Recently there was an article and an Our View opinion printed in The Monroe Times. Both discussed what they reported as first-time outdoor policies at Green County Humane Society. As one of the Board members who resigned, I feel compelled to share some, in my view, information that was not included.
The "old guard" has been very progressive, with the current board reaping the benefits and credit for it, in my opinion. In the past five years the "old guard" computerized the shelter and started a Web page. The web page has links and areas where Internet users can easily donate, adopt, become a member, sponsor, and view GCHS pets all online. The end result of the Web site and more than five major annual fundraisers and various promotions has been increased visibility across the U.S, which resulted in increased adoptions, memberships, sponsorships and organizations' support. The most notable organization donation came from Maddie's fund, because of the board's dedication to the "no-kill" philosophy.
In addition, outdoor policies were implemented two years ago that allowed outdoor dog adoptions on a case-by-case basis. Dogs were adopted to homes that could provide companionship, warm shelter, training so that dogs would not run at large or needed to be tied up. Also, the qualifications included requiring health care that included annual check-ups, flea and tick and heart-worm medications, vaccinations and care if injured. Cats that were adopted to outdoor homes were cats with behavior problems that made them not appropriate for inside homes, feral and semi-feral cats. Lap cats and kittens were not sent to outdoor homes. Instead, creative advertising, aggressive adoption policies and foster homes were utilized. This kept the population as controlled as humanely possible. Never, to my knowledge, were cats put in outdoor homes with little regard to their quality or length of life, as a way to control the population and the "bottom line."
This year, reports said GCHS ended the year in the black. I believe this was mostly due to cutbacks affecting animal care. However, it is my understanding there were still December bills not entirely posted that would make that report less accurate. The "old guard" did include these bills in the past when giving year end financial figures.
In addition, my resignation was not simply because GCHS was implementing outdoor policies, since those have been in place for over two years. I resigned because I can no longer be a part of policies that I feel allow marginal health care and placing animals in inappropriate outdoor homes. I agreed with policies that defined what cats and dogs were appropriate for outdoor homes. Also, when health care rules were spelled out to ensure the adopter knew they must provide vaccinations, emergency care, checkups and medications appropriate for animals kept outdoors 24/7, as well as warm shelter and companionship. In doing so, adopters would have known up front what an appropriate home was expected to provide and what pets were or were not appropriate and why. To me, this would prevent misunderstandings as well as ensure good homes were found. When I learned about adoptions that had not followed policies, I could not be a part of outdoor adoptions like this.
The adoptions I am referring to is where more than two dozen, mostly tame lap cats, in my opinion, were placed on one farm (some on days when temperatures were in single digits and wind chills were well below zero). Among them I saw an older cat that now finds itself so thin that its backbone and ribs are showing because, in my opinion, it ended up at the bottom of the food chain. I do not feel this was humane to the cats or the farmer. When I tried to offer help the farmer was OK with, I was prevented from, at my own expense, giving it. I do not feel policies and actions like this are humane to fellow board members trying to help, or to the cats or the outdoor pet owner. In my view, proper food and vet care are expensive. Placing more than five cats in an outdoor home makes proper care cost prohibitive in most cases.
I believe feral cats and cats born to farm homes usually have the instincts to survive. I have found that cats kept inside do not have these instincts. It is my feeling that GCHS outdoor adoption policies will not be administered appropriately and should not be taken at face value. I feel there has been a type of secrecy surrounding adoptions, therefore requiring GCHS to report monthly the number of animal deaths, sick animals, dogs and cats going to outside homes (separately) and the running total number placed in one location is essential.
The only way I see things really changing is if people make their feelings known, foster pets, volunteer and attend board meetings (held at 6 p.m. on the second Wednesday of the month at the Library meeting room). Also, there will be six board seats up for election at the annual meeting May 1st. If you feel strongly about making a difference in the lives of homeless pets, become a member, if you are not already. Then get 20 member signatures and submit your name to run for a board seat before the due date of March 14. It is my understanding that this membership list is available to the public by asking the county or shelter board for it.
Editor's Note: According to Times reporter Brian Gray, the board reported a profit of about $27,000 for 2007, with bills expected to come in during December that would be around $2,000. After anticipating December bills the shelter figured to make about a $25,000 profit.
The "old guard" has been very progressive, with the current board reaping the benefits and credit for it, in my opinion. In the past five years the "old guard" computerized the shelter and started a Web page. The web page has links and areas where Internet users can easily donate, adopt, become a member, sponsor, and view GCHS pets all online. The end result of the Web site and more than five major annual fundraisers and various promotions has been increased visibility across the U.S, which resulted in increased adoptions, memberships, sponsorships and organizations' support. The most notable organization donation came from Maddie's fund, because of the board's dedication to the "no-kill" philosophy.
In addition, outdoor policies were implemented two years ago that allowed outdoor dog adoptions on a case-by-case basis. Dogs were adopted to homes that could provide companionship, warm shelter, training so that dogs would not run at large or needed to be tied up. Also, the qualifications included requiring health care that included annual check-ups, flea and tick and heart-worm medications, vaccinations and care if injured. Cats that were adopted to outdoor homes were cats with behavior problems that made them not appropriate for inside homes, feral and semi-feral cats. Lap cats and kittens were not sent to outdoor homes. Instead, creative advertising, aggressive adoption policies and foster homes were utilized. This kept the population as controlled as humanely possible. Never, to my knowledge, were cats put in outdoor homes with little regard to their quality or length of life, as a way to control the population and the "bottom line."
This year, reports said GCHS ended the year in the black. I believe this was mostly due to cutbacks affecting animal care. However, it is my understanding there were still December bills not entirely posted that would make that report less accurate. The "old guard" did include these bills in the past when giving year end financial figures.
In addition, my resignation was not simply because GCHS was implementing outdoor policies, since those have been in place for over two years. I resigned because I can no longer be a part of policies that I feel allow marginal health care and placing animals in inappropriate outdoor homes. I agreed with policies that defined what cats and dogs were appropriate for outdoor homes. Also, when health care rules were spelled out to ensure the adopter knew they must provide vaccinations, emergency care, checkups and medications appropriate for animals kept outdoors 24/7, as well as warm shelter and companionship. In doing so, adopters would have known up front what an appropriate home was expected to provide and what pets were or were not appropriate and why. To me, this would prevent misunderstandings as well as ensure good homes were found. When I learned about adoptions that had not followed policies, I could not be a part of outdoor adoptions like this.
The adoptions I am referring to is where more than two dozen, mostly tame lap cats, in my opinion, were placed on one farm (some on days when temperatures were in single digits and wind chills were well below zero). Among them I saw an older cat that now finds itself so thin that its backbone and ribs are showing because, in my opinion, it ended up at the bottom of the food chain. I do not feel this was humane to the cats or the farmer. When I tried to offer help the farmer was OK with, I was prevented from, at my own expense, giving it. I do not feel policies and actions like this are humane to fellow board members trying to help, or to the cats or the outdoor pet owner. In my view, proper food and vet care are expensive. Placing more than five cats in an outdoor home makes proper care cost prohibitive in most cases.
I believe feral cats and cats born to farm homes usually have the instincts to survive. I have found that cats kept inside do not have these instincts. It is my feeling that GCHS outdoor adoption policies will not be administered appropriately and should not be taken at face value. I feel there has been a type of secrecy surrounding adoptions, therefore requiring GCHS to report monthly the number of animal deaths, sick animals, dogs and cats going to outside homes (separately) and the running total number placed in one location is essential.
The only way I see things really changing is if people make their feelings known, foster pets, volunteer and attend board meetings (held at 6 p.m. on the second Wednesday of the month at the Library meeting room). Also, there will be six board seats up for election at the annual meeting May 1st. If you feel strongly about making a difference in the lives of homeless pets, become a member, if you are not already. Then get 20 member signatures and submit your name to run for a board seat before the due date of March 14. It is my understanding that this membership list is available to the public by asking the county or shelter board for it.
Editor's Note: According to Times reporter Brian Gray, the board reported a profit of about $27,000 for 2007, with bills expected to come in during December that would be around $2,000. After anticipating December bills the shelter figured to make about a $25,000 profit.
