The Irresponsible Public Helps Reunite a Family in Memphis

A reader who visited the Memphis pound this month was waiting in the lobby when she saw a senior citizen holding a small dog with grey around the muzzle at the payment window.  The man was telling the MAS employee, “But I don’t have the money, I don’t get my check until the end of the month.”  The woman approached the man to ask him what was going on.

The gentleman explained that his dog has escaped his home and been picked up by a Memphis ACO.  He said he called MAS to ask about reclaiming his dog and was told to come on down and get him.  When he got there, they gave him his dog and sent him to the payment window.  When he got to the window, he was told there was a $55 redemption fee.  He said no one had told him of the $55 fee previously and, since he was a disabled veteran, he could not afford to pay until his check arrived at the end of the month.  The owner had tears in his eyes.  MAS did not offer any type of payment plan or alternative way for the dog to go home with the owner.

The woman offered to pay the fee but MAS refused to accept her check, saying that the name on the check did not match the name of the owner.  She then offered a credit card and they took her money. The woman wrote to me:

The man was very grateful and asked me for my name and address and said he would reimburse me when he got his check. I told him how much I appreciated him serving our country and this was the least I could do. He then said, “You know, my dog is my only friend. I don’t know what I would do without him.” I gave him my phone number and asked that he stay in touch with me and told him we would be friends.

Pet killing facility employees and enablers often tell us the so-called irresponsible public is to blame for the killing of shelter animals.  They claim they are doing the best they can and that no one wants to kill shelter pets.  In this case, the dog in the pound had an owner who came there to take him home.  He just couldn’t afford the redemption fee on that day.  Why would MAS, or any pet killing facility, want to prevent sending a dog out alive, back to his permanent home over a matter of money?  Do they really want dogs like this to take up cage space at the pound and possibly get sick?  Do they want to break up a family over $55?  Would MAS have held the dog until the end of the month and not killed him after the 5 day mandatory hold expired like they do so many others?  And if they did hold the dog, what would the redemption fees have amounted to by then?

And yet it is the irresponsible public who came through for this dog – the owner coming to the pound to immediately reclaim his lost pet and the good Samaritan offering to pay the ransom.  Ordinary people did the right thing here.  Because the pet killing facility wouldn’t.  Thank you irresponsible public, once again.

Animal services=family services.  Any questions?

Leave a comment

26 Comments

  1. Great story…it’s about time there’s some good news..

    Reply
    • Dot Kirby, what? It’s wonderful that the woman was there to help, but this story hardly constitutes good news. It is just another glaring example of how the kill-for-convenience shelters don’t care about a goddamn thing except maybe their budgets.

      Reply
      • I know all too well just how bad MAS is..I think it’s wonderful that the person stepped up, went above and beyond to get the dog out of the clutches of that shelter.. I know all too well what it’s like to survive on Social Security, only having money once a month. I have had numerous emergencies with my dogs and dogs I foster.. I have a great amount of respect for the woman that helped this dog and owner, I have been in that owners shoes.. thanks to people like that woman.. many animals in my care have received what they needed. To me.. this is wonderful that the dog and owner are together. I don’t have anything good to say about MAS

  2. Here is another shelter San Bernardino withholding an owned dog for fees they can waive:

    http://www.change.org/petitions/san-bernardino-animal-shelter-management-waive-the-fees-for-animal-a4-dog

    Reply
  3. Pretty typical for MAS, don’cha think? Bless the Good Samaritan’s heart. My hope is that there will be more of the good guys and the bad guys will be put out of business.
    This makes me so angry . . .

    Reply
  4. mikken

     /  February 17, 2013

    But nobody WANTS to kill shelter pets…right?

    Reply
  5. mikken

     /  February 17, 2013

    They have no plan for people who can’t afford the redemption fee? Nothing in place to work things out so a pet can go home alive?

    Reply
  6. Jackie

     /  February 17, 2013

    Thank goodness for the woman who helped out that poor man. What cold hearted people must work at that so called shelter. New rules need to be put in place. They don’t gain anything by keeping the dog there and possibly killing it for lack of someone reclaiming it. Stupidity.

    Reply
    • Not only stupidity – but lack of heart, compassion, morals, ethics, all that stuff. THEY.DO.NOT.CARE from mayor wharton to the so-called “friends” to rogers and most of the people who “work” there.

      Reply
  7. Gwen macLeod

     /  February 17, 2013

    These places are frequently run by city officials who don’t care at all about the animals. Many don’t realize this. I didn’t and innocently made many donations to them.

    It’s heartbreaking.

    Reply
  8. Laurel

     /  February 18, 2013

    I am afraid that this is a story that is played out time and time again across this country, but alas, probably more often without the caring citizen to come to the aid the the “irresponsible” pet owner. Something needs to change!

    Reply
  9. anne

     /  February 18, 2013

    Stories like this are far too rare.

    Reply
  10. I wonder how many animals with homes that were picked by MAS were killed because their guardians had no money to redeem them and no Good Samaritan stepped up with assistance?

    Reply
  11. Thank God for good people. I’m so disgusted with MAS! I wish they could be shut down!

    Reply
  12. God love this beautiful soul, she is another shining example that there is hope for humanity, and God bless the man who got his dog back, too often we forget the sacrifices that our seniors have made on our behalf and we should all be grateful to these wonderful souls,.,,,, SHAME on the MAS for their blatant disregard and unkind treatment of this man, if they are treating people this way one can only imagine how horrid they are treating the fur babies..,,,,

    Reply
  13. Anonymous

     /  February 21, 2013

    I think that you shouldn’t slander MAS on something you don’t know anything about Ms. Fisher. It’s not the fault of MAS that you paid this mans fee for an animal he obviously had no money to provide for.

    Reply
    • Just a thought, maybe MAS shouldn’t be charging this ridiculous high fees and instead helping people? After all, MAS is paid for by the tax payer already.

      Reply
      • Anonymous

         /  February 23, 2013

        Or maybe the citizens should be cited more often and have heavier penalties for dogs running at large. In the end of any discussion it is the fault of the individual who owned the dog for violating a city ordinance in the first place. So he’s quite luck MAS didn’t cite him on the violations, cause I’m sure his animal was not fixed or up to date on its vaccinations. So really he’s lucky to not have a court date with a $500+ court fees?

      • Well, Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous, I’m not sure in which century you are living but it sure isn’t the 21st century. You do understand that the dog would be dead today if nobody would have come forward to help this man? Do you even care about that?
        It is beyond ridiculous to “cite” somebody because his dog run away. I can see writing a citation to somebody if a dog constantly is on the loose and a danger to the public. But this was not the case here. This was a disabled veteran, a man that has put his life in danger for his country and that is what he receives as thank you treatment from his local government? I can assure you that in our animal shelter he wouldn’t have paid one cent to get his dog back. He would have gotten his dog back from me vaccinated, de-wormed and bathed. By the way, we call that customer service.

      • Thanks for playing, Anonymous but it looks like we have a winner.

  14. Apparently, Ms. or Mr. Anonymous is one of the stellar employees at MAS, defending the agency’s archaic and inhumane policy. Disgusting …

    Reply
  15. Bobbie

     /  February 28, 2013

    What I find the most astounding about this horrible situation is that a person was willing to PAY and they were even resistant to that???Thank God the person had more than one way to offer the money..many of us wouldn’t have had any other option.Why on earth would they NOT just take anyone’s money to help the owner who was standing there holding his dog….money for them..peace for him…who loses?

    Reply
    • The only thing that comes to mind is: Then no one at MAS would get to kill the dog.

      But of course that couldn’t possibly be the reason, since we are always told that nobody at shelters actually WANTS to kill pets.

      Reply

Speak!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 857 other followers

%d bloggers like this: