To the editor: As someone who passionately supports shelter animals, I believe transformative change in Los Angeles hinges on strong and effective leadership. I’m unwilling to sit back and wait for the system to magically heal itself while innocent, loving animals face dire fates. (“Head of troubled L.A. Animal Services steps down amid high euthanasia rates, overcrowding,” Dec. 2)
In response, I propose several actionable steps for the public to help save more animals. First, consider adoption instead of buying your next pet. Shelters and breed-specific rescues have a wide variety of breeds. Opt against breeding pets, and ensure your animals are spayed or neutered. With the constant influx of new animals, we need to tackle pet overpopulation head-on. Think about fostering for a local rescue or shelter. Rescues are often overwhelmed; they can’t retrieve animals from shelters unless they have foster homes available. Even brief fostering can make a life-saving difference. Take a shelter dog out for a weekend or on a hiking trip. It’s beneficial because it eases the animal’s stress, increasing their chances of adoption. Volunteering is also impactful—volunteers provide the essential care and affection that make these dogs more adoptable. Lastly, voice your concerns to your local council members and participate in city council meetings. As taxpayers, we shouldn’t stand by idly while our funds contribute to the neglect or euthanasia of adoptable animals.
Melissa Klaskin, Los Angeles
—
To the editor: The primary issue at Los Angeles Animal Services (LAAS) isn’t euthanasia itself, but rather the poor living conditions animals endure in overcrowded, unhygienic environments for extended periods. There’s also a troubling habit of routinely turning animals away and ignoring emergencies.
These problems existed before the tenure of former LAAS General Manager Staycee Dains, and her departure alone won’t resolve them.
Despite local groups urging action, Mayor Karen Bass has yet to implement meaningful change. It’s imperative that she appoints a manager committed to enhancing the quality of life for animals, beyond just improving “live-release” statistics. This includes keeping shelter doors open, efficiently handling emergency calls, enforcing a ban on backyard breeding, and abandoning the misleading “no-kill” rhetoric that has contributed to these issues.
Without these changes, the suffering of animals at the hands of the very agency meant to protect them will persist.
Lisa Lange, Los Angeles
The writer is senior vice president of communications for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
—
To the editor: Using the term “euthanasia” for the deaths of healthy, adoptable shelter animals is misleading, as it suggests a compassionate choice. As someone who has volunteered at shelters and rescued dogs for years, I find it more truthful to call this killing.
In the past, shelter staff and volunteers were required to complete an online course that focused on managing and reducing fear, anxiety, and stress, or FAS, in dogs. Experienced volunteers were often successful in helping these dogs become adopted or rescued.
However, during Dains’ leadership, dogs exhibiting FAS were frequently labeled as dangerous or suffering, leading to their classification as behavioral issues. This classification increased the number of dogs added to the kill list.
Even though Dains has stepped down, her policies continue to influence the categorization of dogs as “rescue-only.” This prevents volunteers from aiding these animals, resulting in unnecessary deaths of many healthy pets.
Shelters indeed struggle with more pets coming in than those getting adopted, causing a rise in the number of innocent pets being killed, which is a heartbreaking reality.
Sherry Brewer, Sherman Oaks
