No kill advocates oppose proposed changes to city animal code

The City recently proposed revisions to Chapter 5 of the City Code (animal related ordinances), which included changes regarding free-roaming cats that were to be presented to City Council for approval on Sept. 1. A vigorous letter-writing campaign urged by No Kill proponents and animal welfare activists such as Alley Cat Allies was conducted and a peaceful protest organized by the Hailey Foundation was staged at City Hall on Aug. 31. The proposed changes were removed from the City Council's agenda, but are still being discussed by City officials.

It is understandable that the city wants to streamline the process for dealing with cats that are truly nuisances or public health concerns, but the proposed changes are likely to have the unintended consequences of more cat euthanasia and of driving people underground in their attempts to manage community cat colonies.

A community cat can be a truly feral cat, an owned cat that is allowed by its owner to roam freely outdoors, or a semi-domesticated cat that does not have a true owner but is fed and cared for by kind neighbors.The distinction between a feral cat and an owned but free-roaming cat can be difficult to make. Many owners may have their cats sterilized and vaccinated, but do not tip the ear as with feral cats. Most owners do not put a collar and tag on their cats due to choking hazards, and many do not put microchips into their cats. Owned cats may be more easily trapped than feral cats because they are more trusting of humans.

The current code allows for cats to be free-roaming if they are sterilized and vaccinated. If they are a nuisance to their neighbors, the neighbor has to fill out an affidavit and have an animal control officer (ACO) investigate the nuisance claim. If the cat is considered to be a nuisance by the ACO, it can be picked up and impounded at Animal Care Services (ACS). ACS does not currently accept cats that have been trapped by private citizens and taken to the shelter as “over the counter” strays.  The proposed code changes reversed these ordinances, making it illegal for cats to be free-roaming and allowing for private citizens and ACO’s to trap cats.  The animal welfare community is concerned that owned cats and cared-for community cats would be picked up and many of them would ultimately be euthanized at ACS

Proposed Changes
The proposed changes to the ordinances stated that trapped cats shall be kept for not fewer than 72 hours and then may be euthanized or sterilized and placed in an area designated by the ACS Director. These proposed changes were intended to address problems caused by cat owners that do not or will not sterilize and vaccinate their cats, allowing them to become a true nuisance to their neighbors and a contributor to cat overpopulation. These changes were also meant to address sick, injured and uncared for cats that are dying in the heat and getting hit by cars. However, animal welfare advocates fear that these changes could encourage inexperienced people to attempt to trap cats, causing injury to themselves and others, as well as the cats, or that cat-hating neighbors would use the new ordinances to trap their neighbors’ cats to get rid of them.

The proposed changes are focused on the euthanization or relocation of unsocialized cats—socialized cats that were impounded would be put into the Live Release program.  However, it is unlikely that any trapped cat, even if it is someone's pet that goes in and out of the house, will appear to be socialized when it is trapped. It will be scared and angry. The only cats that appear to be socialized and adoptable when trapped are kittens.

Catching and impounding cats would increase the number of euthanizations at ACS, and set No Kill efforts back. The City’s current position on feral cats is arguably the most successful No Kill effort that has been made and these proposed changes would set back the good work done with feral cats.

No Kill program
San Antonians who support the City's No Kill program applauded the changes made to Chapter 5 in 2007 that allowed for free-roaming cats as long as they were vaccinated and sterilized. This allowed for openly caring for cat colonies and TNR. Trapping/Neutering/Returning and caring for cat colonies is the only effective means of community cat population control.& Scientific studies and decades of experience show that catching and killing or catching and relocating community cats do not eliminate cats from the area where they were trapped. Other cats will move in and they will have to do it over and over again. TNR and managing cat colonies is the only method of cat population control that works. It plays out over a period of several years, but it does work.

It goes without saying that Animal Care Services must perform its due diligence to scan for microchips and use licenses to return cats to their owners. Healthy, unsocialized cats should not be euthanized, but be sterilized and returned to the location where they were trapped or to a designated cat colony or barn cat program. City Council should strike the language that says (sterile and vaccinated) cats must be restrained at all times and add that healthy, socialized trapped cats must be sterilized and returned to the location where they were trapped.

Education is the best tool to address free-roaming cat overpopulation, and it has not been used pervasively by the City. The city must do a better job of explaining why cat colonies are good neighbors: they keep other cats away, they keep rodents and snakes away, they are not less healthy statistically than owned cats, and if fed properly in a designated location, they will leave everyone alone and stick to their territory. At the same time, the City must provide education to the public on the need to microchip and license their cats, especially if trapping by the City and neighbors is to be supported by ordinance changes.

The city has the responsibility to enforce ordinances that require pet owners to vaccinate their cats and to sterilize them if they are going to allow them to roam outdoors freely. Indoor/outdoor cats are more the rule than the exception, and owners have a responsibility to their neighbors to abide by the laws. While the City is pursuing its enforcement duty, Animal Control officers can provide information about humane alternatives to individual citizens, City council representatives can encourage humane alternatives with their constituents via their newsletters and Town Hall meetings, and they City can make it easy for citizens to comply with the ordinances. If fact, all of these ideas are in the 2006 Animal Care Strategic Plan:

• Provide owners spay/neuter and educational alternatives to fines.
• Offer reduced fees, community service and other alternatives for reclaiming a lost pet.
• Offer spay/neuter as an incentive for reclaiming a lost pet.
• Waive fees for first time reclaim if the pet is spayed or neutered.

For San Antonio to truly be a No Kill city, we must exhaust every humane alternative before we resort to euthanization. The good news is that across the United States, humane alternatives are much more cost effective and much more successful methods of stray and free-roaming cat population control.