Could Scruffy's Law have saved Lucy the Lab?

The Kansas Humane Society took about ten minutes to kill a young, healthy Lab named Lucy after her owner surrendered her -- just enough time for the owner to break down in the parking lot, change her mind, and come back in to get her back. From Yes Biscuit:

Ms. Nott went to her car in the pound’s parking lot and called her sister, sobbing.  Together, they decided that Ms. Nott should go back and get Lucy and they would “figure something out”.  But when she returned to the pound’s lobby, she learned the Kansas Humane Society had already deemed Lucy unadoptable – due to the description of the inappropriate chewing behaviors – and had killed her.

Their defense of this turbo-charged timeline is that her behavior problem -- excessive chewing and destructive behavior when alone -- would have precluded her from being adopted, and they wanted to spare her the stress of being in the shelter by killing her.

The ASPCA, a national organization that runs a shelter in New York City, weighed in, saying that the onus of Lucy's death is really on her owner, who should have known better than to have brought her to an "open-admission" shelter -- by which they mean "kill shelter," since there are plenty of open-admission shelters that would not have killed Lucy or a dog like her.

Now, maybe Lucy's owner really sucked. I don't know. Mostly I find that people who sob in the parking lot after surrendering their dog, and who surrender her with her toys, treats, brush and special food, as Lucy's owner did, don't actually suck. They're just at the end of their personal resources.

But let's say she sucks. Let me tell you why this is still the fault of the Kansas Humane Society and its defender, the ASPCA.

Lucy the Lab was not owned by someone who raised money by saying they were there to help animals. She did not  have the word "Humane" in her name, nor the phrase "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals." She was not a non-profit charitable organization. She did not have as her stated mission the protection of pets.

Lucy's owner told the Wichita Eagle:

I think the public needs to know what really goes on out there.... It is the Humane Society, after all. Whatever happened yesterday was not humane.

Animal shelters exist because some pet owners suck, and because even those who don't suck get into situations where they can't keep their pets. Blaming that predictable, eternal reality (being "overburdened," in the ASPCA's words) for an organization killing healthy young animals because they don't know what else to do with them is not just a failure of compassion and morality, it is a form of deceit being perpetrated on every person who donates a dollar to those organizations.

The Kansas Humane Society should not have accepted Lucy if they were going to kill her.

The ASPCA should not have defended them for doing so.

Perhaps Lucy's owner should have had her change of heart ten minutes earlier. Since she's not out there running ads on late night TV asking me to send her money to take care of "dogs like Lucy," that's between her and her conscience.

Scruffy's Law wouldn't necessarily have saved Lucy's life. But it would probably have turned down the flow of revenue to the Kansas "shelter" by forcing them to remove the word "humane" from their name as long as they were killing young healthy dogs like Lucy. Perhaps that threat would have been enough to push them to comply with the requirement that they have to earn that designation by saving at least 90 percent of the pets who come in their doors.

Read more about Scruffy and Scruffy's law here. And don't donate to organizations that use the words "humane," "shelter," or "prevention of cruelty to animals" unless they've earned them.

 

Comments

[Cheryl]

What the hell ever happened to a reasonable waiting period? What ever happened to evaluations by a qualified person? Maybe the dog did not really have issues other than inadequate training by the owner. Maybe some training by a qualified dog trainer could have resolved those issues. Perhaps the Kansas Humane Society should have a chat with Best Friends about setting up a program where owners at their wits end can get training help. If it works for BF - it should work for KHS.

[YesBiscuit!]

Thank you for covering this Christie. It certainly wouldn't be a bad thing IMO to force places like the Kansas HS and Arizona HS to choose whether they want to get on board with saving pets or change their names to Kansas/Arizona Pet Slaughterhouse.

[straybaby]

This just breaks my heart. I'm dealing with a young Dal I adopted. Thankfully, the owners didn't turn her into a kill shelter when they realized she was too much for them to handle. She has some "undesirable" behaviors, but d@mn if she isn't a fantastic dog otherwise. And yes, the owner shed tears over giving her up. They may have actually walked back into a shelter with a change of mind.

Not sure how quick they kill in the NYC ACCs anymore, but, yes, a walk back to the shot used to be expected when I first started rescuing/volunteering there. . . . unsure how it is in my area of California, but I do know too many good pets still die. The ASPCA is sure a mixed message though. They defend this sh*t, but when I volunteered in the Behavior dept, they worked with these pets to help ensure successful adoptions.

R.I.P. Lucy . . . you deserved better from a "Humane" Society.

[Jen]

There should be so much more transparency in what happens the second a leash or kennel is handed over. I remember standing in the parking lot of a place I used to volunteer at, and I know I would have been kicked out for some of the cautions I gave to folks wanting to bring in stray cats (etc), thinking they would get help at this high kill shelter. People honestly believe that even places without humane/SPCA in their names actually help all the animals that pass through their doors. I hope more than anything my words were heard by those few I managed to speak to before they went in.

And the spot where I'm at now (also in the Bay Area, CA), which does "live release" over 80% - after orientation, I offered free training services to them -- as I want to practice a whole lot of dog training/behavior education I paid for in the subject in several lengthy courses I took. Like what you mention, Cheryl - my hope is to try to keep dogs in homes. It's actually why I took the courses in the first place, to offer free services to shelters. But they rejected it, thinking there "may be insurance issues" and nixed the subject without further investigation etc. They won't even let dogs be walked outside, saying there aren't enough sidewalks (there are, plus it's a quiet area) - they only let you take a dog to a room to "socialize". And they complain in the orientation there just isn't enough help - and the next moment they are rejecting a whole bunch of offers for various forms of help. And this is one of the better programs I've come across!

I am completely rambling, I know, but long story short I think laws like Scruffy's Law are the only thing that will get some spots to change. A percentage of the problem has to be in the "not thinking outside of the box" issue plaguing the management of some open admission shelters. Or downright gut-wrenching stupidity in Lucy's case.

[Sharon]

Didn't it even occur to these Philistines that Lucy might have simply been upset because she was dumped there by her owner? She might have settled down after a short while= there is NO JUSTIFICATION for what they did!

They definitely need to be FORCED to take the word 'humane' out of their name. I think humanity went out of that place a long time ago.

[Val]

Christie - what's happened to the old Pet Connection. Could not access it Jan 2 or Jan 3. Please advise.

[Nancy]

A neighbor and her daughter took our precious Binks to the Capital Area Humane Society, Hilliard, OH. Our neighbor thinking Binks was lost, surrendered our cat, donated $50 and was told by the staff they'd help find her owner and take good care of her. We arrived at 6 pm, she was already dead. The neighbor said she never would have left her had they told her the truth.

[Christie]

Val, I guess it's finally gone for good, but I don't know... you'd need to contact Gina. :(