Meet Alee (skinny puppy) and Bustah (older dog.) Both were turned in, according to official owner surrender paperwork, because of the "NYCHA ban." They arrived at the shelter this past weekend. This information is just some of the facts that have been coming to us here at New York Tails Magazine during the course of our extensive investigation into the NYCHA rule and the reasoning behind it. No relying on other people's reports, blogs, or twits here. Lead reporter Courtney Kistler has been in the projects, talking to the residents, getting to know the people and the animals there, and digging up the good, the bad, and the ugly truth from all sides of the debate.
If you haven't ordered your subscription to New York Tails yet, you might want to do so now so you don't miss our Summer 2009issue, where this exclusive investigative story will be featured.
A Flood or a Flicker?
Asked if there has been a notable increase in the number of dogs like Alee and Bustah arriving on the shelter steps since the NYCHA ban, AC&C spokesman Richard Gentles said no. Mr. Gentles said he'd spoken to each of the shelter supervisors recently (there are AC&C facilities in each of the five boroughs, although Queens and the Bronx only receive animals.) "For NYCHA pet owners that come to the shelter, we give them a flyer explaining the process for them to keep their pets," Mr. Gentles said. "This seems to be working because they leave the shelter with their pet."
A memo is now supposed to be posted in, and distributed from, each AC&C shelter and other places where animals are likely to be surrendered telling NYCHA residents that they may have a right to keep their pet, hopefully averting a surrender. This is the memo:
NYCHA Resident’s Rights
http://www.animalalliancenyc.org/press/memo2009-06-08.pdf
Right before (or concurrently with, it's unclear to me) this memo was issued, the ASPCA issued press release to the media titled "Revised Pet Policy Threatens Dogs Belonging to NYCHA Residents ASPCA Letter Outlines NYCHA Tenants’ Rights.". The rather strongly worded release went on to describe how the "NYCHA Dog Policy Bites" (direct quote). Both Laura Maloney, ASPCA Senior Vice President of Anti-Cruelty, and Jane Hoffman, president of the Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals, were quoted in the release stating their strong disagreement with NYCHA's policy.
While well-intentioned, I'm not sure any of this is going to work. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.
Here's why.
Many of the people who live in the PJ's (projects, ie, NYCHA housing) are loathe to 'rock the boat' when it comes to their apartments. Having a low-cost, relatively livable apartment anywhere in this city (I include all five boroughs in this) is as good as hitting the lottery. Couple that with the highest unemployment rates in decades and fear of losing one's job (if it hasn't been lost already) and even people who absolutely love their pets are apt to make the hard choice of giving up their pet. Many of us who are more fortunate are quick to condemn people who make this choice--an apartment over a pet--but we have options. Lots of people in NYCHA are a paycheck or disability check away from homelessness. Guess what they're going to choose.
Secondly, there are a fair number of people in the PJs for whom English is a second language, Spanish and Chinese are currently two of the most common. Once again, someone who is afraid of losing their apartment and has a shaky grasp of English is probably not going to be up for a fight if they even have a remote fear of losing their apartment.
Then again, I could be completely wrong. Part of the reason we're in this predicament is because the previous law a few years back banned dogs over 40 lbs. This provision, however, was apparently not enforced too vigorously. There may be the same lax attitude toward enforcement this time around as well toward the over-25 lbs dogs.
We shall see.
If you haven't ordered your subscription to New York Tails yet, you might want to do so now so you don't miss our Summer 2009issue, where this exclusive investigative story will be featured.
A Flood or a Flicker?
Asked if there has been a notable increase in the number of dogs like Alee and Bustah arriving on the shelter steps since the NYCHA ban, AC&C spokesman Richard Gentles said no. Mr. Gentles said he'd spoken to each of the shelter supervisors recently (there are AC&C facilities in each of the five boroughs, although Queens and the Bronx only receive animals.) "For NYCHA pet owners that come to the shelter, we give them a flyer explaining the process for them to keep their pets," Mr. Gentles said. "This seems to be working because they leave the shelter with their pet."
A memo is now supposed to be posted in, and distributed from, each AC&C shelter and other places where animals are likely to be surrendered telling NYCHA residents that they may have a right to keep their pet, hopefully averting a surrender. This is the memo:
NYCHA Resident’s Rights
http://www.animalalliancenyc.org/press/memo2009-06-08.pdf
Right before (or concurrently with, it's unclear to me) this memo was issued, the ASPCA issued press release to the media titled "Revised Pet Policy Threatens Dogs Belonging to NYCHA Residents ASPCA Letter Outlines NYCHA Tenants’ Rights.". The rather strongly worded release went on to describe how the "NYCHA Dog Policy Bites" (direct quote). Both Laura Maloney, ASPCA Senior Vice President of Anti-Cruelty, and Jane Hoffman, president of the Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals, were quoted in the release stating their strong disagreement with NYCHA's policy.
While well-intentioned, I'm not sure any of this is going to work. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.
Here's why.
Many of the people who live in the PJ's (projects, ie, NYCHA housing) are loathe to 'rock the boat' when it comes to their apartments. Having a low-cost, relatively livable apartment anywhere in this city (I include all five boroughs in this) is as good as hitting the lottery. Couple that with the highest unemployment rates in decades and fear of losing one's job (if it hasn't been lost already) and even people who absolutely love their pets are apt to make the hard choice of giving up their pet. Many of us who are more fortunate are quick to condemn people who make this choice--an apartment over a pet--but we have options. Lots of people in NYCHA are a paycheck or disability check away from homelessness. Guess what they're going to choose.
Secondly, there are a fair number of people in the PJs for whom English is a second language, Spanish and Chinese are currently two of the most common. Once again, someone who is afraid of losing their apartment and has a shaky grasp of English is probably not going to be up for a fight if they even have a remote fear of losing their apartment.
Then again, I could be completely wrong. Part of the reason we're in this predicament is because the previous law a few years back banned dogs over 40 lbs. This provision, however, was apparently not enforced too vigorously. There may be the same lax attitude toward enforcement this time around as well toward the over-25 lbs dogs.
We shall see.
0 comments:
Post a Comment