Support Oreo's Law, prevent institutionalized animal abuse in shelters

Oreo's Law would protect the most vulnerable animals--those in shelters--from institutionalized abuse.

Valerie Hayes

 

Related articles

I was there: one volunteer’s view of a shelter’s transition to No Kill

Interview with Nathan Winograd, part one of two

Interview with Nathan Winograd, part two of two

'Building No Kill Communities' lights the way for change in Georgia

A modest proposal: PETA should 'euthanize' only animatronic dogs and cats

A recent feature article in the New York Times Magazine, entitled "The Animal Cruelty Syndrome" explores the issue of animal cruelty and the growing awareness that cruelty to animals is a serious crime, and is inextricably linked to other crimes, including violence against people.  This increasing awareness is leading to animal cruelty being taken more seriously, with felony animal cruelty laws in 46 states where once they existed in only four, and to cruelty cases being handled by police departments rather than relegated to local SPCAs. 

The article describes the work of Randall Lockwood and Melinda Merck, both of the ASPCA.  Lockwood, a psychologist, is the ASPCA's senior vice president for forensic sciences and anticruelty projects, and Merck, a veterinarian, is its senior director of veterinary forensics.  It delves into the link between animal cruelty and domestic violence and child abuse, and explores the psychological dynamics behind that link and resulting from it.

The dynamic of animal abuse in the context of domestic violence is a particularly insidious one. As a pet becomes an increasingly vital member of the family, the threat of violence to that pet becomes a strikingly powerful intimidating force for the abuser: an effective way for a petty potentate to keep the subjects of his perceived realm in his thrall.

The focus of the article was on acts of cruelty to and crimes against animals committed by individuals, but consider this:  according to Dr. Jan Scarlett of the Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine, shelter killing is the leading cause of death of healthy dogs and cats in the United States.  Consider the institutionalized cruelty inherent in that scenario. 

The No Kill Advocacy Center recently published the results of a survey of animal rescuers in New York State.  The findings were shocking even to long-time shelter reform advocates:

Seventy-two percent of non-profit organizations--nearly 3 out of 4--are denied the ability to rescue by at least one NYS shelter they are willing to save animals from, and these shelters are in many cases killing these animals instead.

The report goes on to say:

In fact, 43% of respondents who have expressed concerns about inhumane conditions which they have witnessed in New York State shelters said that their non-profit rescue organizations became the subject of retaliation, while over half (52%) who have witnessed it but did not express concerns said they were afraid to complain about inhumane conditions--and simply looked the other way--becasue they were afraid if they did complain, they would no longer be allowed to rescue, thus allowing those inhumane conditions to continue.

When I published "I was there", a first-person account of my experiences volunteering in a shelter with a high kill rate, and of witnessing its subsequent transformation into a No Kill shelter at the center of the nation's first No Kill community, I was innundated with emails.  I was almost overwhelmed by the response from animal rescuers and shelter volunteers who saw their own experiences reflected in the article.  They told of experiences such as this:

I run a rescue group. My local shelter killed animals I specifically called and said I was on my way to pick up. Why? Because like you, I complained about the shelter publicly. I tried to work with them, but my concerns were ignored. They said I was unreasonable because I thought dogs should have access to clean water. I am so sick of people saying shelters have no choice but to kill, that they work hard, that they care so much. Tell it to the two dogs I was on my way to save when they thought they would teach me a lesson by killing them. I will never forget the look on the staff's face when I arrived. They were smiling and smirking. As soon as I saw them, I knew something was terribly wrong. I just could not imagine that it was that. I've not been back since then. But no more. Your article has inspired me and I will not let them win.

Clearly there are a lot of petty potentates employed by our nation's animal shelters.  Animal rescuers, fed up with being as helpless as abused children,  would very much like to be released from their thrall so that they can carry out their mission to rescue animals.

Oreo's Law, currently in the Agriculture Committee of  the New York Assembly, would do just that, making it illegal for a shelter to kill an animal that a rescue group is willing to take.  It is high time that this particularly cruel and criminal type of killing was recognized as such and made illegal.

There's a glitch, however, a very large and well-funded glitch.  The ASPCA opposes Oreo's Law.  Yes, you read that correctly--the organization that many think of as protecting animals, the one featured so prominently in that New York Times article about the increasing awareness of the seriousness of animal cruelty, the one whose own senior vice president for forensic sciences and anticruelty projects clearly understands the psychological dynamics involved when someone kills or mistreats an animal another person cares about, opposes a law which would make it illegal for shelters to kill animal that rescue groups are willing to take.  They would have such killing continue to be perfectly legal.  They would allow shelters to kill a volunteer's foster kittens with impunity.  They would allow shelters to kill dogs a rescuer has informed them that she is en route to pick up, with impunity. 

Peel off a few layers from that big old onion called irony.

It's better to fight it than to cry about it.  Animal lovers, especially those who are New York State residents, should call and email members of the Agriculture Committee to express support for Oreo's Law.  Tell them not to table the bill on Tuesday June 15.  Allow rescuers to rescue animals.  Let good deeds go unpunished.  Let them report abuse without fear of retribution.  You can send an email to all Agriculture Committee members by clicking here.

Why is the ASPCA placing itself in the role of enabler to those who would abuse and kill shelter pets, protector of petty potentates?  Good question.  The ASPCA lost its way upon the death of its founder Henry Bergh, back in 1888, and took up the Poundmaster's contract for New York City, becoming the largest killer of dogs and cats in the city.  Flash forward to 2009, and they killed an abused dog named Oreo which a rescue group had offered to take.  That incident and the resulting public outcry highlighted the need for a law that would make it illegal for shelters to kill an animal which a rescue was willing to take.  That wasn't an isolated incident and recurred with another dog named Max, further highlighting the need.  As the No Kill movement continues to gain momentum, more and more people are seeing that these large national groups do not actually have the best interests of shelter animals at heart.  In fact, they don't seem to have a heart at all.  If they are actively campaigning on behalf of petty potentates and against animals, animal rescuers, and shelter volunteers, then that shows all the more that we need Oreo's Law. 

Oreo's Law is modeled after the Hayden Law, which has been in effect in California for ten years.  In that time, many thousands more animals have been saved, rescuers have created a stronger safety net for shelter animals, and taxpayer money has been saved, progress which would have been held back by unrestricted shelter killing.  We need Oreo's Law, not just in New York State, but in every state.  Goodness knows, we need it in Georgia.  If New York succeeds in passing Oreo's Law, it will light the way for similar legislation in other states, including here.  If not, we'll have to forge ahead without them.

The ASPCA has long been a nice comfortable killing machine.  It’s really quite amazing how times have changed and not changed. I will conclude with  a story about the ASPCA from years ago:

An accountant was visiting his client, a veterinarian who worked for the ASPCA in addition to his private practice. In fact, he seemed to spend a lot more hours at the ASPCA than he devoted to his private practice, even though they weren't paying him all that much. The accountant was at the vet's office wrestling the books into some semblance of order and a very friendly dog with a badly scarred and misshapen head came galumphing over to be petted, which he did. The dog was friendly to the point of making a pest of himself by attempting to be an oversized lap dog. The accountant shooed him away so that he could get some work done. He could hear the clop-clop of the dog's paws on the floor as he went down the hall, around a corner, and back up another hall to reappear at the opposite door of the office he was working in, with a look on his scarred face that said "Hi, I'm a different dog than the one that was just here a minute ago, pet me too".

The dog had come to reside temporarily at the vet's office as a result of the vet's work for the ASPCA. He'd come in as a badly injured stray. Someone had apparently beaten him and he had multiple fractures to his skull, which the vet, who is well-respected for his considerable skills as a surgeon, had spent hours in surgery wiring back together. He practically donated some very fancy surgery to them because that's the kind of person he is. They wanted to kill the dog after all that--"a friendly dog who wouldn't win any beauty contests", as the accountant described him. The vet removed the dog from their custody instead. The accountant told the vet that while he admired the work he did on behalf of this dog and other animals at the ASPCA, it was his responsibility to advise him to leave the ASPCA and concentrate on his private practice, and frankly, he couldn't understand why he took that kind of abuse from them, and for so little money. The vet's reply was "The animals need me."

One protector in the killing machine was better than nothing at all. I can't imagine how he did it for as long as he did. The tradition of killing animals for being there and abusing those who would do otherwise is a long one there. I am perpetually amazed at people who see it as a benevolent place. Apparently their marketing has done its job, but it would take a lot more than some nice packaging to remove the image of that dog my father described so vividly and what the ASPCA wanted to do to him, and to the vet.

I hadn't thought of that dog in years, but recent events have made him restless. He's been making his circuit down the hall, around the corner, and up the other hall, to reappear at the opposite door. Always the same question: "Will it be different this time?"

It is my most sincere hope that the answer to that question will be a resounding “Yes!”

If you liked this article and would like to receive other articles by the Atlanta Animal Welfare Examiner by email, just click the 'subscribe' button at the top of this page.

Become a fan of the Atlanta Animal Welfare Examiner on Facebook.

Become a fan of Amazing Grace, the dog for whom Grace's Law is named,  on Facebook.

Become a fan of the Georgia Voters for Animal Welfare, the organization that led the successful grassroots effort to pass Grace's Law, on Facebook.