Gwangju Animal Shelter in Turmoil Again... Fierce Debate Over 'Illegal vs No Problem' Claims

Former Shelter Director Participates in Citizen Group, Points Out Current Issues... Urges Normalization of Operations and Direct City Management

Shelter Side "We Are Following Principles... If There Are Problems, All Organizations Should Take Respo

[Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Yoon Jamin] The much-discussed and controversial ‘Gwangju Metropolitan City Animal Shelter’ has become noisy again.

A citizen group involving the former Gwangju animal shelter director pointed out current issues and urged the normalization of operations and direct management by the city, prompting a fierce dispute as the shelter side rebutted.

The ‘Citizens for the Normalization of Gwangju Animal Shelter Operations’ recently raised concerns, hoping the shelter would correct all illegal and irregular practices and become a ‘clean shelter’.

First, they addressed illegal buildings within the shelter.

The group stated, “Most outdoor structures other than the main building of the Gwangju Animal Shelter are illegal buildings,” adding, “This conflicts with the appropriate management number set by the city and will lead to increased staffing due to the excess number of animals being sheltered, resulting in additional operating costs and wasteful tax spending.”

They continued, “We hope that animals housed in illegal buildings will be given humane alternative protection rather than euthanasia as an extreme measure,” emphasizing, “Do not distort the demolition of illegal buildings as a shield for demands for euthanasia.”

They argued that managing animals according to the appropriate number would allow more of the budget?80% of which is personnel costs?to be invested in the care of the sheltered animals.

Next, they criticized the lack of clear hiring standards and employee training.

The group claimed, “The city hall department in charge is evading responsibility by saying that hiring standards for employees who directly handle the lives of abandoned animals fall under the contractor’s jurisdiction,” and added, “Although employees are hired as animal caretakers, most of their work is cleaning. In other words, cleaning and hygiene staff are also managing animal care.”

They also requested, “Please disclose in detail the qualifications of current cleaning and hygiene staff, as well as employees in accounting, counseling, and medical departments, and respond regarding regular employee training.”

They then mentioned compliance with euthanasia regulations and approval procedures.

The group stated, “It is known that unqualified staff related to animals and veterinary medicine lead euthanasia at the Gwangju Animal Shelter, with veterinarians only performing treatments,” and demanded, “Since careful and strict management of euthanasia procedures is subject to criminal penalties, please clarify the current situation in detail and respond with evidence and testimonies regarding responsibility and alternatives.”

They also addressed ‘restrictions on volunteer activities.’

The group explained, “In the past, volunteer activities were conducted in both dog and cat kennels at the Gwangju Animal Shelter. However, citing COVID-19 social distancing, volunteer activities in dog kennels are still restricted,” adding, “After countless citizen complaints demanding openness, volunteer activities are only allowed on weekends. This is clearly unfair management.”

They raised issues regarding violations of prohibitions on donations and sponsorships during local government subsidized outsourced operations.

The group emphasized, “According to local government subsidy laws, the Gwangju Animal Shelter is prohibited from receiving donations or sponsorship goods from citizens, yet it has been secretly accepting them from the past until now,” and stressed, “This is not to block donations and support for abandoned animals, but unregulated sponsorship goods being used indiscriminately at the relatively well-funded Gwangju Animal Shelter, violating the law, is clearly illegal.”

They demanded, “If outpatient treatment is necessary, please create expenditure items to legally spend medical expenses and disclose work logs specifying outpatient treatment cases, actual incoming sponsorship goods ledgers, and proof of re-sponsorship.”

Finally, they criticized the operating organization as irresponsible.

The group claimed, “Currently, the representative of With leaves the operation of the Gwangju shelter to the employees and hardly manages it,” adding, “Entrusting workers with the daily life-and-death scenes of sheltered animals and not even coming to work raises doubts about the purpose of outsourced operation.”

In response to these claims, the shelter side rebutted point by point.

The shelter stated regarding additional allowances for kennel staff, “The current operating organization, With, has only been in charge for four months,” and explained, “The previous operating organization, Gachibodeum, managed the shelter for a total of four years and three months. With has inherited the employment of all staff hired by Gachibodeum and continues to pay the existing allowances as before.”

They added, “The facility labeled as an illegal building was an extension built by the previous operator, so why shift the responsibility to With?” and asserted, “Demolition is absolutely impossible, and we will proceed with obstruction of business and damages claims.”

Furthermore, they said, “We do not understand why the issue is raised now when 10 out of 12 employees were hired by the previous operator,” emphasizing, “The Gwangju Animal Shelter complies with all regulations, and there has been no case where employees ignored veterinarians and led euthanasia.”

Regarding volunteer activity restrictions, they stated, “We accept dog kennel volunteers on both weekdays and weekends. However, weekday volunteering is mainly conducted by individuals with appointments or groups contracted with the shelter,” drawing a clear line by calling the claims false.

They explained, “The Gwangju Animal Shelter’s principle is not to accept donations. However, some voluntary material donations from citizens are accepted and used where needed.”

They also said, “With does not avoid managing the Gwangju Animal Shelter and has appointed a highly capable employee as director to faithfully carry out all tasks,” urging, “Stop defaming the organization.”

Finally, they added, “I wonder why the former operator suddenly raises issues about mistakes made during their four years of management. Did they only realize them now?” and said, “If so, they should first show responsibility and resolve illegal elements by taking initiative.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.