TLAC Support

I've heard a few different reports now from TLAC volunteers about how TLAC staff is telling them that the Running Buddies program is not an official TLAC program, so they can't log the hours that they work for Running Buddies on their TLAC timesheet.

This program gets great pictures of our highest energy dogs, puts together professional looking flyers, and distributes them all over town to help the dogs find homes faster (and hopefully more permanently, as we focus our publicity on places that have active people who might want an active dog, and will adopt that dog for his activity level, not because he looks cute, sorry for the run-on sentence). We only do this for TLAC dogs. I don't understand how helping with this wouldn't be considered volunteering for TLAC.

The more flyers we can distribute, the better. Chandra and I have had a hard time finding enough volunteers to help us. I had always attributed this to the revolving door of volunteers and too few of them staying long enough to get more involved with programs like these. Perhaps there's more to it, though?

I just can't imagine why they wouldn't support this program, although this isn't the first time that they've shown negativity toward it. Dorinda knew about the idea of it from almost the very beginning and she seemed very supportive of it.

2007 results at TLAC

After Mission: Orange was started in Austin in January 2007, the kill rate went up 11.4% and the combination adoption/rescue rate went down 3.6%. After seeing almost nothing come of Mission: Orange in the last year, I wouldn't have expected to see much progress, but to see that we've actually gotten worse is very sad.

This report compares Austin on Mission: Orange to Reno, NV who implemented the programs of the No-Kill Equation and decreased their kill rate by 53.2%. It's a great report.

Deadlines for adoption dogs

Kelley left an interesting comment - that TLAC's director just signed something at the most recent Austin Advisory Commission meeting stating that animals who make it into the adoption program will get to stay there until they are adopted, regardless of how much time it takes.

I don't know about this recent action, but I have to assume it's the same thing that they've been telling volunteers for a long time. Their policy has been that an adoption dog gets to stay in adoption until he's adopted, unless his behavior deterioriates to a level that makes him a danger to the public or it's inhumane to keep him in a cage any longer because he's losing it.

All it takes is for staff to note in a dog's file that the dog was too rough (a danger to the public) or have the behaviorist observe his cage behavior and find that it's not good (losing it) for them to justify killing him.

Staff have made many comments to us about how it's not fair that a dog gets to stay in adoption for 100 days, or whatever it takes, when other dogs, who may be better behaved, don't get the chance to make it to the adoption side because of lack of space.

Frustratingly, very little effort seems to go into enriching the dogs' lives at the shelter to avoid behavior deterioration. Volunteers, with very little training or experience, try to work with the dogs, but are usually totally ineffective for dogs who have or develop issues. The volunteer base at TLAC is a revolving door. It's mindboggling how many new volunteers we get each month, yet how few stay active for more than a month. But TLAC cites national averages on volunteer retention at shelters, which are just as poor, and decides that they must be doing a good enough job if they're just like everyone else.

Because of the lack of volunteers, most dogs really only get out of their cages for 15 minutes a day, if that.

And, by the way, the puzzle toys for feeding has still not been implemented. They did a pilot program for about 3 weeks a few months ago, which worked very well for those dogs, but now they're still working out the logistics on how they can do it for all of the dogs, so the program is still on hold.

And they've definitely backed off of their promise to give us a week's notice before euthanizing an adoption dog. They also haven't brought in any professional trainers. Because I was out of town, I missed some meetings with Dorinda, so unfortunately, I can't write as much as I'd like to about this right now.

On a positive note, the APA! program is starting to take some of our adoption dogs to off-site adoption events to help get them more exposure. Also, the group has pulled out a few dogs from the adoption side who weren't doing well and put them in foster homes to get them training and find them new homes.

I believe that the key to getting Austin to no-kill is with this new APA! initiative and not by trying to change TLAC. I have already started putting more of my time into the new program and have been spending less time at TLAC and assume it will stay that way. I'd still like to be a volunteer at TLAC, to know what's going on there and help coordinate the program with APA!, but banging my head against the wall with TLAC is a waste of time.

I hope that soon, APA! will be helping and saving all of the animals and we can leave TLAC to their job of protecting the public from dangerous animals (the italics is supposed to denote irony).

Gabe is back

I received an email on Saturday from the woman who adopted Gabe that they returned him to TLAC. I had to give myself a few days to cool off before I could write about it or talk about it.

She sent me multiple emails while I was away with pictures, going on and on about how much she loved him and what a great dog he is. When I got back last week, I sent her an email thanking her for the updates and the work she had done with him. Her reply was not as positive. I asked her if everything was still ok and reminded her that she still hadn't used the private lessons we set up for her at a huge discount ($20). She said that everything was still ok, she'd had a health issue and they hadn't done the private lessons because their new apartment required a higher deposit for him than they had originally thought. I offered to find the money for her because I knew that Gabe really, really needs those lessons. He is still quite reactive and those lessons are the only way that I can see him learning to relax instead of bark in stressful situations. He'd made a lot of progress in his first 3 lessons and he really should have had the next 3 as soon as she adopted him. She took me up on the offer to pay for the lessons and assured me that everything was ok, it was just difficult.

That was Friday. On Saturday, she sent the email that she'd taken him back to TLAC. I couldn't have been more clear with her that if things didn't work out, that she needed to give him back to me and NOT take him to TLAC. She said that he'd damaged their new apartment and they couldn't afford it. It sounds like they left him unattended, uncrated in a their brand new apartment. I suppose I should at least be relieved that she told me and I was able to work on getting him out of there.

Not surprisingly, TLAC wouldn't give him back to me. I had to find a rescue group to pull him. Thanks to GSD rescue and lots of awesome people in Austin, I was able to get him on Tuesday night.

I've since learned from the trainer that she was doing really well in the group class we arranged for them. The husband, however, seemed to really not like the dog and was very critical of her and the dog during the most recent class. I think that her health issue, Gabe's challenges, and her husband's dislike of the dog were just too much.

His behavior isn't too bad right now. I can tell that she was working with him. So, even though the situation is incredibly disappointing, I had to leave town anyway, so I'm going to look at it as free foster care for him while I was gone and try to learn something from this.

So, what have I learned? What would I do differently? First, I would ensure that all adults in the household understand the dog's issues. I told her about them, but he wasn't around for that conversation. It would be impossible for one person to handle all of the burden of a dog with issues, especially if the other person is so unsupportive.

I would also do more follow-up with the training. I wish I'd asked sooner about the private lessons and found help for them.

But the main issue is that he just wasn't ready. He'd made a lot of progress, but ideally, I should have had him for at least another month and gotten his reactivity down even more before sending him off with someone with very little experience. I'm happy that I'll get that chance now. It feels really good to have him back.

More happy news for Arlo

Sorry for the long break, I just got back in town. There has been a lot going on in the last month, I look forward to posting a lot in the coming weeks. Austin Pets Alive! has started a new initiative, which is really exciting. There's going to be a lot more in the coming months.

Arlo was evaluated by a trainer at Lee Mannix's facility. She said that he is not fearful or aggressive, but highly insecure. With some training, she believes that that he could quickly become a great, "thinking" dog, instead of a reactive one.

Arlo's foster dad took him to daycare at Taurus Training. They loved him there and one of the staff decided to adopt him. He'll get all the training he needs. Arlo is a very lucky dog.

New job posting for City of Austin

The City of Austin posted this job. I'm not sure what it means, but it's very interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Job listing for HHS Manager, Animal Services City of Austin


Description:
The City of Austin is seeking qualified applicants for a Health and Human Services Manager, Animal Services. This position will serve under general direction of, and as assigned by, the Assistant Director, Animal Services, of the Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department. Key duties and responsibilities include the following: Responsible for the day to day operations of the Animal Services Division. Manage, coordinate, provide leadership for, and promote services and programs. Implement new programs and program enhancements.

Supervise and coordinate activities of subordinate staff; and provide leadership in policy development and decision-making. Provides leadership, strategic directions and supervision. Responsible for full range of supervisory activities including selection, training,evaluation, counseling, and recommendation for dismissal. Financial Monitoring/Budgeting activities to produce financial and budgetary information and reports to ensure appropriate allocation, utilization and control of City resources in compliance with city and other financial policies. Develops and maintains standard operating procedures. Researches, designs and promotes best practices for the delivery of program and services. Oversees the coordination of activities. Resolve customer complaints. Coordinate activities with other organizations, community groups, and citizens. Interface with Austin based animal welfare agencies on programs, services, projects, and community impacts. Perform special projects for Assistant Director.

Requirements:
Graduation from an accredited four-year college or university plus five(5) years of experience in a field related to public health/human services programming, public health/human services planning or program management. Two (2) years of which were in a lead or supervisory capacity. Masters degree may substitute for two (2) years of the experience. Knowledge and experience in animal services related programs. Skill in communication effectively with the public, media, animal welfare organizations and co-workers. Skills in effective oral and written communication. Skills in project management and project implementation.

Deadline: Until filled.To Apply:www.austincityjobs. org Req: 063724

Another euthanasia without notice

Today we received this email from staff. This is the second time that they have decided to euthanize a dog without giving us a week's notice, after the Arlo incident. To be fair, finding a solution for a dog who has shown this behavior and has heartworms is difficult (although, again, I question if the current staff making a diagnosis of dog "aggression" is appropriate).

As one volunteer pointed out after we received this email, perhaps we should spend less time discussing how these decisions are made and more time preventing them in the future, through de-stressing activities, training, a foster program, and increasing our adoptions.

Unfortunately, we had another event yesterday in which one of our dogs jumped a playpen fence (the "hilly" pen, not the lowest-fenced pens) and attacked another dog. The description from Chameleon is below:

"03/24/08 A volunteer had Gus (A499574) out in a playpen (the one on the side of the barnyard hill w/ the 4' fence) today. LMC had "Delilah," A501463, out on leash, walking up the hill to the long run. Gus jumped the fence & went straight for Delilah-- hackles raised, growling, & lunged straight for Delilah's face. Delilah cowered & ran behind LMC to hide, LMC grabbed Gus by his scruff & flung him back. Gus then proceeded to circle LMC & Delilah, growling, stalking, until the volunteer was able to leash Gus & pull him away. Putting to Adopt Attn for ALR to evaluate. NOTE: dog did NOT have a fence-jumper sign on his kennel. LEW"

Dorinda and I have made the decision to remove Gus from the adoption program and to euthanize him. After his behavior assessment on 2/08, I had decided that he was not a very good adoption candidate (also hw+), but, at the urging of a volunteer, and because we had some space, I decided to keep him and give him a try. He's now been in the Adoption Program 45 days and has not had any interest, and his behavior has become unsafe. Our Rescue Coordinators do not feel he is a good candidate for partner placement with his behavioral record.Sorry for the sad news, and thanks for all you do,Amber RowlandAdoption Program Manager

P.S. Dorinda and I will be meeting with Dog Volunteers Thursday evening, April 3 from 6:30 - 8:30, and a major portion of the agenda will be dedicated to issues surrounding cases like this and recent events with Arlo, Derby, and Sampson. We encourage you to attend the meeting and participate in the discussion if you are at all interested or concerned about the shelters' decision-making with adoption dogs.

Happy News for Arlo

At the final hour, the volunteers found a rescue group who were willing to take a chance on Arlo and he got to go home with one of our volunteers. Because of liability issues, most rescues were afraid to take on a dog that showed even the remotest sign of potential to bite. It sounds like Arlo is having a bit of separation anxiety now that he's home, hopefully the volunteer will be able to work through these issues with him. He'll be taking Arlo to an aggression specialist soon, so we'll then have a better idea if he truly has fear aggression.

Report on Gabe

When I returned home from work last night, I was not in the best of moods, after all that had happened at TLAC. My husband greeted me at the door and told me that Gabe's new family called and left a long voice mail telling us about how well he is doing and how much they love him. (But he accidently deleted the voice mail!) They also sent a picture, which was captioned:

"Our new baby Gabe! Resting on my new king size bed after a good run."

Seeing him lying on the bed wearing the walking harness cracks me up. He's probably exhausted from pulling her down the street for the last 3 miles.

Another euthanasia today

We received this email last night from staff:

I made the decision to euthanize Sampson (A501475, was in kennel 3) this evening because he jumped the exercise pen fence and attacked another dog who was bieng walked back to his kennel after surgery. It took 4 staff members 5 minutes and many desperate efforts to get Sampson to let go of the other dogs neck and head. The victim dog went home with his adopter shortly after with treatable injuries, but due to the severity and tenacity of the attack, I removed Sampson and requested that he be euthanized.

I have to note this one because staff did recently promise to give us a week's notice before euthanizing a dog. However, after the incident with Derby did not produce any options, they probably thought that this would be the most humane decision. There's certainly no point in putting a dog in a stray kennel, where no one will interact with him, if he's going to be euthanized anyway in a few days.

It's still a little bothersome to have received no other explanation for why they didn't give us the week's notice after all of the trust issues were discussed so vehemently the other night. Anyway, there could be a really good reason for it and I don't plan to challenge any of it, I just thought I should document it.

Update on Arlo

Ugh, this is a hard one to write.

Yesterday, a customer went to TLAC to check out Arlo. She spent a lot of time with him and was really interested in adopting him. She went back in the evening and staff asked one of the vets to go interact with Arlo so that the adopter could see his fearful side. It came out, big time. Here's what the lead adoption counselor had to say:

"took man and his toddler to join the wife interacting with Arlo in the big pen (square yard above stray 3). On the way, Dr H happened to be in Stray 3 so I had her walk over with us. Arlo had been easy going and relaxed with the family. Dr H was walking along the fence in a relaxed manner and calling to him in an inviting and sweet way. As soon as he focused on Dr H, his demeanor completely changed. His tail tucked so far under his body it nearly touched his chin. He was shaking and retreated as far away from her as he could. She came into the pen with us and he would not come ANYWHERE near her. She has not even touched this dog before. As she approached him, he retreated, stopping only to snarl or growl back at her. The family was very nervous about his behavior and left. Dr. H and I realized we were now going to have some trouble getting Arlo BACK to his kennel, we asked Victor to come assist (Victor had also not interacted with Arlo before). Arlo became even MORE fearful, snarling and growling whenever Vic approached. Running to the different ends of the yard, he acted trapped, looked hunted, almost feral. At the gates he would bark and growl back at us and then retreat again. I was finally able to lasso him but not after considerable growling, woofing and snarling. It was the first time since working at the shelter I feared I could truly get bitten if I was not extremely careful. Once out of the excercise pen, he practically sprinted to his kennel to get away from Vic and Dr H . I opened the kennel door and he bolted in. Vic opened the guillotine door and he skittered inside. I reached in to get the leash off him and he became VERY tense, his mouth got so stiff, he looked at me sideways, and I was worried he would bite me so I backed off. Vic managed to remove the leash with the metal gate rod, but Arlo snapped, growled, thrashed and bit at the pole several times in the process. We were all shaken up after trying to handle him safely while he was in this state.

It was very hard to see the agonizing fear in his face. I can't help but to liken it to a Jeykl and Hyde transformation. He seemed truly tortured in a way that broke my heart. I feel he is NOT safe for ANYONE BUT STAFF to remove him from his kennel. I also feel it is truly inhumane for us to allow him to live like this any longer.

The family interacting with him decided he is not a good match for their family. They were very scared by the behavior that they saw (they didn't see the re-kenneling or leash-removal) I think ANYONE who sees the way he reacted to our vet staff would be reluctant to take him into their home. I understand he could "just have issues with vet staff" but the dramatic change in behavior and demeanor of this dog indicates to me he is extremely unstable and unpredictable. I truly feel that in this instance, it would be EXTREMELY irresponsible for us to put this dog into our
community."

I don't want this next paragraph to sound like I am criticizing the adoption counselor. She is experienced with dogs and does a great job. However, I do wonder if it's appropriate for TLAC to let an adoption counselor to be leading this kind of experiment and making this kind of diagnosis and not a behaviorist, trained in aggression. TLAC only has a limited budget, so I can see why they do not have someone on staff to handle this. But as a member of our community, I would like to see our city giving TLAC the resources to better make these life or death decisions, and of course, help the dogs with these problems.

But even more importantly and more sadly, the dog they saw last night was not the dog that arrived at TLAC on February 3rd. He passed his temperament test and vet check. His first negative comment didn't come until February 25th. Over the next two weeks, his behavior deterioriated, but no one noticed (or at least volunteers were not made aware of a possible problem). When he finally jumped that fence to fight the other dog, staff took a look at all of his comments and notified us about his behavior problems. In the week since we received that notice, he was given no specialized help or training, but was put in increasingly stressful situations, causing his behavior to deteriorate to a level that has caused staff to say that euthanasia is now the only option.

I feel sick right now. The number of people who have responded to our flyers and Craigslist posting is amazing. How might this situation have ended differently, if his problems were only caught a little earlier or if there was someone at TLAC who could have helped him? I know that there is at least one volunteer who was trying to convince TLAC to allow him to foster Arlo, so he could take him to a trainer and work with him. I'm guessing by this recent email from them that they are not going to allow it. (I can understand their fear of liability issues and releasing dangerous dogs into the public, but on the flip side, it would be incredibly valuable for one of our volunteers to get specialized training in fear-based aggression, especially if he is up for the task.)

Finally, another volunteer posted this in response to staff's email about last night:

BTW, the adopter mentioned in this report called me today to tell me what happened. According to her, they were not frightened by Arlo's behavior, but did feel terrible for him when they saw how frightened he was. She described the vet as giving Arlo a mean look as she approached. The woman felt Arlo was trying to run to her to get away from the staff, which she said "broke her heart." The woman really felt bonded to Arlo, but has a 4-yr-old and felt she should heed your warnings. If they were upset, it was because they wanted to help Arlo but felt they were not in a position to do so.

Arlo and Derby

Well, I'm happy to report that staff has kept their word and has given us prior notice of a dog's euthanasia and a week to find a way out of the shelter for that dog.

Sadly, in just two weeks, we've already had two dogs who have qualified.

The first was Derby, who did not make it, I'm afraid. (Staff has not followed up on him with us, but I am assuming that no news is not good news.) He attacked and really hurt another dog. He had just made it into the adoption program, so the volunteers had no information yet about him and unfortunately, the poor guy did not have any advocates.

The next is Arlo (the dog pictured), who is a favorite among the volunteers. Arlo jumped a 4-ft fence last week and "attacked" another dog. We haven't received any details on the attack (details have been requested, but nothing has been provided yet), except that neither dog was hurt. He has since acted nervous on two occasions, growled and snapped at a vet tech, and put on an "aggressive display", barking and lunging at a staff member who walked by his kennel.

Both staff and volunteers are in agreement that Arlo is stressed at the shelter and his behavior inside of the kennel is deteriorating. Outside of the kennel, he is a laid-back, friendly lab. Inside of his kennel, he is highly reactive.

However, volunteers think that he is just stressed at TLAC and will be a different dog outside. He is a perfect gentleman on trail walks on Town Lake. He walks perfectly on the leash and is friendly to all people and other dogs. We've put up flyers everywhere and have posted his story on Craigslist and, luckily, are receiving lots of interest.

Staff, on the other hand, has labeled him an "aggressive" dog and seem to be communicating that to all interested adopters.

I haven't personally spent much time with Arlo. Of course, volunteers spend far more time with the dogs than staff does, so I generally trust their opinions a little more than staff's.

We received an email from staff today and one of the points said:

The behavioral reality is that a dog who has used aggression in the past is very likely to use aggression in the future, and we are not sure what might trigger Arlo to use aggression, so his aggression MUST be taken seriously, and anyone interested in trying to live with him must understand that this will be on-going for him -it won't just "go away" once he's comfortable and loved in a home.

Professional Behaviorists agree that "working with" a dog that has shown aggressive behavior is not about stopping the dog from being aggressive, but about managing the dog so that it is unable to hurt anyone, and hopefully not given any additional opportunities to practice aggression or to see that it generally works to get the dog what it wants. This is an important distinction to consider.

I have a dog who loves to start fights with other dogs. We had to see an aggression specialist, Lee Mannix, at one point. He told us that she was not aggressive, but was a "school-yard bully". I'm going to try to summarize what he told us about her issues and aggression: The fights were loud and dramatic, which is usually just a dog putting on a good show, not being aggressive. True aggression, with the intent to hurt, usually happens very quickly and quietly.

So, we stopped taking her to dog parks and started exercising her...a lot. My husband takes her on 6-10 mile bike rides every day. He takes her to the green belt all the time (off-leash) and she never starts fights anymore. I think she had frustration of not being able to run (we thought we were great, taking her on 2 long walks every day, but she's a border collie mix and needs to stretch those legs). Once she got what she needed, she was fine.

So, I have to wonder, is Arlo truly aggresive, and his aggression will need to managed for the rest of his life? Or is he acting out at the shelter and will be different in a home environment?

I take dog aggression very, very seriously. It would be terrible for the public and TLAC's image to adopt out a dangerous dog. However, it doesn't seem like there's anyone at TLAC who has in-depth experience with aggresive dogs. I wonder how much of the decision is based upon how scary a dog seems to a given person on a given day, as opposed to an expert making that decision based on science.

Gabe was adopted today!

Gabe and I hung out at TLAC this weekend, hoping to meet someone who would want to adopt him. We were just about to leave yesterday, when a woman saw him playing so well with toys, that she stopped us to meet him. She came over today with her husband and is just crazy about him. They have officially adopted him, but haven't taken him home yet. That's going to be really hard for me. I stopped fostering a few years ago because it became too hard.

I know that this couple will be good for him, though. She doesn't work right now and is looking forward to continuing with his training. She is also a jogger, which he needs.

They are scheduled for lots more training with Lee Mannix next week, so I'm pretty sure that the timing will work out perfectly. The day of tutoring he had with them last week, by the way, did wonders for him. He no longer reacts much in the car. He cries and growls a little when he sees another dog, but the insane barking is gone. He's still pretty bad out on walks, though. I told the adopters all about him and that it will probably be a long time before he will be able to jog with her at Town Lake, but they seemed up for the challenge.

So I'm a little sad, but I'm more relieved that he has a home now, since I leave in under two weeks.

Gabe update

I've had Gabe for about 6 weeks now. We had 3 private lessons with Lee Mannix about 2 weeks ago. When he first met Gabe, he told me that I'll be as trained as one of his interns by the time I'm finished with him. But the little guy is incredibly smart and is picking this up really fast. Lee was surprised at how fast he was learning to relax when other dogs came near, instead of going crazy. At home, certain behaviors, like jumping on me or barking at my other dogs to get them to play have completely ended. In fact, he quit doing those after just one time-out.

Outside, at my house, is a different story. He still barks at everything. I'm just not getting through to him. I understand that if a dog knows to do something in one situation, it will not automaticallly translate to other situations. I know that you have to teach a dog to do that behavior in many different situations before they can generalize. He was perfect at the trainer's, but he's just not getting it at home and I'm at a loss for what I could be doing better.

It's frustrating because I'm leaving town in a few weeks for a long trip and I just want him to be "fixed" so he can get adopted by then. I'm sure that this attitude is what is slowing down his progress. If I can figure out where he can go when I leave, if he's not adopted by then, I will probably be much less stressed about it. If my only option is to put him back in the shelter (and possibly face euthanasia while I'm gone), I'll have to cancel the trip I've been planning for years. I'm working with tlac staff on this now.

Tlac staff, by the way, have been incredible. They've reimbursed me for $235 of training costs (which is only a fraction of what it would have cost if Lee hadn't given us such amazing deals). They've been really supportive and thankful the whole time. I get to take Gabe on tv next Friday (hopefully he won't be a holy terror). I usually get the feeling that they aren't crazy about volunteers putting so much time into just a few problem dogs, but I haven't felt that way at all in this situation.

Gabe is at daycare today with Lee Mannix. Daycare at Lee Mannix's isn't like doggie daycare at other places. The day is spent on training and working on the dog's specific issues, rather than just playing with other dogs. Hopefully, this will help us all figure out how I can teach him not to react when outside at my house. We also have 3 more lessons coming up and he's enrolled in a 6-week group class after that (which may have to be postponed if he's not adopted because I won't be in town to take him).

Lee Mannix and his trainers have all been amazing, too. They've given us really, really cheap training and have gone out of their way to make this work. And if Gabe needs even more training, one of their trainers started Schrodi's fund, to help pay for training for dogs like Gabe.

So, everyone has been incredibly helpful and Gabe has learned a ton in the last few weeks. If I didn't have this damn deadline looming over my head, I'd probably be viewing this situation completely differently.

Meeting with Dorinda

On Thursday, Dorinda Pulliam, the shelter director, met with the volunteers who work with the dogs. It was quite a heated discussion. Supposedly we are going to have these meetings every month. By the end of the meeting, she had agreed to the following proposals by the volunteers.

• Off site adoption events at the Farmer's Market
• Allowing volunteers to foster dogs more often
• Giving volunteers one week's notice before euthanizing any dog in the adoption program
• Bringing in more outside, professional trainers to help dogs in trouble

Personally, I was thrilled about what we accomplished. I'd imagine that any rational person reading this who cares about ending euthanasia of adoptable animals is probably shocked to be reading this. Shocked that these simple, common-sense measures are a revolutionary idea at TLAC and shocked that a volunteer would be so thankful for such paltry efforts to reduce the killing.

In the four years I've volunteered there, the volunteers have been given almost no responsibility. They expect us to come in and teach the dogs to sit and that's about it. Teaching a dog who is going kennel crazy or is developing dog aggression to sit is rather pointless. We watch dogs deteriorate as the weeks go by while having no tools or recourse to stop it. We offer to bring in trainers, at our own expense, but are always denied. We try to find rescue groups and offer donations to the rescue groups to take a dog that is deteriorating, and are told we cannot do that.

We are asked to give staff honest feedback about the dogs' problems. However, absolutely no good can come of the negative feedback, because there is nothing that is done for the dogs with problems, except for killing them.

We spent a lot of time talking about that issue and the complete lack of trust that we have in the staff. We talked about how staff has alluded, in conversations and email, to euthanizing earlier now, so that we can't form bonds with dogs that have the potential for problems. Dorinda vehemently denied this, but the staff who have been involved in those conversations and emails were not present during this part of the conversation. Actually, when this conversation started, one person who has been involved in those conversations got up and left the room.

So, after four years of doing almost nothing, I felt like we accomplished a lot for the dogs on Thursday. Other, newer volunteers, however, saw things very differently. In fact, one quit in disgust. She, in particular, was vocal at the meeting about how much more management could be doing and drew Dorinda into a bizarre fight in which Dorinda became incredibly defensive (for which she did apologize later).

Hopefully, Dorinda won't change her mind about these meetings and we'll have lots more. I'll definitely be keeping detailed notes for the next ones.

Update: The volunteer who quit emailed me and told me that she did not, in fact, quit in disgust, but actually that she "can do more from without than from within". She and Dorinda have had friendly and respectful exchanges since, and Dorinda has told her that she really wants someone who is so open and caring with so much energy and creativity to remain a volunteer. I agree. I've seen a lot of great people leave over the years. Whatever this volunteer decides to do, I'm certain that she'll be making a big impact for the animals and Austin animals are lucky to have her here.

Doing more

To elaborate more on Cornbread's euthanasia yesterday, I'll copy another volunteer's response to the news:

The best way to prevent sad news emails is to constantly work for improvement and change. Whether that is pushing for more proactive programs to reduce stress on the dogs so they don't go kennel crazy, marketing the dogs and the shelter so TLAC becomes people's first option for getting a new pet, increasing rescue and foster placements so dogs with health or behavior issues have the time to heal or improve so they are adoptable, promoting spay/neuter of pets, introducing an off-site adoption program, etc., etc.. We can't relax and we can't become resigned to the killing as just something inevitable that happens. Just looking at adopt a running buddy and how the adoption rate for the featured dogs increased (5 dogs in 6 days) when we had a newspaper article, flyers in more locations, and a booth at the Farmer's Market, tells me that hard work and increased exposure can make a huge difference in the outcomes. We may not be able to save every animal this year or next year, or maybe ever, but every animal that dies in our care that wasn't terminal or dangerous when it arrived should be viewed as a failure of the system. That's the only way to learn and improve. For ideas that have helped increase the save rate to as high as 92% in communities that have adopted them wholeheartedly, try this link.

I would like to see staff return to giving warning before the dogs are killed. TLAC may not have been the right place for Lefty or Cornbread, but how do you know there wasn't a volunteer out there who really cared for one of those animals and who could have provided a foster home where they could recover? Or a rescue group that might have been able to take on the challenge, perhaps supported by a donation from volunteers who were willing and able to help in that manner? You don't have to say we're about to kill so-and-so, but a simple message saying a particular dog is deteriorating at the shelter and needs rescue, foster, or adoption immediately, with a deadline, would suffice.

This email sums it all up. These are the kinds of things we've been asking to do for years and we've never been allowed to do them. We've still had no response from staff on this email. I will definitely post something if we get anything.

Bonding "problems", Part 4

We received this from staff yesterday:

Cornbread in Kennel 55, ID A499195 had to be euthanized yesterday. His ringworm had gotten worse and worse and was not responding well to treatment. He then developed some sort of infection in his eye and we just didn't feel he was doing well here in the adoption program.

We then got another email from staff:

Everyday TLAC staff has to make tough decisions about which animals get to go to adoption and which ones don't. These decisions are never, ever made lightly. With limited kennels, limited resources and the reality of dogs in our care deteriorating no matter what we do to try to protect them - TLAC Staff makes theses decisions every day. Our hope is that before staff, and especially volunteers, get attached to animals that do not have a very good chance of ever getting reclaimed, rescued or adopted, the animal leaves the shelter as quickly and peacefully as possible.

Is this the best solution? Of course not, in a perfect world every animal would be given a chance at adoption, no matter how long it took. We are not there yet - each and every one of us is moving towards that goal in every moment of our lives - but we simply are not there yet.

This brings me to Lefty. He had a bum front left leg - no telling how long it had been that way and what it might have taken to fix it. His mouth was full of infected, abscessed teeth (the ones he had left anyway). We was high heartworm positive. He was a two year old unaltered pit bull. Could he have gotten adopted? Perhaps. But each day he was in an adoption kennel, countless other dogs, more adoptable, healthier dogs, would not have even been given a chance. We had to take all of these things into consideration when we decided to remove him from the program this morning.

We do our best to keep dogs who we truly feel are not good adoption candidates from landing in adoption kennels, but sometimes they slip through the cracks. I apologize profusely to anyone who may have become attached to Lefty during his short stay in Kennel 49.

I need to comment on a few things here. First, this sentence: "Our hope is that before staff, and especially volunteers, get attached to animals that do not have a very good chance of ever getting reclaimed, rescued or adopted, the animal leaves the shelter as quickly and peacefully as possible. "


I suppose that this confirms what I'd feared...that staff is trying to euthanize dogs faster who might have issues so that we won't become bonded to them.


Whenever they euthanize a dog and volunteers get upset, we are always told that "These situations are not about what is best or easiest on our own human emotions but on the needs of the animals. " (See letter from staff at end of this posting.)


So, it's "not about what is best or easiest on our own human emotions" when they kill a dog with whom we have bonded, but then they're killing dogs sooner, before we've had a chance to bond, to help protect us from our own emotions. Seems to me like if it's not about our own emotions, then we shouldn't be proactively killing dogs to avoid potential heartbreak in the future.


Next, the part about Lefty slipping through the cracks and making it into the adoption program, has already been commented on by another volunteer:

First, I was dismayed that Lefty was described as falling through the cracks because he made it to adoption. I would say he had every right to make it to adoption, and should have been given every chance to succeed. I would say that he fell through the cracks when he was euthanized at TLAC. I am sorry that Cornbread was killed because of ring worm and "some sort of eye infection."

Which leads me to the last piece on which I want to comment - euthanizing Cornbread for having ringworm and an eye infection. This posting is already getting very long. I think I'll save this one for the next posting.

Bonding "problems", Part 3

I talked to the volunteer coordinator this weekend about the euthanization policy and she cleared up any confusion for me. She said that the policy has not changed and that the recent euthanizations were merely forgotten about. Staff is still committed to notifying us when this happens.

On Saturday, another two were euthanized and we were notified. That makes 4 dogs in a month, which is really high. I'm very concerned that we have a trend starting, but we'll see what the next few months bring.

Open Paws

TLAC is implementing a new training program called Open Paws. You can read articles about it here and here.

Trainings for the new methods are beginning and new pilot programs are starting. One that I'm particularly excited about is feeding the dogs through puzzle toys instead of bowls. Not only are the dogs' lives being enriched while at the shelter, staff has made flyers for the kennels teaching the public about what's going on. A lot of the credit for this goes to a new staff member, who used to be a volunteer, and is now the Animal Care Supervisor.

I look forward to this new program and the results it might bring.

Mission: Orange

It's the one year anniversary of the Mission: Orange kickoff event here in Austin, called the Homeless Animals Summit. From the ASPCA's website:
"ASPCA Mission: Orange is a focused effort to create a country of humane communities, one community at a time, where animals receive the compassion and respect they deserve—a nation where there is no more unnecessary euthanasia of adoptable animals simply because of a lack of resources and awareness. "

I'm guessing that there were about 100 people at the event, including the leaders from TLAC, ATA, Emancipet, and the Humane Society, who are the partners with the ASPCA in Mission: Orange. A good number of the attendees were from other cities, though, so there were probably only about 50 Austinites. We spent the weekend brainstorming ideas for getting Austin to "no-kill". It was a great weekend that produced lots of ideas.

But just ideas. There was no one responsible for implementing any of these big ideas. After the summit, I received a few emails thanking everyone and one regarding a Mission: Orange contest (do something to promote the program, the winner gets a prize trip to NY), but nothing about the ideas that came of the weekend. There was no leadership set up to put these ideas into motion. As far as I know, not one idea from that summit weekend has been implemented.

So, around TLAC, what has changed? Nothing. There was some talk about training for staff, which may have happened, I don't know. There was talk about implementing a new program for better matching customers with pets, but that hasn't happened yet. I'm sure that something has happened, but I'll bet if you ask any volunteer at TLAC about Mission: Orange, they won't know what you're talking about.

So, not quite the impact I'd thought we see after the summit last year. The ASPCA did give a sizable donation to ATA, which is wonderful. But compare that $300,000 donation to the $6 million annual budget of TLAC and you won't be convinced that it's going to quickly solve our problems here in Austin.

The Mission: Orange website mentions 2 specific goals. The first is to increase the adoption rate by 10% in the first year. I haven't heard yet if they made this goal, but it's doubtful. I do believe that adoption numbers are up this year, but I'm not sure if we can discern the cause (not that it really matters, adoptions are up, so YAY!) Unfortunately, the adoption numbers at TLAC are paltry (rescue groups account for many more of the animals who leave alive). The number is around 3,500 per year, I need to look up the exact number, then I'll post it. So, if we can save another 350 a year, that is fabulous, but not exactly earth-shattering and it will certainly not get us to no-kill anytime soon (TLAC kills approximately 10,000 animals in a year).

The second goal is to get us to a 75% save rate by 2010. So in two years, they're going to get the rate from 50% to 75%. Hmm.

I suppose that I am a little frustrated with the ASPCA and the Mission: Orange program for more than just a lack of action here in Austin. Nathan Winograd, on his blog, claims that the ASPCA told Philadelphia that they'd be dropped as a Mission: Orange city (and lose the grant) if they didn't withdraw their support of his book tour. This is crazy! I don't understand why these groups have to be in war with each other. I don't care who does it, the animals certainly don't care who does it. If there are others out there who want to save the animals, too, shouldn't we all be supportive?

If the ASPCA came to TLAC today with a list of programs that they want to implement, I'll be the first one to sign up. Finally some leadership to get us out of this mess! After this year, I'm still waiting. Maybe we'll see something this year...we'll have to see something to get us to that 75% goal in 2010.

Gabe

In a super-cool move by staff, I was allowed to take home and foster Gabe, a dog who was not doing well at the shelter. We've had him for almost a week and he's quite a handful. He's incredibly reactive to everything. It could be night, before bed, everyone's snoozing on the couch/dog beds and he hears a dog bark a mile away and he's up and barking. Trying to drive with him in the car is bound to get me in a wreck. Forget trying to walk him. His last owners tried to deal with this problem with a shock collar, which obviously didn't help because they still returned him to the shelter.

We had a consultation last night with one of Lee Mannix's trainers. She evaluated him and told me that he has an extreme level of frustration and no idea what to do with it, which is causing this behavior. Staff noticed that he had no interest in toys at the shelter, which was odd. We will be working on getting him interested in toys and games in the next 2-3 weeks. No affection unless he has a toy in his mouth and all food must be worked for - put into a puzzle that he has to figure out to get the food. We'll go back to the trainer in 2-3 weeks to work on the reactivity problem. Until then, we have to avoid his triggers, which is going to be a challenge since everything triggers him. Even after just one day, though, he already seems less reactive in the house. I filled up a kong with a delicious treat and he worked on that on our drive over to doggy-daycare today - he didn't bark once.

I'm feeling really optimistic that he'll be highly adoptable in a few weeks. We tried getting some pictures of him, but he was too hyper and they didn't turn out well, which is too bad because he is SO CUTE. He's a great size, too - just 30 lbs at 9 months. Once his frustration levels drop and his reactivity goes away, people are going to be fighting to adopt him.

This is really important because the volunteers have been wanting to have a foster program for a really long time and staff has never been for it. It's an important part of the No-Kill Equation. Staff has mentioned that they are interested in trying this on a limited basis. I want them to see how well this can work so that they will let us do more of it.

"Studies"

One response from staff regarding their negativity about some of the dogs said this:

"In the studies that have been done about how people choose pets at a shelter and what factors have the greatest impact on whether an adoption is successful, it has been found that there are 2 consistent key factors that lead to successful, long-term placement... Get ready... 1. a soft coat! and 2. the adopters' expectations.

That's right, it's not whether a pet is a certain size, color, or breed, whether it is house-broken or not, whether it jumps up or not, whether it is friendly with other animals or children or not, whether it is easy to train or not. What matters most is that the animal has a soft coat and that an adopters' expectations of what their life will be like with that animal are close to what the pet can actually live up to."

A soft coat is what leads to successful, long-term placement. Really. That's really what she wrote. I hope that anyone who reads this, who has adopted a dog, will leave a comment on this posting and let me know if that's the reason why you've kept your dog.

Unfortunately, no sources were given to us for the studies mentioned. The second factor - the adopters' expectations - makes sense to me. However, when coupled with that first factor, I have a hard time buying into any of it.

Bonding "problems", Part 2

Here's a volunteer's response to the last email from staff on the issue of euthanization notices and why the policy seems to have changed:

It appears that our definitions of "Sadness" differ - that's unfortunate. Sadness for me, is not a label.

An animal that is brought into the adoption program, proves that that animal is mentally sound and healthy to deserve a shot at adoption. A lot of animals that qualify and don't even get this opportunity - that's tragic, but an animal that's pulled out of adoption because he/she succumbed to the stress and couldn't take it anymore (and thus now is a danger to all those around) is no less devastating. Hence, a dog's mental or physical disposition has no bearing on the sadness of a situation. Also, at the cost of being repetitive, How does informing the outcome for an animal hamper the safety of the environment? How are they even remotely related? It just sounds incredible.

Indeed, its a courtesy TLAC extends us by informing us about the status of the animals we toil and care for. Its much appreciated. Perhaps, if the staff had the time,
opportunity and encouragement to spend only an hour (or even a half) with an animal of their choice, once a week, such a courtesy might appear to be a natural and a compassionate gesture. But that's a whole different debate that needs a separate forum. But please, make no mistake, a volunteer who doesn't care much for being notified of the tragic news doesn't see the rationale or the emotions behind those to request such a courtesy. A compromise it may be, but both sides respect and empathize with other's feelings.

There also appears, and I repeat, a significant shift and contradiction in management policy. You first email categorically states, and I quote: "Notification of euthanization WILL NOT be made for an animal that must be removed right away for behavior or health issues" while your last email suggests that "Every effort to notify volunteers with a "sad news" is made . . ." So what has changed and why? Your emails do not explain this anywhere.

I appreciate Sarah for her efforts in writing a depressing email each time something happens. I think its brave and extremely difficult. Also, I don't think that TLAC management is without care, there are places where in volunteers don't have the opportunity to even express themselves as I do right now. But why do you refuse to take a hand that is offered to you? I've been here for over two years, the dogmanners program has come a very long way. Its never been as strong as it is now. How do you think this occurred? And more importantly, how do you expect it to go on, if you don't offer us the trust you expect in return? Volunteers can't expected to be dictated upon without offering a plausible explanation . . . we'd like to be seen as a worthy partner. I've said enough and I thank you for reading thus far. It's all I have to say and you won't be hearing from me on this issue anymore. This email is not directed at all at [the volunteer coordinator], I hold her in very high esteem . . . but it certainly deserves an honest introspection from management. "

And here's the result of the "honest introspection from management", yet still no direct answer acknowledging that the policy has changed or why:

Every effort will be made to notify volunteers with a "SAD NEWS" Yahoo! posting when an adoption animal is pulled from the program.

Check adoption outcome reports and "ALL" animals on our website by animal ID#. Remember to keep track of the animal ID # if you want to email me for the specific outcome of the animal.

Lizzie, Part II

The Austin American Statesman did an article on Lizzie and the Running Buddies program, which was totally awesome and probably a big factor in our recent adoption successes. I'm hoping that it will convince staff to keep this program going, since they've recently voiced concerns about it.

I want to document an email I received from another volunteer about Lizzie when the issue of staff negativity came up:

"I had the same thing happen to me with Lizzy. She only had 2 days to go before being euthanized. I was told that [the staff evaluator] had determined that Lizzy because of her behavior would not be a good candidate for adoption. But [the staff evaluator] only observed Lizzy inside her kennel and based her decision on what she saw. Once outside Lizzy was a completely different dog. I wanted to take Lizzy home for an overnight foster and get her away from the shelter. That staff member told me to focus my attention on another dog one that had a chance of being adopted and not to work with Lizzy. As a last resort I took her out on the trail that Friday night hoping someone would see her and show some interest, with no luck. Upon returning to the shelter I met a lady and one of the staff members at the front door. The lady was waiting to see Lizzy, she saw her flyer and wanted to meet with her. She immediately fell in love with the dog and adopted Lizzy."

(Hopefully you've already read the statesman article and know what a great pet Lizzie has been with her new family.)

Evaluations/temperament testing is another issue I'd like to explore more in this blog (I'll save it for a later posting). But I just want to get this thought out: Temperament testing is a great tool for evaluating the deluge of animals that come to TLAC every day. Statistically, it may be the best way with the budget that TLAC has for deciding which animals make it to the adoption program and which get euthanized. However, there's no test that is fool-proof and will accurately predict an animal's behavior 100% of the time.

Bonding "problems"

I had a very troubling conversation with staff about a month ago, which I've already once written about. In that conversation, they mentioned that they didn't like how bonded the volunteers are becoming with the dogs and that they perhaps need to start euthanizing dogs earlier who might become problems, to avoid the bond and the difficulties caused when they decide it's time to euthanize.

In the past few weeks, three dogs have been euthanized without a notice going out to the volunteers. We only know about this because of volunteers tracking dogs, noticing a dog isn't around and that it wasn't on the list of adopted dogs, and inquiring from staff in person to find out what happened. We've had an understanding with staff that we be notified of an adoption dog getting euthanized (as opposed to the unlucky 30 animals a day who are euthanized in the stray area and never even make it into the adoption program). I sent an email to find out if the policy had changed and here's the response:

"Notification of pending euthanization will occur only when we believe the animal is safe enough to leave in the adoption program. Notification of euthanization WILL NOT be made for an animal that must be removed right away for behavior or health issues. It is the responsibility of TLAC management to keep our environment safe and healthy. We respectfully ask that you trust us to make the right decision for everyone and every animal - even though it is emotionally difficult for all of us. We are still committed to notifying volunteers of any "Sad News" postings when appropriate."

Another volunteer replied to the group, expressing his disagreement of only getting the "Sad News" emails for certain dogs and bringing up the trust issue. Here was the response:

"The "Sad News" euthanization notification has not changed. This applies when the adoptable animal has been in the adoption run for an extended period of time. What makes it "sad" is the animal is healthy and its' behavior is fine, it just hasn't had an adoption We notify volunteers about the five day pending euthanization if an adoption is not made. This notification is a courtesy for the volunteers desiring to know the specific outcome of the animal. For volunteers that do not want to know, the "Sad News" posting is a compromise. But when the health or behavior of the animal compromises safe conditions for the public, staff, volunteers and other animals, it is the responsibility of TLAC management to remove the animal immediately. Every effort to notify volunteers with a "Sad News" notice is made. Does it always happen? No.

Why weren't you told? I can't say specifically without knowing the animal ID number. Is it because the animal was actually adopted with the new adopters giving a new name? Are you assuming the animal was euthanized because it no longer is in our care? That is not the case with all animals. With an animal ID number, I will be
happy to look up the animals to confirm their outcome. I cannot do it by name. "

By the way, two of the dogs' names were Abner and Lefty. Apparantly, we have so many Abners and Leftys that they can't find those dogs in the system using just their names nor can anyone remember them.

All of the staff responses have come from the volunteer coordinator, who does not have knowledge of the individual dogs. However, all of staff are included in these emails. The same staff members who told the volunteer about the dogs getting euthanized when she asked are seeing this email thread. So far, none of them have come forward to tell the group what has happened to the dogs. They're just letting the volunteer coordinator tell us that without an animal id, they don't know what happened, so we should just assume the dog has been adopted.

I'm sure that this isn't the end of this issue and I'll have another post about it soon.

Staff negativity, defensiveness

Recently, the volunteers have been talking with each other about our experiences hearing extreme negativity coming from staff to customers about certain dogs in the adoption program. Here are some examples:

Someone on staff evaluated a dog and on the way back to the pen with him told me that he doesn't belong in the adoption program (read: needs to be euthanized) and is a total nightmare. Soon after, the dog was adopted and was immediately calm and happy in his new home with another dog and cat.

A customer was in the adoption office and mentioned having a chihuahua at home and is interested in adopting the pit bull, Chickpea. As soon as the staff member heard this, she said "You have a dog at home? You do NOT want Chickpea." Chickpea plays very rough and did not do well on one meet and greet. The other dog wanted to be left alone, but she kept wanting to play. Chickpea had many play buddies at TLAC and got along great with them. So based on this one meet and greet, the adopter had immediately turned off the customer without giving it a chance. Remember, staff rarely interacts with the dogs. They base their comments to customers on a few items in their database.

One staff member told me one day how much she hates her job. Not that it's hard or frustrating, but that she "hates" it.

A couple was in this weekend looking at Chickpea. An experienced volunteer introduced them to the dog and talked to them for a long time about her special needs and how she'll need training and a strong leader. They were very open to all she had to say. They went in to the adoption office to fill out the paperwork to adopt her.

A little while later, the volunteer noticed them talking to another volunteer, so she walked over and saw the the women in this couple was crying. Apparantly, the staff member told her that Chickpea should never go to a dog park and would attack other dogs on walks in their neighborhood. Yes, the same Chickpea who had plenty of play buddies at the shelter.

The volunteers have seen what happens when an adoption match is bad. Usually when a dog gets returned after being adopted, it gets immediately euthanized. We've had some of our favorites get adopted, Yay!, to be returned in a few days and euthanized. It's devastating. We strongly believe that informing adopters about all behaviors noted at the shelter, and their possible implications, is crucial to ensuring a permanent match.

This is not what we've seen with staff, though. Instead, we're seeing extreme negativity about dogs and quick, biting comments that would scare off the most dedicated adopters.

So this volunteer sent out an email to the volunteers and staff, explaining the recent comments that volunteers have heard, along with this recent one, and suggestions that we all stop and think about how we relay negative information about a dog to customers. Not hiding anything, but not condemning the dog, either. This was staff's first response:

"It is not our job to be negative, it is our job to be informative and educational. Believe me, we want long stays dogs into appropriate homes as much as anyone because we see daily the dogs that do not even get a chance to come to adoption. Staff was very appropriately trying to make sure the adopters expectations met those with which living with Chickpea would be like...I feel confident that all of us, volunteers and staff, did the best possible job with this dog. We need to Remember, we are all on the same team. We all want the same thing and we need to trust in each other that we are all doing the best we can. "

Ok, the volunteer specifically said that we need to be completely honest about the dog. She only said that perhaps we need to reconsider how that message is being delivered. This was her response:

"I'm sorry, I have to respectfully disagree. Over and over I have heard the first words out of a counselor's mouth about a particular dog be very negative and discouraging. It is often an off-the-cuff reaction, not a well-thought out counseling session based on knowledge of that adopter's circumstances and skill level. I would not be surprised to find that many of our visitors find the attitude they are met with not only discouraging, but also demeaning to them. Worse, yet, the comments have often been ones that I found to be overstated or inaccurate based on my experiences. I'm certainly not claiming to be the all-knowing arbiter of dog behavior. The volunteers try to respect staff judgment. But very often, it is the volunteers who spend numerous hours with the dogs. It is the volunteers who see how they interact with other dogs and people over and over and over in the courtyard. If anyone has actually seen the potential adopter interacting with a given dog, it is a volunteer. So I think our judgment has value as well.

I can think of 2 dogs off the top of my head (Diesel and Santa anyone?) that I really liked that went to inappropriate situations and were returned and killed. So I know the stakes of a bad adoption. My post did not question informing or educating adopters,or ask staff and volunteers to have a Pollyanna attitude about the challenges of some of our dogs. It asked everyone to think about how they convey that information. This was intended to make everyone examine their own actions and re-think bad habits they may have unconsciously fallen into. And if this is a shelter policy, then it is a request to the management that the policy be changed.

Finally, I will once again ask everyone, staff and volunteers, to think of the numerous reports we have gotten about dogs that were troubled in the shelter and became model citizens once they left. When the first words out of your mouth are going to be the equivalent of, "you don't want THAT dog," please stop and think for a minue about whether you are unfairly condemning that dog. "

So staff replied, stating again that they must give the whole truth to the adopters, so the volunteer replied, stating again that she agrees the whole truth must be given to the adopters, she's just asking that everyone think about how they deliver their message. Then staff sent out this message:

As a courtesy to other volunteers, please do not continue to carry this thread into the Dog Manners Yahoo Group. This conversation is better served between the key parties and not the entire Dog Manners Volunteers - who often just want to come in and interact with the dogs without getting into these in-depth differences of opinion. We could not do all that is achieved without the abundant support, dedication, and cooperation from our volunteers. WE give a huge thanks to those of you continuing to serve the shelter. Volunteers are here to support the shelter in the manner in which TLAC Management deems to be in the best interest of the animals in our care. If you want to address the decisions of the TLAC Management team, bring your concerns to the team and not to the entire Yahoo Group.

Barney, Part II and more happy news...

After almost 4 months at the shelter, Barney was adopted this weekend. Not only that, but about 8 of our long stays, some with some difficult issues, have been adopted in the last two weeks. According to staff, the adoption numbers for January are way up compared to last year's January (haven't been given any percentages, though).

Cricket

Cricket was euthanized yesterday, causing sadness among both staff and volunteers, due to dog aggression. She'd been at TLAC since November 5th and had been a total sweetheart to people the entire time. Her behavior evaluation when she entered the shelter stated that she was aloof, but relaxed around other dogs. The shelter can be a particularly difficult place for black pit bulls, as they don't get much attention from the public.

Running Buddies

Chandra and I have been running the Running Buddies program for almost a year. It seems to be quite successful and people really seem to like it. Last night, however, staff mentioned that they're not sure that they can keep supporting the program. They don't like it that we keep advertising our dogs with "issues". Not all of our dogs have issues, but many do. They're afraid that the flyers might not accurately represent the dog. We talked about ways to fix that. At least we can all agree that the flyers should be accurate. Chandra and I want Running Buddies to be a positive brand, not one that just represents the worst dogs.



We try to focus on high energy dogs. They have the hardest time at the shelter because they don't get the exercise they need and in turn can act crazy when someone takes them out. Some of them are super-cute and end up getting adopted by someone who chose a dog based on looks, but was totally unable to give the dog the exercise it needs. We'd like to prevent that and get the dog into an active household. Because these dogs are usually long stays and have a lot of frustration about being pent up in a cage all day, they can have some issues. We do know that some of these dogs with the worst issues went into homes and became perfect pets almost immediately. I'm certain that won't always happen, but having issues in the shelter isn't a perfect predictor of how the dog will be in a home.



Another reason staff said they don't like the program anymore is that doing these flyers has made people more bonded to the dogs, which is going to make it more difficult for them when it comes time to euthanize. As I've mentioned before, there is nothing worse for them than volunteers questioning their decision to euthanize.



So, what do we do? The flyers have definitely been bringing more people into the shelter, which is a great thing. We can't focus on the easy dogs, because by the time we get them photographed and have their flyers made and distributed, they'll be adopted. These high energy dogs are still in the adoption program, so why should we ignore them? Hopefully we can work with their concerns and continue this program.

Barney

At TLAC, the staff does not have the time to interact much with the animals. They do the initial evaluation and decide if the animal makes it to the adoption program. Once in the adoption program, the animals are primarly handled by volunteers. The volunteers are spending a lot of time working for the animals and becoming bonded with them. The staff, on the other hand, are evaluating all the animals that walk in the door and picking the best for the adoption program. They are euthanizing the rest (who don't get pulled by a rescue group), which is about 30 per day.

So on one hand, you have volunteers who can see great potential in a dog who has some issues and know that the dog will make a great pet for the right person. On the other hand, you have staff who see a "problem" dog in adoption, taking up space, while they have to euthanize some good dogs, who might do better in the adoption program. When staff has decided that they've given a dog enough time and it's time to euthanize him, the volunteers can get very upset. This irritates staff like nothing else.

Barney is our example of the day. He is a great dog. He loves people, is good with kids, is affectionate and has good manners. However, he shows dog aggression at times. All that TLAC staff knows is that "Barney is very dog-aggressive". However, the volunteers know that Barney is just fine with most females. Barney is also more into treats than trying to be aggressive to other dogs. We've sat with him in the courtyard at TLAC with dogs passing all around and he pretty much ignored them because he was having fun with us. A couple of times we could see him tensing up, so we pulled out the treats and he forgot all about the other dog. Most dogs at the shelter with dog aggression cannot be redirected away like that with a treat. While Barney does need work, and needs to be adopted by someone willing to do the work, I don't think he's a difficult case at all.

For some reason, TLAC keeps putting him in a pen right next to another aggressive, reactive male. Every time he gets taken out by a visitor, he gets into a scary barking session with his neighbor. We keep asking for him to be moved, but he just gets moved next to another aggressive male.

TLAC staff has been very negative about him. They have said that they've been holding him for 100 days when they should have euthanized him to open up that space for other dogs. I believe that their negative feelings and lack of awareness of who's he kenneled next to has kept Barney from being adopted.

At one time, I agreed with TLAC that we need to make space for easier dogs. Now, I'm not sure. Every time a dog gets euthanized, volunteers quit. I've been volunteering there for 4 years and can only think of 3 other volunteers who have been there longer than I. We have a revolving door volunteer base of mostly inexperienced, unknowledgable dog handlers. Our work there can really feel useless and pointless. You give up your free time, you get your heart broken, you don't feel like you're making a difference - what's the point?

After learning about the success that Nathan Winograd has had in other communities, I think now that TLAC needs to stop euthanizing the dogs in the adoption program. I think we need to find other solutions for these dogs - good training, foster care, etc. I believe that if the volunteers are allowed to do these things, they will feel like they are making a difference and won't give up. If we hold onto volunteers and grow their skills, it could completely change the shelter.

Unfortunately, no one at the shelter sees it this way. When I talk to them and hear their negativity about Barney, it's really easy to see them as the bad guys and start to work against them. But they're not bad and working against them wouldn't help the dogs. We all just have differing opinions on how to reach our goal. I am determined not to fall into the trap of demonizing others for their opinions. This blog will undoubtedly have more negative posts than postive ones because I want to document what goes on at the shelter, from a volunteer's perspective, and there's a lot of negative stuff that goes on down there. I think it's critical, though, to keep working positively with everyone. After all, I could be the one who is wrong.

Differing Opinions...

This should be the title of the blog, not just this post. In the animal rescue community, we all want basically the same thing - the end of killing of adoptable animals. However, the way to get there and the way to measure success differ widely from person to person. Add those differing opinions to the highly emotional subject matter and you get a ridiculously politicized environment with extreme reactions to certain people and organizations. When I first became involved, I assumed that because we all wanted the same thing, we were all working together. In fact, the opposite is true. I think that this is one reason that Austin's no-kill millenium plan hasn't worked and why we seem to just be spinning our wheels here. I suspect that the situation exists in most communities.

There are many different "sides" to the struggle going on in Austin. In particular, there are two strong sides and they seem to be particularly pitted against each other. The first is the "establishment", which are the groups involved in Mission: Orange. (TLAC, ASPCA, Humane Society, Animal Trustees of Austin, and Emancipet). The other are a group of disciples of Nathan Winograd.

This blog posting describes our situation better than I can. Read it. It's great.

What I cannot understand is why some of these groups are so vehemently opposed to Nathan Winograd's plan. The no-kill millenium resolution, passed in 1997, has failed, with 50% of animals entering TLAC being killed currently. He is the only person in the United States to turn communities around and stop killing 90% of animals that come into the shelters. AND he's replicated his success to other communities.

Why not try his methods? The volunteers at TLAC are dying to to do more. Why not let us foster and take animals out to adoption events in the community? We were actually told recently that we are not allowed to post any video of our animals on the internet. We can post pictures, yet for some reason video is off-limits. Why? Why? Why?

In a progressive, animal-loving city like Austin, it is shocking that we're doing so badly.