Dog #259497 was impounded as a stray by the Memphis pound on September 25, 2013. A note appears on his cage card: VERY FRIENDLY!
MAS records for the dog, obtained via FOIA request, indicate a member of the public expressed an interest in adopting this dog on September 28 and gave his name and phone number. Records state that a few months prior, the potential adopter had passed the background check and fence inspection required by MAS. I assume he was not allowed to take the dog home that day because the holding period had not expired.
On October 1st, both a member of an approved rescue group and a second member of the public placed their names on this dog. MAS conducted the background check on October 2 for this second potential adopter but the yard check had still not been completed by October 8 when the applicant informed MAS he had found another pet. There are no notes indicating why the dog was not released to the first applicant or the rescuer, both pre-approved, after the holding period expired on October 1st. For whatever reason, the dog was forced to continue living in a cage at the pet killing facility. And people continued to fall in love with him.
On October 12, a third member of the public applied to adopt this dog. MAS completed the background check for that potential adopter on October 15 – the same day a fourth person submitted her information in hopes of taking this dog home. The background check was completed for the fourth applicant on October 16. MAS never conducted the fence inspections for either of these applicants according to the records even though both passed the background check. There are no notes indicating why the dog was not released to the first applicant or the rescuer, both pre-approved, after the holding period expired on October 1st. For whatever reason, the dog was forced to continue living in a cage at the pet killing facility. And people continued to meet him and fall in love.
On October 19, a fifth person submitted information in hopes of adopting this dog. MAS completed this applicant’s background check on October 22. MAS never conducted the fence inspection for this applicant according to the records even though he passed the background check. There are no notes indicating why the dog was not released to the first applicant or the rescuer, both pre-approved, after the holding period expired on October 1st. For whatever reason, the dog was forced to continue living in a cage at the pet killing facility while MAS staff did nothing to get him out alive. Meanwhile, this note appears in the dog’s records on October 21:
To the best of my knowledge, Dr. Coleman is not a behaviorist. There are no notes indicating a behaviorist ever saw this dog. There are no notes indicating this dog was ever walked and no behavioral notes beyond the one above. The dog who was “VERY FRIENDLY!” may have started going kennel crazy inside the pet killing facility, I don’t know. With two pre-approved safe places to go and several other applicants just waiting for MAS to complete the fence inspection, this dog could have been released long before this date. Meanwhile,the dog continued to be housed in an area visible to the public and people continued to meet and fall in love with him.
On October 24th, a sixth person applied to adopt this pet. There are no notes indicating MAS conducted either the background check or the fence inspection for this applicant. On October 25th, the records contain this note:
Despite having 6 members of the public plus an approved rescuer who each offered to save this “VERY FRIENDLY!” dog, MAS killed him on October 26, 2013.
Adoption applicant #1 was pre-approved. The rescuer was also pre-approved. Why didn’t MAS send this dog home with either one of these people as soon as the hold period expired?
Applicant #2 waited for MAS to do a fence check for more than a week and finally adopted another pet. Another missed opportunity to save this dog’s life.
Applicants #3, 4 and 5 each passed a background check but MAS could not be bothered to perform the fence checks for any of them. Three more opportunities wasted.
Applicant #6 did not have either check performed by staff and MAS killed the dog two days after the applicant’s information was submitted.
The Memphis pound requires Pitbull adopters to jump through special hoops in order to save pets from their kill room. But MAS can’t be bothered to perform the inspections they themselves require. Even when a pre-approved applicant and a pre-approved rescuer were willing to save this dog, MAS couldn’t be bothered to release him. Why?
This pet had seven chances to get out of MAS alive and MAS dropped the ball seven times. And instead of finally doing right by the dog, they sent him to the kill room where he was probably tortured in the squeeze device on the wall before ultimately being dropped in a garbage bag. Seven people fell in love with this dog while one vet with a notorious track record made one negative behavioral note and that trumps everything? Nobody WANTS to kill animals? Seriously MAS, you people are creeping me the math out.