The Right Hand?

(Picture Left: Poochie....Careless attention to her grooming needs might be the least of her problems.)

In an old song from the 50's, entitled "16 Tons," Tennesee Ernie Ford sang:

"If the left hand don't get ya, then the right one will."

Likewise, in animal rescue, if you're not dealing with a behavioral problem in an animal, you are almost always dealing with a medical one.

It seemed almost too good to be true when I picked up "Poochie" from the shelter a couple of days ago.

A face so sweet it would melt your heart, the little Chow welcomed pets and cuddles. It was obvious from the minute I met Poochie, this was a dog who was going to present with absolutely NO behavioral issues. She was a total love!

So why did past owners give up such a lovely dog as Poochie?

Well, they claimed Poochie was a "gift" eight months ago and they "had no time" for her.

Normally, this is not too unusual with animals who are given away as presents. The recipients of the pets often never truly accept full responsibility for the animal that they did not choose to bring into their lives. "It's not really my animal. It was given to me!"

So I did not initially question too much the circumstances of Poochie or why she ended up in the pound.

But, after meeting this lovely, gentle and totally balanced dog and wondering how anyone could give her up (even if a "gift") a slight feeling of concern and apprehension stirred within me.

I paid no mind to it and took Poochie anyway.

Since I had no available and open foster, I brought Poochie to the dog boarding facility on Manhattan's Upper East Side. She sat on my lap in the taxi and gave me kisses.

Everyone at the "spa" loved Poochie. "Oh, what a sweet and pretty dog!" "Surely, you won't have her long. Who wouldn't want to adopt this sweetie?"

But, the following morning, I received a call from the facility advising me that Poochie had some blood in her urine.

I tried not to immediately panic with this news. Sometimes there can be a little bleeding following a spay and Poochie had just been spayed the day before and was already on antibiotics. If the bleeding was due a possible Unrinary Track Infection, then presumably it would respond to the medication.

Since Poochie was eating and didn't appear to be in any immediate distress, I decided to give the situation 48 hours. If we did not see improvement, Poochie would have to go to the vet.

Later that day, Sarah, one of our group's stellar volunteers, went to the facility to walk Poochie and Maxi (one of our other dogs in boarding).

As expected, Sarah (who is a Chow Chow lover) immediately was taken with Poochie.

She called me later to tell me what a sweetheart Poochie was. Sarah was very eager to foster Poochie -- if her roommate would agree to it.

Yesterday, Sarah informed me that her roommate had relented and agreed that Sarah could foster Poochie providing the dog had no behavioral issues.

"Behavioral issues" are a million miles away from Poochie. She is a canine version of Mother Teresa!

However, Sarah did mention Poochie still had some blood in her urine. It was one of the prime reasons Sarah wanted to take Poochie home -- in order the bestow some extra nurturing care to the smallish, golden dog.

This morning I called our vet to set up an exam appointment for later today for Poochie.

At best the bleeding is due to a routine Urinary Tract Infection. But, at worst it could be caused by bladder or kidney stones or even something worse -- like the "C" word.

I think about the former owners who seemingly abandoned a perfect dog.

Would they do that for an easily treatable illness? Would they do that simply because of never accepting responsibility for a dog they did not choose? Would they do that because they couldn't find the "time" to walk an easy, loving dog like Poochie a couple of times a day?

None of it makes much sense.

Then again, I've seen thousands of nearly perfect animals dumped over the years for reasons that made absolutely no sense.

We are obviously hoping for the best with Poochie, but will of course have to be prepared for the worst, as well.

Sarah's bubbly, cheerful words this morning ironically add to a somewhat uneasy feeling.

"She is such a good little girl, Patty! Some silly woman in the lobby this morning poked a big, rubber chicken in Poochie's face and the dog didn't even react! Some guy moving out furniture accidentally bumped Poochie and she just turned her head...."

I laughed.

"Well, its a good thing, Sarah, you're not fostering Chance, my Pomeranian. You'd be calling me about the dog BITING the lady with the chicken AND the moving guy!"

But, joke as I might, I am just a tad bit worried.

Why would people give up a "Mother Teresa"-like dog?

We might better know the answer to that question later today. --PCA

*********

"Rehab"

(Picture Left: "Geena" - A dog who found her way back from the brink. Hoping for a "Geena Outcome" again.....)

I received good news yesterday.

Ken, the trainer who spent more than two hours with Dutch yesterday informed me that Dutch had done very well in the session. Dutch remembered Ken and responded well to him. The Shepherd mix was easy to get in and out of the cubicle. Dutch spent some time playing happily with another dog. He was far more relaxed and easy to work with than the previous day. Although Ken was still careful in handling or attempting to pet Dutch the news was welcomed relief to me.

Ken's positive report helped spur me to a final decision on Dutch.

Someway, somehow, I had to get Dutch into "rehab."

I called Chris in Brooklyn.

Chris and his wife, run a boarding/training operation in Brooklyn. Chris has vast experience in both, dog rescue and training. The couple have a small house and yard. Boarded dogs are able to run, play and feel "part of the pack."

Chris is especially experienced in dealing with Pitbulls. But, he works with all kinds of dogs.

About six months ago, I sent "Geena" to Chris for almost three months.

Geena, was a shy, depressed and somewhat nervous, 6-year-old, German Shepherd mix who arrived at the animal pound as an extremely emaciated, half dead, Bronx "stray." Her coat was filthy, raggedy and matted. Geena was missing hair and most of her muscles had atrophied due to malnutrition. Her hanging mammary glands indicated a dog who had previously bourn many litters of puppies.

In short, Geena was a mess.

Geena could not be spayed at the time due to her extremely debilitated condition. Another rescuer told me about Chris and, after calling him, he was willing to take on the dog who looked like she never had a good day in her life.

The road back from hell was difficult in the beginning for Geena. She was guarded, weak, nervous and even a couple of times, snappy with Chris. But, he prevailed and after some weeks, Geena began to come out of her shell, interact with other dogs and develop a strong attachment towards Chris.

More than two months into the boarding, Geena had finally put on weight, been cleaned up and began growing a lovely, silky coat. It was time to get her spayed.

I arranged with Chris to send Geena to my vet via Pet Taxi. Following her spay, I had a couple who were interested in meeting Geena as a possible foster.

When meeting Geena for the first time since her rescue, I could barely recognize her.

Gone was the raggedy, spotty coat, replaced by a clean and plush one. Gone were the protruding ribs and jutted hip bones, replaced by a sound and healthy weight.

Gone was the haunted look in Geena's eyes, replaced by a kind of confidence and enthusiasm.

Indeed, she didn't appear to be the same dog!

On the contrary, instead of the weak, almost lifeless dog I had rescued from the pound almost three months before, Geena was a jumpy, almost puppy-like canine.

The couple from New Jersey who came to meet Geena, did in fact, agree to foster her.

There were a few rough patches in the beginning of Geena's foster as she then had to adjust to new people and a new situation. She was a bit guarded and anxious at first. I advised the young couple to go slowly with her and allow Geena time to acclimate.

There were several conversations between myself and the couple over the next few weeks. Mostly, there was concern over Geena's irregular, blackish nipples and still somewhat large mammary glands. But, since my vet had given Geena a clean bill of health, I assured Joe and Susan that such was simply the aftermath of multiple litters. The nipples and glands would slowly shrink down now that the dog was spayed.

Eventually, Geena came to love the people and they her. This past December, Joe and Susan officially adopted Geena.

It was a wonderful outcome for a dog who was virtually on death's doorstep when she had arrived at the pound so many months before.

When I called Chris again yesterday about Dutch, I wasn't sure what to expect.

I wasn't just calling him about a shy, emaciated Shepherd. I was calling him this time about a dog who had actually bitten several people, including me.

Chris is a very in-demand guy.

When first speaking with me, Chris indicated he was being "inundated" with requests from other rescuers to take dogs.

That didn't sound good for Dutch. But, it was to be fully expected.

The AC&C has been putting a great deal of pressure on rescues lately in a public relations quest to be "no kill" (for space) of adoptable animals during January, February and March (the lowest months of the year for animal intakes).

Each day we (in rescue) are swamped with sometimes more than a dozen email "alerts" with as many as 60 animals on each one who "desperately need rescue!"

It was therefore not surprising that Chris (one of the very few reliable boarding/training operations around) would be overwhelmed with requests to take dogs.

But, for some reason, I was extremely lucky that Chris agreed to take Dutch! (Perhaps the guy just likes a real challenge?)

Over these past few weeks, a number of people had advised me to have Dutch put down -- if not through direct words and advice, then through raised eyebrows and furtive glances.

It was not that these people were cold, cruel or uncaring. On the contrary, most were my friends and people who deeply care for and have dedicated much of their lives to helping animals.

But, there was the very valid concern about possible liability issues with a dog like Dutch, as well as the practicality considerations. "You could spend thousands of dollars to try and turn around this dog and it might not work. That same investment could save many other dogs."

One woman told me that society needed to be protected from dogs like Dutch.

Was this advice wrong? Were all these people wrong?

I can't say. I spent weeks trying to mull over the well intentioned (and in many ways), sage advice, as well as trying to scout my own head and heart for an answer.

But, in this conflict between "head and heart," this time heart won out. No matter how much I tried to rationalize and see the wisdom in the advice from others who cared about me as well as animals, my heart just could not accept pulling the plug on such a young dog who had been so seriously wronged so early in life.

I could justify something on paper. But I could not justify it in my soul.

Yesterday, I asked the question, "Can damage done to humans and animals very early in life be reversible?"

The answer to that question is probably somewhere between "yes" and "no" depending on the individual people and individual animals.

This morning, Dutch was transported to Chris in Brooklyn via help from the AC&C..

The journey was rocky with the frightened dog at first refusing to come out of the Animal Control van. Dutch growled and snarled. The driver suggested to Chris using a "catch poll" but Chris refused. After some gentle coaxing, Chris was finally able to slip a slip leash over Dutch and lead him out of the van.

Despite a few other nervous moments, Dutch has already enjoyed some play time in the yard and according to Chris is now peacefully settled down in a "Great Dane size" crate after eating and drinking.

I know Dutch is now with the right person and in the right situation. Will "rehab" work for Dutch? Can damage done early be reversed?

The answer to those questions will ultimately be up to Dutch.

But, right now I am feeling pretty good about it -- as well as the ultimate decision to try and save this "damaged" dog.

I am hoping for an eventual "Geena outcome!"

Ultimately, its up to the dogs to make their ways back from whatever human wrongs were done to them.

We just have to give them a chance and lend a helping hand. -- PCA

********

Damage

(Picture left: Dutch -- a troubled dog.)

I have written often of the difficulties in animal rescue, particularly those of finding reliable and responsible foster and adoptive homes for animals.

But, by far, the hardest decision an animal rescuer ever has to face is when to euthanize a dog or cat either for medical and especially, behavioral issues. This is especially hard and guilt-inducing for those of us who call ourselves, "no kill."

I am dealing with that situation now and have, in fact, been agonizing over it for some weeks now.

It is especially difficult because the dog in question is very young (only a year-old) and healthy. I can't think of this decision as one to "eurthanize" or not because the dog is not suffering from any terminal disease.

That is, unless we can refer to the separation of infant animals from their Mothers at too early an age a "terminal disease."

But, in many ways, when young kittens or puppies are separated from their Mothers and either sold or adopted out when (in my view) less than eight weeks old, it is a "terminal illness" because the animals are almost always destined to have some kind of "behavioral issues" (usually a lack of security and fear or aggression in unfamiliar circumstances) that will often result in abandonments to streets or pounds and early death.

When using the term, "eight weeks" I am speaking of the acceptable social norm. Most shelters and rescues will adopt kittens and puppies out at 8 weeks and sometimes younger.

My personal view is that infant animals should be kept with their Mothers and siblings for at least twelve weeks and preferably longer.

The early weeks in an animal's (or human's) life are extremely critical. Not only does the Mother provide nutritional sustenance, but even more importantly, she provides a sense of SECURITY to babies, by (in human cases) holding, cuddling and cooing and in animal instances, licking, grooming, protecting, holding and staying close.

The kitten or puppy who is fortunate to stay with his/her Mother and siblings for at least 3 or 4 months, grows up with a strong sense of security, adventurism, curiosity and a general feeling of well being.

When handled gently and lovingly as well by humans at a very early age, the animals delight in human handling and mature with a love and trust for humans. Such animals, whether mixed or purebred make the best companions for humans and usually get along very well with other pets and children.

Unfortunately, almost all "puppy or kitten mill" animals are separated from their Mothers and siblings very early (usually 6-weeks or younger) as well as they receive little (if any at all) early human handling.

Even if physically healthy, these animals almost always suffer later behavioral and fear/insecurity issues.

Recent documentaries have shed light on the serious behavioral troubles suffered by children orphaned in Russia and later adopted out to loving couples in the United States. Because these children received almost no nurturing or motherly attention when babies, they are seemingly scarred for life in terms of serious insecurity, adjustment, depression and aggressive difficulties. Many of the children have later been given up by the couples because the behavioral issues could not be solved despite numerous and dedicated efforts.

Well, the same is sadly true for animals.

It requires almost superhuman efforts in understanding, patience and "rehabilitation" to try and establish trust and a sense of security with animals who have been deprived of early mothering and nurturing, as well as early socialization to humans. Trying to turn around any aggressive behaviors in animals as result of poor early nurturing and socialization, likewise is an extremely daunting challenge.

We face such a challenge now with "Dutch" the adolescent and quite beautiful Shepherd/Retriever mix rescued more than a month ago.

Dutch came into the city shelter as result of a "seizure" when his former owner was evicted from her apartment.

From the beginning, Dutch displayed nervous and unpredictable behavior. When rescued from euthanasia at the shelter and sent to my vet for boarding and neutering, Dutch bit one of the vet techs when she tried placing him back in the cage.

I was called about this incident and requested to "make a decision" about Dutch. I either had to get him out of the veterinary clinic or grant euthanasia.

Such is a very hard question to pose to an animal rescuer. We only like "playing God" in the sense of saving lives, not condemning to death.

I struggled with the decision, but ultimately speculated that perhaps Dutch's "aggressive" behavior was due to the stress of boarding or a distaste for vets (which can be common in many animals.)

Following neutering, I placed Dutch in a state of the art boarding facility where the dogs are not in cages, but rather small rooms. I hoped the less stressful environment and larger space would help calm Dutch.

But, that did not occur.

When noting (and being told about) of Dutch's nervous and unpredictable behavior (attempts to bite) in the boarding facility, I began efforts to try and get more information from his former owner.

A direct call to the shelter Director resulted in me being able to get the number of Dutch's former owner and contact her.

The hope of course, was that Dutch's former owner was in position to then take Dutch back (as she had indicated she wanted her dog returned following the eviction.)

But, "Darlene" informed me that she lost her case in court and was now in a homeless shelter. She could not take back her "baby.".

I asked Darlene numerous questions about Dutch and explained that he was presenting with numerous behavioral issues and that unless solved, Dutch could not be placed in a home. He would have to be euthanized.

Darlene assured me that Dutch was a very good dog with her and her neighbors. But, she also mentioned something about a "nervous condition" Dutch had, as well as the fact that "he hates vets." Darlene also added that Dutch (despite only being a little over a year old) "sired two litters of puppies." (Fabulous news to someone in rescue!)

But, the most telling information Darlene shared with me is that she acquired Dutch as a two-week-old puppy!

Suddenly, many things about Dutch's nervous, insecure and seemingly fearful/distrustful behavior make sense.

He startles (and reacts defensively/aggressively) when encountering joggers, cyclists, skateboarders or even just someone darting out of a building on the streets.

He reacts fearfully and defensively with anyone entering his room.

He is extremely difficult to put back into his room after being taken for a walk.

And though most dogs can be comforted by some petting or stroking and soft words, Dutch does not seem to respond to human displays of affection.

In addition to be separated from Mother and siblings at too early an age, one has to speculate that Dutch wasn't handled and socialized properly (with humans) as a puppy.

Yesterday, I spent almost two hours with Dutch and a respected trainer trying to evaluate the young dog's troubled behavior and how "solvable" it may be.

What are my options with this dog?

They aren't unfortunately, a whole lot.

Ken (the trainer) did not deem Dutch's behavior to be hopeless in terms of remedy. There were a few positive signs while we took Dutch on a walk. Dutch was fairly easy to correct when reacting to joggers and made eye contact with his handler (in this case, Ken). And although difficult to put back in the small room, Ken was able to get Dutch to relax enough to finally accomplish the mission.

But, it wasn't easy.

Ken is returning to the boarding facility today to spend time with Dutch "one on one." It is hoped that with the dog better knowing Ken somewhat, Dutch will relax further. When Ken first removed Dutch from the room yesterday, Dutch attempted to bite him. -- Certainly a rough and ominous beginning.

Depending on what Ken advises me later, my decision will be to either send Dutch to a very experienced trainer and one who is able to do rehabilitation (a very costly venture indeed and one which cannot guarantee 100% behavior modification) or have him put down.

With me, Dutch had been fairly trusting and not difficult to handle (although I had always been very cautious with him, sensing he was a nervous and somewhat unpredictable dog). But, the other night my "luck" ran out when attempting to put Dutch back into his room, following his walk. He backed up, tried to escape his leash and when finally pushed, bit me on the knee.

I fully anticipated the bite and was not at all surprised. My job however was to get Dutch back in the room and with only a short leash to work with, it was almost impossible to prevent the bite.

I now have to decide what to do with a dog who has bitten several people, including myself.

A dog, who from his first days on earth was never treated properly by humans or even allowed to spend suitable time with his Mother and siblings -- as nature intends for all animals, including humans.

How seriously and intensely we damage animals when not allowing them to remain with their families during those first few critical months of life.

The question is, can that damage be reversible? -- PCA

A Little Truth in Everything......

"Poochie is a 4-year-old, beautiful and very sweet Chow who was abandoned at the city shelter when former owners claimed "no time" for her. According to her previous people, Poochie was a "gift" 8 months ago. Poochie is housebroken and "loves men, women, kids and other dogs." Poochie is only 37 lbs and walks very nicely on the leash. Perhaps Poochie's story proves a good example of why animals should never be given out as "gifts."
Not everyone is prepared for the time and responsibility that a pet requires. Giving others a cat or dog as a "gift" is giving someone a JOB. -- Sadly, in many cases a "job" the people don't want and aren't equipped for. In any event, our "job" now is to find Poochie a person or family who truly want and are happily prepared for the joy and responsibility of having a loving dog. If interested in Poochie, please CALL us (NOT email). She is currently being boarded at a kennel and we would love to get this little sweetie into a real foster or adoptive home as soon as possible. (212) 427-8273. "

The above is the write-up I just put on adoption sites regarding "Poochie," the Chow pictured on the left and who I received a call about yesterday from the shelter.

I of course, have no business taking any more dogs now as we still have 4 in boarding and no available foster homes.

But, I am hoping Poochie's pretty looks and reportedly sweet temperament will be enough to find her, if not a quick adoption, at least a new foster.

Am I being overly optimistic? Am I looking at the world through rose colored glasses?

Perhaps.

But, constantly looking at the dark side of matters or feeling hopeless is not a good thing either.

It is tough sometimes to find the middle ground (or, what probably is the true "reality") between the ridiculously "Pollyanna" and Disneyworld optimism of "no kill" promises by such and such a year and the equally absurd doom and gloom pessimism of utter hopelessness ("things will never change").

I am constantly struggling with that in-between line and in fact am currently involved in a debate about it with other Animal Protection activists on a private email list.

Some people see me as too "critical" and doom and gloom.

Others agree with me.

My personal motto (one which I made up) is that, "There is a little truth in everything and the whole truth in nothing."

Indeed.

It is that constant search for truth in the primary colors that finally leads to all the colors of the universe or in essence, true reality as a whole.

Between the stark and absolutes of black and white are all the shades of gray, in addition to the palates and rainbows that make up the world around us according to those truths we are actually able to perceive. -- PCA

*****

Goals and Ideals Vs. Reality

I have been critical of the public message that New York City is "on the road to no kill" and will in fact, be no kill by "2015."

I don't see how this can realistically occur in light of the constant and overwhelming Pitbull problems we have in NYC, as well as serious and ever present cat overpopulation and dumping problems.

We simply cannot rescue or adopt our way out of these crises.

I have been asked to make "constructive suggestions" on what can be done to address these issues.

I believe for starters, we must always strive to be as HONEST and DIRECT with the public and media as humanly possible.

Sure, we would all like to see a day when our great city might become "no kill" of "reasonably" adoptable animals. But, such is a GOAL and an IDEAL we all strive for, NOT a REALITY that can happen any time soon in light of the large and serious obstacles to those goals we face.

I believe HUMANE EDUCATION in the inner city schools is a MUST if we hope to "reach the kids" before they learn their attitudes towards animals on the streets or in dysfunctional homes.

That is #1 and until this occurs, I don't see any end to the cycle of breeding, abusing and dumping animals -- particularly Pitbulls on our city streets or in our animal shelters.

Secondly, I believe we need some type of legislation to address the problem. I do not favor a "ban" on a particular breed of dog as such would punish responsible owners of the breed. But, why not a mandatory SPAY/NEUTER law for Pitbulls and/or Rottweilers? This would be designed to ONLY target those breeding and/or abusing these dogs as opposed to those people adopting them. Normally, mandatory spay/neuter proposals don't go anywhere as they raise the ire of the breeding industry. But, if only targeted towards the one or two breeds flooding our shelters, perhaps it might stand chance of passage?

Thirdly, we were promised shelters in the Bronx and Queens many years ago. That has still not occurred. We can claim we are only euthanizing "sick or vicious" animals, but the facts are very different. As long as shelters are short on cage space and animals are only allotted days to find rescue or adoption, then sneezes or shyness will serve as rationalizations to kill thousands of otherwise adoptable animals every year.

The cat problem is quite different than the dog issue and this is where we need to be very honest and direct in pleading with the public at large for greater responsibility and care towards cats. The promises of "no kill" I believe has mostly damaged cats as the public no longer perceives the URGENCY in saving these animals and more often than not, now demand "kittens, purebreds or declaws" for adoption. Many people now buy these animals from breeders, completely ignoring the need to save any cats at all. Why should they? They believe all cat killing problems have been solved.

The public needs to be made aware how many thousands of loving, adoptable cats (and yes, kittens) are currently going down in our shelters ever year.

Any failures to neuter these animals or actions to buy cats, rather than adopt result in certain and unjustifiable death for hundreds of these animals every week.

No, we have not solved our cat overpopulation and dumping crisis. (If anything, it has gotten worse.) And no, it is not attributable to "climate change." Such is to simply deny the reality that most cats arriving at city shelters are previously owned pets rather than feral strays.

Any incentives we can put into place to motivate people to neuter their animals, particularly Pitbulls and cats need to be implemented.

For example, what if the ASPCA or NSAL approached APPLE and requested a donation of several thousand IPODS to be given out to young people bringing in their Pitbulls or cats for neutering?

Is that "bribing" people to do the right thing? Sure. But, I think it would also be a good thing and probably result in some favorable media coverage for both Apple and the shelters.

These are a few of my ideas for starters. But, the most important is HONESTY with the public.

There is a difference between goals and ideals vs. reality.

The challenges we currently face are huge and will not be solved with wishing thinking and "positive spins."

As Dr. Phil is famous for saying, "You can't change what you don't acknowledge."

It's time we started to acknowledge the dire facts and plea with the public for greater help, engagement and responsibility.

Only then can the dreams and ideals eventually become the reality. -- PCA

******

Press Releases and States of Denial (Reply)

(Picture left: Chiva -- just another Pitbull who recently hit the Euth list of our city shelter for apparently sneezing once. Wonderful and healthy dog, with extremely loving temperament. But, one who represents a nearly impossible adoption, due to Chiva's breed and color. Can New York City ever become "no kill" of cats and dogs? Not unless it finds a way to declassify Pitbulls as "dogs" and cats as "pets.")

Question: So what do you all think of the recent ("No Kill by 2015") press release sent by the Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals? (From private animal-related email list)

Reply: As is true for most press releases, the one from MA is misleading and deceptive.

The lofty goals of a "no kill" city by "2005, 2008, 2010, 2012 and now, 2015" (Different Alliance members keep moving up the projected dates) fail to take into account the composition of most of the animals euthanized in city shelters -- adult, DSH cats and Pitbulls.

It was reasonable to expect that with the initiation of the various programs outlined in the MA press release, that shelter euthanasias could be reduced substantially over a period of time. Almost all small dogs and non-Pit and non-Rottie purebreds can and do go out to rescues, as well as many of the non-pit and non-Rottie mixes.

But, the programs outlined in these ambitious plans do NOT address the constant FLOOD of PITBULLS arriving at city animals shelters every day and the intense difficulty in finding responsible placement for these dogs.

Nor does the press release address the easy disposability attitudes towards companion cats whose intake and euthanasia stats have actually RISEN over the past year, not decreased.

In a recent conversation with the PR representative of AC&C, I brought up the fact that cat intake and kill numbers had increased over the past year, in direct contrast with the MA's and the shelter's PR claims and grandiose goals. I was told that the increases (in the shelter's view) was due to "climate change."

This is ludicrous considering that most cats arriving at city shelters are owned pets, not feral strays reproducing in alleys.

In many ways, the MA and the city shelters (AC&C) are in a state of denial.

The press release modifies it's lofty goals by saying "no kill" refers only to "those animals of reasonable health and temperament."

This represents a canyon size loophole by accepting and excusing the killing of thousands of pets for things as simple and curable as sneezes, (URI's almost always contracted in the shelters), hissing at a vet tech (cats) failing to respond appropriately to a "tag test" (dogs) or just being scared or shy in the shelter.

What desperately needs to be acknowledged is that the "no kill" mandate can (and at least for cats has already) HIT A PLATEAU where further reductions become impossible unless programs are put into place to address and attack the Pitbull breeding and dumping problems, dog fighting, cat dumping and public ignorance regarding issues of animal behavior, training and psychology.

Moreover, it is reasonable to project and conclude that "positive PR spins" and manipulations of facts will over time, only serve to further mislead and DELUDE the public into thinking that all companion pet problems have been "solved" and that there is no sense of urgency to either "do the right thing" by our animals (such as neutering) or, indeed even keep them.

After all, if we are a "no kill" city where every stray or homeless cat or dog is guaranteed rescue and a home, what incentive is there to neuter, keep or even adopt pets from shelters or rescues?

Anyone who thinks all people are adopting pets rather than buying them from breeders, pet shops or the Internet isn't paying attention.

What's wrong with buying "designer pets?" Nothing. We are, after all, "on our way to a no kill city." -- PCA

*****

Black Holes of Animal Rescue

(Picture Left: "Dutch" -- Young Shepherd mix who lost his home when owner was evicted. Very stressed in boarding, to the point of becoming "unadoptable." Dutch's only hope now is that former owner can win case in housing court and take back her dog.)

This past December, I sent out a newsletter to more than 300 people begging for dog or cat fosters.

Unfortunately, most of the people on our mailing list are past adopters and most likely not in position to foster.

I therefore was not expecting many responses to the foster plea, but thought we might hopefully get a few.

That hasn't happened.

While a number of people generously donated money (which of course we need, particularly to pay skyrocketing boarding and veterinary bills), the sheer lack of foster homes for either dogs or cats to go to, can virtually put us out of rescue all together.

Boarding spaces for animals is limited. Moreover, boarding animals, especially for long periods of time presents with many problems.

First, there is the problem of stress, lack of suitable exercise and social interactions for dogs. Secondly, there is anxiety, worry and guilt for the rescuers (for we never know how long a dog will have to stay in boarding). There is the mounting expense. And there is the problem of not getting to know or ascertain with any clarity how a dog will do in a normal home setting -- particularly a home that may have cats, other dogs or children.

Most people seeking to adopt dogs have many requirements and questions. All we can say about dogs we have in boarding is how easy or hard they are to walk, how they are in a cage and how friendly they are with strangers. In almost all cases, we don't really know how the dog is in a home or family enviornment and without that information, most people look elsewhere to adopt.

Boarding dogs can become like the perennial "black hole" of rescue or to put it another way, the "Hotel California" of an old Eagles song: "You can check in any time you like, but you can never leave!"

I am in a particular quandary now with lack of dog and cat fosters.

As noted previously, we have basically been out of cat rescue for many months. I personally ended up keeping the "hard to adopt" (i.e. animals with shyness or minor medical issues) cats rescued last year, which basically took me out of cat foster for space reasons. With no new people coming forward to foster cats, we are down to only two cat fosters and both are already fostering rescued cats.

But, we are now almost in the same position with dogs.

Five dogs in boarding and only one currently in a foster home. No new dog fosters on the horizon.

In recent days, two of our regular dog fosters informed me that they cannot foster anymore. One girl has an uncooperative roommate. And the other woman has a dog who is very stressed around other dogs and suffers seizures when experiencing any kind of anxiety.

Another dog foster has some family problems right now and may have to take a short break from fostering and still another has upcoming business travels.

Other dog fosters have either adopted their foster dogs or just seem to want to keep them.

I am virtually out of all dog and cat fosters and that is scary. It means we could soon be out of rescue and at least for the moment, are.

And so yes, I am very grateful that the recent newsletter brought in some very needed and generous funding for without it, we couldn't pay boarding or vet bills.

But, it didn't bring what we really wanted. -- Foster homes.

The Rolling Stones sang, "You can't always get what you want, but you get what you need."

Unfortunately, when the subject is responsible and ultimately successful dog and cat rescue, "want and need" are the same.

Money alone, doesn't solve all problems -- it only buys time, putting off important decisions for another day. -- PCA

*******