Be Kind! Just Say Thank You!

I often read comments on social media of people asking why animal rescuers are so cranky, and we shouldn't be in the business of helping animals if we don't like it. In fact, one self proclaimed puppy mill expert often posts that "animal rescuers" should be polite and more willing to help people yet has never spent a moment in rescue herself. Of all the comments I read as a rescuer, the "cranky" one always hits a nerve with me, especially by people who are clueless to what we put up with on a daily basis.

I try and refrain from responding to those armchair experts, but today's telephone call hit the nerve which urged me to write a response. While I was polite (as I could be) on the telephone, I decided to share my after thoughts here.

First let's start with the telephone call. Man calls to "drop off" his 14 year old cat because he is moving. Asking questions is important to gain an understanding of the "full reason" this man feels the NEED to abandon the life of his 14 year companion simply because of a relocation. So after almost 30 minutes of questions, struggling to get an answer each time, it all boiled down to this:

Man is building a home. He sold his previous home. He is uncertain where he will be staying and is kenneling his dogs. He may have to live with a friend and can't have a cat with inappropriate elimination! BINGO! There we go. NOW we know why he wants to "get rid of" his pet. With a good ear, a little tolerance and a whole lot of patience, the truth always comes forth.

So the next part of the discussion is about getting to the root of the problem with the cat's inappropriate behavior. First suggestion is to see a veterinarian to rule out any medical issue. Won't do it, because the vet wants to run a lot of tests. Costs aren't the issue, we offered to help with the bills. The next 15 minutes of the conversation is about all the things he's tried that didn't work.

"First, I love this cat, that's why I'm looking for a no-kill to take it. I don't want it killed, but I can't keep it. We've tried "everything" including that special spray (turns out it's Feliway he tried), giving the cat a time out, and using a squirt bottle when we find potty outside the box. Nothing works!"

Since everything he mentioned was absurd, I swallowed hard and began the painstaking process of trying to provide a little education to the gentleman offering alternative solutions, only to be cut off with:

"Look lady! I don't need a lecture. I've tried everything! I just need a place to take my cat! I don't want it killed, but I can't keep it. If you can't help me, I'll find someone who can." (Yea, good luck with that one mister!)

Despite my effort to explain I wasn't trying to "lecture" but to provide viable solutions he simply didn't want to hear. Plain and simple. He wanted to dump his problem onto someone else! He doesn't want a KILL shelter because he doesn't want to be responsible for it's death. He doesn't want to spend money on the vet (even when we offered to help with the costs). He doesn't want to work on the behavior...He just doesn't want the cat. He doesn't want to hear about how a litter change might help, or scooping the box more frequently, or offering a second box. Nope! It's simple. The cat is 14 years old and it has served it's purpose in his life. His life is changing and the cat is now an inconvenience! No solutions, no suggestions, nothing was welcomed, except for "sure, we'll take it", which wasn't offered!

Now....that is ONE call today! Just one! There will be anywhere from 10-25 this week from pet owners who are inquiring about our "no-kill" services for their unwanted pet that they love more than life itself, (but not quite enough to do what it takes to keep it). So you tell me, how SHOULD we feel? After all, none of us are saints...or at least I'm not! I'm a human being who has a passion for the welfare of animals, and make daily sacrifices for them to help make the world a better place. It isn't a choice. It appears to be my calling. And most days, are like above, especially as a no-kill. It's NOT like the fluffy happy stories you read by those who profess to be animal rescuers but only participate in transports and adoptions.

As I ended the call as politely as I could, wishing him the best (since nothing we offered was good enough for him), I felt deflated and saddened, because I knew the cat's life would fall victim to this lazy uncaring ignorant human who is just seeking out a guilt free way to dispose of a beloved soul because it no longer fits in his life-style! And then I get a little frustrated because I know I can't save them all, but that this cat will most likely lose it's life because this gentleman not only knows it all, apparently has tried it all, and doesn't care to do any more for the animal. So he'll take it to his local animal shelter where it will be euthanized for him and he can walk away without the guilt of killing it himself. And the shelter will be all too happy to do it for him...because after all "they don't turn any animal away!" And so the cycle continues. Ignorance breeds arrogance and animals die! But not to worry...there will be another call like it tomorrow. And if the kitty (or puppy) is lucky, the owner will have a conscience that we can tap into and the animal's life can be saved.

I'm glad that I choose not to participate in the innocent killing of animals because our society has a disposable mentality. I'm glad to be part of an organization that has policies and procedures way above the state's required standard of care. I'm thrilled that the organization I'm a part of has chosen to be a leader in "successful" adoptions to eliminate these types of returns.

And I won't apologize because a person felt "lectured" when I was actually providing viable solutions with a little education on how to keep his beloved pet alive and well even if it wasn't what he wanted to hear.

So the next time you read, hear or feel that a person in animal rescue is cranky, take a moment and remember this ONE incident, and cut them a break! Instead of writing some nasty comment about them, why not show a little empathy and gratefulness for what they endure and realize that their crankiness might be more out of frustration and helplessness than intolerance and anger.

Because I'm certain that those of us who help save lives are doing it because many of you reading this don't want to! Just offer your support, either through your time, your services, your donations....and help them keep their spirit alive. In doing so, you provide them with a little hope that all the work they do DOES make a difference and that the world is made up of more animal lovers than animal dumpers!

Be kind and just say thank you!

Humane CARE or CAREless Reporting

A recent news article on KWWL.com has a community of pet owners questioning an animal shelters practices and the integrity of the reporter who wrote it.

Co-Director, Kristy Gardner of Cedar Bend Humane Society shared with KWWL reporter, Danielle Wagner CBHS' annual statistics declaring that 12,000 animals were "handled" by the shelter and AC officers yet, the article only produces the intake, disposition and euthanasia for 5,171 of them leaving 6,000+ animals unaccounted for by a city/county run shelter.

That leaves 6,829 or 57% of the animals "handled" by CBHS unaccounted for.

CBHS website says that they annually care for approximately 10,000 domestic animals, not 12,000 but also state that they help "homeless animals from the smallest gerbil to the largest injured mastiff". Yet, no small animals or any other are listed, only cats/dogs.

In the beginning of the article Ms. Wagner reports:

The total number of cats and dogs actually entering the shelter last year was 5,171.

At the end of the article Ms. Wagner misleads the reader to believe there were even more animals saved with a breakdown:

Some other numbers for you from 2012 at the Cedar Bend Humane Society:

• 1,031 "cats/dogs" were were surrendered by pet owners (20%)
• 2,283 "cats/dogs" were strays brought into the shelter (44%)
• 1,181 "cats/dogs" were brought in by Animal Control (23%)
• 676 "cats/dogs" came in from surrounding communities (13%)

If you add up the numbers above, you will notice they total the exact same amount as reported in the beginning of the article: 5,171 which could lead a reader to believe that 10,000+ animals were saved. But instead it's a repeat of what is already posted still leaving 6,829 animals unaccounted for and 981 MIA.

Next, the breakdown of the disposition of those cats/dogs that DID make it into the shelter was:

• 1,319 "cats/dogs" were adopted (26%)
• 842 "cats/dogs" were returned to owner (16%)
• 162 "cats/dogs" euthanized by owner request. (3%)
• 1,867 "cats/dogs" were killed by the shelter (36%) Their breakdown is:
• 453 injury/illness (9%)
• 208 aggression (4%)
• 629 feral cats (12%)
• 577 "other (11%)

But that only totals 4,190 not 5,171. That leaves 981 animals reported entering the shelter, but no stats on what happened to them? Killed? Adopted? Mising? Simple math would have brought forth questions for clarification but apparently Ms. Wagner didn't ask them or cared to print it.

The intake/disposition numbers of the animals that entered CBHS' are not all that is in question either. Their euthanasia numbers are equally as troubling. And again, they are only providing stats for "cats/dogs" not the entire 12,000 that they handled. Those are still MIA!

If we start by defining the difference between the term "euthanasia" and "kill" you'll see why I keep using the word "kill".

"Euthanasia" by definition is:...the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.

"Killing" or to "Kill" by definition is: to deprive of life; cause the death of; to put an end to; to destroy the vital or essential quality of

Based on these defintions I'm certain that at least 50% probably more dogs/cats alone were "killed" not "euthanized". Questions that demand answers are:

• What illnesses/injuries determine an animal untreatable or unfixable?
• If the animal has a treatable virus/manageable disease/or fixable injury what does the shelter to prior to tagging it for euthanasia?
• Who is trained or who does the shelter use professionally who has the training to properly assess if a dog has aggression issues, which type they are and whether they can be rehabilitated.
• What programs are in place to help feral Cats and if so what are they?
• Does CBHS or is CBHS working on a program whereas feral cats can be brought in, and given time to assess properly or do they have or are trying to have offsite facilities/barns for them to go. Does CBHS have a network of rescues/barns/sanctuaries who can assist them when they have colonies of cats to care for? If so, what are they?
• Is CBHS aware that some FeLV cats that test positive never have the disease? And that FIV+ is NOT a death sentence but a very manageable virus whereas cats can live long happy lives? What programs are in place or are being put in place to offer these types of animals and what education is CBHS offering to end the mass killing of cats in these situations?
• How does CBHS determine the difference between a "feral" cat and a "unsocialized" or "scared stray" if they are not allowing adequate time to assess them?
• What determines "other" for any animal to be killed?

Most likely if you can get answers to these questions, you will find that CBHS has no plans or programs in place now or in the near future to do better at saving lives.

Summary: Out of 5,171 cats/dogs that entered the shelter:

• 42% cats/dogs saved.
• 39% cats/dogs killed. 
• 19% cats/dogs status is unknown (981)

which means that:

• Less than HALF of what CBHS "handled" was brought into the shelter and given a chance to survive.
• Less than HALF of the cats/dogs that were brought in survived in their care.
• Over HALF were killed and 50% or more of those didn't need to be
• Less than 1/4 of cats/dogs disposition that entered the shelter is missing or unreported.

So even if these numbers are wrong, Ms. Gardner's pride in their organization's efforts is disturbing. That an above average paid shelter director of a city/county funded organization can't even save 50% of the animals in their community? Don't get me wrong, running a shelter is hard work, but I wouldn't be proud of killing more than I saved.

CBHS' mission is to provide humane care for all animals under their protection and yet 39% of the animals that wound up in their care were murdered with little explanation as to why.

In addition the reporter appears to be defending CBHS with her statement of:

You might wonder why other shelters can be no-kill. Those shelters often pick and choose which animals they take in. Cedar Bend doesn't have that option. It takes every animal that is brought in.

I was bothered more by the careless reporting with this comment than the ignorance behind the statement by Ms. Wagner. Perhaps she should actually visit or contact a no-kill organization before reporting such biased comments. But more recent postings from this writer clearly shows she is simply a stenographer for CBHS rather than a journalist for KWWL.com. An abuse of the pen and an insult to it's readers.

So let me provide some clarification about no-kills:

The truth is that no-kill organizations receive more calls, save more lives and are making a larger impact on the animal world than the kill shelters spewing out large numbers deceptively getting the public to think they actually saved the lives of that many. Reasons pet owners contact no kills are:

• Many pet owners have no idea who to call should their pet go missing or lost and contact the first listing they google. In many cases that's a no kill shelter or rescue because they are sought out for help more than kill ones. 
• Shelters operating hours are primarily during business hours Monday through Friday and closed on weekends when most people are working. Stray calls tend to double in the evening hours between 5:00 pm - 9:00 pm and heavier on the weekends when the working population is out and about to take notice of the animals in need on our public streets.
• Owners wanting to relinquish their pets seek out no-kills not kill shelters.
• They have had bad experiences with their local animal control or kill shelter.
• They have learned the truth that many of these organizations are more about profit than they are the care of the animals and saving lives.

Which brings up another issue, which in reality has backfired on the traditional shelters own practices.

• Kill shelters have open admission because they claim that owners will abandon their animals if they have no place to go. Not true. Most people seeking a place for their animal don't have the heart to abandon their animal uncared for and consider it cruel. They seek out no kills as a guilt free solution. In many cases when confronted with euthanize your own pet or work to save it, they opt to save it, when viable solutions are offered. Some of these include:
• Behavior counseling and training classes for behavior issues
• Rehoming assistance (pet remains in the home until a new one is found)
• Shelter/Rescue Networking can provide multiple solutions for a pet owner to keep their pet or if absolutely necessary, safely find new home for it.
• Assistance with food, medical care, exercise, temporary housing and more.
• Pet Loss Counseling. When all else fails and no viable solution is welcomed by the pet owner, then assist the pet owner as they say goodbye. It's not a shelter or rescue's responsibility to take responsibility for your pet and kill it for you.
• There are many more solutions and there are extenuating circumstances that do justify the surrender of a pet...but in most cases, responsible pet owners, if given the knowledge and assistance will keep their pet.
• Kill shelters have created and enabled a mindset that "pets" are merchandise and disposable and have contributed to the overcrowding in all shelters and rescues through their own actions such as:
• Irresponsible adoptions. Not screening applicants thoroughly and properly increasing return rates.
• Unaltered animals being adopted allowing "mistakes" or "oops" litters to happen.
• "Specials" on adoptions (i.e. 2 for 1 cats.) These create a sale type purchase rather than a lifetime commitment mindset.
• Easy disposal options. Accepting returns without counseling or problem solving with the pet owner to help keep the pet in their home when at all possible decreasing  kennel spacing for those who really need them.
• Pets as Prizes: Numerous shelters have held lotteries for animals that are popular or in high demand.
• Same Day Adoptions. Emotionally based adoptions have a 50% chance of being returned 1-3 years later.
• Minimal screening of applicants. Adopting a pet for a lifetime requires more than signing a bill of sale (adoption form). It requires preparing the adopter in all aspects of being a pet owner from financial, to long term care, to understanding the breed/species they are adopting.

Open admission shelters criticize no-kill operations calling them "limited intake institutions that force them to kill" with the effort to get people to think that they are swamped with animals and saving their precious lives. And yet, CBHS doesn't have any of the viable programs in place that in fact, have proven in kill and no kill organizations across this county to save lives.

Regardless of how you feel about the "kill vs. no kill" debate, the stats published for CBHS in this article should prompt questions and demand clarification and answers by everyone who owns a pet, because it could be your companion that ends up in the hands of caretakers like these with a 16% chance of it being returned to you (even chipped and tagged) and a greater chance (39%) of it being killed. More disturbing is there is a 57% chance that you will never know what happened to your pet and from the lack of  a response seeking clarification they don't have any plans to tell you either!

The reporting by Ms. Wagner is equally disturbing and careless. This type of yellow journalism should bring equal disgust to anyone who reads it and people should ask KWWL.com to find people who can report without passion and prejudice bringing forth accurate facts and not personal opinions.

I'm certain that CBHS and Ms. Wagner have put themselves on the radar with animal advocates and only the public can make institutions and their staff be held accountable for their actions. Add your comments to the article or write KWWL and ask them to provide clarification for those comments that don't add up. Contact the Board of Directors at Cedar Bend Humane Society and ask the questions posed in this article and see if you can receive some clarification for the 6,000+ animals unaccounted for.

ASK! DEMAND! DO SOMETHING...If you don't, then people like this will continue to participate and facilitate in the killing of millions of animals across this nation. And those who give every minute they can to save a life from these types of institutions will become discouraged and quit. And that is exactly what places like CBHS are hoping for.

To learn more about the no-kill movement and all the alternative ways there are to save a life check out these resources:

• Nathan Winograd
• No Kill Advocacy Center