County veterinarian says parvovirus outbreak and gaps in isolation, supplies led to euthanasia of nearly 20 animals

Dr. Douglas Pernicoff, the veterinarian who ran the St. Louis County Animal Care & Control clinic after the county takeover earlier this year, told the county Council Committee of the Whole on June 26 that a parvovirus outbreak in April prompted the euthanasia of about 19 animals after staff lacked space, staff and full treatment capacity.

Pernicoff, who said he began at the shelter on Jan. 21 and worked on average 50–60 hours a week though the agreement was for 32 hours, described the first clinical parvo case as coming from a large kennel ("kennel 500") where the dog was in general population and could not be properly isolated. "We had to leave it there. There was no place for legitimate isolation and quarantine of that animal," he testified.

The veterinarian said the shelter lacked the capacity for intensive treatment — including IV fluids and sustained individual care — and that the monoclonal-antibody therapy used in some clinics would have cost about $1,100–$1,200 per large dog, which the shelter could not afford. Asked about the decision to euthanize, Pernicoff said he had circulated a decision-tree protocol for euthanasia and that supervisory staff and the population manager reviewed lists of potential animals for euthanasia. "No. I was remiss in not calling her that we were gonna euthanize animals, but I'm sure she was aware of what was going on," he said, referring to Dr. Cunningham.

Pernicoff described immediate outbreak responses that staff did implement: personal protective equipment (masks, gloves, gowns and shoe coverings), targeted revaccination of exposed animals, enhanced cleaning and bathing of exposed dogs, and quarantining areas where feasible. He said the team organized morning huddles and shared lists of potential animals for euthanasia during a rapid cluster of new clinical cases over several days in April.

But he told council members the program faced multiple operational constraints. Pernicoff said the shelter had about 240 animals at the time, that intake and vaccination processes were inconsistent because of limited staff, and that the county-provided standard operating procedures (SOPs) only reached the clinic in the first week of May. "We didn't even have a single IV line," he said, summarizing procurement shortfalls. He also criticized the county procurement process as slow and layered, and said some items requested were never approved before he left the position.

Pernicoff said he resigned initially in February, was asked to return, and was later relieved from his duties May 9 following the outbreak. He testified he had distributed a parvovirus protocol after the first cases but that Dr. Cunningham had not signed off on it before the mass of euthanasias.

Council members and other witnesses pressed him on whether Dr. Cunningham, assistant health officials such as Dr. Burris, or other supervisors were notified as cases increased. Pernicoff said Dr. Burris and others were "in and out of there all the time" and that he expected chain-of-command communications to occur, but acknowledged he "was remiss" in not making direct calls about euthanasia decisions.

Pernicoff described the causes he believed drove the outcome: limited isolation/quarantine space, low staffing levels compared with the previous contractor (he said the prior operator, the APA, averaged many more daily cage-cleaning staff), constrained procurement (single-vendor limits, layered approvals), and a budget that he said did not support hospital-level care. He told the committee repeated requests for supplies (IV lines, diagnostics, antigen kits) were not fulfilled before he left.

The committee took official notice of Saint Louis County ordinances and resolutions at the start of the hearing and has issued subpoenas for documents; council staff later noted a data production of some 28,000 documents responsive to subpoenas and committee requests that council members will review. Council members said additional hearings and requests for specific system reports (the "Chameleon" intake/medical record system was discussed) will follow.

The testimony did not resolve all points of dispute. Pernicoff defended many of the outbreak responses the on-site team implemented and said the spread was contained relative to literature describing worst-case shelter losses, while critics and public commenters pressed the council for fuller accounting of staffing, procurement, and policy decisions that preceded the outbreak.

The committee paused the witness’s testimony to allow public commenters to speak and signaled it may recall witnesses for additional questioning. The committee also accepted documents produced in response to subpoenas and indicated further review would continue.