60 Dogs Needlessly Killed in TX Shelter

Parvo is a highly preventable and treatable disease, even in a shelter environment.  The diagnosis of parvo, whether confirmed or merely suspected, is not a license to kill dogs.  Euthanasia is appropriate based upon veterinary prognosis for an individual when a vet determines the dog is suffering and his chances of recovery through treatment are poor to grave.

Puppies squashed into a rusted cage, as posted on the Petfinder page of the Conroe Animal Shelter.

A dog named Nina is pictured on a chokepole on the Petfinder page of the Conroe Animal Shelter.

The Conroe Animal Shelter in TX is run by the police department.  The shelter does not appear to be fulfilling its obligations to provide true shelter to dogs in terms of prevention or treatment of parvo:

While the shelter immunizes animals brought into the facility, there is a 72-hour waiting period mandated by the state.

Please show me this TX law that says the mandatory stray hold requires shelters to shun best practices.  And what about owner surrenders without documented vaccination history – does this same law require them to be left unvaccinated for 72 hours in the shelter too?  Ridiculous.

And yet when a recent parvo outbreak at the Conroe Animal Shelter made the news, deputy chief of police Russell Reynolds astonishingly told a reporter:

“It is very important for pet owners to get their dogs vaccinated.”

Really?

When two dogs were impounded on April 4 who “displayed positive symptoms of the viral disorder”, the Conroe facility killed 60 dogs in response.  They also ceased adoptions.  Not that they had any live dogs left to adopt, I imagine.

“We’re doing everything we can to address the situation,” [Reynolds] said.

No you’re not.  Following standard disease prevention protocols, including vaccination upon intake; providing treatment to dogs based upon veterinary diagnosis, not “looks like parvo”; and reserving euthanasia only for those individuals whom a veterinarian issues a poor to grave prognosis with treatment – that would be doing everything you can.  What you’re doing is nothing.  Nothing but killing.

In this photo posted to the Petfinder page of the Conroe Animal Shelter, a sick kitten appears to be housed with a healthy kitten.

(Thank you Clarice for the links.)

NYC Pound Fail

Oh NYC ACC, you rascal you.

Screengrab from Facebook. (click to enlarge)

Here is the text (replete with misspellings/typos) from the FB post by Urgent Part 2 – Urgent Death Row Dogs

SUPER URGENT 4/9/13
Manhattan Center

CHEWY – A0961371
*** POSSIBLE SPINAL INJURY; NEEDS TO LEAVE ASAP ***

MALE, CREAM / SILVER, LHASA APSO MIX, 5 yrs
STRAY – STRAY WAIT, NO HOLD
Reason STRAY
Intake condition NONE Intake Date 04/06/2013, From NY 10028, DueOut Date 04/09/2013, I came in with Group/Litter #K13-133014.

Medical Behavior Evaluation No Initial Behavior
Medical Summary
No Initial Exam

MEDICAL
4/9 Re-exam:
Brought to medical by ACO this early morning
with reports of not moving
QARH, MM- pink
OD- hyperemic conjunctivea
pink mm
unable to use hindlimbs, no fx palpated, painful on palpation of thoracolumbar spine, rear legs have deep pain
reports that *the dog was on top cage of Ward B, may be the dog jumb/fall dawn on floor
dog was given 0.8cc of Hydromorphone IM, 0.5cc of Dexamethasone IM, early in the morning
A: parareresis rear legs r/o- IVDD vs other
P: methacarbamol 100mg/ml 3cc IV
rec rads , NH placement
Rx- tramadol 1 tab po bid
cage rest

4/9 Observation:
Brought to medical by ACO Walton this early morning
with reports of not moving
QAR
redness of eyes
T102.5F
HR 110/min
pink mm
unable to use hindlimbs, no fx palpated
pain elicitd on thoracic and lumber area
*the dog was on top cage of Ward B, may be the dog jumb/fall dawn on floor and get hurt
spoke to Dr Stewart and explained
Dr Rec 0.8cc of Hydromorphone IM, 0.5cc of Dexamethasone IM, monitor in medical and follow up vet check.
nosf

4/7 Initial: GREEN
Scan negative
BARH
Mild dental tartar
Rt mandibular K9 chipped
Neutered
Nosf

It “may be” that the staff at NYC ACC took in a healthy dog and then allowed him to take such an extreme fall that it damaged his spine and rendered him unable to use his hind legs.  But they don’t know for sure.  Either way, I guess they should fast-track him to the kill list.  Because the NYC pound is just awesome like that.

(Thank Susan for the link.)

Alabama Animal PAC Pushing Bill Which Will Save Zero Shelter Pets

My view that animal shelters can and should stop killing pets immediately is regarded by some as extreme.  There are many people who believe some period of time is required (months or years) in order to fully implement all the needed programs, personnel  and funding which will secure no kill for the long term.  During this transition period, pet killing continues, with a goal of steady reduction, and is regarded as a necessary evil.  I refer to this as transition killing.  And I wholly reject it.

There is an even more watered-down philosophy embraced by many animal activists which says that, “No kill can not be achieved until [insert your killing apologist claim-du-jour here].  Some of the many claims offered to extend the killing indefinitely are:

• No kill can not be achieved until everyone spays and neuters their pets.
• No kill can not be achieved until puppy mills are shut down.
• No kill can not be achieved until we accept that we are all on the same team.

This tactic is nothing more than a carrot on a stick and it results in even more permanent damage than transition killing because there is no end in sight.  The date when any of these stated goals will be accomplished is never.  So when an animal activist embraces one of these indefinite delay tactics, what they are really saying is what they really believe, and what they hope to convince you to believe too:  No kill can not be achieved ever.  Again, I reject this philosophy entirely.

In Alabama, a political action committee called Alabama Voters for Responsible Animal Legislation (AVRAL) is lobbying for a mandatory reporting bill (HB 238) which would require shelters to submit annual intake and outcome numbers to the state. Failure to report is a Class A misdemeanor under the bill.  There has been significant objection to the bill from shelter pet advocates for several reasons, which I will cover in due course.  But suffice to say that the premise put forth by AVRAL seems to be yet another carrot on a stick:  No kill can not be achieved until we know exactly how many animals are in the system in the state.  From a recent mass e-mail sent out by the group:

In an effort to determine how many homeless animals need assistance in our state, [AVRAL] wrote the shelter and rescue reporting act, which simply asks for a tally of how many animals enter shelters/rescues annually, whether they are strays/owner surrenders, are adopted, euthanized, etc. The purpose is to define the scope and nature of the homeless animal problem in Alabama, it is a starting point from which we hope to assist shelters and rescues with their efforts. As I made clear, shelters/rescues didn’t create the problem, they are the ones left to clean it up. I urged everyone not to demonize shelters in particular: they are easy targets, but people tend to forget they didn’t put the animals there.

We knew shelters might resist releasing their numbers. What we did not realize was that certain groups—animal welfare groups included—would spread such overt lies and misinformation about our bill that we are left dumbfounded.

Although my gut reaction is to tell AVRAL to take its blame-the-public BS and shove it, I have to ask the logical questions which come to mind:

• Who is going to pay to enforce compliance with this mandatory reporting which will make criminals out of any non-profit or municipal facility which fails to submit numbers?
• Even if the funding for enforcement is obtained, there are still likely to be some non-compliant shelters so the true state totals may never be known – do we have to put off no kill even longer because of this?
• For the sake of argument, let’s say every shelter in the state reports how many animals they are killing.  So what?  We already know shelter pets are being needlessly killed in AL, why do we need to pinpoint an exact number?  How will having that number change the need for an immediate end to the killing of shelter pets?
• Why is AVRAL pushing a bill which does nothing to help save the lives of pets in shelters?

Dog #406248 at the Huntsville pound in AL, as pictured on PetHarbor.

The Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA) has a reporting requirement for shelters but it primarily outlines specifically how shelters must make lifesaving their primary function.  Minimum standards of care and access to the pets by groups willing to save them are key elements of CAPA.  If AVRAL wants to spend resources on pushing a bill, why is it ignoring CAPA in favor of HB 238 when its bill will not save the life of a single shelter animal?  Even if AVRAL doesn’t believe AL is prepared to enact the full CAPA, there is a modified version available, if what the group truly seeks is “a starting point from which we hope to assist shelters and rescues with their efforts”. CAPA clearly defines those efforts as saving the lives of shelter pets.  This is in stark contrast to AVRAL, which appears to define the mission of animals shelters as cleaning up after the so-called irresponsible public.

From the AVRAL mass e-mail:

HB 238 is a first step toward understanding exactly what we are dealing with, what we are paying for, when it comes to the tragic problem of companion animal homelessness. It is one of the most “common sense” bills ever introduced in the legislature.

I am not a PAC but common sense tells me that animal shelters should shelter animals, that instead of shelter directors doing their jobs they are killing the animals in their care, and that I don’t need to know the exact number of dead pets in order to demand an immediate end to the killing.  One is too many.  And since I know there is at least one, that’s all the information I need.  Common sense tells me that if I continually chase the “No kill can not be achieved until…” carrot, I will keel over before the lives of shelter pets are protected.  CAPA, or a modified version, would include the annual reports AVRAL desires but primarily would ensure that animal shelters do their jobs.  CAPA takes away shelter directors’ discretion to kill animals.  Common sense tells me that is a bill I would support.

Case Update: MA Junkyard Shelter

Regular readers might remember the post on the Salisbury, MA junkyard dog catchers – a father and daughter team allegedly defrauding taxpayers.  One owner described to a local news reporter how the female ACO came into her yard and cut the rope to which her dog was tied.  The owner says she tried to reclaim the dog and was informed she would need to come up with more than $1000, payable personally to the ACO.  When the owner was unable to pay the fees, the dog was “adopted by someone else”.

Salisbury officials recently determined that, in taking the dog, “proper procedure wasn’t followed”.  They found the dog, a boxer named Shelby, and reunited her with the rightful owners 6 months after the ACO stole Shelby from her home.  Local officials have also deemed the housing of the dogs at the ACOs’ junkyard a “conflict of interest”.  The state is involved as well:

The state Department of Agricultural Resources, which oversees local animal control officers, also started an investigation. A department spokesman said Thursday the investigation is still ongoing.

(Thanks Clarice for the link.)

Save them all, kill the excuses.

Dog #0871849 at the Charlotte pound in NC, as pictured on PetHarbor.

Many pet killing facilities in this country are enabled by caring volunteers and rescuers who buy into the Save a Few, Kill the Rest business model.  How it works:  The pet killing facility allows members of the public to care for, network and rescue certain pets so long as the public plays by its rules.  The rest of the pets are killed.  The rules that must be obeyed typically center around silence on the part of the enablers – no speaking to the media or posting online about the truth of what goes on at the shelter.

How do compassionate people stand by silently while healthy/treatable pets are being killed all around them?  It a two-pronged attack – one from without and the other from within.  The pet killing facility tells the rescuers and volunteers:

• We’re not monsters.  No one here wants to kill pets.  We’re animal lovers, just like you.

• It’s the public’s fault that we have to kill pets.  With the exception of you guys, the rest of the public is irresponsible and uncaring.

• We’re all on the same team.  But if you speak to the media about what goes on here, people might get the wrong impression and stop donating.  That will only hurt the animals.

The rescuers and volunteers carry the weight from there and tell themselves:

• If I publicly tell the truth about what happens at the shelter, I won’t be allowed to walk dogs/foster kittens/rescue pets any longer and then the animals will have no one to be kind to them because the people here are monsters.

• The people here aren’t monsters.  They only kill pets because the irresponsible public forces them to do it.  I am a member of the public and so are all the networkers, adopters, fosters, donors, rescuers, volunteers and transporters that I know.  Before we got involved with the shelter, we were all just regular pet owners.  I guess I and everyone I know are all exceptions.  Yes, that must be right because only uncaring people would surrender their pets to these monsters.

• The people here aren’t monsters.  After all, they are allowing me to save a few of the pets.  And saving a few is better than saving none so I am going to keep my mouth shut and play by their rules in order to maintain my privileges.  If I don’t, they might kill Fluffy, whom I’ve been working on getting into rescue for 2 weeks, in retaliation.  I can’t risk these monsters killing Fluffy.

Do you recognize yourself in any of these statements?  This is how our broken shelter system’s status quo of Save a Few, Kill the Rest is maintained.  The monsters sell it and the compassionate public buys it.  If you buy it, there will always be a place for you at your local pet killing facility.  Because there will always be a Fluffy.  They will dangle a Fluffy in front of your face forever and taunt you with their power of life and death.

A pet adopted from UPAWS in Michigan, as posted on Facebook.

If however you decide to empower yourself to be free from this mindset, to put the responsibility for Fluffy’s protection on those paid to protect her, and to stand up for what you know in your heart is right – that ALL SHELTER PETS HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIVE – let me know.  I’ll stand by you.

We don’t have to accept saving just a few.  We can save them all.  As compassionate pet advocates, we must reject the myths of pet overpopulation and the “irresponsible public” that have been put forth in an attempt to justify needless killing.  It is our duty to publicly condemn the notion that saving shelter pets is a “privilege” which directors extend only to those who play ball.  We must organize, not to enable more killing by keeping quiet, but to garner legislative support for the Companion Animal Protection Act to protect pets from monsters.

Take back your power.  Giving it up was a tragic mistake but one that can be made right – unlike killing.  Save them all, kill the excuses.

Shelter Pet Killing is a Scam

Protecting shelter pets’ right to live is the moral duty of every animal welfare group. The killing of healthy/treatable shelter pets by the very groups who claim to be sheltering them is a scam.  And tragically, it happens all too often, in both public and private facilities.

In July 2012, a reporter in Atlanta exposed a scam at the Boggs Mountain Humane Shelter where the shelter would pressure donors to send money quickly in order to save a pet in the Lucky Dog program then, with cash in pocket, would take the “lucky dog” to the county pound to be killed.  Authorities have identified 17 dogs so far who were killed under these circumstances, their sponsors receiving cruel letters stating the dogs had been adopted into loving homes.

Screengrab from MyFoxAtlanta depicting 2 pets in the “Lucky Dog” program who were secretly killed by Boggs Mountain after funds were collected to sponsor them.

Buddy came to the SPCA of Southwest Michigan from the Carthage HS in Missouri via Rescue Waggin at the end of October 2012.  He was 8 months old.  Rescue Waggin had evaluated and passed him, which was a requirement for transport.  The Rescue Waggin website states they only deliver “behaviorally and medically sound dogs and puppies” to shelters.  After a few weeks at the SPCA of SWMI, Buddy was assessed and passed again.  A handwritten note on Buddy’s file describes him as “mouthy but very sweet” and “high energy”.  The SPCA of SWMI killed Buddy for supposed behavioral problems, along with another dog named Artie, whom they also obtained via Rescue Waggin.  When I spoke to the acting president of the SPCA of SWMI, she told me how proud the group was of its affiliation with the Rescue Waggin program.

Buddy, killed by the SPCA of SWMI who obtained him via the Rescue Waggin transport program. (Photo submitted by Stephanie Faulkner.)

At the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co, there have allegedly been dozens of dogs killed in the past year.  They were all apparently longtime residents of the shelter and many of them were part of a HS program called Anakin’s Buddies:

[T]he Humane Society launched the Anakin’s Buddies program, which allows volunteer dog walkers to sponsor the adoption fee for a rescued animal at the humane society.

[...]

Many of the Anakin’s Buddies dogs have called the humane society home for several years, and volunteers cannot understand why no one has adopted them. As a result, many of them sponsor more than one dog. “When a volunteer sponsors a dog, they are basically vouching for that dog,” said Kelly Jo Graves, executive manager. “Every Anakin’s Buddy is sponsored by a dog walker who knows them well and has bonded strongly with them.”

Animal advocates allege that after accepting the funds to cover the adoption fees for the dogs in the program, the HS kills some of them and pockets the cash.

Shelby Angel, a dog in the Anakin’s Buddies program, who was killed on Valentine’s Day by the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Some animal groups give their fraudulent fundraising/secret killing programs special names while others scam compassionate pet lovers by using two simple words: animal shelter.  Make no mistake:  if your local “shelter” is killing healthy/treatable animals, it’s a scam.

Why are shelter directors killing pets whom rescue groups are willing to save? Because they can.

Many pet lovers are shocked to learn that most municipal facilities that call themselves animal shelters do not actually shelter animals. In fact, these so-called shelters kill pets rescuers are willing to save, because they can. More still are astonished when they learn that some of the private non-profits calling themselves humane societies or societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals are guilty of the same crimes against pets as the municipal facilities that kill pets who are wanted.

In the case of public facilities, pet advocates can and should petition their government for a redress of grievances. But historically this has been a mixed bag of results with far too many elected officials blatantly thumbing their noses at taxpayers who call upon them to force animal shelter staff to do their jobs. Our public servants delete animal advocacy comments from their Facebook pages, ignore e-mails and petitions, and refuse to meet with advocates in person. When they do address the issue publicly, it’s usually to give the pet killing facility a pat on the back while wagging their fingers at the “irresponsible public”.

When it comes to the private HS/SPCA organizations, well-meaning advocates sometimes believe they should report the needless killing of pets there to the “national” HS/SPCA, meaning the Humane Society of the U.S. and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The sad truth is that neither of these organizations is affiliated with your local shelter, even if the names are similar. Furthermore, HSUS and ASPCA are primarily fundraising organizations and will likely not intervene to prevent wanted pets from being killed by your local non-profit organization.

But there is a solution that addresses the needless killing of wanted pets, and offers numerous other protections for shelter animals, at both public and private shelters. It’s called the Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA).  CAPA has already been passed in DE and has been introduced by legislators in MN, RI and WV.  Modified versions have been introduced in NY, TX, IL and FL.  More states will be announcing modified versions of CAPA on their legislative agendas soon.

CAPA lays out a number of important requirements for public and private shelters that include lifesaving, transparency and community participation.  Specifically, neither public nor private shelter directors would have the discretion to kill pets under CAPA without giving public notice nor would they be allowed to kill pets that a rescue is willing to take.

Too often on this blog, we hear from pet advocates who have been shafted by shelter directors committed to killing for arbitrary reasons and, in some cases, in retaliation for shining a light on their dark secrets.  Here is a way to do something about that.  Augment your existing animal advocacy (fostering, rescue, networking, etc.) with some political advocacy that will not only save pets’ lives, but help the people who love them too.

Do you want accountability, transparency and legal access to the animals in your shelter’s care?  If so, you want CAPA.  Talk to your state or local legislators about getting CAPA introduced to protect your community’s pets from those who are needlessly killing them, because they can.  CAPA would make needless and secretive shelter pet killing illegal, regardless of whether the shelter is public or private.  Under CAPA, we would not only protect the lives of shelter pets but the hearts and minds of pet advocates who currently suffer at the whims of directors, standing by their cabinets of Fatal Plus and scoffing at the so-called irresponsible public’s attempts to actually shelter animals.

Allegations of Needless Killings and Bullying at the SPCA of Southwest Michigan

Stephanie Faulkner says she started working at the SPCA of Southwest Michigan in August 2011.  On the shelter’s “About Us” page, it says the SPCA is “dedicated to rescuing homeless dogs, cats, puppies and kittens from Southwest Michigan pounds and adopting them into responsible homes.”  The page emphasizes the shelter’s commitment to rehabilitation and ends as follows:

SPCA of Southwest Michigan is a registered 501(c)(3) not-for-profit animal welfare organization. We do not receive funding from any government agency or national organization. We operate solely on privately donated funds and adoptions fees. Therefore, unlike county pounds, SPCA is not subject to any government regulations requiring euthanasia as a means of managing our population of rescued pets.

To my knowledge, there are no government regulations requiring shelters to kill pets for population control.  In any case, there is a law in MI that requires all licensed shelters – public and private – to report anual statistics to the state. The SPCA of SWMI last reported in 2008.  It does not appear they reported in 2011, 2010 or 2009.

Ms. Faulkner states that very soon after she started working for the SPCA of SWMI, she met a dog named Jay “when a coworker brought him outside during a break and he climbed into my lap like a big baby.”  Jay was reportedly killed for aggression shortly after that.  Ms. Faulkner was told that this was a very rare occurrence at the shelter so she did not become immediately suspicious of wrongdoing.  Her concerns began to grow just a few months later.  She writes (passages from Ms. Faulkner appear in red.):

In November, two dogs were euth listed. Jacobi and Lolly Doo (now Elsa). Jacobi growled at her kennel door, but once you opened it she was a peach. She was timid in the shelter but a happy, normal dog otherwise.

Elsa was there for 5 months, during which she ran from everyone and was completely terrified.  She was pulled [from the pound] because she was pregnant, and puppies are $375 apiece at the SPCA. After her puppies were adopted she languished in the kennel for five months, heart worm positive, and no one did any thing for her until it was announced she needed to be euthanized, along with Jacobi. So a coworker and I offered to foster them. Katie [Meskil, director] said that was not an option. We could either legally adopt them, or they would have to be euthanized. Did not make any logical sense to me, so I said OK, I’ll take Elsa. [The co-worker took Jacobi and] I took Elsa, and Katie had me sign this “waiver” she hand wrote.

Elsa is a shy dog, but she is absolutely not a bite risk, warms up to new people with ease, and loves my youngest dog. She’ll need a forever home that is aware that she will have to warm up to them and they will have to be kind to her, but absolutely not a euth candidate. She, like the others, has no assessment paper work. All I was given was that hand written “waiver” and a scant medical sheet that says she got a bordetella vaccination and tested HW+. I treated her heartworm and had her spayed and vaccinated, by vets who were strangers to her, without issue.

Elsa (formerly “Lolly Doo”), adopted from the SCPA of SWMI by Stephanie Faulkner. (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

I note that in the waiver for Lolly Doo/Elsa, director Katie Meskil writes that the dog is “feral” and that her positive heartworm status is “contagious”.  While the former is an opinion, and not borne out by the fact that Elsa is obviously able to be handled, the latter is scientifically unfounded and outright false.  Furthermore, the disturbing bit at the end of the waiver, that Ms. Faulkner can never return the dog to the SPCA, strikes me as a condition no compassionate director would ever place upon any pet adoption, regardless of circumstances.

Elsa gets a kiss. (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

The following month, two more dogs were killed for aggression. Ms. Faulkner writes:

Rex and Stephanie Faulkner. (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

Banjo (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

Rex was a shy guy who went into an inexperienced foster home. The first day he was there, the foster’s roommate leaned over to kiss his head and he nipped her in the face. I heard various stories of “plastic surgery!” and “dozens of stitches!” but when I spoke to the actual foster she stated she had a gash on her lip and they were really sorry and did want to foster him after his quarantine was up. He sat in “quarantine” for over a month.

Banjo was in the healthy kennel, available for adoption, until one day she had a “staff only” sign up. When I inquired with the operations manager Katie Meskil as to why Banjo was on “staff only” she stated she was a “bad dog” and “people are scared of her” which was not my experience with Banjo in the slightest. She had no bite record, never so much as growled at any one.

The day Rescue Waggin brought up 20 some puppies both Rex and Banjo were abruptly euthanized and their kennels filled. Supposedly they were assessed and failed, but Katie Meskil never offered up that assessment information to the staff. I expressed my displeasure with the situation, as I was close with both of them, but she refused any further information, told me this is what has to happen and I need to understand that, and then later told me that while the vet was euthanizing them she pointed at them and said, “This is what you get for being bad dogs!” I don’t care if this is excused as “care givers fatigue” because it was insensitive to me, and disgusting. I left off with telling her that I had many rescue connections and would have easily placed them elsewhere. I never saw a single assessment on them and NO ONE was told they were even candidates for euthanasia. We were told multiple times and in our handbook that in the event of a euthanasia decision, staff would be told and given the opportunity to say goodbye. There is also a form they have to fill out and I was not afforded the opportunity to look at that for either of them.

Rex and Banjo were callously euthanized in the office where we pick up our checks, their bodies left laying on the floor.

The next pair of dogs to be killed for aggression were Artie and Cobalt. Ms. Faulkner writes:

Artie the hound at the SPCA of SWMI. (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

Artie was at the shelter for a year and a half, in and out of foster homes.  Then surprisingly Artie was adopted by a couple with a 5 year old son on April 4th 2012. He was returned Sunday, April 15th 2012.  The SPCA is closed on Sundays, so I was the only available person there. I talked with the man who returned him. He was very upset and explained that he did not want to return him, but his wife was afraid of him. The reason they were returning him was because while Artie was asleep in their bedroom on the bed with them their son opened the door in the middle of the night and Artie woke up barking at him.

The next day after I did the leg work I informed Katie I had gotten Artie into three different places and I would pay for his flight to any one of them. Katie stated she didn’t care and to take him. Tuesday she tells me a tale that the board said no, there is nothing she can do, so sorry. When I contacted [a board member], he informed me that the board is not involved in euthanasia decisions nor do they even know about them. When volunteers and I kept questioning why I could not send Artie to places he was wanted, Katie informed everyone that Artie had attacked a sleeping child and he needed to be euthanized and that was that. She began to verbally reprimand me daily for asking about him. I pleaded AGAIN that it would cost the shelter absolutely nothing for me to send him to these places and that they wished to talk to her about their credentials and ability to take him. She told me she could not afford to give me any time off to move him, and when I countered that I needed no more than one of the two days I ALWAYS have off a week, she said “end of conversation”.

Cobalt (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner)

Cobalt was set up to fail by staff. A staff member transported him to be neutered at a vet clinic, where they had a free range office cat. Cobalt began lunging and straining for the cat and rather than removing him from the situation he pulled away from her and bit the cat. He bit a dog at the shelter as well when another staff member put him outside with a small Jack Russell.  He was euthanized because of incompetent staff. Katie asked me if I could find a certified person to evaluate Artie and Cobalt (I had many) only to euthanize them both on my day off. I do not believe any evaluations ever happened, again. I was never able to locate even a file on either of them after they were killed.

This is the form Ms. Faulkner states is supposed to be a part of every killed pet’s records at the SPCA.

Buddy (Photo submitted by Stephanie Faulkner.)

The last dog for whom Ms. Faulkner advocated before leaving the SPCA of SWMI was a puppy named Buddy.  Buddy came from the Carthage HS in Missouri via Rescue Waggin at the end of October 2012.  He was 8 months old.  Rescue Waggin had evaluated and passed him, which was a requirement for transport.  The Rescue Waggin website states they only deliver “behaviorally and medically sound dogs and puppies” to shelters.  After a few weeks at the SPCA of SWMI, Buddy was assessed and passed again.  A handwritten note on Buddy’s file describes him as “mouthy but very sweet” and “high energy”.

Buddy was adopted in December and returned a few weeks later.  Ms. Faulkner provided the portion of the owner surrender form that was completed by the adopter at his return.  The adopter stated Buddy was being returned due to allergies and her long work hours.  Buddy was adopted again immediately but returned after a few days for being mouthy and unruly.  (Ms. Faulkner has copies of all the documents in Buddy’s file here.  There was no surrender form from the second adopter in his file, per Ms. Faulkner.)  Buddy was placed in quarantine, despite the fact that no one had reported a bite.

Ms. Faulkner, who had already given her employer two weeks’ notice, was concerned that Buddy would end up being needlessly killed like the other dogs she had tried to save.  She decided to take her concerns to the public this time in hopes of getting a better result.  She posted about Buddy and her fears that he would be killed on Reddit (here and here) and on Facebook.  (Please take a few minutes to read the posts as their content is important to the story.)  In response to the posts, people began contacting the SPCA of SWMI to advocate for Buddy’s right to live.  Ms. Faulkner says she did not call or e-mail the shelter herself as she had no need to – she worked there.

Two days after posting publicly about Buddy, Ms. Faulkner received a phone message from a police officer at 9:30pm.  The call was apparently made from a cell phone.  You can listen to the message he left here.  This is a transcription of the call provided by Ms. Faulkner:

Hi, if this is Stephanie’s number, this is Tim Briggs with the sheriff’s department. Uh, I just wanted to call and let you know a complaint has been made against you by Katie and uh, basically I’m just calling to tell you to not send any more e-mails, not have any more of your friends send any more e-mails to her in reference to the dog shelter. Uh.. if it does persist and they keep doing it then uh.. we’ll find out who the other ones are- of course I already have their names and charges will be brought against you so.. hopefully if you just stop doing it that’ll be that. Also, Katie told me to tell you that uh.. you’re not to report to work any more. Apparently you.. already have given your notice and already have another job so… but you don’t have to report to work any more. If you have any questions, please give me a call [his apparent cell phone number]. Thank you.

Still with me, faithful readers?  Good,  Now please fasten your seatbelts and make sure your tray tables are in the upright and locked position as we prepare for takeoff to Nuckin Futz.

Although Ms. Faulkner stopped reporting for work, as directed by the officer, she still wanted her final paycheck that she was owed.  And since the officer never said anything about not going to the shelter ever again, nor had anyone from the SPCA contacted her to formally terminate her employment, she felt it was appropriate to go there to pick up her last paycheck on Wednesday, the regular payday.  She went to the shelter during regular open hours and entered through an unlocked door. She says there were cars in the parking lot.  While there, she visited Buddy and made two short videos of him to showcase his personality in order to aid the advocacy efforts on his behalf.  She posted both videos on Facebook that night.

The next day, Ms. Faulkner received another message from a police officer which you can listen to here and which she transcribed as follows:

Stephanie, This is deputy Robert Smith with the Kalamazoo County sheriff’s department and it’s Thursday, February 14th 7:20 PM. Might want to write this case number down. One three dash one four five six. I’m currently at 6955 West KL [address of the SPCA of SWMI] reviewing a video that you were in here sometime after deputy Briggs told you not to return. Now, breaking and entering even if you had the key is still a five year felony minimum. Might want to contemplate that because a five year felony will not do one’s career very well. It’s a real easy deal- Deputy Briggs told you to cease and desist on the calls and the Facebook and Reddit type stuff, but now that we got the copy of the video of you being in here- especially because you were next to a dog that didn’t come into the facility until 4:30 PM on Tuesday, you’re sort of going down a river without the paddle, you know what I mean? So here’s the way the games gonna be played: You cease and desist, or at any time they have the right to get a hold of their SPCA attorney and lay a five year felony on you. Now I’d suggest you put one hand on each side out and sort of weigh it out- is it worth it doing all this garbage? Or do I really want a five year felony? You can decide, I’m just letting you know how they want to play the game. I’m here right now if you’d like to document I’m actually here please feel free to call the sheriff’s department [number] and ask them if a deputy Smith came out to the SPCA and the case number’s one three dash one four five six. Hopefully deputy Briggs or myself won’t need to talk to you any further. Thank you.

OK, most of you probably just fell out so I’m going to pause here for a bit to let you regain consciousness.

[elevator music]

Let’s be clear.  The video shown to the deputy was not some sort of surveillance camera footage depicting Ms. Faulkner chucking a cinder block through a window of the shelter and climbing in to ransack the place.  The video shown to him was the one she posted on FB of Buddy being a big puppy lovebug who hadn’t yet been taught proper manners.  And last I heard, our justice system has not been reduced to the SPCA lawyer deciding who to “lay” five year felonies on.  I am neither a police officer nor a lawyer but I understand that many places have actual laws against bullying and harassment.  As long as we are putting one hand on each side out and sort of weighing it out, I guess I just wanted to toss that in there, for your third hand or whatevs.  I don’t know, maybe the Kalamazoo sheriff’s department and the SCPA of SWMI have a Secret Book O’ Lawz which says that shelters are required to kill pets for population control, the SPCA of SWMI does not have to report its statistics to the state, and individual lawyers walk around laying felonies on people their clients don’t like.

At the time Ms. Faulkner left the SPCA of SWMI, Buddy was alive but she was deeply concerned about him.  She contacted every rescue group she could think of in the area to see if they had taken him but never found him.

I contacted the SPCA of SWMI and requested an interview.  I spoke on the phone with Joni Smith who said she is the acting president and treasurer for the SPCA of SWMI.  Ms. Smith told me she was very proud that the shelter is an approved Rescue Waggin facility.  I asked her about dogs with behavioral issues and she said, “If we consider euthanasia, it’s a very last resort”, performed only after consultation with board members, 2 veterinarians (to rule out possible medical explanations for aggression) and their volunteer behaviorist/trainer.  I wanted to ask her about each individual dog Ms. Faulkner had written me about, but Ms. Smith declined.  She did speak to me about 3 of them.

Ms. Smith basically described Artie as kennel crazy and said he “attacked” a 12 year old sleeping boy, unprovoked.  She admitted the boy was not hurt.  Cobalt had a bite history and was “very aggressive” according to Ms. Smith.  Buddy was returned by the second adopter because he bit the man, per Ms. Smith.  A rescue group in Benton Harbor that specifically works with aggressive dogs was contacted about Buddy but said there was no hope and they could not help him.  She also disputed Stephanie’s claim that Buddy was a puppy.  She said she didn’t know his exact age but he was definitely over one year when they got him.  And she confirmed that the SCPA of SWMI killed him.

Ms. Smith’s description of the process for determining when euthanasia for aggression is warranted seems to be in line with this internal “Quality of Life” document provided by Ms. Faulkner.  I asked about getting copies of the records for the dogs who had been killed.  Ms. Smith said that the vet consults were often verbal and notes may not have been made.  I specifically requested to see the behavior evaluation sheets that most all behaviorists, regardless of methodology, use when evaluating dogs.  She declined.  I suggested that providing records which documented the extensive efforts that she says were made to save each of these dogs would be helpful in showing that the dogs were treated with compassion by the SPCA of SWMI.  She again declined and said that she felt she had provided me with enough information.

Before she ended our conversation, Ms. Smith described Stephanie Faulkner as a “disgruntled ex-employee” whose internet postings about Buddy “included profanity, name calling and untrue information”.  Ms. Smith said the police were called because, based upon the posts, the director felt “afraid for her personal safety and that of her daughter”.  She said Ms. Faulkner “broke into” the facility to take pictures of Buddy.  When I tried one more time to express how valuable sharing the information in the dogs’ records would be, Ms. Smith told me she felt comfortable having my readers decide whether to believe Ms. Faulkner’s claims in light of the information Ms. Smith had given me.

As of this posting, Ms. Faulkner has not heard from the  sheriff’s department again.  No charges were ever brought against her.  She has not heard from the SPCA lawyer.  Ms. Faulkner now works for an animal sanctuary in MI.

Elsa, the “feral” dog, saved from the SPCA of SWMI by Stephanie Faulkner. (Photo submitted by Ms. Faulkner.)

Allegations of Dog Killings and Fraud at the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co

After posting yesterday about Truffles, I heard from some additional animal advocates who are concerned about killings at the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co, a private shelter in TN.  Apparently the planned killing of Truffles is not an isolated incident.

Toffee, a dog at the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co, slated for killing. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Toffee, a littermate to Truffles, is also reportedly slated for killing by the HS.  Her Petango listing has been removed but she can be seen in a recent local news segment as “Pet of the Week”.

Joy, a dog at the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co, slated for killing. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Joy is another dog who is reportedly going to be killed by the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co.  I don’t know why the HS would kill either Toffee or Joy.  I still haven’t received any response from the HS so I haven’t been able to ask them for their side of the story.

In addition to these alleged planned killings, there have reportedly been dozens of other dogs killed in the past year or so at the HS.  They were all apparently longtime residents of the shelter and many of them were part of a HS program called Anakin’s Buddies:

[T]he Humane Society launched the Anakin’s Buddies program, which allows volunteer dog walkers to sponsor the adoption fee for a rescued animal at the humane society.

[...]

Many of the Anakin’s Buddies dogs have called the humane society home for several years, and volunteers cannot understand why no one has adopted them. As a result, many of them sponsor more than one dog. “When a volunteer sponsors a dog, they are basically vouching for that dog,” said Kelly Jo Graves, executive manager. “Every Anakin’s Buddy is sponsored by a dog walker who knows them well and has bonded strongly with them.”

Animal advocates allege that after accepting the funds to cover the adoption fees for the dogs in the program, the HS kills some of them and pockets the cash.  Four dogs allegedly killed under these circumstances:

Graham, a dog in the Anakin’s Buddies program, who was killed last week by the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Milton, a dog in the Anakin’s Buddies program, who was killed this month by the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co. Milton swam in flood waters for 2 days to stay alive before being “rescued” by the HS. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Hollywood, a dog in the Anakin’s Buddies program, who was killed by the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Shelby Angel, a dog in the Anakin’s Buddies program, who was killed on Valentine’s Day by the HS of Memphis and Shelby Co. (Photo submitted by a reader.)

Again, I have been unable to ask the HS about these allegations since they have not responded to my queries. I am not an attorney but if the accusations of pocketing cash paid by volunteers, purportedly to help dogs get adopted who are instead killed, are accurate, it sounds like fraud to me.  It reminds me of Boggs Mountain, the place in GA that was scamming financial sponsorships from the public for dogs they were taking over to the pound to be killed.  This is the first time I have heard of a shelter allegedly scamming money from its own volunteers.  I think they call this Rock Bottom.

Is there anyone willing to advocate for Toffee, Joy and Truffles?  Tell the Humane Society of Memphis and Shelby Co, in polite terms, that all dogs have a right to live and that killing healthy/treatable pets is inconsistent with their mission as a so-called humane society.  Remember to keep your comments respectful.  We can condemn the allegations of wrongdoing in the strongest possible terms while maintaining civility.

“No animal is here because of bad things it’s done.” – Sue Putnam, HS volunteer credited with starting the Anakin’s Buddies program

Enabling Shelter Pet Suffering: A How-To Guide from Lawrence Co

Screengrab taken from a blog allegedly depicting a sick dog at the Lawrence Co pound in Ohio.

This dog reportedly died in his cage, never receiving vet care or even having water in his bowl. Read how the “Friends” of the Lawrence Co pound attack the photographer and enable the neglect and suffering at the facility.

It sounds like the pets at the Lawrence Co pound need some friends in their corner, advocating for their rights, not covering up the abuse.