Animal shelters and adoptions

(The following comment in reaction to "All adoptions have perils" [May 12 post] comes from Elda Hubbard, the advisor of JPawS, the J P Stevens High School Animal Welfare Club in Edison, NJ, and a volunteer at two local shelters. She also fosters a young pit bull named "Buttercup," who is shown here. Hubbard's is the voice of experience and expertise.)

Shelter workers can be tempted to find homes for animals in the shelter as soon as possible because it is very sad to see them in a cage 24/7, many times without proper exercise or interaction with people. That is NOT the place for them.

However, as bad as it is for animals to be there, it can be very traumatic and even dangerous to place them in a home that is not the right home for them. It is also traumatic for an animal to think that he/she has a home, then find him/herself back in the cage after a few days because the adoption did not work out. Sometimes, this stresses the animal even more.

Responsible shelters will do their best to ensure that an animal is being placed in the right home. For instance, it is imperative that prospective adopters be properly screened to determine if they are the right family for that particular animal and if the animal is the right animal for them.

Not all animals or families are alike. Dogs have different temperaments and needs, just as families have different lifestyles, energy levels and willingness to commit and dedicate themselves to the needs of animals they are bringing home.

For that reason, prospective adopters should be well aware of all the characteristics of the animal they are adopting, not only the animal's good qualities, but also any behavior problems that he/she may be exhibiting. Adopters should also know that the behavior of an animal may change once he/she is in a different environment and they should be open to working with the animals should he/she develop other behavior problems.

It is also advisable for shelters/rescues to follow up with families immediately after adoption, especially at the beginning, to find out how the adjustment period is going and if they need advice, assistance or recommendation for a dog trainer. Ideally, shelters might have training volunteers available to follow up with the families when needed.

However, the main thing is to disclose all possible information about the animal's history, temperament and behavior so the adopting family is fully aware of what it will take to make this a successful adoption.

Nothing worthwhile is easy in this world and we must work hard for what brings satisfaction to our lives. Adopting an animal is one of those things that takes sacrifice, effort and commitment. The time and effort we put into the process pays off with years of companionship and unconditional love.
#

“Shelter” as murderous misnomer

Animal “shelters” (though sometimes mis-named, considering how animals can be badly treated in such places) have a name that suggests a temporary safe place, a haven and hopefully a way-station before a “forever home.”

In Utah, shelters can have a far different meaning. They’re shops, where animal experimenters buy animals to use in their labs. It’s true. According to a story in the latest Animal Times from PETA, this happens at the University of Utah (the U) in Salt Lake City.

Banned by 17 states and Washington, D.C., this barbaric practice known as “pound seizure” is legal in Utah and two other states where government-funded shelters are required to turn animals over to laboratories that request them.

As the article puts it, “This is a betrayal of homeless animals and of the public, which counts on animal shelters to serve as safe havens for cats and dogs.” It details some specific cases, in which animals were subjected to horrific treatment by the U’s experimenters. And yes, death is often the outcome for the animals involved, although by then, it may be a welcome end.

To watch an undercover video, visit PETA.org/UtahLab, and/or write to the university president: Michael K. Young, Univ. of Utah, 201 S. Presidents Cir., Rm. 203, Salt Lake City, UT 84112.

Localizing this issue, we wonder how shelters in New Jersey guard against the same thing happening here. How quickly can a person adopt an animal? On the initial visit? What kind of checking is done, both before and after adoption? . . .

For the animals’ sake, “shelters” must live up to their name.
#

"Oh, give me a home . . ."

“Hopewell Twp. close to purchasing land for animal shelter,” according to a story in last Monday’s Trenton Times. It sounded like the long-awaited next word on a shelter to house animals from a few communities, including Lawrence Twp.

The three towns mentioned in the first story, some months ago, may have included Ewing too, although Monday's story quotes Mayor Jack Ball, who says his town is working on building its own shelter, and “time is of the essence.”

However, Ewing council member Bert Steinmann spoke in support of a regional shelter run by a nonprofit organization. He claims having said “from day one” that “we” (presumably, the local government) “should not be in the animal business” – a belief that innumerable animal rights activists in the area would immediately agree with.

Two such different opinions from reps of Ewing township only add to the impression that one hand doesn’t know (or care?) what the other hand is doing and/or that whoever is in charge there (mayor or council?) is up for grabs and/or that Ewing reps speak with forked tongues -- all of which has sure seemed to be the case throughout the current brouhaha over Ewing's animal shelter.

Adding to the advisability of taking all this news of a shelter site with a large grain of salt – maybe a giant salt lick would be better – the animal control officer of one community likely to be involved says the story came as a total surprise to her; she hadn’t heard a thing about it.

So does that mean politicians know more about animal shelters than their towns' own animal control officers? Will they involve the ACOs only after the plan is final, if then? Any chance the ACOs might contribute questions and ideas – call it expertise -- before decisions are made?
#

Cats in trouble -- part 1

Feral cats are in trouble in Ewing Township, where there are also problems with the staff and volunteers, as well as the inhabitants, at the animal shelter. Sketchy newspaper coverage makes it hard to talk about the issues with authority, but the situation has been festering all summer, with no word of a peaceful solution.

The problems – many of which seem to come down to poor communications and indistinct lines of authority – include (1) what to do about feral cats; (2) should (and could) the operating philosophy of the animal shelter be "no-kill"; and then immediately (3) how is that term defined.

For instance, “no-kill” can mean different things to different people with different interests. What about incurably sick animals? What about vicious ones? What about animals for which there is simply no room? And then, how’s a word like “vicious” defined and proven? Who must vouch for “incurable”? And so on.

Meanwhile, of course, the animals are in the middle. That’s not a good place to be when emotional, partial and often politicized information is being traded without ground rules for civility, accuracy or timeliness. At some point, people can become their dearest cause’s worst enemies, and impartial mediation seems to be the only way out.
#

2 good shelter stories

A couple last thoughts about animal shelters . . . for now, anyway.

First is an update on the “McDonald’s boxer” that Valerie Noble and I tried to save on July 15. Soon after she reached the Trenton Animal Shelter, the word was she’d go to a boxer rescue group. But then it got even better: when Valerie phoned to learn whether that had happened, she was told the boxer had been adopted! A woman who came in to register saw the dog and that was it. “Our” boxer left with a new collar, going to a new home.

Next is an excerpt from a haunting-but-(ultimately) happy book that Bobbie, the great children’s librarian at Labyrinth, introduced me to:

“. . . Most Friday afternoons on his way home from school, in that time before the weekend when lonely people realize just how lonely they are, George visited the dog shelter. And he always seemed to end up by the last cage in the last aisle . . . where the dogs no one wanted went for a final week before their journey to heaven. George felt at home there. In the dark gloom, he found a place where everything seemed lonelier than he was. . . .”

George finds a dog in that last cage, the two immediately relate, and . . . ! Plus, a kindly shelter manager plays a part in the story.

The book, which Bobbie and I agreed has a horrible title, is The Big Little Book of Happy Sadness. It was written and illustrated (beautifully) by a Brit, Colin Thompson, who is reportedly color blind. (Kane/Miller Book Publishers, Inc., La Jolla, CA, c. 2008)

A lovely gift for a child, the book suggests there are friends out there in the world and people and animals need one another.
#

Animal shelters: all different

Not all animal-helping gestures work out, but it’s looking as if the “McDonald’s boxer” mentioned in my last post may soon be on her way to a boxer rescue group from the Trenton Animal Shelter.

Assuming a rescue group looks out for its own, that’s good news, especially if the dog is in fact pretty old and therefore less likely to be adopted. (An awful thing to have to say: that advanced age, in a dog or cat -- or person, I’m afraid -- makes that creature less adoptable – i.e., loveable, desirable, fun to be with . . .)

Valerie Noble, the woman who phoned the shelter for help last Wednesday, and then phoned to check on Friday and again this morning, evidently feels good about the dog’s prospects. And I want to do the same.

This would make the 2nd animal shelter “with heart” that I’ve encountered lately. The first was only in a movie, “Wendy and Lucy,” but of course I lapped that up too. That shelter, somewhere in Oregon, actually notified the girl who had lost her dog when the dog turned up and was placed in foster care.

Both shelters represent a sad contrast to a local shelter that has been in the press lately as shelter volunteers and town politicos battle it out. The for-sure facts seem to be that animals there are terribly mistreated and in this particular town there doesn’t seem to be much sympathy for them. Nor do there seem to be ways of discussing civilly, arguing factually or solving the problems that exist in humane ways. It’s ugly.
#