| OCR Text |
Show Animal Shelter Personnel Visit Local City Councils to Discuss Issues Facing Shelters by Geri Taylor In light of a recent change in the law, North Utah County Animal Shelter (NUCAS) personnel per-sonnel have been visiting City Council Meetings throughout the district, educating and seeking support for their current cur-rent policies. Until May of this year, animal shelters were required by law to supply animals when requested by medical research facilities such as the University Univer-sity of Utah. The seemingly minor change in the law from "mandated" to "optional" participation has caused a backlash that shelters did not foresee, specifically becoming targets of animal rights activists. activ-ists. Chairman of the Board Bob Conners, gave background back-ground information of how the facility came to be, then presented statistics of the "revolving "re-volving door" process at their shelter. Five years ago Utah County decided to duplicate in north Utah County what they were doing in the south end by creating a Special Service District to handle the growing grow-ing number of animals coming com-ing into the shelter. Each city from Orem to point of the mountain is represented by a board member with an additional addi-tional three at-large members. Shelter director Tug Gettling, recruited from Oregon, has an extensive background in animal care and is well-known throughout the industry for his expertise. About 7,200 animals were processed through the shelter shel-ter last year with the majority being dogs. By law there is a three day wait period for the animals to be claimed, but if space allows, that time is extended, ex-tended, sometimes up to several months. After five days efforts are made to adopt out the animal ani-mal through advertising and on their website, with the shelter going to great lengths to get the animals into a home. Statistics differ between animals an-imals as well as between breeds and since dogs constitute the majority of intakes, they were used as the example. Of every 100 dogs, half get redeemed by their owners and of the remaining remain-ing 50, approximately 25 percent per-cent are adopted out and some go to rescue groups that have specific needs such as German Shepherds. This still leaves plenty to be put to sleep or sent to a research facility. Over-population is a nationwide problem and there are not enough homes or facility space to accommodate accommo-date all the stray animals. When the law changed, activists began harassing shelters shel-ters to stop donating animals for research, accusing them of mistreatment, even using the NUCAS logo to solicit support for their cause. After the shelter shel-ter was picketed, deluged with emails and staff members received re-ceived death and bomb threats, the board researched and discussed dis-cussed the situation and decided de-cided unanimously they would continue with current policy of sending six or seven animals each month for research. Blatant accusations of inhumane in-humane treatment at the U of U research facility prompted Gettling to make an impromptu visit to tour the facility and meet the directors. His experience gave him a new appreciation for the value and necessity of animal research. re-search. In the last century, every ev-ery medical advance has come from animals in this area of research re-search which has also resulted in animals having a higher quality qual-ity of life and better medical treatment. Gettling met with staff and observed a cat having the electrical elec-trical activity of its brain read, which aids in prosthesis research. re-search. The painless procedure is helping researchers find ways to help Vets who have lost limbs be able to wear their prosthetics prosthet-ics without complications. This particular cat was the poster animal an-imal for mistreatment and was adopted by the staff member who conducted the tests. With the excellent and spacious spa-cious facilities and a team of 10 handlers, Gettling says research animals get better treatment than at the shelter. They have more social interaction, are walked and even receive obedience obe-dience training to prepare them to be adopted. Sixty percent of these animals are put into homes after their testing is completed. With deep concern for the safety and welfare of their staff, the directors asked if the facility really needs the donated animals. They were given a resounding "Yes" and told if they had to bring animals ani-mals from out of state, it would raise the costs immensely which in turn would have an adverse effect on research. NUCAS believes that donating do-nating animals for research is the right thing to do, not only for the animals, but the constituents con-stituents they serve and are determined to stand firm in this decision. |
