E-MAIL I SENT ON 11/16/12 TO SENATOR BLEVINS AND SEVERAL OTHER TF MEMBERS:
I don't have everyone's e-mails, so please, if you feel any of this information is worth passing on, do so.
FIRST, I would like to thank Senator Blevins and Ms. Ranji. The statements made regarding the shelter standards (specifically vaccinations) as similar to regulations for any other business, and that the cost of doing that business is NOT something the State should be paying for (and the counties only in relation to the number of dogs processed contractually) is similar to the statement I made to a reporter this past summer. However, the article never mentioned this; only Mr. Usilton's cry about an unfunded mandate. ( I have attached a copy of several e-mails (Kenney) concerning the rampant kennel cough and lack of veterinary care at the KCSPCA; the complaint certainly supports the argument for vaccination on intake.)
Also, I would ask that, for the Public Hearing, you consider that some of the public MAY have legitimate questions, rather than comments. Mr. Carroll's reluctance to deal with the public stems from the fact that several of his volunteers have posted complaints on FB about their perception of the direction DHA is taking; also, a supporter of DHA, using a false name, has been sending threatening e-mails to those volunteers. I understand his concern, but that should not stop legitimate give and take at a public hearing.
MICROCHIPPING: Regardless of what they may be told when they adopt an animal, or the paperwork they are given, most people do not understand that while the microchip will last the life of their animal, the registration service is fee-based, and must be paid for annually. In addition, there is more than one service. I have been told that one company actually offers service for the life of the animal, a one-time fee, but you must get the chip from them and the initial outlay is a little more expensive, although it pays for itself very quickly.
STATISTICS: Carol Furr has been monitoring the statistics from the KCSPCA for over a year. The numbers do NOT add up when you take the quarterly report apart. In the publicized numbers, there are always several lines of reporting left out, which results in "missing" numbers of animals - in the thousands. Commissioner Sweeney has asked for these reports in relationship to the KC dog control contract; they were never provided.
"ROGUE SHELTER:" Last month I made a statement regarding small rescues being concerned that they, or their fosters would be targeted as "hoarders." Mr. Usilton's statements saying some shelters were really hoarders demonstrated that, as long as the KCSPCA is the one with enforcement authority, their concern is very real.
HOLD TIME: Last, but certainly not least, I have to tell you how disturbed we all were concerning Mr. Usilton's attempt to change the hold time to 24 hours for animals he deems "unadoptable." And I believe we would feel this way no matter who made this statement. Twenty-four hours is not enough time for anyone to find their missing pet, OR to determine whether or not an animal is "unadoptable.
First, there is no definition or consensus on "unadoptable." Second, the temperament tests that Mr. Usilton referenced have been the subject of criticism for as long as I have been working on this issue. I did my own research on temperament tests. There may be a national standard, although I could not find it. But the ones I DID find all agree - the animal should be given time to acclimate to the new environment. None of the tests that have been reported at the KCSPCA are even mentioned in the articles I found. Those tests include poking paper at a cowering dog in a kennel; when the dog snaps at the paper, it is declared a bite risk and refused to rescue groups (this was reported to me by the DE rep of a national rescue). They also pull food away from an animal that may have been starving; if the animal growls, snaps, or swats, they are declared food aggressive. Another dog refused to allow kennel workers to put a collar and leash on him; he was said to be difficult and the rescue group had to keep pushing to get him. Someone finally realized that the dog must have been caught with a catch-pole (rabies pole). This not only explained his resistance to being handled, it made it much easier to help him re-adjust. To illustrate how poorly their system works: Recently, an individual (Butler) with a lot of background in rescue and animal care adopted a dog from the KCSPCA. (I will attach her story here, some of you may have seen it already). Long story short; the dog's kennel card said no cats, no dogs, no children. She adopted him anyway, despite her dogs and cats. Not only has Roody (new name) NOT been a problem with her other animals, he sat nicely and gave the neighbor's young daughter his paw.
My apologies - I did not intend this to be so long. Thank you for your patience.
AND STATEMENT I MADE AT THE NOVEMBER 29 PUBLIC HEARING:
My name is Catherine Samardza and I live in Kent County.
Earlier this month I attended the November AWTF meeting. During that meeting, Kevin Usilton of the KCSPCA argued for reducing the 72 hour hold period to only 24 hours for “unadoptable” animals, so he could euthanize these animals and “make room for another.”
This is disturbing on many levels. First, there is no legal definition of unadoptable. Second, the so-called “temperament tests” at the KCSPCA have been criticized by rescue groups and individuals alike. And third, 24 hours is not long enough for an animal to be claimed by an owner, or to acclimate to a shelter situation to be accurately evaluated.
I would ask first, that the AWTF NOT reduce the hold time for stray and abandoned animals. Second, that a definition of “unadoptable” be added to the laws for animal welfare and shelter standards; third, that some research be done on “best practices” for temperament tests and evaluating animals that come into the shelters and last, that those “best practices” be added to the laws as well.
This was amended somewhat on the spur of the moment; I felt I had to remind people that I am not a No-Kill advocate, and that I do not believe CAPA is part of some conspiracy on the part of the No-Kill movement.
