This letter is written in response to Ms. Augsburg's rather confused and inaccurate statements in her letter to the editor and her personal attack on me.
The barb to Mr. Bauman, for whom I have the highest regard, was given because he, and many others, seems to believe that the Green County Humane Society protocols for outdoor adoptions are being followed. There already are examples that they are not.
Ms. Augsburg claims she served on a committee with me. That is not true. She did come to a board meeting and spent 30 minutes telling us how little we knew and how much she knew. I questioned her interest in the GCHS, since she in one of her columns had written with obvious longing "we used to have a humane society." I could only interpret that as a longing for the old kill shelter, where 60 percent to 80 percent of the cats and dogs were killed every week and disposed of in the trash. Nobody, least of all Ms. Augsburg, complained about this except the garbage collectors and they only complained because of the stench in the summer.
Ms. Augsburg claims there are animals that live at the GCHS. This simply is not true. This no-kill shelter has been operating since 1999 and only once did a dog stay for two years. He eventually went to PetsMart and found the most wonderful home. Well worth waiting for. However, she has no objection to a dog being adopted to a home where it will spend its days in a crate. Since she is the director's consultant, I assume she gave her blessing to this adoption.
Ms. Augsburg wants coonhounds to be free to chase raccoons. Has she ever wondered why there are so many hounds and beagles at the shelter? Did it occur to her that unless these dogs are tied up they will run for miles following a scent and then get lost or hit by a car? No one has a problem with dogs that stay on the farm, have companion dogs, and spend their days running free working with their humans. But she seems to think a dog is happiest living a lonely, boring and frustrating life tied to a doghouse. Does she know that hounds and beagles make wonderful indoor pets? Does she advocate for that?
Unlike Ms. Augsburg, who prides herself in having managed three kill shelters, I worked tirelessly to change the Green County Humane Society from a high-kill to a no-kill shelter. Unlike Ms. Augsburg, who glorifies outdoor placement of animals, I would like to help outdoor animal owners understand that they can bring their beloved dogs and cats into their homes, without the difficulties that they imagine.
Nobody wants the humane society to be successful more than I. I have devoted years of hard work to the animals at the shelter and am appalled by what is going on now.
Here are few examples of concern:
Volunteers, past adopters and board members who do not agree with the new policies for outside adoptions are treated very rudely and unprofessionally by the president. Three board members and at least one volunteer have left GCHS, not only because they couldn't support the outdoor policy but also because of the abusive, mean-spirited and harassing treatment they witnessed or received from her. She has jeopardized a $30,000 grant because she placed unaltered cats on her property. It is also a violation of state law.
The director prides herself on the good health the animals enjoy. Not long ago, a cat that she sent to PetsMart for possible adoption collapsed in the arms of the woman who wanted to adopt him. He was so severely dehydrated that he suffered acute kidney failure and had to be put down by the PetsMart veterinarian. I personally paid for the vetting of several animals that arrived at PetsMart in poor health. Adopters of some animals have discovered that their pets have existing health issues that require vetting.
GCHS' outdoor protocol states that no more than five cats are to be adopted to a farm. The cats are to be guaranteed vet care, food, water and shelter. Why, then, were 27 cats dumped on one farm where there would be very limited veterinary care, if any? Outdoor homes are to be inspected before and after an adoption takes place, yet when the chair of the outdoor adoption committee did just that, she was severely reprimanded by the president, the treasurer and the secretary and forbidden to visit the farm again. She was even barred from bringing medicine to help some of the cats that had fallen ill!
The protocol says that outdoor dogs should have a buddy, but this rule is violated when convenient. A dog is to get basic obedience training so it stays on the farm and is kept safe. Who will follow up and who will be allowed to do so? Obviously not someone who disagrees with the president or the director. If the rules are not followed, what possibility is there to enforce them?
I had the highest hope for this new board. After all, I voted to appoint most of the members. I am deeply saddened and disappointed that they have taken a direction that has harmed the animals, does not allow opposing views, that doesn't follow their own protocols, and that uses an adviser that inaccurately glorifies outdoor adoption. I can only hope that the considerable talent on the board will be put to better use.
- Gunhild Marcher is a former
member of the Green County
Humane Society board.
Editor's Note: Marcher submitted this guest opinion in late February. It was held from publication to allow for time to investigate a couple of claims she has made. Regarding the "buddy" protocol, Dane County's humane society requires outdoor dogs to have a buddy, but Green County does not. Regarding the farm where 27 cats were "dumped," reporter Brian Gray spoke to the farmer, who said the cats are being fed dry cat food and fresh milk twice a day. They have been cared for by vets when necessary, the farmer said. The cats stay in the barn when it's cold outside. The farmer said the home was inspected by two board members before and since the animals were placed there. The farmer said that the chairman of the outdoor adoption committee was forbidden from visiting the farm again after making repeated visits and at one point being found in the barn without permission.
The barb to Mr. Bauman, for whom I have the highest regard, was given because he, and many others, seems to believe that the Green County Humane Society protocols for outdoor adoptions are being followed. There already are examples that they are not.
Ms. Augsburg claims she served on a committee with me. That is not true. She did come to a board meeting and spent 30 minutes telling us how little we knew and how much she knew. I questioned her interest in the GCHS, since she in one of her columns had written with obvious longing "we used to have a humane society." I could only interpret that as a longing for the old kill shelter, where 60 percent to 80 percent of the cats and dogs were killed every week and disposed of in the trash. Nobody, least of all Ms. Augsburg, complained about this except the garbage collectors and they only complained because of the stench in the summer.
Ms. Augsburg claims there are animals that live at the GCHS. This simply is not true. This no-kill shelter has been operating since 1999 and only once did a dog stay for two years. He eventually went to PetsMart and found the most wonderful home. Well worth waiting for. However, she has no objection to a dog being adopted to a home where it will spend its days in a crate. Since she is the director's consultant, I assume she gave her blessing to this adoption.
Ms. Augsburg wants coonhounds to be free to chase raccoons. Has she ever wondered why there are so many hounds and beagles at the shelter? Did it occur to her that unless these dogs are tied up they will run for miles following a scent and then get lost or hit by a car? No one has a problem with dogs that stay on the farm, have companion dogs, and spend their days running free working with their humans. But she seems to think a dog is happiest living a lonely, boring and frustrating life tied to a doghouse. Does she know that hounds and beagles make wonderful indoor pets? Does she advocate for that?
Unlike Ms. Augsburg, who prides herself in having managed three kill shelters, I worked tirelessly to change the Green County Humane Society from a high-kill to a no-kill shelter. Unlike Ms. Augsburg, who glorifies outdoor placement of animals, I would like to help outdoor animal owners understand that they can bring their beloved dogs and cats into their homes, without the difficulties that they imagine.
Nobody wants the humane society to be successful more than I. I have devoted years of hard work to the animals at the shelter and am appalled by what is going on now.
Here are few examples of concern:
Volunteers, past adopters and board members who do not agree with the new policies for outside adoptions are treated very rudely and unprofessionally by the president. Three board members and at least one volunteer have left GCHS, not only because they couldn't support the outdoor policy but also because of the abusive, mean-spirited and harassing treatment they witnessed or received from her. She has jeopardized a $30,000 grant because she placed unaltered cats on her property. It is also a violation of state law.
The director prides herself on the good health the animals enjoy. Not long ago, a cat that she sent to PetsMart for possible adoption collapsed in the arms of the woman who wanted to adopt him. He was so severely dehydrated that he suffered acute kidney failure and had to be put down by the PetsMart veterinarian. I personally paid for the vetting of several animals that arrived at PetsMart in poor health. Adopters of some animals have discovered that their pets have existing health issues that require vetting.
GCHS' outdoor protocol states that no more than five cats are to be adopted to a farm. The cats are to be guaranteed vet care, food, water and shelter. Why, then, were 27 cats dumped on one farm where there would be very limited veterinary care, if any? Outdoor homes are to be inspected before and after an adoption takes place, yet when the chair of the outdoor adoption committee did just that, she was severely reprimanded by the president, the treasurer and the secretary and forbidden to visit the farm again. She was even barred from bringing medicine to help some of the cats that had fallen ill!
The protocol says that outdoor dogs should have a buddy, but this rule is violated when convenient. A dog is to get basic obedience training so it stays on the farm and is kept safe. Who will follow up and who will be allowed to do so? Obviously not someone who disagrees with the president or the director. If the rules are not followed, what possibility is there to enforce them?
I had the highest hope for this new board. After all, I voted to appoint most of the members. I am deeply saddened and disappointed that they have taken a direction that has harmed the animals, does not allow opposing views, that doesn't follow their own protocols, and that uses an adviser that inaccurately glorifies outdoor adoption. I can only hope that the considerable talent on the board will be put to better use.
- Gunhild Marcher is a former
member of the Green County
Humane Society board.
Editor's Note: Marcher submitted this guest opinion in late February. It was held from publication to allow for time to investigate a couple of claims she has made. Regarding the "buddy" protocol, Dane County's humane society requires outdoor dogs to have a buddy, but Green County does not. Regarding the farm where 27 cats were "dumped," reporter Brian Gray spoke to the farmer, who said the cats are being fed dry cat food and fresh milk twice a day. They have been cared for by vets when necessary, the farmer said. The cats stay in the barn when it's cold outside. The farmer said the home was inspected by two board members before and since the animals were placed there. The farmer said that the chairman of the outdoor adoption committee was forbidden from visiting the farm again after making repeated visits and at one point being found in the barn without permission.
