Report Blasts Animal Control Shelter

The day after the Riverside County Grand Jury issued a scathing report condemning the management of a county-operated animal shelter, workers at other shelters and local animal rights activists said the findings were a vindication of their long-standing complaints.

The findings included charges that animals are routinely euthanized without attempts to contact owners or rescue groups and that animals are poorly cared for, with feedings that take place only once every 33 hours, instead of every 12 hours as mandated by law.

The report also states that the Riverside County Animal Shelter is unable to account for 14% of the creatures it takes in.

In addition, the report accuses the Riverside shelter’s administration of ignoring recommendations the staff veterinarian made for improving animal health, failing to address low staff morale and assigning employees to spend 30 days at a time performing euthanasia duties.

The grand jury also ordered an emergency audit of the shelter’s finances, which found that donations and restricted public funds had not been accounted for appropriately.

“I think the report covered pretty completely the problems I have experienced over many years,” said Katie Wider, a local animal rights activist who resigned from the shelter’s community advisory board last year.

The shelter, which takes in about 22,000 animals each year, is run by the Riverside County Community Health Agency’s animal services department, and has handled animal control operations for the city of Riverside on a contract basis since 1995. City leaders hoped that bringing the county in to run animal control services would resolve a series of management crises that plagued earlier contractors, including the Humane Society.

County officials acknowledged that the shelter had been the target of complaints, but they questioned the reliability of the grand jury’s findings.

“I would not rush to conclusive judgment based on the raw report from the grand jury,” said county Supervisor Bob Buster, who sits on the shelter’s advisory board. “My experience has been that often many of these reports have to be corrected, because there are misunderstandings that occur on the part of grand jury members.”

Janis McLaughlin, the shelter’s executive director, said many of the claims were “inaccurate,” though she did say there were “a few good ideas” among the panel’s suggestions.

She said that a schedule drawn up in August did result in a 33-hour gap between feedings, but that it was a one-time anomaly.

The shelter, McLaughlin said, operates on a standard 24-hour schedule because it is legally exempt from the twice-daily feeding requirement.