Linden Pound Ordered Closed by State Due to Massive Failures

On September 16, 2014, the NJ Department of Health wrote a letter to the health officer for the city of Linden ordering her to “immediately” close the pound due to failed inspections in July and August.  All the animals and records are to be transferred to another licensed shelter.

Among the most egregious violations found during the inspections at the Linden pound:

  • Impounded animals were being sold or killed before their 7 day mandatory holding periods expired.
  • Animals were not being scanned for microchips at time of impound, at time of sale, or before being killed.
  • Ketamine and euthanasia solution showed evidence of being used but no records were kept regarding their usage.
  • Animals were not being weighed before being killed (in order to determine appropriate drug dosages) and no records of animal weights or dosages of drugs used to kill them were maintained.
  • A veterinarian had not established or maintained a disease control or health care program at the pound, as required by law.
  • Housing for the animals was in severe disrepair.

It sounds as if the city was given an opportunity to correct problems noted in July but inspectors found conditions worsened when they returned in August.  Linden Mayor Richard “A Total Lie and an Exaggeration” Gerbounka says the state health department is “overreacting” and as of today, the Linden pound remains open in defiance of the state order as far as I know.

(Thank you Robert Scutro for the FOIA’d documents.)

Fulton Co Protests Pound’s Killing Policy for Pitbulls

More than 80 animal advocates turned up at a peaceful protest at the Fulton Co Dog Pound in Ohio last weekend designed to raise community awareness regarding the pound’s regressive pitbull policy. Fulton Co kills any dog or puppy who is not reclaimed by an owner and whose body shape resembles that of a pitbull or pitbull mix in the opinion of the dog warden or his assistant. This cruel policy not only defies logic, it defies legal recommendations on the local and state level:

The commissioners unanimously passed Resolution 2012-47 in May, 2012, just after and in spite of the Ohio Legislature’s removal of breed-specific language from state code and against the recommendation of their legal counsel, Fulton County prosecutor Scott Haselman, to remain breed neutral. The policy states that no dog identified by the dog warden or assistant dog warden as a “pit bull” or “pit-bull” mix will be adopted out or transferred to a rescue group from the pound.
[...]
Dog Warden Brian Banister, who according to county records recommended and initially drafted the policy, said he agrees with the county’s decision about “pit bulls.”

Area animal advocates have been trying to present a case for judging each dog and puppy as an individual, based on behavior, instead of having a blanket policy of death for all unclaimed dogs and puppies based on body shape. But the county already knows everything:

The two leaders of Fulton County No Kill, Carol Dopp of Chesterfield Township and Tasha Grieser of Archbold, Ohio, said dogs should be judged by their behavior, not their physical appearance. The pair met with County Administrator Vond Hall in mid-August to discuss the matter with the intent of placing it on a county commissioners’ meeting agenda. They were rebuffed.

Mr. Hall said he approached the commissioners, who refused to open a discussion about the policy and have not met with representatives of either group.

“The board members fully understand the position the No-Kill group has, and they also fully understand their own position,” he said. “They do not see the need to discuss what they feel they already understand.”

It’s got to be a good feeling, knowing everything and not needing to listen to your constituents, your county attorney or your state’s legal recommendations. They probably sleep like babies. And act like them:

[A] Fulton County resident and dog trainer who is certified in a behavior-evaluation protocol developed by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals offered to evaluate the county’s dogs at no charge. That offer was refused.

*stomps feet*
We. Already. Know. Everything.
Why isn’t anyone listening to us?

“We are not a shelter,” Mr. Hall said.

Problem number one, in what appears to be a lengthy list in Fulton Co.  By the way, it’s not necessary to call yourself a “shelter” in order to stop killing stray dogs and puppies whom people are willing to save.  You can just call yourself a human to do that.

Mr. Hall said [...] those people protesting the policy appear to be “expressing concern about the animal, not the public.”

Wait – I thought the people protesting were the public. But heaven forfend anyone be concerned about an animal, especially one with fat head and a waggy tail.

(Thank you Arlene for the link.)

ACO Runs Out of Cat Catching Ideas After 60 Seconds, Calls In Police to Shoot Cat

Clark, as pictured on the Press-Herald website.

Clark, as pictured on the Portland Press Herald website.

On August 20, Some Guy in Gorham, ME called police to report that a limping cat had scratched or bitten his child and that he suspected the cat had rabies. The Gorham police sent an ACO to the scene at 7pm. The ACO was unable to immediately trap the animal and so called for a police officer to come shoot the limping cat with a 16 gauge shotgun. Which is the next obvious step after the limping cat, having been diagnosed as possibly rabid by Some Guy, refused to walk immediately into a trap. There are zero steps in between Immediately Secure Cat in Trap and Blast Cat with 16 Gauge Shotgun.

After being shot, the cat ran off into the woods for 4 days. He finally emerged in the yard of a woman who has been feeding him on her back deck for years. He was trapped and taken to an area shelter. He is being monitored by a vet as his front leg bones are shattered from the shotgun pellets and may require surgery to repair. It’s painful to even imagine the suffering this cat endured for 4 days after being shot.

Lt. Chris Sanborn of the Gorham PD said the department will investigate itself in the matter, the officer who shot the cat is still on duty, and that officer is not being named. Also, he doesn’t know what to do if a cat diagnosed by Some Guy as possibly rabid doesn’t immediately limp into a trap:

Sanborn said his department follows state protocol for dealing with animals that police suspect may be rabid, including trapping the animal so it can be quarantined while veterinarians determine if it is infected. Sanborn said he did not know what the protocol is for situations where the animal cannot be caught.

If you don’t know, start shooting. I think that’s what it says on the sides of police cars.

The cat, now named Clark, is having his vet bills paid by the police department. He is not rabid but is reportedly very friendly and loving. The lady who has been feeding him on her property is worried the shelter will kill him.

An ACO obviously ill equipped for the job.  A police officer ready, willing and able to fulfill cat shooting requests upon demand.  A supervisor prepared to provide cover for these heinous actions.  A shelter where citizens fear their pets will be killed.  Yay public servants.

(Thank you Clarice for the link.)

TZI Recommends Shelter Should Not Let You Have Your Lost Cat Back

Cleo, a feral cat who has been vaccinated and neutered, and whose caregiver loves her.  (Photo by Casey Post)

Cleo, a feral cat who has been vaccinated and neutered, and whose caregiver loves her. (Photo by Casey Post)

In August 2013, the Maddie’s Fund Shelter Medicine Program issued a summary of recommendations to the Hillsborough Co pound in FL following a consultation.  The recommendation regarding stray cats was particularly troubling to me since it threatened the bond between people and their lost pets.  From the report:

Eliminate the required hold period for stray cats. Stray cats lacking identification are extremely unlikely to be reclaimed by owners and are at high risk for shelter – acquired disease and euthanasia. Eliminating even a few days in the shelter may be the difference between life and death for them. The shelter can simultaneously have an option for immediate live release paired with a required hold period of 3 days prior to euthanasia.

Not only is Maddie’s Fund failing to attribute a low return to owner rate to its proper source – the pound, it fails to acknowledge one of the primary purposes of municipal shelters:  to reunite lost pets with their owners.

The No Kill Advocacy Center weighed in on the elimination of stray holding periods when HSUS suggested it in its 2013 white paper on California shelters:

[I]f a dog or cat comes in as a stray, and he does not have identification, he can be adopted to someone else immediately without giving his family any time to reclaim him. This is unfair to families who deeply love their animal companions. [...] Accidents happen; animals get lost and end up at shelters. Since the choice presented — immediate adoption or sickness/death — is a false one, breaking up families by having them lose all rights in their animal with no reclaim period of any kind appears draconian.

I am deeply opposed to the elimination of holding periods for any pet whose owner might be looking for him. It’s the shelter’s job to treat the bond between pets and their people as sacrosanct. Which is why I was shocked to read that the Target Zero Institute, in its recommendations to the troubled Amarillo pound in TX, has taken the travesty even further. TZI not only recommends eliminating the holding period for stray cats lacking identification but for all cats found outside – including friendly, possibly microchipped pets who may be wearing collars and/or tags and whose owners are searching for them:

The TZI recommends returning outside cats back to their original neighborhoods following sterilization, rabies vaccination and ear tipping. [...]TZI recommends returning cats to their ‘outside home’ where they have a food source as evidenced by a healthy body weight. These may be feral cats that cannot be handled or friendly cats found outside.

If Amarillo, or any other municipal shelter, adopts TZI’s barbaric recommendation regarding cats found outdoors, your pet could be turned into the shelter by a cat hating neighbor or anyone at all, or he could simply be trapped by an ACO and, so long as he appears to be “visually healthy”, he would be immediately vaccinated, neutered, ear-tipped and put back on the street. This would happen as a matter of policy – even if you were actively searching for your pet, even if you had microchipped him and even if you had placed a collar and an ID tag on him. If he’s found outside, TZI wants him immediately anesthetized, put through surgery and turned loose in the area where he had gotten lost (or presumably where the cat hating neighbor says he was found).

TZI says in its report that this practice will save money by reducing the number of cats who “have to be cared for, fed and ultimately [killed] in large numbers” at the pound.

No cats “have to be” killed.  Full stop.  If you don’t get that, get out of the shelter consulting business.

All cats impounded by shelters should be immediately – in the field whenever possible – scanned for microchips and checked for ID tags.  No exceptions.  A chip or ID tag should equate with a free ride home from the ACO.  Those cats lacking identification should be photographed and posted online by the facility immediately.  Anyone visiting the shelter looking for a lost pet should be shown every pet in the place as a matter of course.  Reuniting families is part of the job.  It seems to me to be one of the best parts, by the way, and I can’t imagine why anyone who supposedly cares about shelter pets would want to eliminate it.

Now that Maddie’s Fund and HSUS have opened this awful door and TZI has barreled through it with a bulldozer, I can’t help but wonder what’s next.  Will some consultant recommend that shelters stop housing all dogs found outdoors too?  Gee but we can’t turn dogs back out onto the streets, can we?  So what will “have to be” done with them?

I’m not a shelter consultant, just someone who loves pets and believes dogs and cats have a right to live, regardless of their status in the community.  I don’t get paid for my ideas nor do I have any big money backing me behind the scenes.  Here’s my unsolicited recommendation to shelters and their staff, for what it’s worth:  Do your jobs.  Stop looking for ways to avoid the hard work of sheltering by bringing in big money consultants.  You are accountable to the local taxpayers who pay your salaries and who love their pets.  Start acting like it.

(Thanks Clarice for the link.)

RSPCA Killing Healthy/Treatable Pets with Bolt Guns and Bullets

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in the UK reportedly killed 53,000 animals in 2011, many of them healthy or treatable.  The RSPCA’s 44% kill rate can not be blamed on an open admission status:

In 2009, the RSPCA, which is one of Britain’s biggest charities and receives £120 million a year in donations, stopped accepting stray animals and unwanted pets.

While the number of animals being adopted to new homes by the RSPCA has fallen, the number of convictions against pet owners has risen by 20%.  Critics claim that the organization’s focus on securing convictions has led to the drop in animals being adopted out as well as thug tactics against pet owners:

[In 2011], spinster Georgina Langley, 67, of West Hougham, Kent, was raided at her home by the RSPCA and had five of her 13 cats put down.
The charity prosecuted her for neglect, but Mr Smith, 62, came to her aid. After sending two of the cats’ bodies to the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) for an independent post-mortem, he said: ‘There appears to be no good reason why the RSPCA allowed these animals to be put to sleep.
‘The RVC post-mortems concluded the cats were healthy, with no signs of incorrect feeding or major problems with fleas or other illnesses.
‘They were very heavy-handed with an elderly lady and kept her standing out in her garden in the rain for hours while they searched her house.
[...]
Following a three-day trial in May 2012, the RSPCA dropped 11 of the 13 charges against Miss Langley.

The RSPCA, which routinely kills animals with a bolt gun, also shoots healthy/treatable pets to death as a form of “euthanasia” according to a whistleblower who worked for the organization for 2 years:

Ms Aubrey-Ward claimed large numbers of animals, particularly dogs, were put to sleep after being classed ‘unsuitable for rehoming’, but that the definition could be widely drawn to often include older animals, those needing veterinary care, dogs deemed ‘aggressive’ or larger dogs which were ‘hard to home’.
[...]
Ms Aubrey-Ward, 44, a divorced mother of four from Martock, Somerset, joined the RSPCA as a trainee inspector in 2007. But she soon found herself at odds with what she described as its ‘antiquated military-style’ regime which placed ‘prosecution and persecution’ of owners ahead of protection of their pets.
[...]
Later, she rescued a heavily pregnant ‘staffie’ bitch from a cruel owner, along with an aggressive male dog. ‘With some TLC in a nice kennels, and someone to work on her behaviour, she would have been OK. The dog warden and I tried hard to find a space for her but we couldn’t,’ she said.

‘The warden took the dogs to RPSCA Hillingdon, where a vet said they should be put to sleep if nowhere could be found for them, and they were killed round the back. The dog warden noosed them and I shot them.’

An RSPCA spokesman told the Daily Mail:

‘We do need to put animals to sleep when it is in their interests.
‘Nobody who works for the RSPCA wants to have to put rehomeable animals to sleep but it is a sad reality of the work that we do.’

Unadoptable.  Putting to sleep.  Killing is a kindness. Nobody WANTS to kill animals. DOMFL. I see pet killing hypocrites are exactly the same across the pond as they are here.

If you can’t own it, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it.

(Thanks Arlene for the link.)

Norfolk Whistleblower Alleges Pound in Violation of State Law, Retains Attorney to Fight Termination

The city of Norfolk, VA kills animals at its pound.  So far in 2014, more than 1600 animals have been killed.  Nearly 600 of those animals were killed because the staff at the Norfolk pound didn’t like their behavior in addition to the 230 animals who were killed for being feral.  Fifty-four animals were killed for being too old while another 125 were killed for being too young.  Five animals were killed for being pregnant, which means their unborn offspring were suffocated inside their mothers but Norfolk doesn’t bother counting them.

The Norfolk pound currently has 8 dogs listed for adoption on its website.  They’re doing the best they can, totally.

A former Norfolk pound employee who says she was fired for being a whistleblower has retained an attorney to fight the city’s termination of her employment:

Adrienne Alper, 26, worked for the city-run shelter for about seven months before she was fired in December. She says the shelter didn’t follow procedure when workers euthanized animals, and that management targeted her after she spoke up about it.

She alleges that staff “often carried out euthanasia procedures in a cruel and inhumane manner.”

Specifically Ms. Alper is alleging that Norfolk was killing animals in their cages instead of taking them to the kill room – a violation of state law.   She also expressed concern at the needless killing of animals, including a surrendered mama Pitbull and her litter of puppies who were killed upon impound.  She says she attempted to go through proper channels before taking her concerns outside the pound:

“I talked to my immediate supervisors but they kind of brushed me off,” Alper said. “They just said that it was the way they did things and the way it was done for years.”

Tragically, Ms. Alper took her concerns to PETA, the Norfolk based pet killing organization. I can only imagine PETA’s concern might have been that the pound wasn’t killing even more animals, faster and more efficiently.  And maybe they had some hurt feels that no one called them to come watch the killing of the Pitbull family.  PETA would have brought popcorn, no doubt.

Ms. Alper was fired soon after and says her termination letter specifically cited the PETA meeting and “alleged that Alper did not get along with co-workers and accused one of them of killing puppies”. I guess she should have said puppies and adults, to be fair.

The city stands by the puppy killers at its pound, noting that surrendering parties sign a form stating their animals might be killed.  So it’s all good, I guess.  Presumably the city’s lawyers will have a tad more than that to offer if the case goes to court.

(Thanks Clarice and Arlene for the links.)

TX Pound Gets Huffy When Local Advocates Ask Them to Stop Hiding and Killing Pets

The Humane Society of the New Braunfels Area in Texas hides many of the animals impounded by the facility. When a citizen contacted the organization in July expressing concern over this practice, Amanda Craig, president of the HS of the New Braunfels Area, responded with an explanation. This is a portion of that response:

I have to assume, due to the content of your email, that your knowledge and opinion of our shelter have been influenced by the No Kill New Braunfels group. I would like to take this opportunity to clarify a few things and invite you to be a part of our future success.

The only animals that are not photographed are the stray animals that are still on hold, animals who enter the shelter in such poor medical condition that they cannot be treated, animals that enter the shelter that are too aggressive for adoption and feral cats. I will elaborate on the “stray hold” policy. When strays enter our shelter they are “held” for 3 business days minimum. During that time they may not be put up for adoption or presented to the public via photographs/internet. The reason for this is that, in the past, there have been issues with people “shopping” our stray area. The reason that people do this is to look for a pure bred and/or intact dog to breed or fight in order to make a profit. You see, if an “owner” claims a dog the fee is typically much less than the adoption fee so it is financially beneficial for these corrupt individuals to claim a stray as their own rather than buy or adopt if they can manage to get away with it. However, during that hold time, if an owner comes in who has legitimately lost a dog, we will happily show them every single kennel in our stray hold area in hopes that we can reunite them with their dog. Based on the level of detail that a person can give about the dog they claim to have lost, we are able to determine if they are truly missing a companion animal or if they are simply “shopping”.

Shorter: No Kill New Braunfels sucks and here’s a bunch of baloney we made up so we don’t have to do our jobs.

For the month of July, when that e-mail was written, the HS of the New Braunfels Area took in 359 dogs and cats, hid an unknown number of them and killed 243 – a kill rate of approximately 68%. But of course, better off dead than living with PET SHOPPERS. Because you know all the evil people in the world are posing as lost pet owners and looking to adopt an animal off death row in the New Braunfels pound. That’s common knowledge.

But alas, No Kill New Braunfels keeps the ball rolling and stays focused on lifesaving with this recent newspaper ad:

Newspaper ad from No Kill New Braunfels in TX (click to enlarge).

Newspaper ad from No Kill New Braunfels in TX (click to enlarge).

How ya like me now, bitchez?

(Thanks Linda for info on this story.)

MI Politician Smears the South as an Excuse for Hiring a Pet Killer

In Leon Co, FL, animal control is run by Andrew Seltz.  On AC’s website, it states that more than 6000 animals are killed every year at the pound.  And there is one of those threats that the killing will continue until magic happens:

Unfortunately, until each citizen commits to preventing their pet from adding to the burden of pet overpopulation, the trend will continue to worsen.

We don’t have to stop killing animals at the pound.  The burden is not on the few of us actually doing the killing.  We are not going to change.  It’s up to the approximately 282,000 residents of Leon Co to change.  And until all 282,000 people meet our demands, the killings will not only continue but will “worsen”.  If you don’t like it, you can go… enact legislation, I guess.

This is the shabbiest, shirkiest form of blaming the public for the killings at the local pound.  Not only is Andrew Seltz refusing to accept responsibility for his actions, he is blaming the public he needs to partner with in order to stop the killings and setting an unachievable demand for the community to meet before he’ll consider stopping.

The fact is, most people have already neutered their pets.  Most of those who haven’t neutered them would do so if it was within their financial means.  Ordering this small group to get their pets neutered on pain of more needless shelter pet deaths does not cause free spay-neuter certificates and transportation to vet clinics to magically happen.  We can not neuter our way out of killing.  Any shelter director knows this and given that they do, it’s especially cruel to dangle that carrot in front of the public who is needed to foster, rescue, adopt and donate.  It’s cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Then stomping your face in the dirt.  While killing friendly dogs and cats.

When it was recently announced that Andrew Seltz was leaving Leon Co to take over the Ingham Co pound in MI, a concerned animal advocate contacted county commissioner Kara Hope.  This is the response received from Commissioner Hope:

From: “Kara Hope” <kara@votekarahope.com>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 1:54:45 PM
Subject: New animal control director

Ingham County is fortunate to have residents like you who care so much about animal welfare. But I hope that you’ll give Mr. Seltz a chance and reserve judgment until he’s had a chance to go to work here.

As someone concerned with animal well-being, you might know that there is a big cultural difference in how animals are viewed and treated in some areas of the southern U.S. To put it crudely, in some southern communities, animals are viewed as disposable. There is less effort and few resources put into re-homing animals. I’m sure that the statistics you refer to reflect policies that result from the difference in points of view.

And it might ease your mind to know that Mr. Seltz told us during his interview that one of the reasons he wants to return to Michigan is because he found the southern perspective on animals and their value to be troubling.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Kara Hope
http://www.votekarahope.com
@KaraHope7

Oh hell naw.  Don’t go blaming the south for your decision to bring in someone who kills animals instead of doing his job.  We here in the south love our animals just as much as anyone does anywhere in this country.  Our compassion for lost and homeless animals is not second-class.  Our perspective that animals in need should be sheltered and not killed is based upon the value we place on our pets.  Now if you want to charge the south with having an overabundance of regressive, good ol’ boy appointed shelter directors who keep killing animals because that’s the way they’ve always done it and why change when you can blame the public instead – well, that’s a conversation we can have.  Case in point:  Andrew Seltz.  (By the way, thanks for stabbing us in the back on your way to the top, sir.  Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.)

While employed in the south, Andrew Seltz blamed his local community for the killings he oversaw at the pound.  If Ms. Hope or anyone else in Ingham Co thinks that’s going to change when he gets there, brace yourselves.  I predict Mr. Seltz will find the unwashed masses just as blamable in Ingham Co as he did in Leon Co.  And he’ll continue killing animals until magic.

My message to Ms. Hope goes for Mr. Seltz as well: If you can’t own it, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it. And don’t expect the south to be your punching bag. We’re all full up on smack-talking shelter pet killers around here so find somebody else to kick around.  Or maybe you could stop looking for whipping boys and start doing your jobs, “to put it crudely”.

Sonoma Co Fires Director Who Implemented Lifesaving Changes at Shelter

Remember that one time we had good news about the Sonoma Co shelter in CA?  Well hold on to that memory like a clip-on koala stuffy because it may be all you get.

Brigid Wasson, the shelter’s director for the past 11 months, was fired without reason by Sonoma Co last week, one month prior to her probationary period being fulfilled.  She describes her termination meeting with the county:

My boss and her assistant came to my office at three in the afternoon, announced their decision, then watched me as I packed my personal belongings and was escorted off the property like a criminal. I was shocked and devastated.

Ms. Wasson, who says she moved to Sonoma Co for this job, is credited by the county with increased rescue placements, establishing social media marketing, improved record keeping and the robust return to owner program for lost pets I blogged about previously.  The bottom line:

The shelter’s live release rate is now at 85 percent, up from 59 percent in 2008, according to the county.

In fact, Ms. Wasson told me she had calculated the year-to-date live release rate at 88% just days before being terminated.  And that she was working on a number of other programs:

  • The community cat program which had already reduced cat euthanasia by 75%
  • The Sonoma County animal related ordinance revision which included bringing the ordinance up to state code (it currently isn’t), adding TNR/cat-friendly language, removing breed-specific language (restrictions to Pit Bull type dogs), and reducing pet limit restrictions
  • An expanded coalition including shelters in our county as well as in neighboring counties.

A Sonoma Co ACO will temporarily run the shelter while the county seeks a permanent director.  The ACO will be the third director in 14 months.  It’s unknown what will happen to the changes and protocols instituted by Ms. Wasson at the shelter.  But the county’s message seems clear enough:  saving the lives of pets at the shelter is not the direction the county wants to go.  What type of applicant will be attracted to the position knowing that the previous director increased lifesaving and was fired by the county?  What will happen to the lost and homeless pets in Sonoma Co going forward?

126 MO Animals Shuffled from One “Humane” Society to Another

The Lebanon Humane Society in Missouri recently elected a new board who voted in Judith Koch as president.  Police had to be called to maintain order at a contentious public meeting.  Some people are so unhappy with the new board, lawyers are involved.

Despite the fact that the organization built and opened a new facility in 2010, Ms. Koch says the place is appallingly filthy and overcrowded.  The board asked the Humane Society of Missouri Animal Cruelty Task Force to take the 126 animals being housed in the new building, which they did yesterday.

Part of the controversy surrounding the new board is the question of killing animals.  Ms. Koch is less than reassuring on the issue:

“We absolutely are not going to kill any healthy, adoptable animal. But if we have a sick animal that may be making others sick, it would be unreasonable not to put that animal down. Priority right now is to get our population down without having to kill any animal that’s adoptable,” Koch said.

“Unreasonable not to” kill any sick animal who “may” make other animals sick. In a shelter environment, that statement equates to a rubber stamp of approval for killing any sick animals of the board’s choosing, even if those animals are suffering from readily treatable illnesses very common in shelters such as coughs and colds.

And I see she managed to work in the “having to kill” phraseology so cherished by killing apologists.  After all, nobody wants to kill animals.  Or so animal killers keep saying.  But don’t criticize:

“I would like to ask that the public not criticize the new or old board until they have walked a mile in our shoes.”

Yeah but I can’t walk a mile in your pet killing shoes because I refuse to consider killing as an option for population control.  So I can’t say anything against what you’re – oh, I see what you did there.

As for the 126 animals now at the Humane Society of Missouri, it looks like they are still in the hands of people who kill animals.  From the website:

We do not give the animals in our Adoption Centers a time limit in which to find a home. Once the animals pass their health and temperament examinations and are offered for adoption, they stay as long as they remain in good health and don’t develop temperament problems.

Pass all our hoop jumping tests.  Don’t get the sniffles.  Don’t cough.  Don’t side-eye anyone.  Just always be perfect and you can live.

Gee, I wonder how these two organizations became friends.

(Thank you Arlene for the link.)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 921 other followers