The Dispatch Story on the Franklin County Animal Shelter: "Not Fit For a Dog"

I was more than a bit unsettled after reading this Sunday's front page story titled "Not Fit For A Dog" by Barbara Carmen in The Columbus Dispatch. If you haven't seen the story, you can read it in its entirety online here.

While my own experience with Franklin County Animal Shelter (FCAS) is somewhat limited, I can say that we presently have 2 dogs adopted from that shelter. Both have been great additions to our family, both were healthy on adoption and remain so, and all the shelter workers I encountered during visits seemed genuinely concerned for the welfare of the animals on their watch. That's not the picture the story paints, unfortunately. In an attempt to offer some rebuttals, I'd like to address several of the comments in the story.

Dogs that bite or attack other pets are given a clean slate, and their adoptive families aren't always warned. A program to screen dogs for behavioral problems was disbanded more than a year ago.

Dogs can bite other pets for many reasons and not all of them indicate the need to put a dog down. The story mentions a dog that bit a child 3 times and was not put down - again, what were the details? Indicating that some dogs were adopted out after biting may not really be an issue - there were only a few dozen examples in shelter dealing with 12K dogs/year. Criticizing the lack of better screening is also misleading, since many of these programs historically are poor at predicting problems in a new home. They also cost money which may not be available, or may be needed for other use.

The shelter adopts out pit bulls and pit mixes, telling owners they are "mixed breeds."

Pit mixes are in fact mixed breeds, and even pure bred pits are not inherently evil as insinuated. Such dogs are powerful, and like all powerful dogs, require experienced and responsible owners. Rather than arguing about breeds, why not make sure individual dogs are being matched with appropriate owners? I think FCAS does try in this regard.

Dogs are being adopted out sick, sticking owners with expensive medical bills.

The majority of this point centers around Giardia which can be spread from dogs to humans. It's treatable, and simple hand washing and general hygiene go a long way to prevent any issues in transmission to humans. Many shelters and pet stores deal with this issue, and people are actually more likely to get it from another human. FCAS is an old facility, and as such, will naturally face more challenges regarding the health of animals kept there. County administrators recognize this and are working on building a new facility - one which I would add is long overdue.

Dogs are suffering, stacked in "small cages with little human contact or exercise for months on end..."

Again, the facility needs updating and almost all shelters nationwide are in need of better funding. The critics are implying that putting dogs down is better than having them live in marginal conditions that at least offer a chance at a better life. I feel those calls are better made on a case-by-case basis, which I believe happens at FCAS.

While reading the story I kept asking "why is this story running now"? I suspect that this time of year is a high point for adoptions, and the story will likely put a damper on that - so how does that help the animals? The story offers nothing new in terms of facts or events, much of what it criticizes has supposedly been going on for months or years. As a point of interest, the same author had a story back in Sept. which was also critical of the County's efforts to build a new Shelter (here).

My hope is that anyone considering adopting won't be put off by this story. It's common to find problems in shelters, many due to lack of funding. Dealing with difficult administrative decisions involving a living creature's life and death can be incredibly stressful for any caring person. Working daily under such stress can make even well intentioned persons disagree, and I think some of those disagreements are surfacing in this story.

In the end, anyone willing to do the work for the greater good of any animal will have earned my respect. I only hope we can all find ways to work together to that common goal.

Addendum: Another article has appeared in the Dispatch by the same author on 01-01-09 (front page). This time the article focuses on several dogs that were adopted out only to be returned for aggression problems. If you read closely the story does note the extremely small number of such cases. Given the huge volume of dogs that FCAS deals with annually I would see this as a 'positive', although the Dispatch seems bent on creating some sort of issue where I don't really see one.

If there's something more here, let's hear it. If not, why all the stories with the same slant? This isn't helping the dogs.