Saturday, September 26, 2009
Fur Ball September 25, 2009 - Daisy's story
For one of the live auction items, we played this video and then asked the crowd to raise their paddles to give $500, $250, $100, or $50 to take home nothing but the feeling of knowing you're supporting a good cause. This "item" earned us about $12,000 and two individuals donated $1,000 each!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHYv3VN2Zuw&feature=youtube_gdata
If you missed the Fur Ball, it's not too late to make a donation in honor of Daisy.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Fern - 9/19 /09 - 2 Days After Rescue
CCHS is accepting donations to cover the costs of Fern's surgery and care. If you send a donation, please write "For Fern" in the memo line. To make a Pay Pal donation, use the link for Fern donations on the CCHS homepage: http://www.cuhumane.org
Friday, August 14, 2009
Michael Vick - As it Stands Right Now 8/14/09
.jpg)
Monday, August 10, 2009
Parking Lot Heroes - Warning: Graphic Content
Here's the story. My friend, C.L., spends a few hours at PetSmart every Saturday, as a rep for a high-end pet food producer. This Saturday, at 2 in the afternoon, she was getting out of her car near Fazoli's and saw three people get out of a Suburban and go into the restaurant. At the same time, she heard the bark of the puppy that was left behind. The Suburban was parked in the sun. They had left at least one window cracked. C.L., having more than 1/2 brain, immediately called Animal Control and waited by the vehicle. At 2:10, Animal Control had not arrived. C.L. had enlisted back-up from a Banfield veterinarian (Banfield clinic is located within PetSmart) and another colleague. One of them called the police. At 2:13 the puppy was in obvious distress; vocalizing and panting heavily. C.L. went into Fazoli's and confronted the puppy's people. She was incredibly angry and upset, but somehow managed not to curse as she informed them that they were killing their puppy over a plate of pasta. They replied that "everybody" leaves their dogs in the car.
When C.L. returned to the Suburban, the puppy was in the arms of the veterinarian, and they rushed him/her into the Banfield clinic for emergency treatment. The pup's temperature was approaching 104. (for adult dogs, 104 degrees is the threshold temp. for heat stroke; at 106 degrees the situation is dire). Initial procedures did not bring the pup's temperature down fast enough. After a cool water enema was administered, the pup's body finally cooled down.
Back outside, Animal Control had arrived and I believe the puppy owner was issued a citation and fine of $225. C.L. reported that the Animal Control officer was appropriately stern. When the puppy was fully stabilized, she/he was returned to the owner. I sure hope they learned a lesson.
Morals of the story?
(1) What's obvious to me is not necessarily obvious to everybody else. Sometimes I get so tired of repeating the "don't leave your dog in the car" message! I think, "surely, everybody already knows that!" Well, apparently not. Remedial as it is, the lesson still needs to be taught.
(2) Under certain conditions, it literally does not take more than 10-15 minutes for an animal to go into crisis due to heatstroke. Please - do not risk your own animal's life for the sake of convenience. And, if you see an animal in a situation that does not look good to you, contact authorities immediately. Don't wait until the animal is in distress -- it will be too late. And,
(3) There are heroes among us! Three cheers for C.L. and her colleagues who intervened to save this puppy's life. They were courageous and they made a difference.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
Protecting the Children? Seriously?
I went into my office to fire up my computer and let the weekend emails pour in while I was gone. I hadn't been there a minute, when I noticed through the window that a woman had pulled into the parking lot. She was already out of her car and walking around with a little dog (looked like a Lhasa Apso to me, but I'm not too good at identifying the little breeds) on leash. She obviously had realized that I was in the building, came to the staff entrance near my office window, and knocked on the door. I checked my watch and wished I could pretend I wasn't there. But I didn't.
At the door, she said they (I assume she was referring to herself and her husband) got the dog from an elderly woman who could no longer keep him. They had thought he would be a companion for their dog, but the two dogs weren't getting along. I explained that we weren't open yet (as if she didn't know that, at 7 in the morning), and asked her to please return later. I explained that I had to leave shortly and that by 8:00 some staff members would be available to do a proper intake, take down pertinent information, examine the dog, etc. She resisted. And resisted. She assured me that she would come back after 8:00 to do the paperwork and provide the dog's vet records, but she really wanted me to take the dog. She said she could not bring him back later. She indicated that this had something to do with her children. She was not entirely coherent, but I realized later that she wanted to off-load the dog while the children were still asleep and planned to tell them that he had gone to live with a family where he would be the only dog. I wasn't really listening when she explained this; I just wanted her to agree to come back later. Why did I care what she told her children? I had someplace to be. And I had to be on time! I wanted the conversation to end. But when she told me that she had planned to leave him tied out in front of the building, I took hold of the leash. I didn't say anything after that; I was done.
Lucky for me, Dr. Stone arrived at about that time, and took care of the dog so that I could round up a kitten and head over to WCFN.
As you probably guessed, the woman never returned to do the paperwork. Our staff brought the dog over to Animal Control because he was not surrendered to us, he was abandoned. I didn't even have the owner's name, let alone her signature on a relinquishment form.
Naturally, as I drove across town (with Peanut, the adorable gray kitten), I thought of all the choicey things I should have said to the woman. I'm very good at caustic retorts when the moment has passed and I've had a few minutes to pull myself together. But it was too late, and probably for the best anyway. No use engaging in hostilities with someone whose mind is made up. Besides, I haven't walked a mile in her shoes. How do I know what was really going on?
As I put the pieces together though, and realized that this whole thing was about protecting the children from the experience of surrendering the dog, I got pretty annoyed. I'll admit right off the bat that I'm not a parent, so perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about. But why is it better to steal the dog away while the children sleep and tell them a lie, than to allow them the opportunity to say a proper good-bye to the dog and explain why surrendering him to a humane facility was the right decision for both the dog and the family? I don't get it.
She robbed her children of closure, as well as the opportunity to learn lessons about consequences and taking responsibility. Instead, her children will learn nothing. Except maybe that sometimes things you love disappear in the middle of the night. Good job, mom.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Our Best Efforts Aren't Always Good Enough
This is Whoopi. She is a German Wirehaired Pointer (mix), somewhere between 18 months and 2 years old. At this moment, I have my fingers crossed for Whoopi because she is scheduled to have a dog-dog introduction today with her potential new family's Boxer. I'm on pins and needles.Whoopi has been with us a long time and we would really like to see her go home! She has been at the shelter since March 23rd. That's 15 weeks -- about 12 weeks longer than an average stay for a dog at our shelter. It's not that we mind having Whoopi around, but when a dog is with us this long we start to get a little anxious.
We have some pretty good ideas as to why Whoopi is taking a little longer than other dogs to place. For one thing, it's not uncommon for dark-hued dogs to stay longer at animal shelters than others. In addition, Whoopi is a medium-large, adolescent dog with a lot of energy. How many people you know want to take that on? German Wirehaired Pointers aren't as popular as say, Golden Retrievers, either. The good news is that Whoopi came to us with some training under her belt and we know she has it in her to be a very good girl, in the right home.
But let's get back to the "dog-dog introduction" for a moment. We require all dog adopters to bring any already existing dog family members to the shelter to meet their potential new "sibling" prior to finalizing the adoption. This is a pretty important step in the adoption process. The following story illustrates the point . . . sort of.
Week before last, a very nice dog was returned to the shelter, after about a week in his new home, with multiple -- and I mean MULTIPLE bite wounds on his face, head, and front legs. The incident had occurred on about the third day after the adoption. One of the resident dogs had attacked the new dog. The new dog did not fight back. The adopter's veterinarian put drains in a couple places on the injured dog's face/head and sutured a wound at the base of one ear. The adopters kept him for a few more days before realizing that the adoption would not work, and returning him to us.
By the day after his return, our veterinarian was able to remove the drains and we sent the dog into foster care with a very caring and responsible volunteer. On that day, we let the dog hang-out in the administrative office until his foster mom could pick him up. He still looked a mess, and was a little sensitive about having his head touched, but otherwise he was happy and affectionate. He is a really sweet dog.
So, you're probably wondering, as I was, what the heck happened?
No one on staff had any reservations about these adopters. They brought their dog in for a dog-dog introduction and it went fine. The staff told me that the adopters were devastated when they returned the injured dog to us; they were in tears. But, here's the twist. The dog that came in for the introduction was not the dog that inflicted the damage on the new dog. They had lied on their application about a second dog at home--they indicated that this second dog was deceased.
In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that they had obtained this dog, the aggressor dog, from us some years ago. That's why they didn't leave him off the application altogether; they knew we would have records of that adoption. Whether the dog had "issues" from the time of adoption or they developed later, I don't know.
It's more than frustrating when this kind of thing happens. All of our adoption requirements are designed to (1) minimize the likelihood of harm coming to our animals and (2) maximize the likelihood of a succesful permanent adoption. Yet we failed to protect this dog from harm and his adoption failed miserably. Not much we can do when people are dishonest.
We're frequently criticized for making people "jump through hoops" to adopt a dog. How do you think the polygraph requirement is going to go over?*
*This is a facetious statement. Please do not alert the media.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Catching Up!
My apologies to anyone who has been checking in only to find that I haven't posted to the blog . . . since the end of May! I promise to do better and post more often, now that the Garage Sale, the budgeting process, and my (too short) "staycation" are behind me.The two pups pictured here are from Lucille's litter, pictured in my last post. The pups will be in foster care until they are 8 weeks old, at which point they will be old enough to be adopted. You can follow the litter at their blog, http://pupsispups.blogspot.com/.
We'd love to get adopters for the pups lined up before the puppies return to the shelter. That way, they can go virtually straight from foster care into their new homes and avoid the stress associated with a shelter stay. You can help by sending the link to "Pups Is Pups" to anyone you can think of who might be interested in a puppy -- or to anyone at all. Everybody likes to take a break from their daily activities to look at pictures of puppies on the web, right? And, I'll let you know when the LIVE Puppy Cam gets up and running again.
A couple other quick updates:
-The GIANT Garage Sale fundraiser was a huge success, raising a record-breaking $50,300 for CCHS. All thanks go to those who made it possible, the Planet's Best Volunteers. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
-The shooter of the cat in Mansfield has not been identified, and I doubt he/she will ever be held accountable.
Tonight, my heart goes out to friends and coworkers who have recently lost beloved animal companions, and other friends whose dogs are struggling with terminal disease. In empathizing with my friends, I feel a fraction of the heartbreak that they are feeling in full force. I feel it in my gut and in my throat. Like a muscle memory, it comes on without even conjuring actual memories of my own similar losses. But because it is not my loss right now, I can shake it off. And that's what I do, most of the time. That, and remind myself that life can change on a dime, and I'm NOT too busy to toss a toy for Daisy or run a brush over Calamity Jane.
On that note, I'll sign off for tonight. Li'l Rocky is ready for some cuddle-time in front of the t.v. I promise to post again soon, with some tales from the shelter.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Puppies Born in Foster Care Today
Lucille's first puppy was born this morning at about 10:00 a.m. So far, she has had seven. Follow the litter at http://pupsispups.blogspot.com.Monday, May 18, 2009
And Not-So-Neat Stuff
Inside the Hall on the Final Day of Drop Offs
Friday, May 15, 2009
GIANT Garage Sale - The Drop Off Phase
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Update on Case 1
I believe that the following explanation of the incident is what was provided to the Police when they investigated: The goose charged the man. The man hit the goose with the golf club, and the goose backed off (positive reinforcement for the man's response). When the goose charged a second time, the man applied the same technique. Unfortunately and accidently, this second blow was fatal, breaking the goose's neck. Thus, the conclusion that no crime was committed.
I've been told that the US Fish & Wildlife Service briefly looked into the matter and upon learning the facts above, concluded its investigation.
I spoke with a representative of the Enforcement Division of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, who said that he would follow up and obtain the status of any US F&W investigation. He essentially acknowledged that no penalty would be forthcoming if it was determined that the man acted in "self defense."
Thursday, May 7, 2009
One Day, Two Cruelty Cases
Case 1 - Man v. Goose At the Legends golf course in Champaign, witnesses observed a golfer club a Goose to death after the goose charged the golfer. When one of the witnesses reported the incident to Champaign Police, he was told that no crime had been committed and that the golfer "had every right" to kill the goose.
Contrary to the assertion of Champaign Police, Geese are a protected species in Illinois and it is illegal to kill or remove geese (or destroy nests or eggs) without a permit from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. The incident has been reported to the DNR and I believe that an investigation is underway.
A concerned citizen who is also a regular patron of Legends spoke with a Legends manager today who had little to say other than that Legends bears no responsibiltiy for the incident. The manager also stated that a goose could "take a chunk out of your leg."
I don't doubt that the goose charged the golfer. At this time of year, Canadian Geese are tending to their young, and may become aggressive toward humans that come too close to their nest site or goslings. I don't doubt that it is extremely unsettling to have an angry goose try to run you off.
I have serious doubts, however, that the only recourse available to the golfer was to club the goose to death. In my opinion, this was a barbaric over-reaction.
Now that the deed is done, what's the remedy? Obviously, I have limited influence, but here's what I'd like to see happen in this case: (1) I'd like to see Legends post signs near nesting areas (a) warning golfers that geese will be protective of their young, (b) clearly stating that geese are a protected species, and (c) instructing golfers to report problems with geese to management; (2) I'd like to see the Champaign Police Department called on the carpet for its incredibly inept response to the report; and (3) I'd like to see the DNR vigorously investigate this incident and impose appropriate penalties upon the perpetrator, whose identity is known.
Resource: http://web.extension.uiuc.edu/wildlife/directory_show.cfm?species=canadagoose
Case 2 - Man v. Cat
This morning in or around Mansfield, somebody shot a cat in the face with a pellet gun. The cat was treated at CCHS and the prognosis is good, although the pellet remains lodged in the cat's head. The pellet missed the cat's eye by about 1/8 of an inch.
At this time, I'm not fully aware of the status of the investigation of this incident by law enforcement authorities. I certainly hope that it is taken seriously and pursued with rigor. I will keep you posted.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
What We Could Do With $4,300 . . . and what consumers can do when they're lied to
-$4,300 could subsidize 50 adult dog adoptions from our shelter.
-With $4,300, we could alter about 170 cats.
-We could treat 29 Heartworm-positive dogs.
-We could run a television ad to raise awareness about pet overpopulation.
You get the picture. $4,300 can do a lot of good. I realize that that $4,300 wouldn't have been ours anyway. How many people who decide not to drop that kind of dough on a puppy will turn around and give it to their local animal shelter instead? Less than one-in-a-million, I'm guessing. So I'll quit daydreaming about windfalls that aren't to be and move on to something more constructive.
I'n the past 18 months, I've talked to several individuals who bought puppies from puppy boutiques and were very upset to learn after-the-fact that the breeder identified on their paperwork was in fact a large-scale commercial dog breeder. Some of these people had gone into the store knowing about puppy mills, but believed the store employees when they assured them that the store did not acquire dogs from such places. Seems to me that lying to a customer who is about to drop a grand for a puppy might constitute "consumer fraud" or "deceptive practices."
Deceptive or unfair business practices and consumer fraud are of great interest to the Attorney General's Office (see http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/consumers/index.html). Anyone who feels that a business in Illinois has been unfair, dishonest, or misrepresented the facts of a transaction, should report their experience to the Attorney General's Office. Here is a simple consumer complaint form: http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/consumers/conscomp.pdf.
Complaints about a business can also be filed with the Better Business Bureau. Here is a link to the Central Illinois BBB: http://heartofillinois.bbb.org/Find-Business-Reviews/#middle-result. I've checked the BBB website and found that no complaints have been filed about the Lucky Puppy Boutique. This despite a number of complaints that have been relayed to me and other people that I know. View the store's listing here: http://www.bbb.org/central-illinois/business-reviews/retail-pet-suppliers/lucky-puppy-boutique-barkery-in-champaign-il-90006518.
If you talk to anyone who was unhappy with a pet-store experience (whether related to the purchase, the contract terms, or negotiating a return), please suggest they do something about it! Filing a report with a local BBB and/or the Attorney General's office isn't difficult.
See also: http://unluckypuppies.blogspot.com to report experiences with the Lucky Puppy Boutique.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Is This a Puppy Mill Dog?
Also according to the paperwork, the dog's breeder was Marsha Cox of Mar-Don Kennel in Chillicothe, Missouri. You can read notes from an investigation of Mar-Don Kennel conducted by the Companion Animal Protection Society in 2007 here: http://www.caps-web.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=169&Itemid=207&report_id=126
Also according to the papers, I have surmised that at some point early in life, this dog was sold by Marsha Cox to Lonewolf Kennels, of Iberia, MO. Lonewolf Kennels is a USDA Licensed Class B dealer. You can read a little something about an investigation of Lonewolf Kennels at this website: http://savepuppymilldogs.com/pow.html (scroll down a little). A video is attached, which shows some auction footage.
The paperwork also shows that the dog surrendered today had been purchased by the relinquisher at the Lucky Puppy store in Champagin.
So you tell me . . . does the Lucky Puppy store obtain dogs from Puppy Mills?
Monday, April 13, 2009
Bo Joins the First Family
Like many other animal-welfare advocates, sure, I'm disappointed that the Obamas didn't adopt a shelter dog. I was already composing pithy ad campaigns in my head: "There's a shelter dog in the White House. Why not yours?"But at the same time I have to admit, I'm kind of o.k. with First Dog Bo.
The way I see it, once you take inhumane breeders out of the equation, the most important thing to me is not where a person obtains a dog, but that they select a dog wisely so as to minimize the risk that the dog will ever be homeless or cross the threshold of an animal shelter.
I believe there is a such a thing as a responsible breeder. I own two purebred dogs (both formerly homeless) and their breeding is part of what I love about them. They are uniquely athletic, intense, and talented at what they were bred to do. I would not for anything wish for the extinction of these breeds. I am not alone. I know a number of people who have given many years of their lives to dog rescue and advocate for shelter dogs with great passion. Yet they also have a special fondness for a particular breed of dog . . . one that speaks to their soul, or touches their heart, in a way that no other dog does.
The Obamas were looking for a reliable family dog that produces minimal dander. They did some homework and determined that a Portuguese Water Dog would be a good fit. Bo was a PWD in need of a new home because things weren't going well between him and another dog in residence. The Kennedys had purchased a PWD from the same litter and had a relationship with Bo’s breeder (reportedly, Martha Stern, of Texas). The Obamas met the dog, and all went well.
Obviously, the Obamas could have adopted a PWD from a shelter or breed rescue group. Wayne Pacelle, HSUS President, has been quoted as saying that HSUS provided the Obamas with a variety of adoption options.
On the other hand, the Kennedys offered the Obamas a dog whose history was known. Yes, rescue dogs can be great dogs with confidence and a rock-solid temperament. But the truth is, you can’t know all there is to know about a rescue dog until months, or even years (in the case of some genetic issues) down the road.
The First Family needs a dog that is more “bomb-proof” than most. They need a dog that harbors no demons. Bo will have to play well with children, members of the press corps, and heads of state. I realize there are no guarantees with any dog, from anywhere. But it would be dishonest for me to deny the fact that obtaining a dog whose genetics and early history are known lessens the risk that a problem of health or behavior will later arise without warning. Note I said, “lessens” the risk, not “eliminates.”
Dog lovers and animal welfare advocates ought to focus on what the Obamas did right. They delayed getting a dog until a major life transition was completed. They did their homework. They considered Malia’s allergies and all that would be required of this dog before they obtained him. They welcomed a displaced dog into their lives at 6 months of age, when they could have purchased a PWD as an 8-week old pup. It seems to me they did a lot of things right in selecting Bo.
I’ll close with two final points. First, the suggestion that the Obamas should now adopt a second dog from a shelter to make good on their promise to do so is ridiculous. The desire to satisfy ones critics is a poor reason for obtaining a pet. Second, this would have been a different essay entirely had the Obamas obtained their dog from a pet store or any other mass-breeding commercial enterprise.










