No Christmas at the Shelter

I wonder what Bailey’s family was thinking.

I wonder what was going through their minds when they tied him to a fence and abandoned him in the Canadian winter.

Was he a cute golden puppy that grew too big for the family? Was he chewing on their shoes? Did he grow too big to be fun anymore? Were they no longer able to afford the vet bills? Did they take Bailey to the vet? Were they worried about losing their jobs? Did they figure it was easier just to leave Bailey tied to a fence than to take some responsibility to look after him or turn him in to a shelter?

What did they think would happen to him? Some kind Samaritan would take him home and love him forever? The authorities would shelter him and he would soon find a new, loving home?

They never could have anticipated, in their wildest imagination, that Bailey would be one of a handful of animals that survived the horrible blaze at the Durham Humane Society Shelter this week. But did it cross their minds that, had Bailey not had the double good fortune to end up in a no-kill shelter and survive its destruction, he might have been euthanized in a few short days?

A good death.

Does Bailey’s family think about the turn of events in the past short tragic week?

Bailey was one of eight dogs and two cats saved from the fire at the Durham Region Humane Society shelter in Oshawa. Most of the animals did not make it out alive.

The overcrowded shelter was in a run-down industrial area of Oshawa, a satellite of Toronto that is facing an evisceration of the automotive sector while Smilin’ Jim Flaherty contemplates his navel lint.

The shelter, run on the broken hearts of volunteers, could not afford a sprinkler system. The ultimate irony is that the shelter was hoping to move to a better location soon because of break-ins and vandalism.

The jury is still out on the cause of the fire, although the Fire Marshall seems to have ruled out arson, which would have been the worst, really unthinkable, scenario. In fact, the culprits could have been mice chewing on wiring in the ceiling.

No revelations will heal the hearts of the volunteers who cared for these precious creatures. We can only let them know that their work on behalf of animals in need is so very special. May they have the courage to pick up the pieces and continue on for the animals that need them more than ever.

Animal lovers across the country rallied to help as the news spread.

“It’s been crazy here,” said Richards. “People are very upset and some people have just been crying on the phone.”

Donations poured in to their website and offers of temporary locations, food and supplies kept staff hopping all day.

Whitby mother Candie Abramson and her sons M.J., 13, and Quinton, 11, arrived at the Animal Services shelter on Farewell St. with cash donations in lieu of Christmas gifts for their teachers.

“How many coffee mugs and boxes of chocolates do they really need?” said Abramson. “We thought this way would benefit the little people with four legs.”

Coincidentally, the 50 members of the Divine Light Spiritual Foundation in Oshawa had already picked the humane society for their annual charity donation.

“When we heard about the fire, we thought, `This is imperative, let’s get this done now,’” said Rev. Alva Folkes of the $5,000 gift.

Animal welfare workers were thrilled with the public response.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.
~ Margaret Mead

May those that were once Bailey’s family come to know how much poorer they are without him, especially during this season of giving.

And I wonder what Bailey is thinking, after losing his home and those he depended on, spending three days in a cold concrete cage, suffering through a frightening fire, and ending up in another cold concrete cage while, in a week’s time, thousands of boys and girls will be having sugarplum dreams of new iPods and Guitar Heros, and their parents, of HDTV.

More on the story at the Toronto Star.

What can you do?

If you are able to help the Durham Humane Society by making a donation to their trust fund or material donations, follow this link to their website.

If you’re not in the area, please consider a Christmas donation to a needy shelter nearby.

Tour de Dog

David Sylvester and Chiva are a human and canine best friend team exploring North America by bicycle to encourage and to teach responsible animal/human relationships.

The goals of Tour de Dog are to raise awareness about the challenges and problems animals shelters and control facilities face and to improve their images and capabilities.

Their plans are to tour animal shelters and control facilities throughout North America, and champion the cause through speaking engagements, blogging, reporting and fundraising. David would like to produce a video documentary of human/animal relationships, and implement improvements for shelter facilities in need.

“In the picture below, Chiva is seen in the gas chamber. Pipes were hooked up to car exhaust and the animals were left in the dark to suffocate. Chemical gas chambers are still used today in the United States to euthanize animals.”

Biking Dog Blog

Buying Time for Soldiers’ Pets

Earlier, we blogged about the kindness of American troops stationed in Iraq, who had bonded with animals there and made the effort to bring those animals back to the U.S. We and our readers were particularly touched by the story of Peter Neesley, whose tragic death overseas did not stop him from giving the next-best gift to his family at home – Boris and Mama, two strays that he had befriended in Baghdad, who are now paying his charity forward by being there for the family when Peter cannot.

A Soldier’s Gift

From Baghdad With Love

Operation Baghdad Pups

Meanwhile, there is darker news States-side in Lakewood, WA, where a local woman who rescued dozens of animals that were left behind by deployed soldiers is being told to give them up.

Diana VanDusen began taking in stray and unwanted pets after the animal shelter at Fort Lewis shut down 18 months ago. Most of the animals are old or disabled, and most come from military families from Fort Lewis who have had to move overseas. Some of the soldiers reclaim their pets when they return home, but others do not have such a luxury.

“The rest (of the soldiers) – they had to abandon (their pets), because they didn’t know when they were coming back,” said VanDusen. “One cat I held for two years, and no one came back for it. So I knew it was time to adopt it out. I met lot of soldiers along the way that are devastated they have to leave their pets behind.” VanDusen’s mother said soldiers found out that Diana would take their pets and hold them or adopt them out when they left for Iraq or other posts.

VanDusen keeps some of the animals in her home and the rest in an enclosed space in her backyard. But Animal Control officers told her she’s in violation of city code, which states one residence can only house up to five animals. Officers told VanDusen that she would be fined $500 if she does not reduce the number of animals in her home to five by April 14.

Van Dusen pays for veterinary care and neutering of the animals she rescues, and Animal Control officers acknowledged that all the animals were properly cared for, according to Dave Bugher, assistant city manager.

The city’s mandate leaves the soldiers’ animals with nowhere to go, VanDusen said. Many of the animals in her care are old or demand special care. In describing one of her dogs (now thankfully adopted), VanDusen said “he’s blind. He has a neurological disorder on his back legs. He’s old, he’s 14 years old. Who wants to adopt a dog that could pass away in a few months? Here, they can stay as long as they need; I don’t euthanize.”

According to her records, Van Dusen has adopted out more than 860 dogs and cats over 17 years. She said she’s rescued and taken in pets in Lakewood for five years. She said she cared for and adopted out hundreds of stray cats and dogs from Fort Lewis before its facility closed in 2006.

VanDusen said turning our backs on the soldiers’ pets is simply unacceptable. “We’re supposed to support our troops,” she said. “If they can’t support the troops by supporting the animals of the troops, then I can’t live in a city that doesn’t back our troops. Because these guys are innocent victims of what’s going on over there.”

She said she’s even considered moving. “If I could relocate myself and my animals within that deadline, I would. But you see how the housing market is right now,” she said.

At time of writing, VanDusen now has around 14 cats in her care, down from a total of 31 animals. Finding permanent homes for the remaining pets cannot happen overnight, and although she is working hard and acting in good faith to place the animals – she is taking them to the Puyallup PetSmart today for an adoptathon – she hopes the city will change its mind. Kudos to PetSmart for offering her the chance to do this each and every weekend this month.

It was hardly reasonable for Animal Control to expect that she could meet their demands by April 14 without making some heartbreaking and hard decisions for the animals. Needless to say, these draconian demands are hardly a comforting message to American troops who have had to leave their pets behind.

Media exposure and email campaigns may have prompted a change of heart for the city which, as of April 9, is now considering an extension of the deadline if Ms. VanDusen continues to reduce the number of animals in her care to five.

“If she is showing effort to come into compliance, we will ease on the deadline,” said Jeff Brewster, who works for the city. But the city is sticking to its maximum limit of five animals per household. “These laws we have are intended to respect and protect the privacy and peace of mind of neighbors that live nearby,” said Brewster.

Assistant city manager Bugher also said that Lakewood officials will review zoning regulations to determine if it can be allowed and under what conditions.

“I think that is just heartless,” said Denise White, who just adopted a military dog from VanDusen. ” I just think that she was doing a good service, and I don’t see where there was any harm. I really don’t.”

Burt Bray just got a dachshund named Rusty for free. He says the city should leave Diana alone. “Why can’t she just be grandfathered in?” he said.

“Not many people want 30 animals living next door to them in a city neighborhood,” said Brewster. But VanDusen said none of her neighbors ever complained.

It is this blogger’s opinion that the city needs to ease up on Ms. VanDusen, and give her whatever time she and the community needs to adopt out the remaining “excess” animals. And should it not be feasible to rehome all but five animals, considering their age and condition, surely it would not be a grave inconvenience, with the agreement of her neighbours, to grant her an exception to shelter them until their families return or for their remaining days.

It is a sad statement about our civilization that petty regulations, paperwork, and deadline-twitchy bureaucracy are allowed to get in the way of compassion.

KOMO-TV

Video at King5-TV

KOMO-Radio Update, April 9

Tacoma News-Tribune

What can you do?

Let the City of Lakewood know that you support Ms. VanDusen’s charitable efforts and a decision to work with her in good faith to ensure that all of her charges have a safe haven.

(Substitute the usual @ character for (at) in your email).

Council(at)CityofLakewood.us

info(at)cityoflakewood.us

straydog

A female collie mix, so beautiful, all gold and white and dirty; she’s in the last cage on the aisle, curled up quiet, watching everything – but when I get too close she goes completely crazy, biting at the bars, herself, anything in reach, until I back off and away. Her growl’s like ripping metal, jagged, dangerous, and strong . . . Don’t mess with me, that growl says. I may be in a cage but I can still bite.

Rachel is happiest when she’s volunteering at the animal shelter, especially after she meets the feral collie she names Grrl: they’re both angry and alone. When a teacher encourages her to write about the dog, Rachel finds another outlet for her pain and frustration. Writing about Grrl is easy. But teaching Grrl to trust her is a much tougher task. And when Griffin, the new boy in school, devises a plan to bring Grrl home, Rachel finds that the dog isn’t the only one who must learn to trust. Kathe Koja offers a raw and emotional tale about a girl who risks breaking out of her own cage to find the help she needs.

straydog is Kathe Koja’s compelling debut novel. Koja writes for young adults.

Writing straydog, my first book for young people, ushered me into a world I knew already as a reader. Many of the characters I love best in fiction — Louise Fitzhugh’s Harriet, J.D. Salinger’s Holden and Franny and Zooey, Francesca Lia Block’s Witch Baby — are people who say what they think, show their bewilderments, struggle with hard ideas, love with all their hearts; exasperating, funny, intense people. Young people.

I’m a strong supporter of animal rights, so I’m especially proud that straydog was honored by both the ASPCA and the Humane Society. I believe that you can learn everything you need to know about a person by watching the way s/he acts with animals and little kids, the powerless ones.

“So what’s up with that collie?”

Melissa’s at her desk, an old-fashioned school teacher’s desk, dented metal drawers and heaping piles of junk: fund-raising appeals, cruelty investigation forms, food orders, a busted leash tagged DON’T BUY THIS KIND!!! At the center of the heap is the brand-new computer, the one new thing in the place, a donation from some distributor. Now Melissa scrabbles like Shiva through the mess, hunting for “The pen,” she says to herself, “where is the pen ?” and then to me “What collie?” She gives me the major Melissa-stare, her wide blue eyes like What! do! you! want! Her hair’s really, really short and blonde, she gels it so it sticks up like porcupine quills. “You mean the one Jake brought in?”
“Yeah. Grrl.” It was what I called her, writing last night in my paper; it fit, it’s just right but “The feral one, you named her?” and she rolls her eyes. “Rachel, before you start, stop, all right? She’s been all her life on the streets, you know what they’re like when they’re –”

“I know, I know.” You can almost never socialize the feral ones, they’re almost always euthanized .I’ve seen dozens of dogs, and fallen in love with half of them, and cried my heart out when they died; that’s how it is here. But this one is different, somehow. There’s something about her, something in her eyes, I can’t stop thinking about her: as if I know what she’s like, know her from the inside out. And I have a plan for her, or at least the plan for a plan so “I just want to try,” I say to Melissa, “just get to know her a little. And it won’t interfere with my work schedule, I’ll still do all my regular stuff –”

“I don’t have time — there you are! — to argue with you now,” she says, snatching up her pen. “Go away. Go talk to the dogs,” which I do, sweep and swab and water and feed, all the while sneaking little looks at Grrl in her cage lying on a blue blanket, one of the old torn-up blankets from the rescue van. Her eyes are half-closed, cloudy; the cage card says she’s got a fever from the leg infection. When I reach to put the card back she growls at me, that ripping, ugly sound: Don’t mess with me , that growl says. I may be in a cage but I can still bite.

So I start talking like I always do, to all the dogs — hey you guys, how’s it going — but once in awhile I say “Grrl”, looking into her eyes, making sure she knows it’s meant for her. “Grrl, Grrl,” almost like her growl but warm and crooning, the name and the idea came to me like a gift last night as I sat looking over the essay, two gifts at once because I’m going to write about that dog, I thought, about Grrl and from “A Dog’s Life” I changed the title to “straydog,” all one word, like a dog would think of herself.

And once I’d done that the words just, just flew, it was like I couldn’t write fast enough. It was like I knew her, knew how she would think and feel and fear, knew it all from the inside out and when I finally stopped writing — not done, only just started but my hand was hot and aching, and my eyes were as dry as little rubber balls — I felt so good, so full , I don’t know how else to explain it; like I’d eaten at a banquet, like I was a banquet. — Oh, that’s not it either, how can words say exactly what you want sometimes and sometimes nothing at all?

Winner of the Humane Society’s KIND Book Award
Winner of the ASPCA’s Henry Bergh Award
A BOOK SENSE 76 Top Ten Summer Teen Reads pick
A selection of the Junior Library Guild
A selection of the Children’s Literature Choice List for 2003

Kathe Koja website

I Can Has Budget?

Yesterday, the Toronto Board of Health voted to boost the Animal Services budget up to $2 million, adding $833,100 to last year’s budget and creating 26 full-time equivalent positions.

The expenditure is expected to be made up with revenues, but citizens who came to speak to the board were skeptical that it would, given that last year the dog and cat licensing project had a $330,000 shortfall.

“I object to the spending of $800,000 for what is a public relations campaign,” said one concerned citizen.

According to Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. David McKeown, department research indicates that the city will have to do more than awareness.

“This report points out that we have 80 per cent awareness – most people know we’re requiring pets to be licensed, but we know there’s a portion of the population that won’t be licensed even if they know that they’re supposed to be unless there’s a significant threat of enforcement,” he said.

The program would allocate nine of the new hires to enforcement for non-compliance with the requirement under Municipal Code 349. Those who don’t purchase a license for their pet can face a fine of $240 or higher, and up to $5,000 if the case goes to court. The program will also include door-to-door enforcement (WTF?), and new processing costs.

This blogger would like to know how Toronto Animal Services is going to use the extra $833K to reduce their inflated kill rate and improve service so that animals can be returned or rehomed.

We expect that animal shelters exist to shelter animals who need a safe haven and a new home. There will always be animals in need of sheltering. Animal control policies need to ensure programs are in place so that no more animals need shelter and assistance than the community can handle, to keep the community active and engaged, to keep the animals moving out, not just in — but out alive, not in a body bag.

Of course, costs increase for everything in this perennially cash-strapped city. But dog licenses used to be free for spayed/neutered and microchipped pets. In 2001, fees went up. More staff were hired on. And now more staff are now being added along with the whopping dollar increase. Before our city councillors rubber-stamp this at the end of the month, can we please see some evidence of how the education-and-door-to-door strategy (we have ways of finding your pit bull…) will improve the lot of animals in our fair city?

Over at Bestfriends.org, Bill Bruce of City of Calgary Animal Services talked about ways to build a “shelter without walls”. He talked about the 4 pillars of responsible pet ownership, preventing aggression in dogs, humane education and how to make licensing work as a key to no-kill.

A shelter without walls; what does that mean?

In Calgary, it means a community of responsible pet owners where every person is taking responsibility for their companion animal. For context, the City of Calgary has an urban population of just over one million people and a dog population of approximately 105,000. We predict our cat population to be between 105,000 and 120,000.

What does it mean to be a responsible pet owner?

1. License and permanently identify your companion animal. Licensing and identification is the key to return to owner of lost animals. In Calgary, we are returning over 88% of dogs to their owner in 24 hours or less. Many do not even come to the shelter and driven straight home by the officer. Returning lost animals home quickly reduces the need for conventional shelters.

2. Spay or neuter your companion animal. We know that unplanned breeding is a major contributor to pet over population that fills shelters each year. Effective spay and neuter programs will reduce those populations of animals and reduce the need for conventional sheltering.

3. Provide the necessary food, medical care, grooming, training and exercise for your companion animal. The actions ensure the health (mental and physical) of an animal and if followed by every animal owner would reduce the need for shelters to house animals in distress.

4. Do not allow your companion animal to become a threat or a nuisance in the community. Many animals end up in shelters because of problems of aggression or roaming at large. Ensuring that your companion animal does not create problems in your community will reduce those animals that are seized in the interest of public safety and end up in shelters. Fulfilling this simple requirement would eliminate the trend of breed specific legislation so many municipalities are enacting to attempt to solve their animal issues.

If all citizens follow these four simple principles, according to Bill Bruce, sheltering can be reduced to the role of temporary housing while Animal Services locates the responsible owner and arranges safe return and emergency sheltering in times of disaster or to aid injured animals.

The City of Calgary has built its entire program on a foundation of Responsible Pet Ownership as opposed to the traditional animal control regulation. Responsible Pet Ownership is supported through education, support program and, when necessary, enforcement. All enforcement is targeted at behavior with a goal to modify the behavior to be in line with the 4 pillars.

Utilizing this approach, the City of Calgary does not support any breed specific legislation or restriction on the number of animals a person owns. The entire system is governed on the 4 pillars of responsible pet ownership.

Following this path, Calgary has successfully reduced the rate on aggressive incidents, (199 bites last year – with very few serious) reduced the rate of animal euthanasia (237 dogs last year), increased the number of animals that go home (88%) and reduced the number of dogs impounded (4800 last year). They have also started work on a spay and neuter clinic to be opened mid 2008 with a capacity to do 10,000 free spay and neuters per year for people who are not financially able to have it done. The entire program is financed on revenues, primarily licensing, with no tax based support. The new spay and neuter program is being funded through the new cat license program.

The goal of these programs is to create a city that does not have unwanted animals being held in shelters, a no kill, city, a city without aggressive animal incidents and a city of responsible pet owners caring for and being responsible for their companion animal.

Read Toronto Sun columnist Sue-Ann Levy on the TAS budget

More on this, including Q&A at Windsor Humane.

Rally for Reason in Rushville

Earlier, we blogged about the crisis at the Rushville, Indiana animal shelter. Gabby, a little mastiff/shepherd mix puppy survived a botched euthanasia and four days in the cooler at the shelter, and was rescued by the assistant ACO.

Rushville Death Camp

After the town’s self-appointed investigation wound up, assistant ACO Jamie Glandon was allowed to return to work at the shelter on December 13, and some changes are now happening.

As part of the changes, a certified veterinarian is conducting any required euthanasias humanely, at least for now. A new dog warden has been assigned. We’re counting on some new procedures and their enforcement, and hopefully a new director altogether, who is forward-thinking, pro-active and an animal welfare advocate.

Martha Boden of the Humane Society of Indianapolis contacted the city to offer to relocate the remaining Rushville animals. She also offered to work with Rushville to develop new policies and procedures, and share lessons that have trimmed the HSI kill rate; HSI takes in about 9,000 animals per year and nearly 60% of them go out to foster or forever homes. (Martha admits that there’s a lot more that HSI could be doing to improve its own kill rate.) It looks as though the remaining Rushville animals are getting the best Christmas gift of all, and the Rushville Shelter has some hope for the new year. The HSI action had also gotten a few Rushville folks thinking positively about how the town could take care of its own.

Regardless, none of the change would be taking place if Jamie hadn’t bared her soul and put her job on the line by surfacing this story. And the progress that is happening is, to a large extent, a result of the dedication of some shelter volunteers and friends of Jamie, who kicked up the dust in this sleepy little town.

Animal welfare and public pound reform advocates descended on the town on December 11 and again on December 17. Donning purple “Justice For Gabby & Jamie–Support Rushville Pound Reform” sweatshirts, they demanded valid and lasting pound reform at the Rushville Animal Shelter.

One of the organizers and a long-time volunteer at the shelter, Linda Wissel, described how she first met Jamie:

“I’ve volunteered at the Rushville Shelter for almost 3 years. I found one of their dogs on Petfinder and went out to adopt, the animals in the shelter broke my heart, the conditions were appalling. Although I live 2 hours away in Cincinnati I vowed to do something for those animals. It’s the hell holes that need us most. That is how I met Jamie Glandon. At the time Jamie was a volunteer from Indianapolis which is about an hour drive from Rushville. Jamie is selfless, compassionate and dedicated to the animals. As a volunteer she would drive almost daily to the shelter to take pictures for the petfinder website, if not for Jamie the shelter wouldn’t have been listed. She was always on the job for the shelter transporting dogs, she made many changes as a volunteer to make the shelter rescue friendly.”

Her account of the first rally is here:

Justice for Jamie and Gabby Rally

Following the second Rally for Reason on December 17, the protesters showed up at the last city council meeting of the year.

“We attended the City Council Meeting last night in Rushville, in a “Silent Protest; We Stand United”. Ten of us were present, all wearing our purple “Reform the Rushville Pound, Justice for Jamie and Gabby” sweatshirts.”

“The Shelter was not on the agenda, so we weren’t expecting an opportunity to address the Mayor/Council. It was important to reinforce the fact that we are not going away, and I think our presence did that. That message was made more clear by our show, since the City tried to thwart us by canceling the regularly scheduled meeting, unannounced, two nights earlier.”

“This was the last Council Meeting held by Mayor Bridges, on January 1 the new Mayor, Merv Bostic takes office. It is disheartening that the issues surrounding the Shelter have NEVER been on the agenda. Rushville’s bogus investigation and findings have never been discussed at a public meeting. This tells me that the administration is not taking seriously the atrocities taking place at their shelter. It has been swept under the rug.”

“As we were pulling out of the parking lot a Rushville Police cruiser drove up from behind us with lights and sirens flashing. I believe it was another intimidation tactic, just like what happened two nights previous, when a police cruiser made their presence known behind us, as we were leaving town.”

“We can’t let this issue lose momentum. The Mayor and City are taking notice of all the phone calls and emails. The Mayor makes a point of bringing it up every time he talks to Jamie. We can’t let up on the pressure. They have to know that we stand for SHELTER REFORM and we will not go away until valid and lasting change is implemented.”

“Indy Humane’s offer to temporarily take the Rushville Shelter animals would have been a strong message, had it been coupled with the condition that the City delve into addressing the real issues. Without that, it appears that they are only assisting in taking the heat off Mayor Bridges.”

“Please help us keep the pressure on, continue to email the Mayor and remind him that the world is STILL watching.”

The incoming mayor Bostic can be reached via email: mayor@cityofrushville.com or telephone at (765) 932-3735.

Update, January 2008: Gabby is learning how to be a puppy, and she is enjoying a loving foster home.

The Myth of Pet Overpopulation

With the debacle at the Rushville, Indiana animal shelter, it’s high time a few folks took a look through Nathan Winograd’s new book, “Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America”.

Winograd has all the credentials any shelter professional could ask for. He left a lucrative career as a prosecuting attorney to devote himself to helping animals. He has spearheaded the No Kill Advocacy Center, a national organization aimed at ending the killing of pets in animal shelters. While director of operations at the San Francisco SPCA, he worked with then-president Richard Avanzino to implement a wide variety of animal livesaving programs, and then went on to achieve similar success as director of a rural shelter in upstate New York.

His book challenges the very foundation of nearly every principle of shelter management: The idea that there are more pets dying in shelters each year than homes available for those pets.

New York City offered Bergh’s ASPCA money to run the dog pound… Henry Bergh [Founder of the ASPCA] refused.

He believed that the ASPCA was a tool to champion and protect life, not to end it. He believed that its role to protect animals from people was fundamentally at odds with that of a pound. Bergh understood implicitly that animal welfare and animal control were two separate and distinct movements, each opposing the other on fundamental issues of life and death.

~~ Redemption, p.11

Why are so many animals ending up in shelters in the first place?

Conventional wisdom tells us it’s because of irresponsible pet owners who aren’t willing to work to keep their pets in their homes. It’s a failure of commitment, of caring, and of the human/animal bond. If fewer pets were born, there would be fewer coming into shelters. If people cared more about their pets, they wouldn’t give them up so easily, would spay and neuter them so they wouldn’t reproduce, and wouldn’t let them stray.

Winograd’s argument is simply this: Based on data from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Animal Hospital Association, the Pet Food Manufacturers Association, and the latest census, there are more than enough homes for every dog and cat being killed in shelters every year. There aren’t just enough homes for the dogs and cats being killed in shelters. There are more homes for cats and dogs opening each year than there are cats and dogs even entering shelters.

This means that the problem is not insurmountable and it does mean that we can do something short of killing for all savable animals today.

There is probably nothing Winograd could say that would more inflame the shelter and humane society establishment than calling pet overpopulation a myth. But Winograd doesn’t just stop there. In “Redemption,” Winograd lays the lion’s share of the blame for shelter deaths not on pet owners and communities, but on the management, staff, and boards of directors of the shelters themselves.

“If a community is still killing the majority of shelter animals, it is because the local SPCA, humane society, or animal control shelter has fundamentally failed in its mission,” he writes. “And this failure is nothing more than a failure of leadership. The buck stops with the shelter’s director.”

Redemption makes the case that bad shelter management leads to overcrowding, which is then confused with pet overpopulation. Instead of warehousing and killing animals, shelters, he says, should be using proven, innovative programs to find those homes he says are out there. They should wholeheartedly adopt the movement known as No Kill, and stop using killing as a form of population control.

“Let’s just look at various animals dying in shelters around the nation today. If … motherless kittens are killed because the shelter doesn’t have a comprehensive foster care program, that’s not pet overpopulation. That’s the lack of a foster care program.”

“If adoptions are low because people are getting those dogs and cats from other places, because the shelter isn’t doing outside adoptions (adoptions done off the shelter premises), that’s a failure to do outside adoptions, not pet overpopulation.”

“And you can go down the list. If animals are killed because working with rescue groups is discouraged, again, that’s not pet overpopulation. If dogs are going cage-crazy because volunteers and staff aren’t allowed to socialize them, and then those dogs are killed because they’re “cage crazy,” because the shelter doesn’t have a behavior rehabilitation program in place, once again, that’s not pet overpopulation; that’s the lack of programs and services that save lives.”

“And you can say that about feral cats being killed because a shelter doesn’t have a trap-neuter-return program. You can say that about shy or scared dogs because the shelter is doing this bogus temperament testing that’s killing shy dogs and claiming they are unadoptable. It goes on and on and on.”

Winograd’s not just talking about something that could happen, but something that has already happened many times in a number of American communities — including San Francisco, which in 1994 became the first city in the United States to end the killing of healthy dogs and cats.

Of course, the San Francisco SPCA was not the first no-kill shelter in the United States. There have always been individual shelters and rescue groups that have not used population control killing. What San Francisco did was to institutionalize No Kill on a county-wide basis, guaranteeing that animals would not be killed simply for lack of shelter space. The SFSPCA promised to take all adoptable, treatable, and rehabilitatable pets that came into San Francisco’s municipal shelter, and find homes for them if the city shelter could not.

“If you look at what San Francisco did between 1993 and 1994, the number of deaths…of healthy animals…declined 100 percent. In the case of sick and injured animals it declined by about 50 percent.”

No Kill has worked in a wide variety of communities. Winograd later left California and took over the SPCA in Tompkins County, N.Y., which held the animal control contract for the region and has an open admissions policy. One of the most compelling sections of “Redemption” tells how Winograd walked into the shelter and, literally overnight, ended the practice of killing for shelter space:

“The day after my arrival, my staff informed me that our dog kennels were full and since a litter of six puppies had come in, I needed to decide who was going to be killed in order to make space. I asked for ‘Plan B’; there was none. I asked for suggestions; there were none.”

He spoke directly to his staff, telling them that they were paid to save lives. “If a paid member of staff throws up her hands and says, ‘There’s nothing that can be done,’ I may as well eliminate her position and use the money that goes for her salary in a more constructive manner. So what are we going to do with the puppies that doesn’t involve killing?”

The story of how Tompkins County stopped killing for population control and started sending more than 90 percent of the animals that come into its animal control system out alive may be one of the greatest success stories of the humane movement. It’s certainly one of the most compelling parts of the argument laid out in “Redemption.”

Because, although it wasn’t always easy, these programs worked, and not only in San Francisco or Tompkins County. “In Tompkins County, we reduced the death rate 75 percent in two years. In Charlottesville, Va., they reduced it by over 50 percent in one year. And Reno, Nev. … has reduced the death rate by over 50 percent,” Winograd said.

“If all shelters not only have the desire and embrace the No Kill philosophy, but comprehensively put into play all those programs and services that … I … collectively call the no-kill equation, then we would achieve success.”

The issue of pet overpopulation is only one piece of the story told in “Redemption.” Within its pages, readers and animal lovers can find the blueprint not so much for our failure to save the animals in our communities, but for our ability to start doing so today. It challenges us to demand more of our shelters than the status quo, to insist on an end to the use of killing as a form of animal population control, and tells us to stop allowing our tax dollars and donations to support shelters and animal control agencies that refuse to implement programs that have been proven in communities across America to work to end the killing.

Excerpted from Christy Keith, SFGate

SF Gate article

Nathan Winograd’s blog

The Rushville Death Camp

It would be any animal shelter worker’s worst nightmare.

Imagine going to a walk-in freezer filled with animals that are supposed to be dead after being euthanized and seeing a dog, alive, pop up.

Now, imagine it’s happened twice before.

So begins the saga of an ongoing investigation at the Rushville Animal Shelter, an explosive situation canvassing community, state and cyberspace forums worldwide.

This “kill shelter” is a contradiction in terms. The kill rate is 93%, and the average time an animal spends here before being euthanized is 5 days.

According to whistle blower and assistant animal control officer Jamie Glandon, the problem started Aug. 8. In a formal complaint delivered to Mayor Bob Bridges Monday, Glandon related that Rushville Animal Control Officer Jack Hill euthanized a number of animals, one of which was a 7-year-old Border Collie.

“After putting the animals down, [Jack] put them in the freezer and went on with his day. On August 9, upon arriving at the shelter at 8 .m., I started my daily routine,” Glandon’s typed statement reads. “When Jack got back he informed me he heard a dog howling in the freezer. So at 8:20 a.m. he went into the freezer and found out it was the Border Collie. He went and got the medicine he used to euthanize, opened the freezer door and injected the dog and closed the door back. At 8:47 a.m. the dog was still howling. At 9 a.m. he injected the dog again and closed the door. That was the last we heard from her.”

According to Glandon, she verbally made Mayor Bridges aware of the situation that day.

On Oct. 25, according to the formal complaint, Hill again euthanized several dogs before Jamie began her shift.

“I arrived at work at 8 a.m. and heard whining from the freezer. I opened the door and found three lab puppies on the top of a pile in the freezer still alive. Jack was pulling up to the shelter when I went in. I told him what was going on. I started to pull the puppies out and he told me to leave them be. He went in and got his medicine and injected the dogs again while still in the freezer. That was the last I heard from them. I verbally made my city council representative aware of the situation on Oct. 25, who then made Mayor Bridges aware.

“I spoke with Jack and asked him what the procedures were and if there were any things that were needed in place to be sure that incidents like this do not happen again in the future,” Bridges said. “Two items needed were a scale and a stethoscope. I donated the stethoscope and told Jack to order the scales that day.” Funds from a shelter fundraiser held earlier in the month were used for the scales, which weigh the dogs correctly so that the proper euthanasia dosage can be administered. Bridges also contacted local veterinarian Rob Jackman so that training on administering the serum could be utilized. The shelter employees travelled to Jackman’s clinic that day and watched as Jackman demonstrated how to find a vein on an animal while administering an IV to a dog.

On that Monday, one day before taking vacation time, Hill put down another group of animals as the shelter was again at capacity. Two German Shepherd-Mastiff mix puppies were on the list for euthanasia that day as pleas for adoption went unanswered and postings on petfinder.com were ignored.

Nov. 16, an elderly woman brought a cat in to be disposed of. Glandon went to the freezer to place the dead animal in it.

“When I opened the freezer door, a puppy popped her head up out of the barrel,” Glandon said. Glandon immediately pulled the dog from the freezer.

“She was buried under other dogs up to her chest,” Glandon said. “She smelled like death, which is the worst possible smell you could imagine, and couldn’t walk. Her back half-end was slightly swollen, and she just started wailing. I placed her in the dog crate outside of the freezer to give us both a time-out because I needed to go to the restroom and throw up.”

Glandon immediately called Jackman’s Animal Clinic to schedule an emergency appointment for the dog who she named “Gabby” and was told they would get back with her. “I gave her a bath while I was waiting for the clinic to call me back because the smell was unlike anything you could imagine,” Glandon said. “Jackman’s took her in around noon.

Afterwards, she shipped the dog out to rescue, and it has been checked by the rescue’s own veterinarian.

According to Bridges, “I received the formal complaint on my desk Monday morning. I told Jamie she had to understand that the investigation will be done, but it will not be done tomorrow. These things take time.”

“I had no idea about the stuff on the Internet until I got a phone call from someone locally saying that they had seen something on a web site, and was it true,” Bridges said. “I had no idea what they were talking about.” A petition on another site already has thousands of signatures from people from France to Bosnia, and calls for no more euthanization.

Glandon hopes this situation will raise awareness among the community about the conditions at the shelter.

“I hope that the shelter changes its policies on euthanization and the treatment of the deceased animals,” she said. “I hope that people realize that animals aren’t trash. A life is a life. I hope that people in Rushville become aware of the problems that the shelter is facing and will step up and help so that stuff like this doesn’t happen again. This is where taxpayer dollars are going. I want people to understand that I have been working very hard at this shelter for almost two years trying to make things better. Had I kept this quiet for the third time, that would basically have been like saying I approve of what’s going on, and that’s not who I am.”

Friday evening, Jamie Glandon was placed on administrative leave with pay.

In the meantime, a hodgepodge of individuals, including Mayor Bob Bridges, city councilman Darrin McGowan, assistant chief of police Tim Williams and Dr. Fred Phillips and staff have been manning the day-to-day operations of the shelter, which has been at a standstill since last week. The team have been feeding and watering animals, cleaning kennels and scooping litterboxes.

Since the shelter’s closing, Glandon reports that calls have been received from rescue groups all over the United States, offering to pull every animal that is in the shelter now to keep the police department from having to use their time and energy to care for the animals, but the city is reportedly refusing.

Eslynn Davis of the Liberty and Cincinnati area organized a protest outside Council Chambers on Wednesday. As a volunteer for numerous animal welfare groups, including CARE (Companion Animal Rescue Effort), Davis took offense to the events at the local shelter.

“The euthanization of healthy animals in the United States must end, and this is just another prime example,” she said. “People must buy into the philosophy of spaying and neutering their animals so that situations like this do not continue to happen.”

“It seemed we had more support for the evening rally then we did for the afternoon. When someone driving by, or stopped at the red light honked we began to chant “THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU”. One woman who joined us was getting ready to leave and I told her how much we appreciated her coming out, I asked what rescue she was with. She said, “I’m just from Rushville, I live here”. I said “You know, you are the very first resident to come out and join us today”. She looked absolutely stricken and said “You have got to be kidding me”. I said “No, in fact, I’m from Cincinnati and have been volunteering at the shelter for almost 3 years and it hasn’t been until this past summer that we got our first Rushville volunteer”. She absolutely couldn’t believe it. She thanked us for coming and doing this for the town. I thanked her again, shook her hand. We had people stopping at the traffic light asking what was going on, when told, they would just lay on the horn. About 8 more residents came forward to join us, we gave them all buttons, cards, exchanged emails so we could organize for the next rally. One man, a Rushville resident, thanked us and went to the Shell Station and bought us all hot coffee, which was much appreciated. Those are the people that give me hope.”

The City, which was going to deliver a pronouncement on Jamie’s fate that day, had removed the shelter issue from the agenda. Apparently, closure on the investigation was postponed because of further formal complaints about Mr. Hill. Jamie Glandon continues to be locked out of shelter premises by the mayor, however, Jack Hill now appears to have been quietly reinstated as a driver for the streets department.

How the animals in the deteriorating Rushville Shelter are faring is anyone’s guess.

For an update on this story and the rallies in support of Jamie and Gabby, read Rally for Reason.

Rushville Republican

Justice for Gabby

Sign the petition!

Watch the video on Indy Channel News

Rushville Shelter