tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post2032747392427458616..comments2023-12-16T00:39:47.007-08:00Comments on Lassie, Get Help: The trouble with "temperament tests." Also: OreoLuisahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04042236324318156854noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-53758160883590074932010-01-13T20:46:49.414-08:002010-01-13T20:46:49.414-08:00Whenever the internets are roiling with a canine k...Whenever the internets are roiling with a canine kerfuffle, I come to Lassie Get Help for sanity and perspective. <br /><br />No non-profit (outside of Peta, because when it comes to publicity they think way outside the box) would want to put down a celebrity rescue. Had Oreo worked out as an adoptable animal, there would have been more new stories and the more folks coming out to adopt and quite likely donations. She was the last dog they wanted to put down, I'm sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-62764613028733161262010-01-11T22:52:45.164-08:002010-01-11T22:52:45.164-08:00I think it was about Oreo to the extent that Natha...I think it was about Oreo to the extent that Nathan Winograd could use her as a weapon against Ed Sayres. <br /><br />The Sayres-hate is eating Winograd alive, and it's not pretty. <br /><br />Memorable <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-16635-SF-Animal-Shelters-Examiner~y2009m11d16-The-meaning-of-Oreo" rel="nofollow">quote</a>: <i>"[P]eople are questioning whether [Oreo] was truly as aggressive as Sayres is trying to make out. There have been unconfirmed reports that staff and volunteers have claimed the ASPCA is exaggerating, and the ASPCA has not yet released any videotapes of her which would shed light on the real extent of her alleged aggression. According to unconfirmed reports, two staff members indicated that while the dog did show aggression, she could also be very affectionate, and as a result, they felt she was treatable. Unconfirmed reports also indicate that staff members asked Sayres for a reprieve so she could be placed in a sanctuary. And finally, unconfirmed reports indicate that a volunteer was able to go in and handle Oreo, despite some aggression issues. I have not been able to verify the veracity of these claims</i>..." <br />but so what — I'm going to post them all here anyway!<br /> <br />Stay classy, dude [shudders].Luisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04042236324318156854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-613130929168757512010-01-11T20:21:40.972-08:002010-01-11T20:21:40.972-08:00hey thanks for the shout out, Luisa! I'm rare...hey thanks for the shout out, Luisa! I'm rarely "accused" of keeping my cool. ;-) <br /><br />I'm still peeved that no one, from Christie to Winograd has ever actually asked Sayres what was his personal involvement (if any) in the decision about Oreo; yet all felt free to attack him hysterically. (we aren't doing that journalmalism, thing, you know...) At some point it was no longer about Oreo at all...EmilySnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-9621222461632418822010-01-11T15:41:03.730-08:002010-01-11T15:41:03.730-08:00Life isn't black and white. And those effing g...Life isn't black and white. And those effing grey areas make decisions like 'to kill or not to kill' <i>really</i> difficult sometimes.<br /><br />We've taken in several fosters who were described as dog-aggressive, human-aggressive, resource-guarders or a mix of all three. In many cases the problems just slip away once they're in a home with healthy structure and boundaries. But not always...<br /><br />I had to hold a foster I couldn't fix in my arms while she died. It broke my heart to put her down - but after nine months with us she was still unpredictably dangerous. The people who gave her to me because they couldn't deal with her wailed and moaned about how hateful I was - but none of them (three previous homes) were willing to take her back.<br /><br />It is absolutely terrible to have to make that kind of heart-breaking decision. But - I think that these decisions <i>need</i> to be made by people whose hearts are broken by them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-64777694657591016112010-01-11T07:37:03.614-08:002010-01-11T07:37:03.614-08:00i am so so so so sorry that i read that thread (in...i am so so so so sorry that i read that thread (including comments) before i went to bed last night. i couldn't sleep. it was terrible. what happened to disagreeing without nastiness? on all sides. agree- emilys was amazingly un-nasty in the face of what was essnetially a mobscene of disagreeing. also love that someone linked to my post. aww, the blogging love :)<br /><br />anyway, as usually, LGH, i think you've nailed it. yes, ttests suck, even if they're the tool we have ATM. and no, oreo wasn't the right dog for the sanctuary. and, even if petconnection didn't think it was relevant, that sanctuary wasn't right for that dog. <br /><br />life is not black and white- the aspca is not good or evil, and sanctuary is not the opposite of the aspca. <br /><br />thanks for speaking out.themacinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14604965394470394628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-58425963484587371682010-01-11T02:13:55.802-08:002010-01-11T02:13:55.802-08:00My first exposure to Sue Sternberg was her lengthy...My first exposure to Sue Sternberg was her lengthy appearance in the documentary "Shelter Dogs." It was easy to dismiss her as someone who cares deeply but ineffectually, is sort of a recluse-hoarder type with perhaps too many pets of her own, and yet is rather creepy in that she seems to thrive off of the plight of the dogs. Munchausen by Proxy. <br /><br />Only later did I find out how influential she is, her lecture campaign, and the wide adoption of her "tests."<br /><br />I think she is the closest thing to the dog Anti-Christ that there is. It frightens me that she's in the world, that people who have the power to kill my dogs listen to her, and that caring volunteers have bought into her notion that slapping a hungry dog in the face with a plastic hand is measuring something useful and predicative.<br /><br />She isn't evil like some comic book villain or Snidely Whiplash, she's evil because she has effectively given people an excuse to free their guilt while they mass slaughter dogs rather haphazardly. <br /><br />We know that the shelter mentality that she lives in is a failure and will always be a failure, so much so that "we kill them because we have to" is a self-fulfilling mandate. In that environment, Sternberg's tests provide absolution for sin, although they are as pointless as random executions or any other arbitrary system for picking which dogs get flushed.BorderWarshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09410343987050560739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-5110795874404691652010-01-10T16:09:00.064-08:002010-01-10T16:09:00.064-08:00The Hayden Act applies to private and public shel...The Hayden Act applies to private and public shelters. I don't know how New York's codes define "adoptable animal", but that would be the only key discrepancy if they don't define it the same way as California. Oreo's Law does not apply to all 501(c)3, but only duly incorporated SPCA's and Humane Societies as well as county/city shelters publicly or privately contracted. That's just like the Hayden Act.<br /><br />But check it out:<br />Sec 12:31108....Does this look familiar? <br /><br />" (b) Any stray dog that is impounded pursuant to this division<br />shall, prior to the killing of that animal for any reason other than<br />irremediable suffering, be released to a nonprofit, as defined in<br />Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, animal rescue or<br />adoption organization if requested by the organization prior to the<br />scheduled killing of that animal. In addition to any required spay<br />or neuter deposit, the pound or shelter, at its discretion, may<br />assess a fee, not to exceed the standard adoption fee, for animals<br />released.<br /><br />Ore's Law is taken straight from the Hayden Act (the author chose to add the specific shelter info, but the Hayden Act still applies to private and public shelters).<br /><br />Now, if, during analysis, lawyers or leg counsel feel there is confusion OR if opposition expresses their concern about the wording, stuff can be changed. Introduced bills rarely, if ever, retain original language. They go through all sorts of revisions. But to discard this bill entirely seems rash. Instead, focus on getting it to be like the Hayden Act (which, by the way, faced the EXACT SAME opposing arguments when it was introduced)...if you like the Hayden Act, that is. :)Rinaliahttp://for-the-pits.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-15628803301401265462010-01-10T15:28:09.943-08:002010-01-10T15:28:09.943-08:00Heather — I think you're right. And yes, that...Heather — I think you're right. And yes, that's a big diff.Luisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04042236324318156854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-42479100492618669762010-01-10T15:21:06.839-08:002010-01-10T15:21:06.839-08:00Oreo's law
Hayden's Law
I am not a lawye...<a href="http://www.petsalive.com/oreobill.pdf" rel="nofollow">Oreo's law</a><br /><a href="http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/97-98/bill/sen/sb_1751-1800/sb_1785_bill_19980923_chaptered.html" rel="nofollow">Hayden's Law</a> <br /><br />I am not a lawyer, but Hayden does seem to address the issue of a dog or cat with "<i>a behavioral or temperamental defect that could pose a health or safety risk or otherwise make the animal unsuitable for placement as a pet</i>." If the shelter believes such a dog "is not adoptable" and will not "become adoptable with reasonable efforts," the shelter is not obliged by Hayden to relinquish the dog to a rescue group. In my interpretation, anyway, and as I said, IANAL.<br /><br />More link goodness:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.maddiesfund.org/Resource_Library/Hayden_Law.html" rel="nofollow">Hayden Law analysis</a><br /><a href="http://www.maddiesfund.org/Resource_Library/Hayden_Law_Update.html" rel="nofollow">Hayden Law Update</a><br />[both from Maddie's Fund]Luisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04042236324318156854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-45290544334227589472010-01-10T15:08:44.838-08:002010-01-10T15:08:44.838-08:00My understanding is that the Hayden law applies on...My understanding is that the Hayden law applies only to public pounds, not 501(c)3's.<br /><br />Big difference.Heather Houlahanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13891198124130533198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-17919138923670316422010-01-10T13:57:17.501-08:002010-01-10T13:57:17.501-08:00Oh geez, you're making me think and stuff. Dar...Oh geez, you're making me think and stuff. Darn you!<br /><br />My pit bull failed her temperament test. Too shy. Yeah, seriously. Her life, which eight years later is full of not-so-shy moments, would have ended. Scary stuff. T-tests are tools. That's it. They shouldn't result in an automatic death sentence.<br /><br />I disagree about "oreo's law" - the same law works great here in California. It's been around for years and we haven't seen the kind of fallout the fear-mongering crowd is claiming will happen. We have seen more dogs transferred to appropriate rescues than ever before. Reduced kill rates. That's good, in my book. I see no logical reason why it wouldn't work in New York.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14977410602426080310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-62996035825334700792010-01-10T13:55:01.294-08:002010-01-10T13:55:01.294-08:00Heather, thanks. Here's a direct link to the ...Heather, thanks. Here's a <a href="http://bluedogstate.blogspot.com/2009/11/pets-alive-animal-sanctuary-or-animal.html" rel="nofollow">direct link</a> to the site you posted. <br /><br /><i>"Or is the next step going to be to mandate that individuals turn over their dangerous or suffering dogs to any rescue that cares to claim them?"</i> <br /><br />Given the ignorance of most legislators and the decibels produced by the Cult of No Death Ever, I'm afraid I could see that happening.Luisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04042236324318156854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33244618.post-22491921509767931822010-01-10T13:15:23.872-08:002010-01-10T13:15:23.872-08:00Don't forget the most depressingly damning, or...Don't forget the most depressingly damning, or damningly depressing, development of the Oreo debacle:<br /><br />http://bluedogstate.blogspot.com/2009/11/pets-alive-animal-sanctuary-or-animal.html<br /><br />As a volunteer with a 501(c)3 rescue that is very much closer to the "save 'em all, make it work" end of the spectrum than the Sterberg-esque "find a reason to kill 'em" end, I shudder at the thought that we would be legally forced to hand over an animal to some other rescue after the organization had made the hard decision that euthanasia would be just that. (This has not happened often, but it has happened, and it was the right call.) We own the dog. We get no taxpayer funds, are not a public agency. Why should a hard decision by a 501(c)3 about a dog they own be treated any differently than the same decision by a private person? Or is the next step going to be to mandate that individuals turn over their dangerous or suffering dogs to any rescue that cares to claim them?<br /><br />It should not be a shock to anyone that animal rescue organizations are not invariably staffed by clear-headed pragmatists with healthy ego boundaries and rich sources of personal and professional validation.<br /><br />I have the scars on my body core to testify to the perceptual and moral failures of one such breed rescue. I thank doG every day that it was me the beast went after, and not the new adopters' grandchild. He meant to kill.Heather Houlahanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13891198124130533198noreply@blogger.com