Georgia County Government - October 2008 - (Page 60) ANIMAL CONTROL continued from page 59 Animal Control has taken advantage of this provision by training its employees in how to administer euthanization. Through such training and by purchasing the euthanization solution wholesale, they are able to save on the cost of putting animals to sleep. Oconee County Animal Control employees have performed euthanization themselves since the opening of the facility, so no figures are available on how much money the county has saved by bypassing fees charged by veterinarians. However, currently the wholesale cost of the euthanization solution is an estimated 20 cents per cc, with each animal euthanized requiring 1 cc per 10 pounds. Therefore, the raw cost of solution for euthanizing a 50-pound dog would be $1. This onedollar figure does not include the cost of labor, but it is evident that money is saved when animal control employees administer euthanization themselves. Heard County Animal Control circumvents the cost of euthanization by focusing the majority of their efforts on procuring the adoption of the animals they take in. As soon as they come through the door, cats and dogs are advertised on Petfinder.com, Dogsindanger.com, and even Craigslist. com in addition to the forums Saving Shelter Pets and Saving Georgia Dogs. Through such efforts, Heard County has not had to euthanize any animals since August of 2007 and had more than 4,000 cats and dogs adopted from their animal shelter in 2007. One factor that has contributed to their successful adoption rate is the help of volunteers and the local Humane Society. With this being said, some counties’ animal control centers take in a significantly larger number of animals, making it more difficult to elicit a high adoption rate. There are still other steps that can be taken to reduce costs. When purchasing new vehicles, try to select lighter-weight, more fuel-efficient vehicles. Doing so will help subdue operating costs as fuel prices continue to rise. If possible, start a campaign to encourage county residents to have their pets spayed and neutered. While such a campaign might raise costs initially, in the long run it could lead to a reduction in the unwanted pet population, ultimately reducing costs. Additionally, it is important to note that while the use of gas chambers might be efficient, several restrictions were placed on the use of carbon monoxide gas chambers by the Georgia Humane Euthanasia Act, which was passed in 1990. Chambers can only be used by animal control centers in counties with a population less than 25,000 or by animal control centers that “used a gas chamber for euthanization of dogs and cats prior to July 1, 1990 and notified the Commissioner of Agriculture on or before August 1, 1990 that such a chamber was in use prior to July 1, 1990” (O.C.G.A. §4-11-5.1). Admittedly, there is no “silver bullet” solution to countering the rising costs of providing animal control services. Yet, by employing some of the cost-reducing strategies described above, counties can help keep the cost of animal control from getting out of control. ■ Andrew Watson, former ACCG intern, currently serves as a Staff Assistant in Congressman Phil Gingrey's staff in Washington, D.C. 60 357665_Mauldin.indd GOVERNMENT GEORGIA COUNTY 1 12/13/07 6:00:04 PM http://www.Petfinder.com http://www.Dogsindanger.com http://www.mjcpa.com
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.