No Second Chance For Dog At Logan Pound

[Mila's Mum]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/questnews/logan/womans-offer-to-adopt-sick-dog-falls-on-deaf-ears-as-logan-city-council-destroys-animal-on-vets-advice/story-fn8m0u8i-1226634678425

AN ABANDONED dog has been put down by Logan City Council despite desperate pleas by a local resident to adopt it.

Cherie Fisher said she first saw the abandoned animal on April 13 and contacted council wanting to help it.

Ms Fisher said she had no agenda other than to save the dog's life and give it a chance.

"It was left malnourished, covered in a skin condition and who knows what else. Her photo just made my heart bleed," she said.

Ms Fisher said she visited the pound twice and after three working days understood the dog to be the pound's property.

She said she offered to buy the animal or foster it at her own expense.

"We are bewildered to understand why will they not take up the offer of help," she said.

"Is the Logan City Council so flush with cash and kennels they don't need assistance?"

A Logan City Council spokeswoman said pound staff had told Ms Fisher that any decisions about the dog would be based on advice by a vet.

She said council's standard practice saw abandoned animals listed on council's website - if they were not registered or microchipped - in an attempt to find the owner.

She said on this occasion, after the standard time lapsed, the owner was not identified and the animal became council's property.

"It was examined by CVLC vet staff and their advice was that the dog was in extremely bad health with a very poor prognosis and the decision was made to euthanase the dog."

The spokeswoman said Logan City Council Animal Management Centre operated a sales and rehoming service for all suitable, unclaimed animals.

"In situations where cats and dogs are lost and become impounded by council, our primary goal is to reunite these animals with their owners," she said.

"If a dog is not reclaimed by its owner, it is assessed by Logan City Council to see whether it is suitable for inclusion in our sales and rehoming program. which involves a veterinary health check and behavioural assessment.

"If a dog fails (its) health check or behavioural assessment then council will consider the options available."

The spokeswoman said council had sold 75 dogs through its sales program since the beginning of the year.

What do you think? Should Logan City Council have put down the dog? Tell us below

(see link at top of post for comments section at bottom of article)

[Guest Ams]

Logan Council Pound imo has a poor track record of saving dogs. I've managed to get one shar pei out of the pound in five years and even then I had to adopt the dog. They don't even return my calls if I express and interest in saving a dog so I no longer bother. They have a few rescues they work with but even they get limited dogs afaik .LDH is becoming very much the same. In deference to the pound in this situation its the 'who knows what else' the person makes reference to that may have been the tilting factor. I've seen dogs in worse condition be rehabilitated but I guess without knowing the full medical records its a hard call to make.

[mita]

Logan City Council spokeswoman said pound staff had told Ms Fisher that any decisions about the dog would be based on advice by a vet.

"It was examined by CVLC vet staff and their advice was that the dog was in extremely bad health with a very poor prognosis and the decision was made to euthanase the dog."

I don't know the specific details of this case. But it seems both those sentences highlight the Council's reasoning.

There's presently, in the Rescue Forum, a case where all worked together on behalf of a 15 yr old dog in awful condition in a near Sydney Pound. Pound staff, rescuers, a person willing to offer a home (pending an vet assessment) & plain good people who offered to help financially (if needed). All agreed with the vet assessment that the conditions were beyond help. And pound staff & others made sure there was a peaceful, dignified PTS with the sweet natured dog being cuddled.

In cases like this, someone has to make the call on what's merciful. And that call depends on the details of each case. The details of this Logan case are not spelled out in that article. So not possible to evaluate their call.

Edited May 5, 2013 by mita

[Loving my Oldies]

In cases like this, someone has to make the call on what's merciful. And that call depends on the details of each case. The details of this Logan case are not spelled out in that article. So not possible to evaluate their call.

I am not commenting on this case specifically, Mita, and unless one was there, I don't believe one can.

However, as I mentioned in another thread, sometimes people whom we trust to be doing so are not acting in an animal's best interest. More so they are sometimes acting in their own interests and motivated sometimes out of spite and self promotion. Sad but true. I think a lot of people who have been involved with pounds and rescue organisations would, if they were being honest, agree with that.

I have had experiences with pounds such as Renbury who will let dogs go to people they know will do everything in their power to ensure the dog's best interests are met. Most of these dogs would never ever pass muster or be given a chance at other places. But because Renbury people know the rescuers and care about the dogs who come into their facility, these dogs are given a chance to live out their lives in comfort, vet treated, full tummies and lots of love.

Sadly, I have seen decisions made by vets working for shelters which horrify me. One such is that a vet assessed a little Pomeranian as having "the worse case of luxating patella" she'd ever seen and would only pass her for rescue if she was operated on immediately. That dog not have luxating patella, but worse in terms of a veterinary diagnosis, the dog's knees were fused, probably from birth. She was as happy a dog you'd want to find, no pain, no problem, just a funny walk.

I'm afraid my experiences over the years have made me very cynical.

[Loving my Oldies]

In the case of May you mentioned in your post, Mita, Hawkesbury pound allowed a rescuer come in to assess her. If other shelters worked with rescuers and volunteers like Nic, they'd all be better places.

The dog in Logan Pound may have had health issues that to allow her to continue would have been cruel. However, if this article is totally correct, they are simply parroting policy without any consideration for the people who really care and are entitled to a bit more than spiel.

These organisations are paid out of our taxes and I believe we need better explanations of why actions are taken instead of what has appeared in this article.

[shel]

Logan stats 2011/12

(Reference)

Just 725 dogs and 349 cats made it out alive via rescue and direct from pound adoptions. Compared to 1,504 dogs and 2,101 cats who were killed.

[mita]

Shel, that sure spells out an important detail.... the context the dog was in. Only 16% of dogs & 13% of cats getting out alive, either via direct adoption or transfer to rescue .... if they're unclaimed by owner.

Surely the huge percentage who didn't make it into second chance, would not have been in some unadoptable condition where PTS would be merciful.

[shel]

Shel, that sure spells out an important detail.... the context the dog was in. Only 16% of dogs & 13% of cats getting out alive, either via direct adoption or transfer to rescue .... if they're unclaimed by owner.

Surely the huge percentage who didn't make it into second chance, would not have been in some unadoptable condition where PTS would be merciful.

Exactly.

There are 2,389 unclaimed dogs. They killed 1,504 of them. This is a kill rate of 63% for unclaimed dogs.

I don't know of any situation that could be used to justify the killing of practically 2 in every 3 unclaimed dogs.

While less than 200 cat adoptions a year is pathetic. That's not even one a day.

[minimax]

9% of dogs, and 6% of cats transferred to rescue. Are QLD pounds not willing to work with rescues, or what's a reason for the low number?

Although now Pound Rounds have their claws in QLD maybe the stats will look better, but at what cost

Edited May 14, 2013 by minimax

[Rosetta]

That is truly appalling. Who has the contract to run the Logan Pound? Doesn't sound like any rescue group has a working relationship with them. If it is anything like Brisbane people would not even know where the pound is.

Strange I was in Logan today and looked at their local paper. There was a small article about the pound and mentioned the number of animals "reunited" with their owners. I can't remember the figures but they were not that impressive and of course they did not mention the terrible real stats as stated above.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Rosetta

[Mila's Mum]

I wonder how many are still being sent to the uni

Logan stats 2011/12

(Reference)

Just 725 dogs and 349 cats made it out alive via rescue and direct from pound adoptions. Compared to 1,504 dogs and 2,101 cats who were killed.

[cherylv]

I wonder how many are still being sent to the uni

Logan stats 2011/12

(Reference)

Just 725 dogs and 349 cats made it out alive via rescue and direct from pound adoptions. Compared to 1,504 dogs and 2,101 cats who were killed.

Any updates on latest stats here ?

[Guest Ams]

Logan Pound staff have recently contacted me re two dogs offering them to rescue and I have taken them up on the offer. Gotta be positive and heading in the right direction.

[Christina]

Can't comment on original post as full details not known however I can comment on those pound stats. Absolutely disgusting The dog numbers are bad enough but the cat numbers are horrendous.

They can't even be trying & I wonder just how much money do they receive to run this execution centre ?

They need a new marketing manager, a facelift & a new attitude.

[sandgrubber]

Has anyone in Oz tried working with the Maddie's Fund people to try and get shelters to adopt the Asilomar Accords standard for recording?

See

http://www.asilomaraccords.org/

http://www.maddiesfund.org/

Seems to me that these are positive approaches to improving shelter outcomes....as opposed to pointing and accusing, and it looks like they are getting good results.