Laserfiche WebLink
Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice <br />return cats to their original location rather than releasing them to randomly selected <br />sites. TNR programs are widespread throughout California, not to mention the nation as <br />set forth in a report from the American Bar Association. The Grand Jury is unaware of <br />any published court case determining that a bona fide TNR program is prohibited under <br />the anti -abandonment statute. Given the important benefits to animals and the public <br />provided by such programs, the Grand Jury believes it would be prudent for the County <br />to revisit the propriety of the former program and consider obtaining a second legal <br />opinion. <br />This report highlights analysis of data provided to the Grand Jury by the shelter <br />indicating that euthanasia rates related to dog behavior and to cats have increased <br />significantly within the last two years. The increase in dog behavioral euthanasia rates <br />suggests that there is inconsistency over time as to how dogs are being assessed and <br />evaluated for behavior -related euthanasia. The increase in feline euthanasia rates <br />appears to be correlated with elimination of the TNR program. <br />This report also addresses the challenges in maintaining quality staff at the shelter, <br />especially in the Animal Care Attendant positions. Hiring practices for the shelter are too <br />cumbersome, lengthy and lack consideration of how those practices impact animal <br />welfare. Animal Care Attendant staffing at the shelter is inadequate and Animal Care <br />Attendant staffing vacancies need to be filled more quickly. <br />This report discusses major deficiencies with each of the issues identified above and <br />makes specific recommendations to help support a more engaged community. Status <br />quo at the shelter is unacceptable. Appropriate remedial steps must be taken as animal <br />welfare is paramount! <br />Finally, this report comments on the difficulties the Grand Jury encountered during its <br />investigation. Without explanation, the entirety of the Orange County County Counsel's <br />office determined itself to be conflicted with the Grand Jury's inquiry into Orange County <br />Animal Care. The investigation was hampered and slowed during the six weeks the <br />Grand Jury was required to arrange for outside legal counsel. <br />BACKGROUND <br />Orange County Animal Care (OCAC) began operations in 1941 and was responsible for <br />rabies and tending to lost livestock. In 1950, the population of Orange County was <br />roughly 216,000. By January 2022, the estimated population was 3.1 million people. <br />OCAC provides a myriad of services over a wide territory and variety of client needs <br />-and expectations. OCAC serves the unincorporated areas of Orange County and <br />--contracts its services to _1.4 client cities: Anaheim, Brea, Cypress, Fountain Valley, <br />Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Lake Forest, Orange, Placentia, San Juan Capistrano, <br />- Santa Ana, Tustin, Villa Park, and Yorba Linda. The remaining cities in Orange County <br />either have their own shelter or contract with other cities or non-profit groups to provide <br />animal care and control services. The unincorporated areas of the county and the 14 <br />ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 6 OF 51 <br />