Animal Services are Family Services

Interesting article on the animal sheltering front:

"Animal Services = Family Services"

"Pets are family.  Animal services=family services.  Or at least, that’s the way it should be.  But all too often, it seems that there is simply a one-size-fits-all approach for authorities dealing with animal situations in people’s homes.  If the residents are breeding pets for sale, they are labeled a puppy mill.  If they have a large number of pets, they are called hoarders.  And it so often plays out the same way:  the animals are seized and sent to pet killing facilities while the people are charged as criminals.

When it comes to human families, social services appears to take a more nuanced approach.  They recognize that even when the home environment is lacking, the parents still have both legal rights to, and deep emotional bonds with, their children.  Breaking up a family by removing kids from the home and placing them into a shabby state foster system is viewed as a last resort.  Social workers generally seem to be able to distinguish the obviously evil parents whose malnourished 5 year old is in a diaper and locked in a closet from those who love their children but need education, assistance and monitoring in order to do a better job as parents.  The former must be charged as criminals and their kids saved from further abuse.  The latter need to be provided with the tools and skills required to bring the home environment up to societal norms."

What happened to Pequeno?

Pequeno is a small young friendly dog who escaped his yard earlier this month. He was picked up by police and taken to Pet Rescue. His owner very much wanted him back, but didn't have the money right away to pay his release fee. While the owner was waiting for their paycheck, Pet Rescue adopted him out to a different family. Pequeno's original owner still desperately wants to get him back.

There's of course a lot we don't know about the situation, but many people in the community have concerns. Why did Pet Rescue adopt out a dog they knew had a owner who wanted him back? Many people are concerned that Pet Rescue may have been motivated to adopt out such cute, young, friendly and highly-adoptable dog since they could make more money that way than on a release fee. Why are they refusing to work with the original owner at all at this point? Couldn't they get the adopter in contact with the original owner without compromising the adopter's personal information?

People are concerned that Pet Rescue is lying about what happened to Pequeno; they're concerned he  was actually euthanized or sold, or that their record keeping is so haphazard that they simply don't know who took him.

 Poorly-handled situations like this erode the community's trust in their animal shelter.

Certainly, Pet Rescue is not required to hold on to dogs indefinitely if their owners aren't able to pick them up right away. But, as a pet owner myself, it's scary to think what might happen to one of my pets if they escaped their yard.

Original information here.

Response to the Excuses of HSEO's Director

On 6/16/13, the East Oregonian published a newspaper article discussing the communities' issues with Pet Rescue. (It's behind a paywall, but it's only a dollar, and I encourage you to read the whole thing).

It quotes Jackie Alleman (owner and director of Pet Rescue) quite a bit.

Jackie Alleman also sent in a letter to the Editor on 6/20/13.

Since no one from Pet Rescue will talk with me directly, I'd like to respond to her statements from both the article and the letter here.


The article states that "...Pet Rescue’s executive director Jackie Alleman is growing wary of what she sees as unwarranted public scrutiny. She said that the shelter has no legal obligation to host volunteers."

This is true, and also ridiculous. Of course there's no legal obligation to have volunteers. It's also not against the law for Pet Rescue to not vaccinate animals, have a website, advertise adoptable animals, or any number of smart shelter practices that I've already outlined. And if they were a non-profit dealing with used furniture or canned food, no one would care. But they're dealing with living animals, pets, and therefore they have a moral and ethical obligation that has nothing to do with legalities. And what's more, they receive tax dollars and donations, so, yeah, public scrutiny is very much warranted.


It also says, "Alleman argued that the training and supervision involved with hosting volunteers makes it a consuming endeavor for Pet Rescue."

and yet she also says: "Alleman said the shelter no longer lets the dogs out to exercise because they don’t have the time."

I'm sorry that doing your job correctly is time-consuming. If this were a regular business instead of a non-profit, that kind of excuse would get you fired.

Pet rescue "...receives the majority of funding from local government (Umatilla County and the city of Hermiston) ... about $120,000 per year... Alleman said that the shelter prides itself on keeping a tight budget."


"Alleman is no longer a paid employee, but lives on-site and receives about $40,000 per year in rent from the shelter."

"Alleman said she is not one to ask for other people’s money and push for donations for the shelter."

They could probably stretch their dollars a little farther if they weren't paying rent to their own director and also started advertising for donations from the community. I'm sure that $40,000 would more than pay for a part-time volunteer coordinator/trainer, for example. Then they wouldn't have to worry themselves about how "time comsuming" it is to have volunteers do free labor for them.

"Hermiston city manager Ed Brookshier said the shelter’s service is “satisfactory” for the city, adding that currently Pet Rescue is the only option. “Frankly, there is no other service around... some larger counties provide their own shelter but we wouldn’t be able to afford that.”

This is certainly understandable, and I don't think anyone expects the city of Hermiston to open a completely city-run animal shelter. Many, many cities and counties do exactly what Hermiston does and contracts their animal control and sheltering with a private non-profit. It's win-win situation in most cases, as the city doesn't have to fund the entire operation, and a non-profit gets a boost of revenue and legitimacy in the community. It's not some new, revolutionary thing; lots of other shelters are in this exact situation and are doing a much, much better job than Pet Rescue.

"Pet Rescue euthanizes nearly half of the thousands of animals it brings in each year. It’s not something Alleman likes, but she said she could never keep the shelter afloat and help 232 dogs and 67 cats get adopted in the last year if they didn’t turn to euthanasia. '“We have to make hard decisions every day,”' Alleman said. “If we didn’t, this shelter would have shut down 19 years ago."

Is it a hard decision to utilize free online advertising? Is it a hard decision to call other rescues in the area when your shelter is full and you plan to euthanize a healthy animal? Is it a hard decision to ask for donations from the public to keep the shelter "afloat"? Is it a hard decision to stop paying yourself $40,000 in rent and instead use that money to save more of the animals you claim you "have to" kill? Is it a hard decision to spend 10 extra minutes per animal to get a good photograph to help market them more effectively? Is it a hard decision to follow any of the best practices for animal shelters that are listed online for free?

In her letter to the editor, Alleman says:

"Suzanne complains in the article ... that she doesn’t see Pet Rescue in the community. We provide tours for girl scout, boy scout and youth groups. We provide pet education classes in the local school districts. We’ve set up a booth at the Good Shepherd Family Education day and handed out information and goodies for 4 or more years now. We’ve had entries in the Hermiston parade. This last year we provided 1300 lbs of dog and cat food for families and seniors citizens that need temporary emergency help. Every year we mentor high school seniors that are interested in animal care as a profession. If Suzanne hasn’t seen us, I guess we don’t hang out in the same places."


All good stuff. Why not do more?

Suzanne is not the only person who doesn't see them in the community. They need to "hang out" in more places, more often, to get more positive exposure. That leads to more adoptions and more pet lives saved.

(And, as a side note for perspective, 1300 lbs of food, while commendable, isn't all that much - it amounts to 33, forty-pound bags of dog food. In an entire year. Fuzz Ball Animal Rescue, which has an extremely small budget (in the hundreds of dollars range) and only a handful of volunteers, managed to give out about 300 lbs of food in 2012. Pet Rescue should be able to do a lot more.)




Alleman says: "We vaccinate high risk animals when they enter our shelter, but then we still have to wait at least 10 days for the shot to have the optimum effect. We have found that one of the best ways for our shelter to keep germs at bay, besides cleaning and disinfecting daily, is to keep dog to dog exposure at a minimum. So this precludes us from letting all the animals run together. 

While it's true that not overcrowding cuts down on the disease transmission risk, as long as dogs share air space, the risk is there. Vaccinating for parvo upon intake is considered best practice by every expert in the field of animal sheltering. Vaccines are inexpensive: between $1-$5 per animal when purchased by a non-profit. There is no reason not to vaccinate all healthy-looking animals upon intake.

"We have volunteers come and walk dogs nearly every day we are open."

This directly contradicts what she told the reporter in the earlier article.



Alleman then starts blaming the public for the inadequacies of her organization: "I cannot express enough the importance of spaying and neutering your pets. I believe the key is to encourage more responsibility from pet owners. .. We believe that the best use of Pet Rescue's resources is to help pet owners become responsible by letting them invest in their own pets spay or neuter and vet care and Pet Rescue encouraging that, by providing assistance as needed. 

How does encouraging OTHER people to spay and neuter their pets help YOU get better at adopting out animals? It's blame-shifting, pure and simple.

"Don’t lash out at the shelters, who are trying to clean up the mess of overpopulation."

There is no such thing as pet "overpopulation". The statistics are readily available. There are, in fact, more than enough homes for every shelter animal, they just have to be marketed properly. And voicing valid criticisms with a goal to improve and save lives is not "lashing out".

"We are thankful to Washington State University and their excellent vet program ... for spaying and neutering at least 25 animals per year for adoption from our shelter."


That's great. But why isn't this advertised somewhere in the community (like on a website) to get more positive exposure for both the shelter AND the university? And why stop there? If you're having difficulty getting local vets to do free spay/neuters, get creative. Build a surgery suite onsite; Vets are usually much more willing to volunteer their time if it's not at their facility and they don't have to do set up or clean up. $40,000 would more than pay for a surgery table, instruments packs, and autoclave. Just sayin'.

 "HSEO/Pet Rescue reunites approximately 10 dogs a month with their lost owners and provides a centrally located facility for folks to check for their stray animal."

I'm confused by the way this is phrased - Alleman is just describing what they're paid by the city to do as if they're doing it for free out of the goodness of their hearts? It's a great idea to advertise and celebrate every stray that is returned to its owner, but this is merely the bare minimum that a shelter should be doing.



"Pet Rescue maintains an inventory of approx. 60 animals to provide the best assortment for those who are looking to adopt an animal. And any business-person knows that you keep your inventory healthy and marketable."

These are actually good ways of looking at things. Many in the rescue community disagree with me on this, but I and others believe that treating animal rescues as businesses and rescue animals as "products" helps to save lives because it puts us in the mind-set of doing everything we can to help animals get out of the shelter alive. Except that one of the main points of this website is that Pet Rescue doesn't have good business sense. They miss so many opportunities to advertise their product, keep their product healthy and marketable, save/make money, and engender a positive image in the community (their customers). Alleman isn't a good business person, that's the whole point of trying to get her to improve!



"Also, I assume, any successful business-person knows that he must sell his inventory at market prices."

She probably mentions this because so many people have complained about the high adoption prices; although there are no set prices for pets from HSEO, some non-altered, non-vaccinated dogs have sold for hundreds of dollars. Adoption prices are controversial but it's my opinion that Pet Rescue's are higher than they need to be, especially when they aren't investing that much in each animal (not spaying or vaccinating in many cases).

"I am happy that Suzanne found a place to volunteer her time. And I am sure, with her efforts, her statement, “the dogs are not overpopulated, just under marketed,” her new shelter will be empty soon."

Ooo, a little passive-aggressiveness. Nice.

"... as in politics, there are many ways to provide services and care for the abandoned and stray animals that are out there in our community. Our current policies are what works for us..."

But they're NOT working. That's the point. At best, they're barely adequate. They could be so much better, and so many more lives could be saved.

... 500 animals that come through our door each year. .. adopting more than 260 shelter dogs per year and reuniting about 120 with their owners.

There's conflicting statistics: in the EO article, it said "thousands" of animals, not 500. But anyway, again, why aren't these happy tails advertised somewhere?

I've said this many times, but since I'm being bad-mouthed but some people about my motivations, it bears repeating: My goal in voicing these criticisms is to help improve the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon/Pet Rescue. If there were another, nicer, less public way of getting the management to shape up and come into 21st century animal-sheltering, I'd do it. I know personally, and from talking with many other people, that the community's concerns and suggestions have been ignored for years. Sometimes public shaming is the only way to get people out of their rut.

An article worth noting

"Former MAS Employee Convicted of Animal Cruelty"
http://yesbiscuit.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/another-former-mas-employee-convicted-of-animal-cruelty/

Just put out there as an example for interested parties. Even animal shelter employees are not exempt from animal cruelty laws. If there are witnesses willing to come forward, such abusers can indeed face jail time.

Update on trying to get some questions answered

On June 6 2013, I sent a follow-up email to the Pet Rescue email asking about my original email and if I could expect a response soon. I received a reply that day from Jackie Alleman, (from her personal email account, not Pet Rescue's, which strikes me as a bit odd). She said:

"We would love to set up a time you can come by and I can answer your questions for you.  You can contact me at..." and then gave her personal email and phone number (again, odd).

I emailed her a day and time, she emailed back and said she couldn't make that time and she offered an alternative. I emailed back and offered to meet the next afternoon.

There wasn't a response from her after that.

However, on 6/21/13, Beau Putnam emailed me from the Pet Rescue email address. Here is our brief exchange:

This was probably a response to an East Oregonian newspaper article from 6/17/13 that interviewed me about my (and the communities') issues with Pet Rescue.

Also take a look at the Facebook page for the East Oregonin from 6/18/13. There are comments from the community about their experiences with Pet Rescue, and many are negative and reflect what I've heard from people before.

Strangely, though Alleman hasn't responded to me directly, she posted a lengthy letter to the editor after the EO article came out. It's directed at me specifically, though she never told me about it: a friend had to point it out to me or I wouldn't have known it existed:


June 20, 2013
Dear Editor,
I’d like to publicly apologize to Suzanne Phillips for not finding her a time at Humane Society of Eastern Oregon/Pet Rescue Non-profit Shelter to volunteer. As we have many volunteers each week and eagerly find tasks for them to do, I can only imagine that there was a misunderstanding between her and our staff. Pet Rescue will set policy so we can improve each volunteer experience, without adding undue liability or risk to our volunteer or HSEO/Pet Rescue.

Suzanne complains in the article (East Oregonian, Tuesday, June 18) that she doesn’t see Pet Rescue in the community. We provide tours for girl scout, boy scout and youth groups. We provide pet education classes in the local school districts. We’ve set up a booth at the Good Shepherd Family Education day and handed out information and goodies for 4 or more years now. We’ve had entries in the Hermiston parade. This last year we provided 1300 lbs of dog and cat food for families and seniors citizens that need temporary emergency help. Every year we mentor high school seniors that are interested in animal care as a profession. If Suzanne hasn’t seen us, I guess we don’t hang out in the same places.

Unfortunately, the bulk of animals that come to pet rescue through government agencies are strays. That means they have had unknown care and their mental stress and physical health is compromised. So each dog we take in, threatens the health of the other animals in the shelter with the germs it carries. It is very common for animal shelters to constantly deal with diseases such as parvo and kennel cough and we do too. We vaccinate high risk animals when they enter our shelter, but then we still have to wait at least 10 days for the shot to have the optimum effect. We have found that one of the best ways for our shelter to keep germs at bay, besides cleaning and disinfecting daily, is to keep dog to dog exposure at a minimum. So this precludes us from letting all the animals run together. We have volunteers come and walk dogs nearly every day we are open. We will review this policy again and strive to improve the facilities of the shelter to allow individual dogs more exercise time.

I cannot express enough the importance of spaying and neutering your pets. I believe the key is to encourage more responsibility from pet owners. Don’t lash out at the shelters, who are trying to clean up the mess of overpopulation. Motivating pet owners with proper licenses and fees is one way. We believe that the best use of Pet Rescue's resources is to help pet owners become responsible by letting them invest in their own pets spay or neuter and vet care and Pet Rescue encouraging that, by providing assistance as needed. We are continually looking for ideas that will help provide these services to families without taking away their commitment to provide for their own animal. We are thankful to Washington State University and their excellent vet program (which some of our local vets are alumni) for spaying and neutering at least 25 animals per year for adoption from our shelter.

I’d like to mention that HSEO/Pet Rescue reunites approximately 10 dogs a month with their lost owners and provides a centrally located facility for folks to check for their stray animal. Each city sets their own fine or deterrent for picking up a lost animal and those funds collected from grateful families go back to the government agencies. The animals that are not claimed within 5 days (Oregon State require only 3) are then evaluated and put up for adoption. Aggressive, severely injured and sick animals must be euthanized. The rest of these animals become the inventory of Pet Rescue. Pet Rescue maintains an inventory of approx. 60 animals to provide the best assortment for those who are looking to adopt an animal. And any business-person knows that you keep your inventory healthy and marketable. To think that we don’t weigh seriously the hard decisions of euthanasia, haven’t managed a business with inventory. Also, I assume, any successful business-person knows that he must sell his inventory at market prices. We believe, the price of the investment in the animal does more to ensure a safe, loving, forever home than an intrusive and judgmental home visit. But again, our board will continue to revisit this policy.

In addition, I want to thank the amazing folks in this area for their good wishes and financial and verbal support they continually give us, from the first years to today, and even through this scrutiny by the East Oregonian Newspaper. People of Umatilla and Morrow County have had the vision to support a shelter of our kind for 2 decades. We will strive to manage the resources wisely these good people grant us to provide a shelter they can be proud of.

I am happy that Suzanne found a place to volunteer her time. And I am sure, with her efforts, her statement, “the dogs are not overpopulated, just under marketed,” her new shelter will be empty soon. I know the hard work that each shelter director down to kennel cleaner puts in every day. And, as in politics, there are many ways to provide services and care for the abandoned and stray animals that are out there in our community. We welcome new agencies with their opinions on animal care, to help with this challenging problem. We will even help you succeed as much as we are able. Our current policies are what works for us and this end of Umatilla and Morrow County and the 500 animals that come through our door each year. And with a little tweeking of guidelines here and there, we have stayed in business for over 20 years now, adopting more than 260 shelter dogs per year and reuniting about 120 with their owners. With no huge grant or government agency money to build us a shelter, my mother, Gay Van Schoiack, took her husband’s life insurance policy and built a building, cleaned the kennels and paid the bills, month after month, because that was the level of her commitment to the animals and this community. Humane Society of Eastern Oregon/Pet Rescue will continue her commitment and legacy.

Sincerely, Jackie Alleman
Director of Humane Society of Eastern Oregon /Pet Rescue
1844 NW Geer Rd, Hermiston, OR 97838


I'll respond to this letter in another post.

Pet Rescue avoids answering questions from the public?

One of the biggest red flags with Pet Rescue is their lack of transparency. There is almost no information online about the organization. Their policies, goals, mission statement, financial information, shelter statistics, even something as simple as the names and duties of the board members is all a mystery. And considering the many allegations of poor practices and downright abuse, many people in Hermiston are concerned that such a lack of transparency is just a sign of corruption and an attempt to hide shady dealings from the public.

On May 27 2013, I sent an email to the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon with a list of 18 questions (see below). The next day, Jackie Alleman (the president of Pet Rescue) sent a Facebook message to my employer stating that she thought some of the questions were "confrontational" but that she would "compile that information as soon as possible". It was inappropriate for her to contact my employer in any way: my questions were sent from my personal email on a weekend day and there was no information in the email that pointed to where I worked and in fact none of the questions had anything to do with where I worked; I was asking them as a concerned citizen. She would have had to search my name on the internet to even figure out that information, and I find that unprofessional and downright strange.


But the bigger point is: I have yet to recieve a response of any kind.

Here are the questions I sent:

Hi, since I moved here a few years ago, I've heard a lot of negative rumors circulating about Pet Rescue, and I was hoping you could answer a few questions. The Humane Society of Eastern Oregon is the largest shelter in the entire region, and I really want to give you the benefit of the doubt.

1) It's difficult to find information about your organization online. Can you tell me the names, and duties of the board of directors (and any paid staff) for Pet Rescue?

2) Do you have yearly statistics for  things like: number of animals that you took in, number adopted, number of return adoptions, number and reason for euthanasias, etc? And if so, is it published somewhere or can you send it to me?

3) I've heard from several people that you've adopted animals to friends or family members who then used the animals for breeding purposes, is this true?

4) Do you utilize foster homes? How many foster homes do you currently have?

5) Every time I visit the shelter, I never see any volunteers working (walking dogs, manning the front desk, cleaning, answering phones, etc). Pretty much the only person I've seen there is Beau Putnam. How many volunteers do you currently have coming on, say, at least a weekly basis? How often are dogs walked during the day?  Is there a fenced play area nearby where dogs can play off leash?

6) What kind of contract(s) do you have with local municipalities, which cities/counties do you contract with, and what are your specific (contracted) duties? How much money do the cities/counties pay you for these contracts?

7) How long do you typically hold a stray/found animal before offering it for adoption or euthanizing?

8) I think that euthanasias are performed in the shelter building, but I've heard that they're done in the cat room in front of all the cats. Is this true? Is there a certified euthanasia tech on staff?

9) The last time I visited the shelter, there were no toys or bedding in any of the dog runs, are the dogs provided with any toys or bedding at any time during the day?

10) The last time I visited the shelter, there were healthy cats in cages very close to cats with an obvious URI. Do you ever separate or quarantine obviously sick animals from the healthy ones?

11) Do you vaccinate animals upon intake? All of the Pet Rescue adoptions paperwork I've seen show that you either don't vaccinate at all, or only vaccinate the day an animal is adopted.

12) Sometimes I've seen some very nice, obviously professional photos of adoptable animals on the Pet Finder website, but most of the time the photos are very poor quality. Is there a photographer who volunteers sometimes, and if so, why doesn't he or she take all the photos for marketing purposes?

13) I've also noticed that almost all the entries on the Pet Finder page under "adopted" animals (aka the "Happy Tails") have been deleted (normally Petfinder keeps them up forever as good publicity for the shelter). Why is that?

14) I've also noticed on Petfinder that the postings for adoptable animals almost never have a description or much information on each animal, even for pets that have been listed for days or weeks. Why is that? Who puts up the Petfinder listings? Do you ever have volunteers do this?

15) Why does Pet Rescue not have its own website?

16) Are there written protocols or SOP's for shelter operations and policies? And if so, can you send them to me?

17) What kind of software/record-keeping do you use at the shelter to keep track of animal ID's, intakes, adoptions, etc?

18) Which veterinarian(s) do you typically use for shelter animals?

I understand that was a lot of questions, but these things concern me and others in the community. Thank you for your time in answering them.

Today I sent a follow up email. We'll see if they respond.

Marketing of Adoptable Animals: Photography and Descriptions

One of the most important (and easy and cheap) ways to market adoptable animals is to have a good photo and description.

Why it's important.

Most shelters are lucky enough to have at least one volunteer who is a professional photographer or serious hobbyist. But even if they don't, anyone can take a decent photo, even with a camera phone: It simply needs to be well-lit, with an uncluttered background, in focus, and catching the animal looking relaxed and happy. This might take a few more minutes than simply snapping a shot of the animal coming in the shelter door, but it can make all the difference in the world.

Take for example, these screen shots from the first page of the Petfinder page of Humane Society of Eastern Oregon from May 30 2013:

Jack and Butterscotch have been up for adoption for at least a week, and yet no one has taken decent photos of them. The photos are poorly lit, poorly focused, and the dogs look scared and stressed. Not the best image if you want to showcase an animal. And if a potential adopter clicks through to read more about these dogs, they don't have any description on their pages:

The only information we get is the breed, gender, and adoption fee. Nothing about the dog's history, personality, energy level, or suitability with children and other pets. Certainly, an interested adopter could call the shelter to get this information, but why put up yet another barrier to adoption when it takes only a few minutes to make this information easily available to the public? And these dogs have been at the shelter for over a week. That is plenty of time for a volunteer to spend some time getting to the know the dog and write a brief description in Petfinder.

A good, brief description of animal anywhere he/she is being advertised: Name, aprox. age, weight, or adult size if it's a baby, maybe a sentence or two of background history, 1-3 sentences on personality, and a cute quirk that will help the animal stand out a bit. End the description with the contact info for the shelter so that interested adopters don't have to go searching for it, it's all right there and they can call or email the shelter within seconds of becoming interested.


I've had this job myself for a couple of the rescues I volunteer for. Petfinder's interface is simple and easy to use. This is an excellent task for volunteers, and takes only a few minutes to set up, take the photos, and upload them to the website.

Being very generous, let's say it takes a total of 30 minutes of time per animal to evaluate them, take a decent photo, upload it, and write a description. There's only 11 animals on the Petfinder page, that's only 5 1/2 hours. A single volunteer could knock that out in a day at no cost to the shelter. And if its a task that's made routine by the shelter management, it's something that could easily be kept up to date when new animals are added to the shelter. 30 minutes per animal is not a lot to ask.

We know that Pet Rescue is capable of this photos because the one of Aurora is good! It's well-lit, in focus, uncluttered background, and she's in an eye-catching pose looking at the camera. Not perfect, but clean, happy, and eye catching, which is all you really need.

We also know that Pet Rescue is capable of writing good descriptions, because Duke and Tigger (although their photos are terrible) have them:

Moreover, on May 30 2013, there were only 11 animals listed on the Petfinder page, all of them dogs. I suspect they also have cats and kittens for adoption (they almost always do), and probably more dogs, but I don't know for sure because there is no information about them anywhere online.

All adoptable animals should be advertised, it only makes good marketing sense. The longer it takes to get them adopted, the more money is spent to house them and the more time they spend taking up space that could go to other animals in need.

The internet is just bursting with tips on photographing shelter animals. Here are a few of them:

How to take better photos of shelter pets, step-by-step
How photography can save pets' lives, from Petfinder.com
Ten simple steps that improve animal shelter photos
Taking great photographs of shelter animals
Five non-conventional tips for creating compelling images of shelter animals

Adopting out microchipped dogs: Cookie's story

This story was sent to me by Becky. She picked up a friendly stray dog in Hermiston on May 12 2013. She didn't trust Pet Rescue, so instead of taking him to the shelter right away, she decided to take on the work herself of finding the dog's owners.

Becky writes: 

"I took him to the vet the next day. He was scanned for a micro chip and one was immediately found. I was elated! They made two phone calls and located the registry on which he was registered and was put in contact with the registered owner.

Maria, the owners daughter, could not believe her father's dog had been found. He had been gone for four months. What was more incredulous, they live in Yakima! Someone had Cookies with them in their truck, there is some confusion as to who, it was either the son in law or the owner, when they stopped in Plymouth, Washington. Cookies went missing during their stop there. He was unable to find him and had to get back on the road.  At that time we had no idea how he had gotten to Hermiston. 

Maria was not immediately able to come to Hermiston due to her fathers illness. I told her not to worry, I enjoyed having Cookies.  His hair was in such deplorable condition that I had him groomed and sent updated pics to Maria.  Two weeks went by and that little dog stole not only my heart but my whole family's.

Fourteen days to the day we found Cookies, my three year old son let Cookies outside without our knowledge. Our yard is fenced but Cookies is so small, there are a couple of spots he can slip out. As soon as we realized he was missing, the search was on. We walked around our neighborhood and posted his picture on several Facebook sites. I also left a voice message on Pet Rescue's answering machine Tuesday morning at 6:30am. And I made the agonizing call to Maria to let her know. I felt I had let her dad down.

A woman commented on one of the posts I put on a Facebook page and suggested we had a poodle thief on our hands because her mother in law had a poodle come up missing two weeks prior. Coincidence? As it turns out, no. After talking back and forth on Facebook, we determined we were looking for the same dog. She didn't immediately recognize the dog because the pic I posted was after he had been groomed. She said her mother in law had adopted the dog from Per Rescue three weeks prior. I told her Cookies' story and she was sympathetic but also upset that her family paid to adopt a dog that already had an owner.

I called Pet Rescue at 11:54am on Tuesday morning. Initially to make sure my message was heard and to check to see if Cookies had been turned in. Beau answered, confirmed he had received my message and said no one had called or turned Cookies in.

I should have left I at that but I couldn't. I told him about how I had heard he adopted Cookies out and questioned why no one checked for a micro chip. He defiantly said "That dog has never been here and we do check for chips. Micro chips aren't always registered." I argued that Cookies' micro chip is registered but my words fell on deaf ears.  He then informed me that whoever adopts a dog becomes the legal owner.

I contacted Hermiston Police Department. The dispatcher took a report and had a deputy call me. His demeanor was unpleasant and so was his response. He told me Pet Rescue is not required to check for micro chips. Despite my protests, he basically told me there was nothing they could do. "It is a civil matter."

I continued to call Pet Rescue every day looking for Cookies. I even went down there to see for myself that he wasn't there because I DO NOT trust them. Fast forward to Thursday, May 30 at 4:51pm. I was at the photo studio located in Wal Mart with my two youngest children getting their pictures taken. I missed a call on my phone while getting my boys into costume for the pictures. As soon as I got the opportunity, I checked my missed calls and saw that Pet Rescue had tried to call me. It was now 4:54pm (6 minutes before the shelter closed) so I immediately called back. 

Beau answered and he says, "I have your dog here." I start crying and and babbling. He asks me to tell him the story again because he is really confused. So I do so. He states that I am the only one who reported him missing so he will give him to me.

Because I am unable to immediately go and pick Cookies up, he says I can come in the following day and positively ID him and pick him up. I explained that it is easy to ID Cookies over the phone. Cookies has a very obvious injury to his nose. His left nostril is separated from his upper lip and there is a scar on the right side of his nose. Plus, you can easily feel his micro chip and told him where it was located.  While on the phone with me, he looks at Cookies' nose and then says, "I remember this dog now. We did adopt him out." 

The following morning, Beau calls me and says that he can't give the dog to me. He said he went back in the 'Lost and Found' book and found where the people who adopted him called to report him missing. He claimed that legally he had to give him back to them.

I was livid. What would this guy have done had I picked Cookies up the night before when he said I could have him? Demand that I give him back? He calls me a little later and claims to have come up with a solution that "works for everyone". His great idea was to contact the people who adopted him in Hermiston, ask them if they want the dog back. If they did not want him back, he would return the fee they paid for the dog to them. Then he would contact the original owners in Yakima and offer them the dog. They would have three days to pick him up and would have to pay a fee of $100. (Remember that the original owner is ill and homebound).

I did not see how this was a good or fair plan. I argued with him and he was quick to tell me that he don't have to do anything. I said "Oh I am we'll aware of that. That is exactly what I was told by a police officer." He says, "So now you're calling the cops on me?!" I defended myself by telling him that I was simply trying to find out if the original owners had a legal leg to stand on in order to get their dog back.

Beau has repeatedly asked why the original owners never called to look for their dog. I can't seem to get him to understand that these people live in Yakima. The dog went missing in Plymouth. How were they suppose to know he ended up in Hermiston?  He also argues that you don't just leave the area where your dog went missing but he doesn't understand that he had no choice. It is my understanding whoever was with the dog when he went missing was on a time constraint due to being on the clock and on the job. I also emailed Beau and argued the purpose of getting a pet micro chipped is so that if a pet goes missing, the owners can be contacted and the pet returned to them. His reply was this-

Hello, I agree with you and it is my hope that the people in Yakima do get their dog back. I hope it all works out. I would just like you to understand that micro-chips are quite controversial. For instance, micro-chip companies have certain scanners that only work for their particular micro-chip. Their are instances when a dog has come in that our so called "universal scanner" has not picked up certain brands of chips. On the other hand Vet Clinics are putting in micro-chips that shelters may not have scanners for. It is unfortunate but each scanner can run up to 700 dollars a piece and we have not been fortunate enough to have the companies donate scanners. On our end it is something most individuals to not know or understand. We are strong advocates of tags with phone numbers on them for these certain occasions. I hope you understand the issues at hand.
Thanks

Now I am to wait for Beau to call me when he gets an answer from the people who adopted him. By today, 3pm I still had not heard from him so I emailed him. He said he still had not been able to reach anyone."

Becky sent an update June 1st:

"The people who adopted Cookies surrendered him. Beau said he is going to return the adoption fee of $100 to them. My husband is on his way to Pet Rescue now to pick Cookies up. We have to pay the $100 adoption fee."

Then later that evening :

"Beau and my husband had a confrontation this morning while picking up Cookies. Later Beau showed up at our house. He has redeemed himself. He came to apologize.

Maybe he isn't a bad guy after all. His concern was that the original owners dumped Cookies and didn't really want him back. Honestly, no one really knows what the real story is. We can all guess and speculate but we will never really know Cookies' story"

We'll start by giving Pet Rescue the benefit of the doubt: Microchip universal scanners are not perfect. Even when used correctly, they fail to pick up chips a small percentage of the time. This error rate drops to almost zero if the animal is scanned a second time, however, which is why current best practice is to scan a stray dog at least twice.

I'd also like to address Beau's statements about microchips line by line:

"... micro-chips are quite controversial."

This hasn't been true since the 1990's, despite the rumors that are still circulating. Microhips used to be  controversial when they were a new, unproven technology that wasn't widely used. Now they are considered almost standard for pets to have, and statistics show that they significantly increase a lost pet's odds of being returned home. Every vet I know recommends them; most shelter and rescue groups have their pets microchipped before adopting them out. Even most of the small private rescue groups I've worked with have a universal scanner because microchips are so widely used nowadays. Several states even have laws pertaining to scanning for microchips. That's how widespread and important microchipping is in the US. The only "controversy" remaining is standardizing the frequencies used and making a universal database. With a current universal scanner, which Pet Rescue claims to have, these issues don't apply.

"..micro-chip companies have certain scanners that only work for their particular micro-chip. Their(sic) are instances when a dog has come in that our so called "universal scanner" has not picked up certain brands of chips. On the other hand Vet Clinics are putting in micro-chips that shelters may not have scanners for..."

Again, this is mainly a problem of the past. Currently, 98% of pets in the US are chipped with 125 kHz chips, there is one company that uses 128 kHz and the rest of the world uses only 134.2 kHz frequency chips, but obviously they're not used very often in the US. Current universal scanners pick up all of these frequencies, anyway.

It's not relevant to this case, anyway, since Cookie's microchip was 125 kHz.

"... each scanner can run up to 700 dollars a piece and we have not been fortunate enough to have the companies donate scanners..."

I'm not sure how this is relevant, since he already stated that Pet Rescue already has a universal scanner and used it on Cookies. Does he mean that they have an old scanner that is inadequate but they can't afford one that actually works? If that's so, it's disturbing, and Pet Rescue needs to correct that immediately. It's not a pet-owner's fault that the shelter has a scanner that outdated a decade ago.

The $700 figure is also an exaggeration; usually they run $250-$300. Cost is a bit irrelevant since this is a vital piece of equipment for any animal shelter, right up there with having electricity and running water. For Pet Rescue, $300 represents the adoption fees of two dogs. Or, have a fundraiser specifically for a new scanner. Heck, I've seen a three-day donut-selling fundraiser run by two people pull in that much money.


It's also not relevant to bring up the fact that sometimes owners forget to register their contact information with the chip company, or forget to update it: Cookie's registry was correct and up to date.

Microchip scanners fail a small percentage of the time, and if we assume that's what happened with Cookie, then certainly Pet Rescue didn't do anything wrong by adopting him out to the family in Hermiston. Once the truth came to light, however, they should have handled the situation MUCH differently.

I'm very glad that Beau apologized to Becky. And it's also true that we may never know what the real deal is with Cookies' original owner. To me it does seem unlikely that they "dumped" him in Plymouth, but it's always a possibility.

However, the facts remain: Cookies was microchipped and the contact information was up to date and the owners wanted him back. It should have been an open and shut case. There's really not much more to ask of the owners except maybe that they expend a little more energy to get the dog, but even that could be understandable due to the drive and having their minds on other things. Not everyone is willing to drop everything to drive 2 hours for a dog. It doesn't necessarily mean they're bad pet owners.

Beau did not handle this situation well. At best, it was sloppy shelter work followed by inappropriate customer service. Either way, he's the director and the public face of the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon and needs to step it up.

Marketing of Adoptable Animals: Overview

Why is marketing so important for animal shelters?

Despite the myth that there is a pet "overpopulation" problem in the US, when you look at actual statistics, there are vastly more homes for a new pet than there are pets being euthanized by shelters.

Overall, only 2% of America's dog population is euthanized each year in animal shelters. Now, that's still a large number: about 3.6 million pets are euthanized by shelters simply for "lack of a home", not for health reasons.  But it means that every shelter in the US is fully capable of adopting out every single one of the animals it would otherwise kill for space or "lack of a home".

Each year, about 23 million people are in the market for a new pet. Of those, 17 million have not yet decided where they're going to get that pet. For many reasons, some of these people choose to get pets from sources other than shelters. And that's OK, we just need to convince a relatively small percentage of people (3.6 million, or 21%) to choose a shelter animal instead.

Shelter pets aren't over-populated, they're under-marketed.

Once we do that, once we as the rescue community step up and truly do the best we can at marketing, then we'll never again be "forced" to euthanize another healthy animal for "space" or "lack of homes".

There will always be a need for animal shelters. There will always be a small number of irresponsible people out there; there will always be stray pets who need temporary shelter until owners can be found; there will always be people who need help re-homing a family pet due to lots of different (legitimate!) reasons.

A huge part of a shelter's job is to find homes for animals. This will always be true, and there is no escaping it; there is no "waiting it out"; there is no "waiting for the public to become 'more responsible'".

This is why organizations like Pet Rescue aka The Human Society of Eastern Oregon exist. This is why we allow them to be tax-exempt. This is why we pay them our tax dollars.

This is where marketing comes in.

Animal rescues and shelters are, in effect, in competition to "sell" their animals with a slew of other sources: Breeders, pet stores, free animals in the newpaper and on Craigslist (and from friends/family/neighbors), puppy mills, etc. It's the shelter's job to showcase their "product" and make it clear that it's better to get a pet from a shelter than anywhere else.

Too often, well-meaning people at shelters and rescues blame the public for not coming to them. They seem to think that everyone should just intuitively KNOW that it's a morally superior choice to get a pet from a shelter. This attitude leads to lackluster marketing, feelings of despair when the public doesn't show up, and a shelter "buying experience" that is depressing for customers. No one wants to come look for a new family member at a place that's stinky, poorly-lit, cheerless, and full of stressed-out, sad-looking animals.

There are some very simple, easy things that will immediately improve marketing of adoptable animals. Here are just a few examples:

Good photo of every adoptable animal


A good, brief description of every animal

Investing in every adoptable animal to make it more attractive (vaccinations, spay/neuter, trick training, etc) 

Posting ads in as many places as possible

Advertising widely

Taking the animals outside the building whenever possible to any dog-friendly event that will get the animal seen.


Customer-friendly shelter building. It doesn't matter how old or out-dated a building is, there are always wallet-friendly ways to cheer the place up.

I'll expand on the different aspects of marketing in future posts. I'll also give specific examples where Pet Rescue aka The Human Society of Eastern Oregon is currently failing in marketing, and simple steps they can take to improve. As long as they continue to euthanize animals for "lack of space", or "lack of homes", there is room for improvement. They are, in fact, obligated to improve.

Other resources:

Marketing best practices - a great list of resources for shelter managers
How to promote shelter pets for adoption, (pdf) from Best Friends Animal Society
How to find homes for homeless pets (pdf)
Show the positive side of shelter pets: increase adoption rates
Why people aren't adopting (Petsmart Charities/Ipsos study)
The where and why of adoption (Petsmart Charities/Ipsos study)
Using Facebook to increase adoptions
The care and marketing of long-term resident shelter pets (success stories from MI)
The life-saving equation
An entire Facebook page on the subject - tips and ideas
Unconventional marketing ideas for many kinds of businesses - lot's of ideas

Personal note

Due to health issues, I'll be mostly home-bound for the next couple months, and sitting in a chair for long periods is uncomfortable. I'll try to keep up the blog as best I can, but updates and replies to comments (if there are any!) may be spotty.

About the Author

Where I'm coming from.

I lived for many years in Corvallis, Oregon, home of Heartland Humane Society, for which I volunteered for 5 years. I also have volunteered for about 10 other animal rescues, I continue to be very active in the rescue community here in Eastern Oregon and Washington. I'm also very active in the online animal rescue and welfare community.  I also worked as a vet tech for three years. I also own dogs of my own, and have competed with them in dogs sports like agility and flyball. I've attended seminars on dog behavior and training, including a three day intensive seminar on training shelter dogs to reduce stress and increase adoptability put on by Kelly Dunbar.

That's my background. I'm not an expert in anything, but I feel that I have a better-than-average grasp of the history, current trends, and policies relating to animal shelters in North America.

The key things to know about Heartland Humane Society:

-Open admission animal shelter, contracting with the city and county to take in stray animals as well as owner-surrendered animals.

-They are "no-kill" in all but name. Well, mostly; they aren't perfect however they mostly follow all the tenets of the No-Kill program.

-Robust and well-organized volunteer program.

-Very active in their community - there is some kind of fund-raising and/or community outreach event at least monthly, they advertise in multiple different media (nice website, radio, social media, newspaper, television), they have donation jars in many local businesses, they have a volunteer-run thriftshop in downtown, they organize programs for low-income pet owners to help with pet retention, they organize spay-neuter programs, etc.

This is the type of sheltering system I expect in every community in North America. Not perfection, but functional and existing for the aim of re-homing pet animals who are temporarily homeless. This is the bare minimum of what we should expect.

In this time in history, as pets are becoming more popular than ever and owners are spending more money than ever on their pets despite a financial downturn, the type of functionality and low rate of euthanasia seen at Heartland Humane society is exactly what we as a community should expect as the norm from our animal shelter.

When I moved to Hermiston in 2010, one of the first things I did was email the Hermiston Humane Society (aka Pet Rescue; aka Human Society of Eastern Oregon) to offer to volunteer. This was the response I got:

Text response reads: "we appreciate you wanting to help out. All our volunteering is done between 8:45 am and 5 pm Tuesday through Saturday. Right now we are good on volunteers. (emphasis mine) You are welcome to come down and fill out a volunteer form and we can call you when needed."


One of the most important parts of a functioning shelter system is a robust volunteer program. This is especially true for shelters on a shoestring budget, who rely on volunteers to do everything from walk/train/socialize the animals, clean cages/dishes/toys, to managing the front desk, answering phone calls and email, and organizing and staffing community events.

While this email is polite, it's very strange for an animal rescue or shelter to say they don't need more volunteers. A good animal shelter continually and actively recruits volunteers and removes as many barriers as possible to have them help.

This point was driven home to me when I next contacted a private rescue and offered to volunteer for them. The difference was stark: They responded to my email within hours; sent the volunteer form as an email attachment so I didn't have to drive anywhere to fill it out; described exactly what type of volunteer work they needed, their mission and philosophy, and a preliminary plan for how I might fit into their organization; and how/what type of training I might need (none, as it turned out). That is a large reason why I chose to give my limited volunteer time to them instead of Pet Rescue. Another large reason is they are much more transparent about their record keeping and activities. More on that in later posts.

Later, I visited the Pet Rescue shelter building in Hermiston to see what it looked like. I suspected that if there was one red-flag raised, I'd likely see others.

Issue #1) There are only two animal holding areas, one for dogs and one for cats. There is no area to quarentine sick animals that I could see, and no separate room to perform euthanasias. It's a small building with limited space to hide such rooms, but I suppose I might have missed a back room or something.


Issue #2) The dog runs are small (a common problem with older shelter buildings, and not necessarily a deal-breaker), however every single run had more than one dog in it. Most had three or more. While it's common and accepted practice in animal sheltering to have more than one dog per run, it's considered best practice to match dogs carefully so that they don't fight or become more stressed by their cage mates. It's unusual that there wasn't even a single run that contained only one dog. I didn't ask, so it's possible that there were dogs in foster homes at the time and that all the dogs had been matched. I have my doubts, however.

Issue #3) there were no toys or beds or blankets in any dog run. Providing toys and comfortable bedding is a cheap and easy way to lower stress for shelter dogs, and is considered best practice. Being in a shelter is stressful, and without outlet, many dogs can develop behavioral issues which make them more difficult to adopt, or more likely to be returned after adoption. There are many programs out there where non-profit animal shelters can get toys and beds for free, so there's no reason for their absence accept laziness or uncaring or ignorance.

Issue #4) None of the dogs I saw that day had been vaccinated on intake. As I've talked with many people who have adopted pets from Pet Rescue aka The Humane Society of Eastern Oregon, and seen many of the adoption forms, it's obvious that pets are almost never vaccinated upon intake, and not always vaccinated on the day of adoption. Vaccinating on intake is considered best-practice and is one of the most important ways to prevent disease transmission in the shelter (aside from quarentine of sick animals).

Issue #5) It was a Saturday afternoon when I visited, and there was no one else on the property that I could see, except Beau Putnam the owner and manager, who was at the front desk. There were no other visiters and no volunteers. This seems especially odd after hearing via email that they didn't need more volunteers. A normal Saturday at Heartland Humane society meant multiple dog walkers working at once, cage cleaners working, cat socializers, dish and toy washers, and at least one person answering phones. Maybe I coincidentally visited at just the perfect moment between some volunteers leaving and others arriving, but I doubt it.

The only really positive thing I could see was that everything looked well-cleaned.

There are many other issues that I've come across since my first visit, and I'll talk about them more in future posts.

But, by far the biggest issue of all: Pet Rescue has a bad reputation in its own community. I've had a chance to talk to hundreds of pet owners who live in Hermiston and surrounding areas. The only positive opinions can be summed up as "they're doing the best they can".

I don't believe this is true. That's why I started this blog. I plan to lay out specific examples where Pet Rescue is failing in it's implied mission, and ways they can improve immediately.

I'm not the first to try to educate Beau Putnam on his outdated sheltering policies, but I hope that one more voice speaking up will eventually lead to change for the better.