Protesters carry signs on October 20 opposing carbon monoxide euthanasia at the city animal shelter. Photo: Dallas Morning News/Garland Blog

The group of protesters that rode the train to the Downtown DART station and others that marched to City Hall before the last City Council meeting have announced that they will return for tomorrow's Council meeting. They are opposed to the City's current euthanasia methods for animals that remain unclaimed or have not been adopted. Specifically, they are opposed to the use of carbon monoxide, claiming the only acceptable method is lethal injection of sodium pentobarbital.
 
The city staff has adopted a policy that will cease carbon monoxide euthanasia (except animals that pose a risk to staff and themselves) in the next few months but several protesters have said they will continue their vigil until all use ceases and the carbon monoxide chamber is removed. The Council has shown no inclination to overrule the staff or to interfere with the announced schedule. Protesters have also asked for a public hearing to express their feelings but as their goal seems to be the same as the city's there is no issue to be discussed, other than the schedule. Protesters have used the citizen comment period to express their feelings to the Council, they've been given very favorable (and some one-sided) coverage in the local media, they've hoisted signs for passing motorists, and they've sent ample e-mails to the Council.
 
Animal shelter administrators have long acknowledged that it was only a matter of time before they would switch to injection-only euthanasia, though I think it accurate to now say that the schedule was advanced because of concerns raised by the protesters and by the acquisition of new software and technology at the shelter. There have been several benefits from the attention that the protesters have stirred: our animal shelter is old and small and much deserving of replacement; adoptions of animals is our preference but also our greatest challenge because of the shear number of animals from too many pet owners that do not take responsibility for the reproductive lives of their pets; our animal services advisory board has been expanded to allow greater participation; and the attention has hopefully attracted participation by more rescue groups.
 
While some of the protesters are from Garland, the largest majority are not. In my discussions of this issue with District 1 residents either in person or by e-mail, the vast majority do not share similar concerns to the protesters. Each has understood that death by carbon monoxide is not a painful experience in most circumstances. I've been surprised by the education level of the general public on this point. They know it is an odorless, colorless gas and I'm often offered anecdotal data to support their understanding:

• we have carbon monoxide detectors in our homes because we can succumb to the gas without any warning,
• suicide by carbon monoxide is a common method because it is painless, and
• some have mentioned the use of canaries in coal mines before modern technology to detect carbon monoxide and natural gas that miners wouldn't know about.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, "carbon monoxide euthanasia performed at high levels will cause death in seconds," which is what is recommended by the American Veterinary Medical Association and the Humane Society of the United States. The HSUS does recommend sodium pentobarbital injection, but also recognizes that "carbon monoxide (CO), when delivered in a properly manufactured and equipped chamber, is a conditionally acceptable method of euthanasia for some animals." Animals for which it would not be an acceptable method are dogs and cats that are old, under four months of age, sick, or injured. When used, "CO must be provided by compressed cylinder gas, be used only in a chamber that has been commercially manufactured for CO euthanasia, and be properly maintained. The chamber must be designed to minimize stress and to allow for the appropriate separation of animals. Chambers must never be overcrowded."
 
Policy at our animal shelter has been the same. Out of literally thousands of euthanasia cases, there have rarely been any slips. The one apparent case was by a worker that was subsequently fired, although it was after her dismissal that her violation was discovered. It is the number of euthanasia deaths that is the greater tragedy and that is the result of, first, the irresponsibility of some pet owners, and, second, the limited space in our shelter.
 
Over and over those that have witnessed the procedure describe it as being extremely quick and with no struggles. The body accepts carbon monoxide even easier than it does oxygen, even at relatively low levels. There is no sense of suffocation.
 
An ancillary lesson to this whole episode is the dangers of carbon monoxide in our daily lives. Carbon monoxide is the product of incomplete burning, when there isn't enough oxygen to fully complete the combustion process. In the open, it will eventually combine with more oxygen to form harmless carbon dioxide. When the bag of charcoal says no burning indoors, believe it! When using a space heater and you are advised to have plenty of ventilation, believe it! When you are told to not use a blocked chimney, believe it! At low levels you might experience a headache and nausia. At high levels, you'll quickly lose consciousness and very likely never wake up.
 
However, many of the protesters believe none of it. These are some of the statements from protesters that have been received in e-mails: "gas chambers are tortuous to animals," "Nazi gas chambers are considered normal in your weird thinking and policies," "my heart breaks at the thought of a confused bedraggled creature being forced to choke to death in agony alone," "they suffocate to death, it can take upwards of 20 minutes, they claw themselves bloody trying to get out of the gas chamber, and they're usually crammed in like sardines so they end up tearing each other bloody as well," "I do hope when election time rolls around each of you is voted out of office and is never again allowed to represent the people of Garland or Texas," "I have been on-site to see, hear and be horrified at the sounds of the animals inside the chamber crying, scratching and trying desperately to get out of the chamber," and "sounds like Hitler." Almost all of these statements were from people outside Garland and some from outside Texas.
 
No matter how accurate or inaccurate the understanding of the operations of an animal shelter, euthanasia is an unpleasant reality at a city animal shelter. More than any other aspect, I hope we can now do more to encourage adoptions and to better educate pet owners the consequences of not having their pets spayed or neutered. I also hope that those that are justifiably concerned with the well-being of animals will become part of the solution by helping to raise money for a new shelter, by sponsoring adoption clinics, by spreading information on spaying and neutering, and helping to educate pet owners on ways to accomplish those tasks.
 
We could use a few more protesters and some healthy giving!