Exercise 8

 

Proposal To Implement/Fund an Efficient Animal Transport Program

Introduction-

My proposal is centered on solving the issue of overcrowding in shelters throughout California. The results of this limited space can prove to have drastic effects on the animals within. Many are mislabeled as a different breed, and as a result can have a less of a chance to be adopted. The end result can be euthanasia because there is not enough room for many animals in one shelter.

  • Use example of the sad commercials on tv about animals who are trapped in cages and have come from abusive backgrounds. This will serve to be a hook in the intro in order to capture the reader’s attention.

  • Address who the audience is, in this case the government. Convince them with the evidence that they should consider the long term effects that these shelters have on the animals and the shelters themselves.

  • Start broad (national) then narrow (CA)

Discussion of Problem-

The problem at hand is that there are too many animals packed within the shelters, which can often lead to the displacement of animals, and high euthanasia rates. In some areas there are more animals that are abandoned and rehomed than there are animals who are being adopted, which creates an imbalanced system. This constant influx of animals results in maximum capacity within many shelters, putting financial stress on that institution. Many shelters take more animals than they can hold which may lead to high euthanasia rates.

The proposal is for animals to be transported from fully capacitated shelters (High-kill) to shelters that are able to take more animals, and give them the proper care that they need. There are many factors that this proposal entails such as cost, health issues, and way of transportation.  Even though there are many factors that are involved, the results will improve the lives of millions of animals, and will decrease the financial burden that is placed upon the shelters who are at full capacity.

Problem- more detail/background-

As a previously explained, the problem is that of overcrowding in animal shelters in CA and how this often results in euthanasia among many animals just because there is no room for them.

The information below comes from a study that was done on the possibility of implementing dog transfer programs.

  • 3.9 million dogs enter shelters in the us annually, out of that number 1.2 million are euthanized (Simmons)

  • 35% adopted, 31% euthanized, 26% returned to owners (Simmons).

  • 90% of dogs get mislabeled as the wrong type of breed (Underwood)

  • This results in lower adoption rates as well as high euthanasia rates (Underwood)

NARROW DOWN STATISTICS TO CA

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-animal-shelters-20150207-story.html

  • 50% of 72000 animals brought to six shelters in LA killed by lethal injection in 2014

  • LA had a 26% percent euthanasia rate

  • 70% of cats brought into LA system euthanized

  • Lesser rate for dogs

This issue can have an affect on the public especially when people are looking to adopt or find dogs. There is a popular site that usually appears on facebook or other social media sites known as The Dodo. I found an article about animal overcrowding on their site that uses the appeal of ethos in order to spread awareness of the issue. The article consists of images of facebook posts that were shared about animals that were going to die if not adopted soon. Imagine coming across this while on a social media site, this would most definitely create an emotional effect on the reader. The fact of the matter is that people can make a difference by adopting or even sharing a post like this in order to save a life (Cotroneo).

The Proposed Solution-

In the state of California, the issue of overcrowding in animal shelters can be lessened through the transportation of healthy and trained dogs from high kill shelters to rescue organizations and shelters that do not participate in euthanasia.

How to Implement The Solution/Feasibility

The report on the efficiency of the transportation of animals that I previously mentioned above,  was conducted under a survey setting, distributed across all US states. This data is a collection from those shelters and organizations who decided to participate in the study. Those who work with these organizations reported:

  • many of those who took the survey came from privately owned organizations (Simmons)

  • 47% reported that their organization was funded by donors, and there was no outside funding involved (Simmons).

  • For the most part, after reviewing this information it seems as though many of the organizations are on their own in terms of funding

  • The cost of transporting the animals alone is not a lot of money

  • According to the humane society, there is a budget set aside for animal welfare (Wayne)

  • In 2015 this budget was 4 million, a large sum that could go toward the costs of animal immunizations and transportation when animals are in need of relocation (Wayne)

  • The ASPCA has information on their website explaining the process of transportation of animals and how effective it can prove to be (“Other Animal Welfare Funders”).

  • They have a list of funders that organizations and shelters can reach out to if they need more help in order to implement their transportation (“Other Animal Welfare Funders”).

  • Shelters and organizations need to work together in order to implement programs like these

  • There are already organizations like these that make sure that animals are transported safely

  • Many of these organizations have a number of volunteers who assist in transporting the animals

  • Use strategies that other programs have used (Menchetti)

  • Implement these strategies in this solution (Menchetti)

  • organizations in California have already implemented suh programs

  • One known as “Wings of Rescue” based in LA leased planes to transport the animals

  • Pilots use planes to save animals

  • Fuel/hangar costs- 2,500-5,000

  • All volunteer pilots

http://www.wingsofrescue.org/

https://www.seattletimes.com/life/pets/from-california-kill-shelter-to-adoption-for-1000-dogs/

Justification-

The government should consider this proposal because this will save millions of animal’s lives, at a very low cost. Through even just a small amount of government funding animals can be placed in adequate shelters, and have a chance at getting adopted. Also, by doing this, the city streets in California will have less stray animals roaming around. This will reduce the population of strays because shelters will be able to spay and neuter them.

  • Appeal to ethos- why this matters, animal’s deserve to have a chance at a happy life

  • Don’t deserve to be euthanized for no reason other than overcrowded shelters

Opposing Views-

Some may think that this program would be too costly and complicated to to the processes that would need to happen in order for the animals to be cleared for travel.

  • Many immunizations before the animal could travel

  • The time it would take to perform these

Other solutions may include:

  • Putting on fundraisers and publishing the animals in need of adoption

  • Reducing the price of adopting a shelter animal

  • spaying/neutering animals to reduce overpopulation

  • Properly labeling pets to avoid mislabeling of breed

The pros outweigh the cons because there are countless programs like the examples I have used, that prove that these programs have been more than successful.

Conclusion-

If this proposal was to be adopted by the government many animals would be saved. The amount of strays on the street would greatly decrease because shelters will have the room to care for more animals. As a result, animals will have a higher chance for being adopted. If more animals are adopted, there will be more room for other animals to be placed in the shelter. In the end, the more animals that are placed in shelters, the less the government will have to pay for the costs that entail overpopulation among animals that are not spayed or neutered.