Latest news with #SPCA
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- General
- San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco is euthanizing more stray dogs. Here's why
When a divorce made life overwhelming late last year, a woman surrendered her dog to San Francisco Animal Care and Control. The 3-year-old pit bull and mastiff mix was gentle, easygoing and friendly, the owner told the shelter, and had no medical issues. But after a short time in the facility, the dog became so anxious that he had to be put down, shelter records show. These shelter records are full of heartbreak — stories of people abandoning their dogs because they couldn't afford veterinary care or housing. Last year, such cases propelled Animal Care and Control, the city's public shelter, to the highest rate of euthanasia since 2013, and it's on track to worsen this year. The problem is playing out across California. When veterinarian clinics closed during the COVID-19 outbreak, spay and neuter surgeries stopped, creating generations of surplus puppies. Huge numbers of people adopted pandemic pets, but now demand for dogs, especially large ones, has plunged. In San Francisco, an increasingly strained relationship between the city's two main animal shelters — one public, one private — is making matters even more difficult. The city-run shelter, San Francisco Animal Care and Control in the Mission District, is obligated to care for all stray, lost and surrendered animals within city limits. In the past, it sent most of the dogs and cats it couldn't adopt out to the private shelter down the street: the San Francisco SPCA, a 157-year-old nonprofit known for filling the windows of Macy's in Union Square with puppies and kittens during the holidays. As a private organization, the SPCA does not accept animals from the public and can choose which dogs or cats it brings into its shelter. Since the 1990s, it has promised to take in any 'adoptable' dog or cat that San Francisco's public shelter can't place as a way to reduce the city's euthanasia rates. The SPCA continues to take in the majority of the public shelter's extra cats — especially kittens, which are easier to adopt. But over the past decade it has increasingly rescued more dogs from Central Valley shelters, where it says the need is greater, and fewer from San Francisco. Critics say the consequences for San Francisco are significant, leading to fewer dogs getting out of the city's shelter alive. The SPCA, though, says its focus is on increasing the amount of low-cost veterinary services in the city to keep animals out of the shelter. The differing perspectives on how to best serve these animals, and which ones to rescue, provide a glimpse into the complex challenges shelters face as they try to save animals during uncertain economic times. 'Historically, the SPCA has taken as many as 600 dogs from us, which helped us save more dogs,' Virginia Donohue, the executive director of Animal Care and Control, said in an email. 'Unfortunately, for the last few years it has been fewer than 200 dogs, so we have looked further afield to find homes. As a city, we need more adoptions and less breeding to make sure that all of our dogs have families to love them.' Jennifer Scarlett, a veterinarian and the CEO of the San Francisco SPCA, which is independent from other humane societies, agrees that the city needs more adoptions — and more San Franciscans willing to adopt. 'At its core, we want to save as many animals in shelters as possible, with the priority being we want to work with Animal Care and Control,' Scarlett said. However, she added in an email, 'We are more than a shelter, and our strategic focus lies on building a system of care in San Francisco.' The SPCA said it provided $3.5 million in free and low-cost veterinary care in the city during the past fiscal year, including for vaccines at mobile clinics, emergency surgery at its animal hospital and preventative care at its Excelsior district clinic, an increase of more than $1 million from the previous year. The SPCA has a larger budget and staff than the public shelter, and it provides a different range of activities, including running its veterinary hospital. It brought in $46 million in the fiscal year ending in June 2024. It cares for only dogs and cats. The taxpayer-funded Animal Care and Control, by contrast, takes in wildlife and domesticated birds, reptiles and rabbits in addition to dogs and cats and has an annual budget of $11 million. It also manages a team of animal control officers who respond to thousands of calls on biting dogs, aggressive coyotes and, recently, baby raccoons nesting in Chase Center. The SPCA accepted 158 of the more than 2,800 dogs that came through the public shelter in 2024, a drop from more than 600 dogs in 2013, records obtained by the Chronicle show. Scarlett said one reason for the decrease is that many San Francisco dogs have medical or behavior issues or are larger breeds — though the SPCA also brings in large dogs from Central Valley shelters. After the Chronicle inquired about the decrease, a spokesperson for the SPCA said it had committed to taking at least five dogs per week in late April, higher than recent years. As of June 13, it had not hit that number regularly, but in some weeks took more than five, according to records. Central Valley collaboration The SPCA started working closely with Central Valley shelters in 2012, when it partnered with Stockton Animal Services, said Regina Moore, a spokesperson for the nonprofit. At the time, the Stockton shelter's live release rate was down to 32%, according to the SPCA. The organization said it helped boost the rate to 82% over five years by providing medical support, such as spay and neuter surgeries, and then moved on to work with other Central Valley shelters, including by bringing their animals to its adoption center. 'One thing that is unique about the S.F. SPCA is they do have the resources to help out in other areas,' said Allison Cardona, California state director for the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program. 'There is a critical need for veterinary spay/neuter across the state.' Drawing from a large network of shelters allows the SPCA to match 'more quickly adoptable' animals from rural and suburban areas with potential adopters in San Francisco, Moore said. San Francisco's public shelter has typically had a higher live release rate than Central Valley shelters, and the figure shot up during the pandemic, when pets were in demand. From the 2017 to 2023 fiscal years, the city's live release rate stayed above 90%, achieving what private shelters call 'no kill' status. However, the rate dropped from 91% to 88% in the fiscal year ending in June 2024, the lowest rate since 2013. That year, it euthanized 257 dogs, and the rate will probably drop to 87% this year, the shelter said. Angie Yen, a former SPCA employee of 12 years, said the nonprofit's drop in dog acceptances from the public shelter contributed to the rise in euthanasia rates locally. SPCA 'reduced their quota to something that works for them but just puts more responsibility on (San Francisco Animal Care and Control) to try to save those lives,' said Yen, who resigned in 2023 in part over what she described as disillusionment with the organization. Yen is now a registered veterinary technician, similar to a nurse, at the public shelter, and said she was speaking for herself. Yen and Chelsea Capaccio were among six former SPCA employees who told the Chronicle they think the nonprofit is putting too large a share of its resources into the Central Valley. 'They're so focused on this Central Valley expansion that they've forgotten that they're the San Francisco SPCA,' said Capaccio, who resigned as co-director of the organization's animal hospital in October over what she said was a personnel matter, after working there for three years. She acknowledged the challenges in the Central Valley, but said the organization should first meet the need of low-income San Franciscans to access veterinary care. Scarlett disagreed that SPCA has forgotten its roots and said her organization is focused on reducing the number of homeless pets, including by providing spay and neuter surgeries at a subsidized rate for San Francisco's public shelter, at a value of $500,000 per year — which Donohue said is an essential service. This year, it is providing an extra $50,000 toward those surgeries at Donohue's request, after the city cut the public shelter's budget. In San Francisco, 'We've seen a slip in the live release rate,' Scarlett said. 'What's happening in the Central Valley is even harder. We're finding buckets of puppies and kittens in orchards.' Trouble moving puppies On a tour of the San Francisco public shelter in March, Donohue noticed that a 5-month-old dog named Starburst had been there for six weeks. The pit bull and husky mix had endearing lopsided terrier ears and mismatched eyes — one blue, one brown. Volunteers brightened her day with walks, but she had resorted to throwing herself balls each morning. 'We're having trouble moving puppies out of the shelter,' Donohue said. The number of puppies was up 40% last year compared with before the pandemic, Donohue said. This year, 18% more dogs came into the shelter from January to May than during the same time period in 2024. Donohue said the public shelter typically does not euthanize 'adoptable' dogs like Starburst, meaning those without major behavioral or medical problems — that is, unless it and its partner shelters are completely full. Also, behavioral issues can get worse over time for animals in the shelter and put them on the euthanasia list. Another factor in rising euthanasia rates is that, in recent years, the shelter has received 60% more custody cases than it did before the pandemic, Donahue said. The cases mostly involve dogs that come to the shelter because their owners are incarcerated or in the hospital. The shelter is required to hold them for two weeks, rather than four days for strays, to give owners time to reclaim them, which fills up valuable kennel spots. 'The pipeline gets clogged, which reduces the number of options you have for getting out,' Donohue said. To find homes for its dogs, and some of its cats, the public shelter increasingly sends them to rescue organizations far afield. Last year, it transferred 89 dogs out of California and 141 out of the Bay Area, compared with 11 out of state and 39 out of the Bay Area in 2019, according to public records. Donohue said that many large dogs, such as huskies, go to rescue facilities in Lake Tahoe where they can roam more freely. And many stay in town, going to places such as Muttville Senior Dog Rescue. Animal shelters across California are facing overcrowding. Last year saw a 7% rise in stray dogs entering shelters in the state, while that number declined nationally, according to the nonprofit Shelter Animals Count. One of the reasons is probably the scarcity and high cost of veterinary care in the state, said Cardona of the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program, who manages a $50 million state grant program aimed at preventing euthanasia of treatable animals. The ultimate goal, Cardona said, is to keep animals within their own communities, with support from pet-inclusive housing policies or pet food pantries, such as those hosted by the organization Full Belly Bus. The nonprofit Vets in Vans provides low-cost and free veterinary care in front of Animal Care and Control. With a $150,000 state grant, it recently diverted close to 200 people from surrendering their animals there, said founder Tracy Huang. Donohue said people can help by donating to the nonprofit Friends of Animal Care and Control and by adopting local dogs from shelters instead of purchasing them online, where they often come from puppy mills in the Midwest. Starburst, at least, ended up being one of the lucky ones. Even after four months in the shelter, she stayed friendly and playful. In April, she left with a new family — and no longer has to throw balls to herself.
Glasgow Times
a day ago
- Glasgow Times
Woman banned from keeping animals over puppy trade
Julie Taylor was sentenced at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court after admitting to selling puppies without a licence and failing to meet their basic welfare needs, pleading guilty on May 6 2025. The Kilmarnock woman sold puppies without the required pet-selling licence and failed to properly care for 16 young dogs. The puppies were kept in poor conditions, separated from their mothers too early, and denied appropriate veterinary care and vaccinations. READ MORE: SSPCA forced entry into Glasgow home to find neglected dogs in cages The animals were housed in 'unsuitable and unhygienic environments' that placed their health at serious risk. In addition to the 10-year ban on owning animals, she was handed a 200-hour community payback order, a five-month restriction of liberty order, and ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid work. The Scottish SPCA launched an investigation after a member of the public raised concerns about an online advert on the website Pets4Home in December 2023. The listing offered King Charles Cavalier Spaniel puppies for sale in Kilmarnock and claimed the animals were microchipped and vet-checked. READ MORE: SSPCA 'disappointed' with sentencing of woman after three dogs found starved A Scottish SPCA inspector said: 'The buyer met Taylor, who handed over the puppy described as the last available. The witness immediately noted that the animal emitted a strong odour, appeared lethargic and frightened, and had a visibly distended stomach. "When questioned, Taylor was unable to provide clear answers about the puppy's age or details about its mother. 'Within a day of purchase, the puppy's health deteriorated rapidly. "A veterinary examination revealed the puppy was significantly younger than claimed—approximately 8 weeks old rather than 10—and suffering from a respiratory infection. "The puppy had not been microchipped and showed signs of poor care consistent with having come from a puppy farm. 'The puppy was prescribed antibiotics and probiotics, but her condition worsened. "Further veterinary treatment identified potential lung and ear infections, as well as internal parasites. "Vets noted that the animal's suffering could have been avoided with proper health protocols and concluded the conditions were consistent with those found in illegal puppy farms. 'This case highlights the distressing consequences of the illegal puppy trade. "Puppies raised in unlicensed, unregulated environments often suffer serious illness or even death due to early separation from their mothers, lack of proper care, and exposure to parasites. 'We receive frequent complaints from buyers whose new puppies are seriously ill shortly after purchase. "Many sellers use online platforms while posing as private individuals to avoid scrutiny. "The financial and emotional burden placed on unsuspecting buyers is huge, and there can also be serious health risks to humans from infections such as roundworms. "We are satisfied with the sentencing outcome, as this individual played a significant role in the illegal and unethical puppy trade. "The sentence sends a clear message to others engaged in this type of activity. "The scale of suffering in cases like this is unacceptable and avoidable. Stronger deterrents are needed to combat the illegal puppy trade and protect both animals and the public.' The Scottish SPCA continues to urge potential pet owners to adopt from reputable sources and to thoroughly research sellers when considering purchasing a pet online.
The Citizen
2 days ago
- The Citizen
ATTENTION: Newcastle SPCA issues urgent appeal to find owner of injured dog
A Memel veterinary team together with the Newcastle SPCA has issued an urgent appeal for assistance in locating the owner of an injured dog. According to the SPCA, it is suspected that the dog may have fallen or jumped from a moving vehicle while passing through the Memel area. 'He is currently receiving medical treatment from the Memel vets. The incident may have involved travellers unfamiliar with the area, and the owner may not yet be aware of where or how the dog went missing,' they stated. If you recognise the dog or know of someone who is searching for their pet in or around Memel, please contact the Newcastle SPCA on 072 337 0347 or the Memel Vets on 062 479 9011. Proof of ownership will be required. Please share this appeal widely to help reunite this dog with his family. The news provided to you in this link has been investigated and compiled by the editorial staff of the Newcastle Advertiser, a sold newspaper distributed in the Newcastle area. Please follow us on Youtube and feel free to like, comment, and subscribe. For more local news, visit our webpage, follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and request an add on our WhatsApp (082 874 5550). At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
Miami Herald
3 days ago
- Health
- Miami Herald
Tiny kitten's foot is ‘completely backward' — but she's a fighter, shelter says
A kitten has been proving to her rescuers that she's a little spitfire after being brought in with multiple ailments in New York. One of which includes a deformed foot and no backstory. 'At just 12 days old, little Janet arrived at the SPCA Serving Erie County in need of serious TLC,' the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in West Seneca said in a June 17 Facebook post. 'She was battling conjunctivitis, and her back left foot was completely backward — likely from a break or a congenital deformity.' Conjunctivitis is considered 'Cat Pink Eye' and is 'inflammation of the eye's conjunctiva' and usually doesn't last long if treated properly, Pet MD says. 'But Janet is a fighter,' the shelter said. 'Despite it all, this tiny kitten's spirit shines bright. After receiving critical care in our kitten nursery, she's now in a loving foster home, getting the round-the-clock care she needs to heal and grow.' Though the backward foot still presents an obstacle, Janet is on the road to recovery. 'Once she's strong enough, Janet will likely need amputation surgery. For now, she's focused on healing, cuddles, and taking everything one brave step at a time,' the shelter said. For more information, visit the shelter's website and Facebook page. West Seneca is about a 10-mile drive southeast of Buffalo.
Daily Maverick
4 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Legal battle erupts over control and conduct of NSPCA
Two local SPCA societies are taking the national body to court with a list of serious allegations. The NSPCA says it's about personal grievances and not animal welfare. A major legal storm is brewing in South Africa's animal welfare sector as multiple local branches of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) take the National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA) and its board to court, alleging mismanagement, bullying and a toxic culture of centralised control that is crippling grassroots operations. Led by Marius Dreyer, chairperson of the Bethlehem SPCA, several applicants have filed an amended notice of motion in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria under Rule 53 of the Uniform Rules of Court. The applicants include directors and management committee members from both the Bethlehem and Tshwane SPCAs. They are asking the court to order sweeping investigations into the conduct of the NSPCA leadership and to suspend several high-profile board members pending the outcome of the probes. At the heart of the dispute is a deepening rift between local SPCA societies and the national body mandated to support them. According to the applicants, the NSPCA board has been using its constitutional powers to shut down, victimise or take over local branches without proper consultation and has levied serious disciplinary accusations without procedural fairness. The applicants claim that the NSPCA has strayed from its constitutional mission and is now acting more like a centralised authority, using audits and internal rules to oust dissenting leaders and possibly absorb society assets. Societies in Tshwane, Highveld Ridge SPCA, Queenstown (Komani) and seven other towns are cited as examples where takeovers or closures occurred under controversial circumstances. 'Instead of supporting societies on the ground, the national body appears more interested in NSPCA building and silencing criticism,' said a legal representative for the applicants. 'The welfare of animals has become secondary to internal power struggles.' The motion calls for an independent forensic investigation – led by a law firm or senior counsel – into the NSPCA's actions and the role of board members Marcelle Meredith, Annette Rademeyer and Hester Kotze. The applicants also ask the Minister of Agriculture to immediately appoint an interim board to take over NSPCA governance while investigations are under way. Personal suspensions In a dramatic move, the applicants are also requesting the provisional suspension of key NSPCA board members from all management and committee roles across the country. They seek a court order to bar these individuals from accessing NSPCA offices, contacting staff or using organisational resources until the investigation concludes. This includes demands that laptops, vehicles and email access be returned or revoked. 'It's a highly unusual step, but one we believe necessary given the extent of the alleged misconduct,' said a source close to the applicants. 'There is a pattern of retaliation against whistle-blowers and local directors who resist NSPCA overreach.' The dispute is also deeply personal. One of the central grievances stems from a series of findings issued by the NSPCA against the Bethlehem SPCA and its leadership, including statements that animals 'suffered under their watch'. These findings have had reputational consequences for local SPCA chairperson Corlene van der Merwe, who was removed from her post by the NSPCA following a disciplinary outcome letter in October 2024. The applicants are challenging those decisions in court, saying they were based on incomplete investigations, lacked procedural fairness and were used as a pretext to remove uncooperative local leaders. They want all such findings reviewed and set aside. 'The damage to our reputations and to community trust has been immense,' said Van der Merwe 'We have dedicated our lives to this cause, and now we are being painted as villains without a fair hearing.' Financial transparency under scrutiny The motion also highlights serious financial concerns. One of the key demands is for the NSPCA to refund close to R900,000 in compulsory levies, paid by the Tshwane SPCA to the national council. The applicants allege that the NSPCA is hoarding funds meant for local animal welfare work. They also seek a declaration that the NSPCA was responsible for the financial administration and management of the Tshwane SPCA between June 2024 and January 2025 – including records of medicine movement, property management and accounting. 'Funds meant for animals in Tshwane and other societies are sitting in national accounts, inaccessible,' said Jeanine Niemann, a co-applicant. 'We are calling this what it is – financial control dressed up as governance.' In what could have far-reaching implications, the case also challenges several sections of the NSPCA constitution, the standard SPCA society constitution, and even aspects of the SPCA Act itself. The applicants argue that parts of these frameworks are unconstitutional or invalid, particularly clauses relating to member societies' voting rights, governance authority, transfer of societies' assets to the NSPCA and internal disciplinary processes. They specifically target the definition of 'good standing' in the NSPCA constitution, as well as procedural rules that have allegedly been used to sideline local leadership. Legal observers note that this opens the door to a broader conversation about the governance framework relating to the SPCA movement. NSPCA responds The NSPCA challenged allegations that it misuses audits or constitutional rules to oust dissenters or absorb local assets, calling them false. 'Our operations, including financial governance, are transparent, accountable and publicly reported every single year. Assertions that the NSPCA hoards funds or owes local societies levies are factually incorrect. Membership levies are prescribed by law and relate to specific legacy funds held for animal welfare. 'The Tshwane SPCA's legacy contribution (in terms of the Act) was paid over voluntarily by the Tshwane SPCA on 1 September 2023 after they received a R9-million legacy – way before the Board took action for failing to provide financial statements. These fees are similar to any statutory body with members. 'The current legal challenge is not about advancing animal welfare. Among the applicants are individuals whose conduct contradicts the values of the NSPCA, including a Society which has not had financial statements (as required by the Act) for TWO years and going on three, and another who was removed from leadership following findings of serious neglect resulting in animal suffering. 'This is a dispute driven by personal opinions and grievances of those who did wrong, not the welfare of animals. Crisis of confidence While the NSPCA has not yet filed answering papers, the case threatens to expose fractures within South Africa's animal welfare community – fractures that could have long-term consequences for how the sector is regulated and funded. At stake is more than just leadership of one organisation: it appears to be a battle over governance, transparency and the future of collaborative animal protection in South Africa. The applicants are pushing for accountability, but also for structural reform. If successful, their case could trigger similar claims by other SPCAs and could reshape how local and national animal welfare bodies coexist – and who holds ultimate power over the country's network of SPCAs. The hearing date has not yet been set. For now, the country's most recognised animal protection body faces one of the most serious challenges in its recent history – not from outside forces, but from its own. DM
