Unlikely adoptions

Sometimes people question my choices when it comes to adoptions that I've allowed for my foster dogs. Some fosters and/or rescues have set rules. "All dogs require a fence" and "no adoptions out of the area" are two more common ones. There's some controversy about invisible fence as well. I've always taken it on a case by case basis. I feel like I know "my" dogs and know what they need. Some do require fences. Some will do fine with an active hands-on owner who plans on spending time with the dog, rather than just turning it out in the yard. (Something I'm guilty of myself!) I'm not going to send an iffy match 5 hours away because I don't want to be making the drive to pick that dog up if it doesn't work out. Still, some of my most successful adoptions were those where I "bent" the rules a little.

Take Blue (NKA Chance) for example. Since he was an aussie, I did insist on a fence for him. I turned one guy down because he didn't have one, and lived in an apartment, even though he insisted he ran every day. Maybe he did, maybe he would've been a good home, but there was no way to verify whether or not he was active enough for a young aussie. As it turned out, Blue got the very best home possible! His new parents drove from eastern PA to meet him and take him home, and yes, they also had an invisible fence. With Blue though I guessed from his nature he would learn the limits of the yard quickly, mostly from other dogs, and have little interest in testing those. He's now living the good life with several other aussies and a mom who participates in agility.

On the other hand, I declined an application for Haven because of invisible fence. With her history of abuse and neglect, being zapped even once would do her in entirely.

Some people insist on "breed experience" but I wonder how will you learn about a breed until you have one? We all started somewhere. I can think of a lot of adoptions I allowed for first time breed owners who understood the basic needs and traits of the breed they were interested in. Tommy the German Shepherd dog is living the good life with his "first time" GSD owners, as is Ilsa, who was adopted by a couple who had Rotties before. And I about bet both of those families will continue to adopt GSDs now that they have that experience.

The one that makes me shake my head the most though was a Jack Russell Terrier named Herman. He was at the pound with an injured leg, which we found out was broken. I don't even know how I ended up fostering him. It's not a breed I've had all that often. He was a young dog too, very sweet but of course very active. He was listed for adoption but not ready to go until the pin was taken out of his leg. I got an application and then follow-up emails from a senior couple in eastern PA who were determined Herman was the dog for them. They'd had a JRT before that had recently died and just fell in love with Herman's picture and story. They didn't have a fenced-in yard but assured me Herman would get all the walks and exercise he needed. I drug my feet for a long time. A young JRT going that far away? And without a fence even? And to an older couple? No way! But they wore me down. They were willing to take on the expense of follow-up on his leg and their vet assured us they went above and beyond for their previous dogs. Finally they made the 7 hour drive and I met them in Sandusky so they could meet Herman. I told them beforehand it wasn't a sure thing yet and they also agreed they would make the drive back if for any reason it wouldn't work out. I had Sally come along since she is the JRT expert, to make sure we were comfortable with sending him on his way. From the minute they got out of the car, holding their camera to get first photos of Herman, it was clear this was a perfect match. They sent pictures when he got home of his meeting the rest of the family and playing with all of his new toys. He is truly their kid, and very well cared for. And what cracks me up the most is out of all the people I've adopted to, his dad sends me an email every year, for 4 or 5 years now, after his check-up assuring me he's had his shots and is doing well.

I'm not against rules in general. In most cases yes, dogs do better with fences, and for some dogs it's an absolute. Still when you never allow for any exceptions you miss out on great adoptions, like Herman's.

this is Nitro's Law

"Nitro was not a Democrat, Republican, Liberal or a Conservative. He was my boy." --Tom Siesto, testimony before Ohio House Committee on Criminal Justice, in support of HB 108, "Nitro's Law."



Nitro was a three year old Rottweiler. Nitro, along with his sister Bella, had been a pampered, beloved part of Liz Raab and Tom Siesto's family since they were puppies.

In 2008, Nitro went for training and boarding at Steve Croley's High Caliber K-9 training facility in Youngstown OH. Tom and Liz had no reason for concern about the care he'd receive. Croley came highly recommended, and had cared for and trained dogs from all over the country. Not only had Nitro been there before, they had spent time getting to know Croley on a social basis. The kennels were clean and well-maintained, and Croley presented himself as a personable man with a great way with dogs. They were also dealing with family medical emergencies and keeping Nitro in a stable, familar environment seemed the best option for him at that time. They talked to Croley on a regular basis and were assured Nitro was doing well.

On October 22, 2008, Steve Croley's High Caliber K-9 facilities were raided. The 19 dogs he had at that time had been systematically deprived of food, water and even access to inside shelter. Of those dogs, 8 were lying dead in their kennels. One of those dead dogs was Tom and Liz's beloved Rottie, Nitro. They had entrusted Croley with the care of their 105 pound baby, a dog who had scrambled eggs for breakfast, wore handmade costumes for holidays, and had always been included in family celebrations and vacations. This is the dog they got back.



Seven other dogs besides Nitro were dead: 3 Dobermans, 1 American Pitbull Terrier, 1 Border Collie, and 2 German Shepherd Dogs, slowly killed by a man who convinced their owners to trust him, and profited from the "care" they didn't receive. This neglect didn't happen in some faraway location. Croley's kennels were right in his backyard. That means for weeks he sat in his air conditioned home, had dinner, access to fresh water, assured the owners the dogs were fine, while 100 feet from where he stood the dogs died slow gruesome deaths based entirely on his own selfishness and greed.

The story doesn't end there though. Perhaps the most appalling part of it all is that Ohio animal cruelty laws are so lax that no matter what someone does to a companion animal: starves it, beats it to death, sets it on fire, pours Drano down its back, shoots it for sport, drags it behind a car, cuts its throat and leaves it to bleed to death, the MAXIMUM SENTENCE for first offense animal cruelty convictions in the state of Ohio is 6 months in jail and $1000 fine. We are one of only five states without ANY felony provisions for first-time offenders, no matter how heinous the crime. We rank 43rd in the country according the the H.S.U.S's 2010 "Humane State Report." Shame on US! And the reality is when the maximum sentence is so lenient, few judges choose to give the maximum sentence at all. The list of convicted animal abusers whose sentences were a veritable handslap is endless. In Ohio you will spend more time in jail for incidental property damage than you will for brutalizing a dog,

Steve C Croley was originally charged with 19 counts of animal cruelty. Due to a technicality, 15 of those counts, including Nitro's, were dropped. Croley plea bargained his case and was sentenced to a total of four months in jail, with credit given for 13 days already served. He was fined $1000, along with $1796 restitution for the care of the dogs who lived. He was given three years' probation during which time he cannot own dogs. He will be free to again care for innocent animals in January, 2012. Croley also filed bankruptcy which eliminated the possibility of justice through civil lawsuits. No charges for fraud or theft were ever brought against him.

Nitro's life might have ended here


but Tom and Liz's fight for true justice had just begun. Since Nitro's death and Croley's lenient sentencing, this New York couple has fought tirelessly for a change in OUR laws. With HB 108 (Nitro's Law) signed into law, kennel owners who abuse or neglect a dog in their care could be charged with a fifth degree felony. Is this enough to bring Ohio cruelty laws in line with 45 other states? Of course not, but it is a solid start towards righting what's wrong with the laws in Ohio. At the very least can we allow for felony sentencing for those you misuse our trust and profit from the care they are supposed to be giving our dogs or cats?! From there we can add to this law and make sure the truly depraved crimes against innocent companion animals are dealt with appropriately. And the fact is, it shouldn't be this hard! In 2010, Nitro's Law was passed in Ohio's House of Representatives but stalled in committee in the Senate. This year it has been reintroduced and is on the agenda for consideration this week in the House Criminal Justice Committee. There is still a long ways to go but with your help we can make sure it is a part of Ohio law before the end of 2011.

What can you do RIGHT NOW to help?

Right now you need to send an email to all of the members of the Criminal Justice committee insisting they support Nitro's law and move it to full House vote immediately. The bill is on the agenda for Wednesday June 22 so they have to hear from you on Tuesday. We absolutely must flood their offices with emails so they are clear on the urgency of this matter. Contact information for the committee members is at the end of this blog. I have also included a link to a letter written by Mel End BSL on facebook, that she has offered for use by anyone who is not sure what to say. I have also added my own letter to this blog. Please feel free to use either one of these or adapt them with your own words. Just a short note to say you care about this bill is a huge help! If you can only send one email send it to Rep. Lynn Slabey, but it only takes a few minutes to copy the same text to the others on the list, too. You can make a difference! With your help, we will see a change in Ohio laws!

Please join The Nitro Foundation's page on facebook for the most current updates on Nitro's Law.
Nitro's Law
For more information go to
Nitro Foundation

About 20 years ago* in Lucas County a woman left for work after a fight with her abusive boyfriend. When she came home, he told her he'd fixed dinner for her, and directed her to open the oven. When she did, she found that he had turned the oven on high and shoved her new puppy in to cook to death. At that time there was a huge outcry over the fact he could not be charged with a felony for what was clearly a premeditated and brutal crime. And since then, for over 20 years, nothing has changed?! I'm no different than anyone else. I assume someone else is doing these things but guess what? No one did! That someone now has to be me. And it has to be you and everyone else! Enough is enough, Ohio! The process for making things right for the companion animals who cannot vote and cannot protect themselves should not be so impossible that even after 20 years, nothing is any different than it was when that puppy burned to death in that oven! The time is now and it's up to every one of us.



Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead

Resources

link to Sample email by Mel

my letter:

Dear Representative XXXXXX,

I am writing to ask for your support in voting to move HB 108, Nitro's Law, to a full House vote, and hope for your continued support until it is signed into law. As a voter and animal lover, I am saddened and dismayed to know that Ohio has some of the most lenient laws against animal cruelty of any state in this country. It is time to change that and Nitro's Law is an important first step in the process. Can we please get this bill passed before we turn on the news to yet another crime against innocent dogs and have to explain to the public why Ohio is so far behind the times on this issue? Thanks for your consideration.

Your name and address



Ohio House of Representatives Criminal Justice Committee:

House of Representatives
77 S. High St
Columbus, OH 43215-6111


Lynn Slaby
district41@ohr.state.oh.us
Bill Hayes
district91@ohr.state.oh.us
Louis W. Blessing, Jr.
district29@ohr.state.oh.us
Danny R. Bubp
district88@ohr.state.oh.us
Robert Sprague
district76@ohr.state.oh.us
Joseph W. Uecker
district66@ohr.state.oh.us
Roland Winburn
district40@ohr.state.oh.us
Nancy J. Garland
district20@ohr.state.oh.us
Connie Pillich
district28@ohr.state.oh.us
W. Carlton Weddington
district27@ohr.state.oh.us
Sandra Williams
district11@ohr.state.oh.us
Margaret Conditt
district55@ohr.state.oh.us


*I cannot find information about this crime so am relating it from memory. I know for a long time I couldn't walk past my own oven without thinking about what that man had done. If anyone can offer additional details, please let me know, thanks.

response to Toledo Blade article. 4-24-11

First off I would like to again acknowledge the Blade's role in pushing for the many changes we have seen at the Lucas County Dog Pound over the past few years. Certainly without your willingness to bring the problems to the public's attention, it could very well be business as usual at our pound. I also appreciate the ongoing updates on dogs available for adoption, euthanized, and transferred to the TAHS. I'm certain that feature helps get dogs adopted.

That said I cannot understand the point of or the need for the negatively slanted front page story on April 24, 2011. From the very headline it is clear what the writer is going for: "EUTHANIZATIONS UP 30%!" Since adoptions are also up 40% that could have just as easily been the headline but that wouldn't have set the tone that continues throughout the entire article.

Not only do I believe you have misrepresented the facts, there is also one huge error or omission that skews the entire story. You are including pitbulls as "adoptable" dogs. To quote:
"Many adoptable dogs were killed simply because the pound didn’t have enough room to keep them alive until homes were found for them." At this time, and presumably until Ohio "vicious dog" laws are changed, pitbulls are NOT offered for direct adoption by the dog pound. At no time is that fact mentioned in this story at all. If anyone could wade through what is said, one might wonder why these dogs are being put down because of space limits when at the same time, John Dinon of Toledo Area Humane Society is saying he has and will take any "adoptable dogs" that are offered. He does not and cannot take all "adoptable" pitbulls because he too is limited by his board's policies and can also only take the dogs he has space for. Whether we like it or not, there are too many pitbulls and so too many pitbulls are being put down.

When it comes to the numbers being tossed out, I really don't know how anyone short of a statistician could even figure out whether the "30%" means anything at all. It looks to me like the comparisons being made are apples to oranges with bananas thrown in too. I count roughly 20 different numbers or percentages in first 12 or so paragraphs. Do you really believe anyone sorts through all of that? I doubt I can even summarize it concisely enough that most people won't zone out and lose focus partway through but I'll try.

Between Jan 1 and April 18, 408 dogs were put down. Of those 67 failed or were too aggressive to be given behavioral evaluations. 160 were pitbulls that were put down because pound was over capacity for pitbull type dogs. In spite of the fact there is also a big emphasis on the dogs failing these tests, no comparison numbers are even given for how many dogs failed evaluations last year.

During first 3 months of 2011, 361 dogs were put down which is 94 more than during first 3 months of 2010 (267). However, there is also an increase of 156 dogs coming INTO the pound and guess what? 119 of those dogs were pitbulls. So, do you see now why the little lapse in mentioning the facts about pitbull adoptions plays a pretty big part in how these numbers play out? In reality that "30%" are dogs the pound has said all along they will not hold and can only be transferred in limited numbers. Do I think it's wrong that one particular breed is singled out for a separate place in the pound and nearly certain death if there's no space available? Yes I do but those are the facts at this time. If the Blade wants to do a story about Breed Specific Legislation by all means go for it, but do not blame Julie Lyle, the dog pound, the Toledo Area Humane Society, other area rescues, or anyone else aside from Ohio legislators who wrote and voted for these laws for simply doing their best with a breed that where supply is way higher than responsible demand and the laws are against them as well.

Going back to the behavioral evaluations, these are not new. SAFER is the same set of tests they have used all along and in fact are used by many other shelters and rescues. Do I personally like these assessments? No, I do not. That is not the point though. Even disliking them, I recognize the need for some sort of tool to determine which dogs are most likely safe to be placed in homes. And anyone who works with rescue or shelter dogs knows Julie Lyle is right when she says most people will pass over dogs with "issues," whether it's a need to be an "only" dog or for more training with food or would do best without young children or whatever else. Yes if you can get that dog into a foster home or adopted by an experienced owner then they will most likely work out but how do you do that at the pound? Because another fact here is for all the discussion about whether or not these dogs should be put down for doing poorly on aspects like food aggression, no one in this article offers a single solution or suggestion as to how or who will work with these dogs towards adoption. All this part of the article does is once again paint the dog warden as the bad guy when she honestly says we do not have the resources to work with these dogs. Without any solutions to this issue it comes across as more needless attacks.

I also find it interesting your writer picked April 13 for his "snapshot" of dog numbers at the pound (105 at pound, "just" 13 available for adoption) but then skips to April 14 to tell us that no dogs were adopted, none were transferred and 5 were put down. If he'd chosen his stats from April 12-13 (available on toledoblade.com), 3 dogs were killed, 3 were adopted and 5 were transferred to TAHS. Or from April 8-11, 1 dog was killed and 6 were adopted. Not nearly as much fun that way is it?

In between all the hype there is good news. The adoption area will make a big difference and be a more comfortable place for the dogs and potential adopters. Of course we see at least 2 references to "too small" cages and another reference to a couple of dogs that have been put down because they couldn't handle being caged all the time. At this time though they can only work with what they have and that pound was not designed to comfortably house dogs at all. Even as far as the pitbull problem, the pound has a Petsmart grant to spay and neuter 500! Toledo pitbulls and mixes for $5!! a dog. A fact that didn't warrant even a sentence in this article. Yes that was published in the Blade earlier but the Dog Warden Commission's recommendations have been published multiple times and they still were added again to this article, too.

What's my interest in all of this? I've been going to dog pounds for quite a few years, as a dog rescue volunteer. I care about dogs and I don't want any of them put down needlessly. The fact is though the dog wardens and other people who work at these pounds don't create the problems. It's one thing to shine a light on corrupt or callous people who aren't doing their jobs. It's another to continually hound someone who is making improvements, simply to sell a few more papers. Do I think there's room for improvement? Certainly, same way I think there's room for improvement in just about any place or any of us. You're not helping the problem when you publish articles that are so biased most people never get beyond thinking "See! Nothing has changed there at all!"

Thanks for your time.

A Challenge to Northwest Ohio Shelters & Rescues

Yes, we all know that for too many years rescues and shelters in this area couldn't count on too many Lucas County dogs, and so everyone adjusted their intake accordingly. In most cases, that meant saving pound dogs from elsewhere. That was great. A lot of wonderful dogs were saved from death row and responsibly adopted into loving homes.

Then, after a lot of hard work by a lot of people, we had a regime change at the Lucas County dog pound. More dogs began getting out alive, both through adoption and via direct transfer to the Toledo Area Humane Society. From there, the pound began working with other shelters and rescues, and those others have helped now and then too. Yes, it's a gradual process on everyone's part. Still, it's been a year now. Isn't it time to start asking "what have all of you done to change along with the dog pound?"

OK, it's been discussed to some degree, in the form of (quite frankly) some unfounded accusations slung in a lot of directions. Where's the positive discussion been? What disturbs me the most about what's been said is just how quickly way too many people are willing to toss Fulton, Ottawa and Wood pound dogs right under the bus. "They can develop their own groups!" And in the meantime, what happens to those dogs? Not to mention, Lucas County has at least a dozen viable options for dogs, and we'll just hope the adjacent counties can manage with one or two?

What was overlooked in all of that was how many dogs come into Lucas County from a whole lot farther away than a 20 minute drive? Yes, those are great dogs too, and the people in those counties work very hard to get some of their dogs to safety. That was fine for a lot of years. Now though we are saving hundreds more dogs from right here in Lucas County. There's not room for the others anymore.

And let's get something else out there not too many people seem willing to say. The "rescues" in this area "adopting out" high demand puppies and dogs for breeder prices are not legitimate. If they paid anything more than a pound fee, and/or do not offer complete veterinary care including spay/neuter and follow-up, and/or are vague about where their dogs come from, they are a for-profit business. Period. And most of the time when you "adopt" a puppy from them, some part of that money is lining the pockets of a puppy mill. We've come a long way in educating the public about pet stores. Unfortunately now we have to do the same thing all over again when it comes to unscrupulous "rescues." And let's also make it clear that puppy mills aren't just huge Amish operations with hundreds of dogs. They're everywhere, everywhere someone keeps breeding dogs in substandard conditions to make money.

So what are we going to do? Where is everyone's willingness to work together for the good of the dogs? I am completely convinced that if all of the legitimate, hard-working, dedicated rescues and shelters in this area were willing to at least talk about common goals and coordinating efforts, the greater Toledo area could be close to "no kill" within a few years. Owner surrenders go to shelters, or better yet, we find more ways to help more owners keep their dogs. Strays go to the pounds, and once they are there, everyone works together to get them out. Some of "our" dogs might go to areas where there's more demand than dogs but we don't turn around and fill the resulting spaces with 3 dogs from somewhere else. Add in continuing education; as many spay/neuter options as possible; recruiting more volunteers and donors; and promoting responsible adoptions, and it is not an unrealistic goal.

It is and should be up to all of us. If you foster, ask where your foster dog came from and if it came from out of this area, ask why? Are you sure that same dog isn't being put down right here? Same if you donate money. We could put together a blog of dogs that die here, if that would bring the reality home. Adopt local dogs and educate yourself about what to expect from a legitimate rescue before you do. We've come a long, a lot farther than most of us could have imagined. Let's not stop now.