The Hermiston Herald newspaper published a front page article about the recent public scrutiny of Pet Rescue on 1/16/15. Unlike the East Oregonian article on the same subject written by Natalie Wheeler in 2013, this one, by Sean Hart, was terribly unbalanced and poorly-researched almost to the point of libel.
Sean Hart attended the 1/12/15 city council meeting where four people spoke about the problems at Pet Rescue (including myself, and I'm named in the article). That would have been a good opportunity for him to pull any one of us aside to find out more about our concerns. Instead, the only people he talked to were Mark Morgan, (the assistant city manager), and Beau Putnam.
Mark Morgan made some inaccurate statements about Pendleton PAWS (an organization he knows little about), but Sean Hart didn't even bother contacting a PAWS representative to fact check, even though the subject was specific aspects of PAWS' policies and procedures.
A numbered list of inaccuracies:
1) "...the complaints were not specific in nature."
Again, he never bothered talking to any of us at the meeting, or doing any research on the subject (like, oh, Facebook or this blog), but even so, our complaints are VERY specific in nature. This blog discusses specific complaints in excruciating detail. As the meeting minutes show (see meeting minutes) there were specific complaints. Hart somehow doesn't mention any of them, except that we complain that Pet Rescue kills too many animals.
2) "...and many of the detractors’ claims are inaccurate or misleading." Ok, which ones? If I'm being misleading, please tell me where, and I'll do my best to address it. And anyway, if we apparently don't have specific complaints, than how can we mislead anyone? So, even though we "don't have specific complaints", Hart made sure to publish Beau Putnam's responses to our non-existent complaints:
2a) It's implied that one of our complaints, that Pet Rescue does not post its animals for adoption online before killing them, is false (even though we apparently don't have specific complaints?). Beau states that "most" of their animals are posted on Petfinder. As I've show people again and again on this blog, this is false. Usually (except for the last month, under intense negative public scrutiny) Pet Rescue has maybe 10% or fewer of it's available animals posted online ANYWHERE.
2b) It's implied that one of our complaints, that Pet Rescue turns away volunteers, is false (even though apparently we don't have specific complaints?) Pet Rescue has turned away volunteers as recently as December 2014, and even those who aren't turned away are mismanaged, and restricted from helping. Most animal shelters have an "open door" policy for volunteers, meaning that once they are trained on certain duties, they can come and go as they please as long as there is a staff member in the building. Pet Rescue doesn't seem to know what to do with volunteers, and wants to restrict them all to a set schedule, putting all kinds of barriers in front of people who want to help, but can only come a hour a week or whatever. Instead of encouraging and working with volunteers.
3) Putnam said, and when no-kill shelters in Pendleton and the Tri-Cities are at full capacity, people will bring in animals that are turned away there to his shelter. This is the opposite of my experience talking to rescuers in the East Oregon and Washington areas. Usually, people who are either turned away by Pet Rescue, or who don't want to use Pet Rescue, will take Hermiston strays AWAY from Hermiston, to Pendleton, Walla Walla, Tri-cities, or even as far as Portland. I'd love to see PROOF from Pet Rescue records, that they took in animals originating from other cities.
4) "In order for the shelter to be able to continue accepting all dogs, some that have not been adopted must be euthanized" - or, they can do what everyone including myself have been BEGGING them to do for years, and actually try to adopt their way out of killing. It's very possible to do so.
5) “Euthanasia is always a last resort,” Putnam said. “As long as they’re healthy and not aggressive, I will do the best I can to find that animal a home." I would love to see PROOF in the form of records, to show this is true. This is opposite of what many people with experience working with Pet Rescue have observed. And since most of the animals who are killed, are killed without ever being advertised, or without another rescue or foster home being contacted first, how can he say he's "doing the best we can"?
6) "the term “no-kill” can also be confusing and misleading"... and yet, there is a wealth of information online about the most common types of "no-kill" animal sheltering. Whether you call it "no-kill" or "low-kill" or "high-save"... the results are always the same. Shelters that truly try, do not kill "for space".
7) "Of the animals euthanized, some are unhealthy while others are aggressive... some owners bring in injured and sick animals just to be euthanized." I would love to see PROOF in the form of Pet Rescue records, that this is true. It's generally accepted that only about 10% of animals in a shelter need to be euthanized due to extreme suffering or aggression (the rest are either healthy, or treatable). And since most shelters don't include owner-requested euthanasias in their statistics (such an animal would not be considered an "intake"), those deaths should not "inflate" the kill numbers. Even so, 40% and 10% are worlds apart.
8) "Morgan said the way the Pendleton and Hermiston shelters operate and contract with the cities is different, which could contribute to misperceptions." This is the premise of the whole article, which I'll address below in detail. The short version: The organizations of PAWS and Pet Rescue, are comparable. The minor differences in their relationship with the city government is insignificant to the discussion of mismanagement and poor performance at Pet Rescue.
9) "After the holding period, Morgan said PAWS employees do not take all of the dogs from the police department. He said PAWS employees choose what dogs the shelter will admit, and the city is forced to pay additional fees for the remaining animals."
Flat out wrong, which Mr. Hart could have easily found out by actually talking to the organization he was reporting on. PAWS takes in EVERY stray dog from the City, except those (rare) who must be euthanized by law for aggression (even if those few dogs were added to PAWS' kill-rate, it would not make it much higher). PAWS also provides the city pound with vaccinations, leashes, and blankets (and the services of cleaning the blankets), and PAWS employees often travel (in their personal vehicles) to pick up stray dogs if the police aren't available. PAWS also takes in stray dogs directly from the street to the shelter if the pound is full, or if there are emergency circumstances, without being paid A DIME by the city for that service. The city of Pendleton is paying less, and getting more, out of it's relationship with PAWS than the city of Hermiston is from Pet Rescue.
10) Pet rescue is "open admission" and PAWS is not.
EVEN IF THIS WERE TRUE, it's irrelevant. There are plenty of truly "open admission" animal shelters across the US who have less than a 10% kill rate (Sean Hart perhaps could have discovered this by using Google, as I just did). And anyway, Pet Rescue is not as "open door" as they imply. They can and have turned people away who have stray Hermiston animals, and people who want to surrender owned animals. Just a few weeks ago, I personally took in a stray dog that Beau turned away. Sometimes owner "surrendered" animals have been taken straight to the kill room without ever going into a cage, so they barely count as an "intake".
In contrast, while it's true that PAWS does not simply take in any animal no questions asked, only to kill it later "for space", they don't "turn people away". Except in cases where the dog has killed another animal or has seriously bitten a person (and even then they sometimes make exceptions based on the circumstances). PAWS tries other methods: they work with owners to retain the animal whenever possible; work to find foster homes or emergency boarding; provide contacts or help with transportation for rescues that would more closely match their needs (breed specific rescue, etc); assist with low-cost spay/neuter/vaccinations and food assistance; help people post online and newpaper ads, and provide other advise for re-homing an animal themselves. PAWS office staff volunteer dozens of hours a week on a Face Book pet re-homing group helping people in the Eastern Oregon region. (And because PAWS isn't afraid of public scrutiny, any of this is easy to confirm and learn more about).
Simply consider the fact that PAWS was able to take in almost two hundred more animals last year, 782 vs. PR's roughly 600, despite being in a community of nearly identical size to Hermiston. If Pet Rescue was really so "open door", and PAWS some kind of picky pet boutique as implied, the opposite should be true.
The premise of the article is that PAWS and Pet Rescue should not be compared because they "operate differently". Yet, Hart didn't even bother contacting anyone from PAWS to find out how they actually operate. I don't know if this is laziness or bias, but the result is the same.
It's incredibly disappointing to see a reporter (and the editor) allowing the front page of their newspaper to be basically free advertising space for an tax-funded organization with which the community has legitimate concerns.
Showing posts with label transparency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label transparency. Show all posts
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Friday, January 9, 2015
Thursday, January 8, 2015
This is what it's like to have a conversation with Pet Rescue staff
Beau Putnam recently posted a statement on the Pet Rescue facebook page:
Here is the link, and here is a screen capture in case it gets removed:
I feel that Pet Rescue is once again not being honest with the public, and is trying to whitewash their reputation with a handful of vague platitudes. I've brought up many legitimate concerns with them for four years now, concerns that many other people have also brought up. I've provided numerous, specific, practical solutions, and continue to be ignored (and I honestly don't know why). We've all been ignored. It's true that Pet Rescue has made tiny improvements over the last few years, but it's not enough, and not fast enough. They could be doing so much more. There's no excuse for killing animals "for space" when there are so many life-saving alternatives they're not even trying.
So, I posted two comments on the facebook thread, and I'll let you judge if they were out of line. Beau evidently thought so, because he deleted them, and then blocked me from commenting. Not sure that's the best way to improve their reputation.
I also had a meeting set up with him tomorrow to talk about ways I could help improve Pet Rescue, but he cancelled because "something came up." I told him I'm still available at other times, we'll see if I ever get a chance to make my case to him.
Here is the link, and here is a screen capture in case it gets removed:
I feel that Pet Rescue is once again not being honest with the public, and is trying to whitewash their reputation with a handful of vague platitudes. I've brought up many legitimate concerns with them for four years now, concerns that many other people have also brought up. I've provided numerous, specific, practical solutions, and continue to be ignored (and I honestly don't know why). We've all been ignored. It's true that Pet Rescue has made tiny improvements over the last few years, but it's not enough, and not fast enough. They could be doing so much more. There's no excuse for killing animals "for space" when there are so many life-saving alternatives they're not even trying.
So, I posted two comments on the facebook thread, and I'll let you judge if they were out of line. Beau evidently thought so, because he deleted them, and then blocked me from commenting. Not sure that's the best way to improve their reputation.
I also had a meeting set up with him tomorrow to talk about ways I could help improve Pet Rescue, but he cancelled because "something came up." I told him I'm still available at other times, we'll see if I ever get a chance to make my case to him.
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Another way to look at it
One of the many problems with Pet Rescue's current policies (which, lacking transparency and anything in writing, basically seem to come down to "whatever Beaut Putnam feels like today"), is that it drives people away from using the shelter, which they are paying for with their tax dollars.
Putnam and Alleman like to say that they're providing a service to the community, but what's actually happening is they are pocketing tax dollars, while many of the animals that SHOULD go to the shelter and benefit from those dollars, end up elsewhere. For example, many strays are kept and adopted to new homes by the people who find them because they don't trust the shelter; some are brought to Pendleton PAWS for the same reason; still others never get picked up in the first place. I know many people who won't report or pick up a stray dog unless it's literally running into traffic or causing danger because they know it might have a better chance at living if it can find its own way home than if it ends up at Pet Rescue.
Putnam and Alleman like to say that they're providing a service to the community, but what's actually happening is they are pocketing tax dollars, while many of the animals that SHOULD go to the shelter and benefit from those dollars, end up elsewhere. For example, many strays are kept and adopted to new homes by the people who find them because they don't trust the shelter; some are brought to Pendleton PAWS for the same reason; still others never get picked up in the first place. I know many people who won't report or pick up a stray dog unless it's literally running into traffic or causing danger because they know it might have a better chance at living if it can find its own way home than if it ends up at Pet Rescue.
correct fees?
According to city of Hermiston, these are the fees for impounding a dog, etc: http://www.hermiston.or.us/finance/misc-rates-fees
Is Pet Rescue always following this? It says "excluding first day", but they sometimes charge for the first day. In fact, they often charge a full day's fee even if the animal's only been there an hour.
Is Pet Rescue always following this? It says "excluding first day", but they sometimes charge for the first day. In fact, they often charge a full day's fee even if the animal's only been there an hour.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
What Should We Demand of Our Local Shelter?
Why should we demand anything of the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon?
Because Pet Rescue is killing about 50% of the animals that come into its care every year and there is no excuse for such a high euthanasia rate. Here is the basic math: in the US there are about 3 million adoptable pets euthanized each year "for space" (including those at Pet Rescue). It sounds like a lot, but it turns out there are 17 million people looking for a pet who could have given those pets homes. All we have to do is reach a small number of those people. Why isn't Pet Rescue reaching these potential adopters, especially when we see that in Pendleton, La Grande, Walla Walla, and the Tri-Cities have no-kill shelters who ARE? Because Pet Rescue is not trying.
Because Pet Rescue is a non-profit organization. They put themselves out there, and receive benefits such as not having to pay taxes, as a service to the community. They are not a normal, autonomous business, answerable only to itself.
Because Pet Rescue receives most of its funding from tax dollars. They receive over $100,000 per year from Hermiston, and Umatilla. Those are OUR tax dollars, we get a say in how they're spent. And I for one don't find it appropriate to spend MY money killing healthy, treatable, and adoptable animals in the face of life-saving alternatives.
Because Pet Rescue already lost its contract with the City of Pendleton (to a no-kill shelter) a couple years ago because of their abysmal euthanization rate and poor reputation in the community.
Because many people, including myself, have asked, begged, pleaded, reasoned, and cried, for the management to change, to stop killing animals, to treat them more humanely, to try harder to find them homes before killing them. For years, we supported; we've suggested ideas; we've offered to volunteer; we've emailed informative articles; we've given options. Mostly, we have been ignored. Many people who want to volunteer are turned away; in some cases, volunteers have been banned from the building for daring to suggest things could be done a different way.
Because Pet Rescue could change to a no-kill shelter (saving about 90% of the animals that come through the doors, notwithstanding extremely sick or aggressive animals) TODAY, overnight, if they made the commitment. It's been done before in other cities around the US, the only thing standing in their way is commitment and caring. If they aren't willing to come into the 21st century, they need to get out of the shelter/rescue business and become for-profit dog dealers.
What Specifically Should We Demand?
The most obvious: Immediately stop euthanizing animals except in cases of extreme aggression or sickness.
This is made possible by immediate, and comprehensive, implementation of programs in 10 main areas:
Here, in my opinion, are the top priorities:
1) Pet Rescue needs to stop paying its own board member, Jackie Alleman, $40,000 per year in rent. That's over $3300 per month. That's SIX TIMES the amount spent on "animal care" according to the most recent tax return (see below). It may be perfectly legal, but it is morally and ethically wrong to throw away that many tax dollars while the animals are killed or go without basic amenities.
2) Expand and vote in a new board of directors. According to the most recent records, the three board members are the same as they've been for years, and they are all related to each other (see above). The organization is stagnant. Board members could and SHOULD do all kinds of organizational work, from writing grants, contacting other rescues for help, completing animal records; most shelters have at least 5 or 6 people, some have dozens. Make meeting minutes available online for people to read would help improve transparent record keeping (which currently has zero transparency) and improve their reputation in the community.
3) Encourage and seek out volunteers. At least as recently as this week, Pet Rescue has turned away people who want to volunteer because it's "too much work" to supervise and train them.Volunteers are the heart and soul of animal shelters. Everything that Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman claim they can't do, can be done by volunteers.
4) Post ALL adoptable animals in at least two places online (for example, petfinder.com and facebook), including a quick photo and brief description. They currently have less than 10% of their available animals advertised, including some who have been there for weeks.
5) Start working with other rescue organizations to get animals moving faster. There's no reason to let animals sit at Pet Rescue for months when there are other shelters who could have them adopted out within days. The Oregon Humane Society, to name just one, has a "second chance" program that
6) Start following the best practices laid out by the Association for Shelter Veterinarians: including
a) vaccinate ALL healthy-looking animals upon intake with core vaccines (cost is usually $1-$4 per vaccine), and b) provide proper cages for cats and kittens, including allowing a minimum of 2 feet between food and litter box.
7) Provide basic comfort items to each animal: bedding, toys, chew toys, etc. Currently, bedding is only rarely provided to any dogs, even on cold days. Puzzle toys (like 'kongs') and chew toys are proven to reduce stress in shelter dogs, making them more adoptable.
8) Utilize volunteers to take nice photos of each animal that's been there longer than, say, a week. There are several photographers who have volunteered their time in the past to take high quality photos, they should be contacted again. Good photos and descriptions of animals are essential to attracting adopters.
9) Create a stray pet plan, and stick to it. This should include: Scanning every stray animal with the microchip scanner when they come in (there are at least three KNOWN cases in the past two years of Pet Rescue adopting out a pet to a new home even though it had a microchip, even though they have a new, universal scanner given to him by Hermiston Veterinary Clinic); posting every stray pet to at least two lost and found online pet sites within 24 hours of intake (for example, craigslist and FB pet group).
10) Start utilizing the low-cost non-profit spay/neuter clinic in Benton City, WA. It's ridiculous that only 25 animals a year are spayed/neutered by Pet Rescue. Using the clinic, this number could go up to almost 100%.
There are many, many potential improvements, but this is a good start. Here is a sample list of resources about animal sheltering in the 21st century:
http://eowatchdog.blogspot.com/p/resources.html
How can we force them to change if they don't want to?
You CAN make a difference just by sending an email, right now. Write city hall. They're the ones who contract with Pet Rescue for pound services. They're the ones giving our tax dollars to a under-performing contractor.
City Hall's phone number is (541) 567-5521
Email: city@hermiston.or.us
Mailing and physical address: City of Hermiston 180 NE 2nd St. Hermiston, OR 97838
Office hours: 8am - 5pm weekdays
The Hermiston city manager is Byron Smith
The assistant city manager is Mark Morgan
The mayor is Dr. David Drotzmann, ddrotzmann@hermiston.or.us
City council members:
Lori Davis, ldavis@hermiston.or.us
Clara Beas-Fitzgerald, cbeas-fitzgerald@hermiston.or.us
Jackie C. Myers, jmyers@hermiston.or.us
Manuel Gutierrez, mgutierrez@hermiston.or.us
Rod S. Hardin, rhardin@hermiston.or.us
John Kirwan, jkirwan@hermiston.or.us
Doug Primmer, dprimmer@hermiston.or.us
Attend a city council meeting and speak a few words during the "public comment" portion. Be polite and brief. They need to know that the community has many concerns about it's animal shelter AND that there's a set of straight-forward solutions that could be implemented TODAY. Print out this blog post to use as talking points. (The next meeting is January 12 at 7pm)
Write a letter to the editor to the Hermiston Herald: http://www.hermistonherald.com/hh/submit-letter
Write a letter to the editor of the East Oregonian: http://www.eastoregonian.com/eo/submit-letter
Write emails to Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman, or message them on Facebook. Let them know that there BETTER ways to do things, and they don't HAVE to kill so many animals. Include specific examples of things they could be doing better. Be polite, but firm. They've done business the same way for a long time, they're ingrained with a certain way of thinking, and are used to blaming others for their shortcomings. They can't hide anymore, we have the data and numerous examples of other no-kill shelters to prove it.
Here is an example letter:
Dear Mayor and Council,
I have learned some disturbing information about the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon aka Pet Rescue, the animal shelter that is contracted by the city to take care of stray pets. They kill 50% of the animals they take in. This is far above the state average of about 16%, and far more than they should. Most of these animals are adoptable, and they do this killing in the face of life-saving alternatives. In addition, they pay their own board member (Jackie Alleman) $40,000 in annual rent, but only spend $5800 in animal care. People who visit the building report dogs and cats get the bare minimum of care, often going without blankets in cold weather, or toys to keep them occupied, or daily walks due to "not enough" volunteers... even as they turn away people who WANT to volunteer! I am greatly concerned that my tax dollars are paying for this substandard and inhumane service.
A group of community members who are knowledgeable in the area of modern animal sheltering have drawn up a list of recommendations for changes at Pet Rescue that would immediately stop the killing of adoptable animals (and improve the mental and physical health of the animals). They've tried to discuss it with board and staff members of Pet Rescue (namely, Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman), but have been completely dismissed. Some volunteers have even been banned from the building for suggesting changes. The list of policies can be found here: ___________
This is completely unacceptable in the year 2015. Every municipality in Oregon and Washington has access to a "no-kill" shelter (a facility with a 90% save rate, euthanizing only for extreme sickness or aggression). Our local ones include Pendleton PAWS, Benton-Franklin Humane Society, Blue Mountain Humane Society of Walla Walla, and Blue Mountain Humane Association of Union county.
We demand that the City of Hermiston contract their animal control with a no-kill shelter. You have influence to affect change at the Hermiston shelter, but if they won't comply with these simple, straight-forward changes in policy, than it's your duty to see that they no longer have the support of our tax dollars.
Sincerely,
(name),
(your address)
Because Pet Rescue is killing about 50% of the animals that come into its care every year and there is no excuse for such a high euthanasia rate. Here is the basic math: in the US there are about 3 million adoptable pets euthanized each year "for space" (including those at Pet Rescue). It sounds like a lot, but it turns out there are 17 million people looking for a pet who could have given those pets homes. All we have to do is reach a small number of those people. Why isn't Pet Rescue reaching these potential adopters, especially when we see that in Pendleton, La Grande, Walla Walla, and the Tri-Cities have no-kill shelters who ARE? Because Pet Rescue is not trying.
Because Pet Rescue is a non-profit organization. They put themselves out there, and receive benefits such as not having to pay taxes, as a service to the community. They are not a normal, autonomous business, answerable only to itself.
Because Pet Rescue receives most of its funding from tax dollars. They receive over $100,000 per year from Hermiston, and Umatilla. Those are OUR tax dollars, we get a say in how they're spent. And I for one don't find it appropriate to spend MY money killing healthy, treatable, and adoptable animals in the face of life-saving alternatives.
Because Pet Rescue already lost its contract with the City of Pendleton (to a no-kill shelter) a couple years ago because of their abysmal euthanization rate and poor reputation in the community.
Because many people, including myself, have asked, begged, pleaded, reasoned, and cried, for the management to change, to stop killing animals, to treat them more humanely, to try harder to find them homes before killing them. For years, we supported; we've suggested ideas; we've offered to volunteer; we've emailed informative articles; we've given options. Mostly, we have been ignored. Many people who want to volunteer are turned away; in some cases, volunteers have been banned from the building for daring to suggest things could be done a different way.
Because Pet Rescue could change to a no-kill shelter (saving about 90% of the animals that come through the doors, notwithstanding extremely sick or aggressive animals) TODAY, overnight, if they made the commitment. It's been done before in other cities around the US, the only thing standing in their way is commitment and caring. If they aren't willing to come into the 21st century, they need to get out of the shelter/rescue business and become for-profit dog dealers.
What Specifically Should We Demand?
The most obvious: Immediately stop euthanizing animals except in cases of extreme aggression or sickness.
This is made possible by immediate, and comprehensive, implementation of programs in 10 main areas:
Here, in my opinion, are the top priorities:
1) Pet Rescue needs to stop paying its own board member, Jackie Alleman, $40,000 per year in rent. That's over $3300 per month. That's SIX TIMES the amount spent on "animal care" according to the most recent tax return (see below). It may be perfectly legal, but it is morally and ethically wrong to throw away that many tax dollars while the animals are killed or go without basic amenities.
2) Expand and vote in a new board of directors. According to the most recent records, the three board members are the same as they've been for years, and they are all related to each other (see above). The organization is stagnant. Board members could and SHOULD do all kinds of organizational work, from writing grants, contacting other rescues for help, completing animal records; most shelters have at least 5 or 6 people, some have dozens. Make meeting minutes available online for people to read would help improve transparent record keeping (which currently has zero transparency) and improve their reputation in the community.
3) Encourage and seek out volunteers. At least as recently as this week, Pet Rescue has turned away people who want to volunteer because it's "too much work" to supervise and train them.Volunteers are the heart and soul of animal shelters. Everything that Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman claim they can't do, can be done by volunteers.
4) Post ALL adoptable animals in at least two places online (for example, petfinder.com and facebook), including a quick photo and brief description. They currently have less than 10% of their available animals advertised, including some who have been there for weeks.
5) Start working with other rescue organizations to get animals moving faster. There's no reason to let animals sit at Pet Rescue for months when there are other shelters who could have them adopted out within days. The Oregon Humane Society, to name just one, has a "second chance" program that
6) Start following the best practices laid out by the Association for Shelter Veterinarians: including
a) vaccinate ALL healthy-looking animals upon intake with core vaccines (cost is usually $1-$4 per vaccine), and b) provide proper cages for cats and kittens, including allowing a minimum of 2 feet between food and litter box.
7) Provide basic comfort items to each animal: bedding, toys, chew toys, etc. Currently, bedding is only rarely provided to any dogs, even on cold days. Puzzle toys (like 'kongs') and chew toys are proven to reduce stress in shelter dogs, making them more adoptable.
8) Utilize volunteers to take nice photos of each animal that's been there longer than, say, a week. There are several photographers who have volunteered their time in the past to take high quality photos, they should be contacted again. Good photos and descriptions of animals are essential to attracting adopters.
9) Create a stray pet plan, and stick to it. This should include: Scanning every stray animal with the microchip scanner when they come in (there are at least three KNOWN cases in the past two years of Pet Rescue adopting out a pet to a new home even though it had a microchip, even though they have a new, universal scanner given to him by Hermiston Veterinary Clinic); posting every stray pet to at least two lost and found online pet sites within 24 hours of intake (for example, craigslist and FB pet group).
10) Start utilizing the low-cost non-profit spay/neuter clinic in Benton City, WA. It's ridiculous that only 25 animals a year are spayed/neutered by Pet Rescue. Using the clinic, this number could go up to almost 100%.
There are many, many potential improvements, but this is a good start. Here is a sample list of resources about animal sheltering in the 21st century:
http://eowatchdog.blogspot.com/p/resources.html
How can we force them to change if they don't want to?
You CAN make a difference just by sending an email, right now. Write city hall. They're the ones who contract with Pet Rescue for pound services. They're the ones giving our tax dollars to a under-performing contractor.
City Hall's phone number is (541) 567-5521
Email: city@hermiston.or.us
Mailing and physical address: City of Hermiston 180 NE 2nd St. Hermiston, OR 97838
Office hours: 8am - 5pm weekdays
The Hermiston city manager is Byron Smith
The assistant city manager is Mark Morgan
The mayor is Dr. David Drotzmann, ddrotzmann@hermiston.or.us
City council members:
Lori Davis, ldavis@hermiston.or.us
Clara Beas-Fitzgerald, cbeas-fitzgerald@hermiston.or.us
Jackie C. Myers, jmyers@hermiston.or.us
Manuel Gutierrez, mgutierrez@hermiston.or.us
Rod S. Hardin, rhardin@hermiston.or.us
John Kirwan, jkirwan@hermiston.or.us
Doug Primmer, dprimmer@hermiston.or.us
Attend a city council meeting and speak a few words during the "public comment" portion. Be polite and brief. They need to know that the community has many concerns about it's animal shelter AND that there's a set of straight-forward solutions that could be implemented TODAY. Print out this blog post to use as talking points. (The next meeting is January 12 at 7pm)
Write a letter to the editor to the Hermiston Herald: http://www.hermistonherald.com/hh/submit-letter
Write a letter to the editor of the East Oregonian: http://www.eastoregonian.com/eo/submit-letter
Write emails to Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman, or message them on Facebook. Let them know that there BETTER ways to do things, and they don't HAVE to kill so many animals. Include specific examples of things they could be doing better. Be polite, but firm. They've done business the same way for a long time, they're ingrained with a certain way of thinking, and are used to blaming others for their shortcomings. They can't hide anymore, we have the data and numerous examples of other no-kill shelters to prove it.
Here is an example letter:
Dear Mayor and Council,
I have learned some disturbing information about the Humane Society of Eastern Oregon aka Pet Rescue, the animal shelter that is contracted by the city to take care of stray pets. They kill 50% of the animals they take in. This is far above the state average of about 16%, and far more than they should. Most of these animals are adoptable, and they do this killing in the face of life-saving alternatives. In addition, they pay their own board member (Jackie Alleman) $40,000 in annual rent, but only spend $5800 in animal care. People who visit the building report dogs and cats get the bare minimum of care, often going without blankets in cold weather, or toys to keep them occupied, or daily walks due to "not enough" volunteers... even as they turn away people who WANT to volunteer! I am greatly concerned that my tax dollars are paying for this substandard and inhumane service.
A group of community members who are knowledgeable in the area of modern animal sheltering have drawn up a list of recommendations for changes at Pet Rescue that would immediately stop the killing of adoptable animals (and improve the mental and physical health of the animals). They've tried to discuss it with board and staff members of Pet Rescue (namely, Beau Putnam and Jackie Alleman), but have been completely dismissed. Some volunteers have even been banned from the building for suggesting changes. The list of policies can be found here: ___________
This is completely unacceptable in the year 2015. Every municipality in Oregon and Washington has access to a "no-kill" shelter (a facility with a 90% save rate, euthanizing only for extreme sickness or aggression). Our local ones include Pendleton PAWS, Benton-Franklin Humane Society, Blue Mountain Humane Society of Walla Walla, and Blue Mountain Humane Association of Union county.
We demand that the City of Hermiston contract their animal control with a no-kill shelter. You have influence to affect change at the Hermiston shelter, but if they won't comply with these simple, straight-forward changes in policy, than it's your duty to see that they no longer have the support of our tax dollars.
Sincerely,
(name),
(your address)
Sunday, September 29, 2013
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.
Monday, August 19, 2013
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.
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.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
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.
"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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)