure and why you should consider it for your dog....

  • Square_100_prince-lorenzo-borghese-the

    Former ‘Bachelor’ star to help control dog population

    February 8th, 2012

    A prince in more than one way, former Bachelor star Lorenzo Borghese will donate funds from his pet spa franchise to help dog low-income dog owners spay/neuter their pet.  

  • Myths and facts about spaying and neutering

    March 31st, 2011

    MYTH: My dog will get fat and lazy. FACT: The only way your dog will get fat and lazy is if you do not provide enough exercise and feed him too much. MYTH: It's better for my dog to have one litter...

Anonymous User

Can this be done as an initiative on the ballot for 2012???

about 1 year ago by Anonymous

Anonymous User

Desperation Aboard the RMS Mancuso August 7, 2010 by Nathan J. Winograd Judie Mancuso and her ilk, the failed Los Angeles-based architects behind many attempts to legislate mandatory spay/neuter in California, have gone on the offensive, attacking me for what they claim is a “web of corruption.” (The allegations are silly and hardly worth an answer, but they are here for the overly curious.) Their latest salvo is the result of the appointment of Brenda Barnette, a successful shelter director committed to the No Kill philosophy and opposed to mandatory sterilization, as the new General Manager of Los Angeles Animal Services. This appointment means Mancuso and her acolytes will no longer have access to the halls of power or an ally for their failed agenda. It threatens to end any hope of mandatory sterilization becoming California law because to the extent Barnette is forthright (compared to her predecessor, Mancuso ally Ed Boks, who was not), she will have no choice but to disclose just what a failure it has been in Los Angeles: more impounds, more killing, more backyard breeding as I discuss below. And this threatens them to their core. These are the last surviving passengers of a rapidly sinking ship. Their latest attempts to denigrate No Kill and salvage their failed agenda of killing apologia and mandatory spay/neuter by attacking me looks, smells, and feels about four years too late. The whole country has realized that the Titanic of Mandatory Sterilization and its sister ship the RMS Opposition to No Kill weren’t even sea worthy, let alone unsinkable, despite their continued assurances to the contrary. As the ASPCA and HSUS who once captained those vessels jump into lifeboats, Mancuso and others like her sit on the deck clinging to life with the same level of self-deception that the medieval Church clung to an Earth-As-The-Center-Of-The-Universe theory even as moons orbiting Jupiter could be seen with clarity through the end of Galileo’s telescope. In the latest salvo, they have even created a silly website that asks people to condemn “Winograd’s No Kill agenda” because I am allegedly caught in a “web of corruption.” They can attack me all they want, accuse me of all the corruption they want, but it doesn’t make a bit of difference. The No Kill movement is much bigger than me. It is no longer about personalities, but about a set of principles that transcends any of us individually. That was one of the central lessons from the No Kill Conference this past weekend. No Kill Conference 2010 was an army of lawyers, legislators, members of the media, rescuers, shelter directors, and other professionals—a multi-headed hydra for good that cannot be stopped by anyone or by any means. Cut my head off, and ten more are there to replace me, in communities across the U.S. and countries around the world, with the same powerful message and commitment to the future of lifesaving; all of them preaching a sanctity of life and the tools to preserve it. No one understands this better than the three blind mice that drove Best Friends headlong into a brick wall. Gregory Castle, Julie Castle, and Francis Battista thought they were invincible. They thought Best Friends was deified. And they thought they could sacrifice the animals of New York State in order to gain access to the dollars of New York City by opposing Oreo’s Law and no one would hold them accountable. After all, they were the revered leaders of the revered Best Friends. How monumentally they learned otherwise when they took a severe beating from the rescue community after it was revealed that they betrayed the animals for personal relationships and naked self-interest. Almost everyone who learned what they did put allegiance to the animals first, rather than to an insular, out-of-touch trio in the middle of the Utah desert. What once was adoration is now vilification and it is fully deserved: 25,000 animals a year were sacrificed on the altar of ego, greed, and power. As the No Kill movement continues to spread, as new leaders emerge, as communities across the United States and world end the killing of healthy and treatable animals in places people have never heard of, by shelter directors people don’t know, any attempts to attack me will have no impact on the widening success of our movement. I am not the No Kill movement and the No Kill movement is not me. And that is a welcome turning point. As Ryan Clinton pointed out during his presentation at the No Kill Conference, you know you are winning when the movement you helped foster becomes bigger than you are. Attack me and Mancuso and company gain nothing. It only serves to show how desperate they have become. Why do people think Wayne Pacelle is now claiming HSUS always supported No Kill and is in fact the leader of the No Kill movement? Even he has seen the writing on the wall, has seen where the future is heading, and hopes to rewrite history in a way that makes him a hero, and not the villain he has been. Yet while Pacelle and others like him escape the rapidly sinking ship, Mancuso and her ilk cling to the driftwood of their old ideologies, even while the animals they claim to want to save are put to death because of them. In fact, if you are poor and have a companion animal who is not spayed because you cannot afford it, their solution is to have the pound kill the animal, even though they claim that they are for saving lives. And they know it because their own community in Los Angeles enacted their legislation resulting in an increase in killing in Los Angeles City shelters for the first time in a decade. Almost immediately, even before the ordinance took effect, LAAS officers threatened poor people with citations if they did not turn over the pets to be killed at LAAS, and that is exactly what occurred. For the first time in a decade, impounds and killing increased—dog deaths increased 24%, while cat deaths increased 35%. Last year, it went up again for dogs, and is still higher than pre-legislation levels for cats. In the process, they also fed the backyard breeding market for more (unaltered) animals. Despite public claims of success and the touting of the L.A. law in a bid to pass the law statewide, recently released e-mails show that they knew their much touted mandatory sterilization law was harmful to animals for another reason. According to the e-mails, after the mandatory sterilization law went into effect, veterinarians across the City of Los Angeles sought to exploit the captive market by raising their prices. Veterinarians wanted a windfall, even though cost was—and is—the primary barrier to spay/neuter. The end result was that while spay/neuter was now the law, the effect of the price increases in response to the law put sterilization increasingly out of reach for those at the bottom rung of the economic latter, forcing them to surrender their animals, which the shelters she supported put to death. So how do they respond to the increased killing in Los Angeles they helped bring about? How do they respond to the No Kill communities achieving success all over the U.S. and indeed the world by following the No Kill Advocacy Center’s No Kill Equation model? By reevaluating their approach? By working for implementation of the No Kill Equation? By fighting for more progressive leadership? Of course not. That is how ethical people dedicated to saving lives would respond. They instead choose to spend their time by claiming I am caught in a “web of corruption.” It is always the same, in every movement, no matter what the issue. But, as anyone who reads history knows, the “controversy” created by those who demand change is quickly forgotten once their goals are realized. As the biography of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, All on Fire, states, “The tension created by significant social movements is always resisted and condemned during the struggle and invariably forgotten afterward.” We are now all abolitionists. We are now all suffragists. Soon, we will all be No Kill advocates. And no one will care or remember the final desperate death rattle of the opposition, except perhaps to marvel at the depths of their self-delusion. “Web of corruption,” indeed. As the RMS Mancuso sinks beneath the waves, as their pro-killing agenda is increasingly seen for what it is, as No Kill communities explode all over the world, no one can stop the forward march by attacking me. I am increasingly irrelevant to the widening success of this movement. As the No Kill movement increases, my importance diminishes. And do you know how that makes me feel? It makes me feel like celebrating.

over 1 year ago by Anonymous

Anonymous User

Desperation Aboard the RMS Mancuso Desperation Aboard the RMS Mancuso August 7, 2010 by Nathan J. Winograd Judie Mancuso and her ilk, the failed Los Angeles-based architects behind many attempts to legislate mandatory spay/neuter in California, have gone on the offensive, attacking me for what they claim is a “web of corruption.” (The allegations are silly and hardly worth an answer, but they are here for the overly curious.) Their latest salvo is the result of the appointment of Brenda Barnette, a successful shelter director committed to the No Kill philosophy and opposed to mandatory sterilization, as the new General Manager of Los Angeles Animal Services. This appointment means Mancuso and her acolytes will no longer have access to the halls of power or an ally for their failed agenda. It threatens to end any hope of mandatory sterilization becoming California law because to the extent Barnette is forthright (compared to her predecessor, Mancuso ally Ed Boks, who was not), she will have no choice but to disclose just what a failure it has been in Los Angeles: more impounds, more killing, more backyard breeding as I discuss below. And this threatens them to their core. These are the last surviving passengers of a rapidly sinking ship. Their latest attempts to denigrate No Kill and salvage their failed agenda of killing apologia and mandatory spay/neuter by attacking me looks, smells, and feels about four years too late. The whole country has realized that the Titanic of Mandatory Sterilization and its sister ship the RMS Opposition to No Kill weren’t even sea worthy, let alone unsinkable, despite their continued assurances to the contrary. As the ASPCA and HSUS who once captained those vessels jump into lifeboats, Mancuso and others like her sit on the deck clinging to life with the same level of self-deception that the medieval Church clung to an Earth-As-The-Center-Of-The-Universe theory even as moons orbiting Jupiter could be seen with clarity through the end of Galileo’s telescope. In the latest salvo, they have even created a silly website that asks people to condemn “Winograd’s No Kill agenda” because I am allegedly caught in a “web of corruption.” They can attack me all they want, accuse me of all the corruption they want, but it doesn’t make a bit of difference. The No Kill movement is much bigger than me. It is no longer about personalities, but about a set of principles that transcends any of us individually. That was one of the central lessons from the No Kill Conference this past weekend. No Kill Conference 2010 was an army of lawyers, legislators, members of the media, rescuers, shelter directors, and other professionals—a multi-headed hydra for good that cannot be stopped by anyone or by any means. Cut my head off, and ten more are there to replace me, in communities across the U.S. and countries around the world, with the same powerful message and commitment to the future of lifesaving; all of them preaching a sanctity of life and the tools to preserve it. No one understands this better than the three blind mice that drove Best Friends headlong into a brick wall. Gregory Castle, Julie Castle, and Francis Battista thought they were invincible. They thought Best Friends was deified. And they thought they could sacrifice the animals of New York State in order to gain access to the dollars of New York City by opposing Oreo’s Law and no one would hold them accountable. After all, they were the revered leaders of the revered Best Friends. How monumentally they learned otherwise when they took a severe beating from the rescue community after it was revealed that they betrayed the animals for personal relationships and naked self-interest. Almost everyone who learned what they did put allegiance to the animals first, rather than to an insular, out-of-touch trio in the middle of the Utah desert. What once was adoration is now vilification and it is fully deserved: 25,000 animals a year were sacrificed on the altar of ego, greed, and power. As the No Kill movement continues to spread, as new leaders emerge, as communities across the United States and world end the killing of healthy and treatable animals in places people have never heard of, by shelter directors people don’t know, any attempts to attack me will have no impact on the widening success of our movement. I am not the No Kill movement and the No Kill movement is not me. And that is a welcome turning point. As Ryan Clinton pointed out during his presentation at the No Kill Conference, you know you are winning when the movement you helped foster becomes bigger than you are. Attack me and Mancuso and company gain nothing. It only serves to show how desperate they have become. Why do people think Wayne Pacelle is now claiming HSUS always supported No Kill and is in fact the leader of the No Kill movement? Even he has seen the writing on the wall, has seen where the future is heading, and hopes to rewrite history in a way that makes him a hero, and not the villain he has been. Yet while Pacelle and others like him escape the rapidly sinking ship, Mancuso and her ilk cling to the driftwood of their old ideologies, even while the animals they claim to want to save are put to death because of them. In fact, if you are poor and have a companion animal who is not spayed because you cannot afford it, their solution is to have the pound kill the animal, even though they claim that they are for saving lives. And they know it because their own community in Los Angeles enacted their legislation resulting in an increase in killing in Los Angeles City shelters for the first time in a decade. Almost immediately, even before the ordinance took effect, LAAS officers threatened poor people with citations if they did not turn over the pets to be killed at LAAS, and that is exactly what occurred. For the first time in a decade, impounds and killing increased—dog deaths increased 24%, while cat deaths increased 35%. Last year, it went up again for dogs, and is still higher than pre-legislation levels for cats. In the process, they also fed the backyard breeding market for more (unaltered) animals. Despite public claims of success and the touting of the L.A. law in a bid to pass the law statewide, recently released e-mails show that they knew their much touted mandatory sterilization law was harmful to animals for another reason. According to the e-mails, after the mandatory sterilization law went into effect, veterinarians across the City of Los Angeles sought to exploit the captive market by raising their prices. Veterinarians wanted a windfall, even though cost was—and is—the primary barrier to spay/neuter. The end result was that while spay/neuter was now the law, the effect of the price increases in response to the law put sterilization increasingly out of reach for those at the bottom rung of the economic latter, forcing them to surrender their animals, which the shelters she supported put to death. So how do they respond to the increased killing in Los Angeles they helped bring about? How do they respond to the No Kill communities achieving success all over the U.S. and indeed the world by following the No Kill Advocacy Center’s No Kill Equation model? By reevaluating their approach? By working for implementation of the No Kill Equation? By fighting for more progressive leadership? Of course not. That is how ethical people dedicated to saving lives would respond. They instead choose to spend their time by claiming I am caught in a “web of corruption.” It is always the same, in every movement, no matter what the issue. But, as anyone who reads history knows, the “controversy” created by those who demand change is quickly forgotten once their goals are realized. As the biography of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, All on Fire, states, “The tension created by significant social movements is always resisted and condemned during the struggle and invariably forgotten afterward.” We are now all abolitionists. We are now all suffragists. Soon, we will all be No Kill advocates. And no one will care or remember the final desperate death rattle of the opposition, except perhaps to marvel at the depths of their self-delusion. “Web of corruption,” indeed. As the RMS Mancuso sinks beneath the waves, as their pro-killing agenda is increasingly seen for what it is, as No Kill communities explode all over the world, no one can stop the forward march by attacking me. I am increasingly irrelevant to the widening success of this movement. As the No Kill movement increases, my importance diminishes. And do you know how that makes me feel? It makes me feel like celebrating.

over 1 year ago by Anonymous

Anonymous User

Well, now that the Spay Neuter bill is to become law, the State Legislature had to adjust the California Broke Budget to include $300,000 more for Animal Shelters to take care of the increased influx of abandoned animals because pet owners can't afford the surgery. Again unintended consequences of this social engineering project that has minimal support in fact. SFreptile

over 2 years ago by Anonymous

Recent conversations on these topics

  • help please!

    i have a 5 year old male staffordshire bull terrier. he has not been neutered and up until recently we have never had a problem with other dogs. bitches he is fine with, but on two occasions he has shown dominance towards another dog with has led to him becoming aggressive towards them. we are responsible, we keep him on a lead and if need be let a fellow dog owner know he is not very good with them. however if another dog off leash approaches him he goes into fight mode and recently a stray akita ran towards him and my dog flipped it over and grabbed a mouth full of fur. my dog will not get the exercise he needs kept on a leash and i do not wish for him to wear a muzzle. will neutering my dog eliviate the problem? we do not stud him and we have only had him for 18 months but because his temperament has always been brilliant, especially with our children we never felt the need.

  • Michael Vick's Dogs Update & Photos!

    Did you see the latest article on the Michael Vick dogs? Those dogs are amazing! Pit Bulls tend to get a bad rap, maybe these dogs will help turn that around! And what about Timmy that the reporter took home with him for a night? Poor thing. Do you think he'll ever be adoptable? Here's the article: <a href="http://dogtime.com/articles/484?breaks=2502_5006_7557_10058_12558_13944&slug=true&title=best-friends">Update On Michael Vick's Dogs</a>

  • Jailed dogs are cut a break! Give-A-Dog-A-Bone Program

    What a great article! Corinne Dowling is such an inspiration! What do you think about this population of "jailed" dogs? Full article is here: <a href="http://dogtime.com/give-a-dog-a-bone.html">Jailed Dogs</a> A maverick program shines a light on a population of dogs the world rarely hears about and offers hope for others like them.

  • Green Your Dog Article

    Anybody out there who is really trying to go "green" with your pets? Got some tips for the rest of us? The article on this site is good: <a href="http://dogtime.com/green-your-dog.html">Green Your Dog</a>

AD

What does the Healthy Pets Act mean?

  • Pet owners must spay or neuter their dogs or cats by the age of six months, unless they buy an intact permit each year. The cost will be determined by local governments.
  • Only certain animals would qualify for an intact permit, including those owned by a licensed breeder; show dogs and cats and dogs participating in canine sports; dogs used in law enforcement, fire departments, and search and rescue; those who are too old or sick to be safely spayed or neutered; dogs used to herd or protect livestock; and assistance dogs for the disabled.
  • Owners could get an extension of up to one year of age, with a letter from a vet explaining that there medical reasons to wait.
  • Until January 1, 2012, the bill would allow owners to buy an intact permit for one male and one female dog per household for a single litter.
  • Money from the intact permits would fund the program.

To read the latest version of the bill, click here.

Will it improve the puppy mill problem?

Not really. There are only about 20 licensed puppy mills in the state, says Curt Ransom, regional program manager for the west coast regional office of the Humane Society. Most puppies in California pet store windows come from out of state breeders. Although the puppies would fall under the law once they arrived in California, their breeders wouldn't be affected.

What can I do to help pass this bill?

If you live in California, there's a lot you can do:

  • The Humane Society is inviting California residents to send a letter to their local representatives in support of the bill. Click here to send a message.
  • The Healthy Pets Act campaign is looking for volunteers. You can sign up here to be contacted about volunteer opportunities.

If you live outside California, you can fax a support letter to the Healthy Pets Act campaign at (310) 274-2003. And of course, anyone can donate to the campaign.

Help shelter dogs and puppies through Save a Dog on Facebook

Welcome to DogTime.com

DOGTIME LOGIN or SIGN UP

AD
AD