Salem County weighs permanent shelter sites, temporary transfers as municipalities face capacity limits

At a Salem County meeting Wednesday evening, county volunteers, municipal officials and health department staff outlined short- and long-term options to address municipal animal shelter capacity, including site visits to three candidate properties, temporary transfers of animals to Monmouth and a plan to return recommendations to municipalities after additional analysis.

The discussion matters because municipalities are currently arranging temporary transport and quarantine of animals and because any permanent solution will require capital upgrades, septic work and ongoing operating funds from the towns that would use the facilities.

Marlene Smith, a member of the county animal shelter committee, said the committee has toured facilities and will hold another tour in the next week to evaluate options. “There’s a lot to this, but I think we’ve got everyone engaged that needs to be from funding to, you know, facilities to health department requirements,” Smith said. The committee is narrowing options and preparing cost and operational comparisons to present to the municipalities.

Rebecca, a Salem County Health Department representative, described visits to one property and catalogued infrastructure needs. She said the Pittsgrove site visited March 25 has roughly “approximately 21 dog kennels,” a quarantine room for about 12 animals and multiple cat housing units, but that the septic system would need upgrading because the site currently has cesspools. The health department recommended improvements such as raised or covered indoor dog enclosures, improved quarantine ventilation and attention to indoor temperature controls.

Committee members said they are compiling intake figures for 2023–24 to estimate capacity needs. A 2023 Cumberland County feasibility study provided a comparison: Cumberland — with a population of about 150,000 — reported 2021 intakes of 649 dogs and 1,686 cats and modeled a countywide shelter with capacity for 28 dogs and 114 cats on a 3–5 acre site. The committee noted Salem County’s population of about 65,000 and said its intake numbers are likely lower; the committee is still finalizing local intake totals.

As a temporary measure, county volunteers and municipalities have arranged to transfer animals from local streets to county custody and then on to Monmouth; the county said it is offering logistical support but not direct payment for transport or quarantine costs. “There’s a cost to that, but we’re offering the vehicle to do this, not the payment,” a committee representative said, thanking Pennsville for assisting with a recent quarantine transfer.

Officials said the committee is currently evaluating three candidate options: a Pittsgrove property (the March 25 visit), a site identified in Piles Grove referred to in the meeting as “Sierra/Seer/Sears Farms” (spelling varied in the record) and the Pennsville facility, which is already operating and being considered for unit expansion. Committee members said they are open to additional suggestions but are prioritizing a short list of up to two final sites for detailed cost analysis and operational planning.

City administrator Ben Angeli, who identified himself as the city administrator and city clerk for the City of Salem, publicly thanked the volunteers and committee members: “You really are doing a great job,” he said. Resident Dan New of Pennsville asked whether the committee sought more than three options; committee members replied they were seeking multiple options but expected to narrow to one or two final choices based on cost and operational feasibility.

No formal vote or policy adoption occurred during the discussion. The committee scheduled its next public meeting for 4 p.m. on June 4 at the same venue, when members expect to present both recommendations and more final intake numbers for municipalities to consider. Until municipalities decide which facility or combination of facilities to adopt, committee members said municipalities will be responsible for ongoing operating costs.

The county reiterated that several technical and regulatory steps remain — including septic upgrades, compliance with health department shelter regulations and finalized intake data — and that any permanent solution will require municipal agreement on operations and funding.