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.