Why FONCA has come under fire
Why attack FONCA? Indeed!
Since it’s not the people, but the program itself under fire, those affected might want to restructure their thinking and consider compatibility with what the community expects from Animal Control.
If the bottom line is what matters, a reduction of unwanted animals, then remedy exists. People want accountability or at least to know what a service might be, as rescuers step in. If it looks like the bottom line is being met, and the program appears to work, it might be accepted by most.
Some seriously consider what it means to support an effort that might not be in the best interest of either the human or the animal affected through adoption – an effort seemingly existing for the benefit of the program – rescue being little more than a buzzword. Skewed or no numbers to determine success, and animal mortality or crippling effects of early procedures are but a few concerns. Documentation doesn’t exist, not unless vets provide it, and none have been forthcoming as death and disability is considered. Nonprofits exist outside of what would be monitored events in normal business.
The county recently decided that FONCA was more liability than enhancement because of the way the program functions … “quantity over quality” questioned regarding motivation … “tactics used” demanding of scrutiny. The public, forced to “donate” $50 per FONCA conditions, won’t be there adopting a sick or dying animal to “protect the program,” not if sensibility prevails.
The current push on residents is for a no-kill shelter. Bad press regarding FONCA was hushed, the potential to slow the push existing. Why? Does a “way justifying the means” by county government protect all or just the program? Is part of the push the formation of the Animal Control Advisory Committee? How far might forced involvement be expanded if FONCA (its equivalent) is allowed (encouraged) to exist, as is? Do we support partnering with nonprofits on these varying levels of deceit, not knowing where it all might lead?
A stray, under supply-and-demand scenarios in Marin County, costs $85. Consider the potential. Then determine: Animal control, rescue or business?
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
The many contributors who have expressed their significant concerns about the Rise Gold proposal deserve our thanks. Perhaps it’s time for a bit of summary of a few salient points. Taken together, their arguments present…