It’s not often the death of a dog gets covered in the New York Times. But when the very organization that “rescued” her is the one that kills her, that’s a story.
Not a pretty story, in this case. One where a pit bull named Oreo gets “saved” from her abuser and then given a shot of Fatal Plus on the order of Ed Sayres, director of the ASPCA in New York — even though a sanctuary that is already a rescue partner and fellow member, with ASPCA, of the Mayor’s Alliance for Animals offered to give her a lifetime haven and appropriate care (although ASPCA animal behavior expert Stephen Zawistowski told Cristian Salazar at the Huffington Post that “the ASPCA was unfamiliar with Pets Alive.”) From Nathan Winograd:
Facts are troubling things. Facts get in the way of a contrived story. And there is one troubling fact that all of Ed Sayres’ double-speak simply cannot overcome. Try as the ASPCA might to argue that Oreo’s death was unavoidable, Sayres’ misrepresentation has one fundamental obstacle: Oreo had a place to go. The issue doesn’t turn on the real extent of Oreo’s aggression. The real issue is that a No Kill shelter and sanctuary, with experience rehabilitating aggression in dogs, which works with area shelters that could have vouched for their credibility, which enjoys wide community esteem, and which is only a short drive outside of New York City, offered to give her lifetime sanctuary, and was refused.
They called and left a voice mail message on Sayres’ telephone. They called his secretary. They called the ASPCA Press Office. They contacted everyone on the ASPCA website contact page. And they were ignored, hung up on and lied to.
Pets Alive in Middletown, New York, is not only a member of the Mayor’s Alliance for New York City animals, of which the ASPCA is also a member, they are not only an Alliance-approved rescue partner, they not only have had experience with aggressive dogs, but they agreed to take responsibility for a dog the ASPCA was committed to putting in a body bag and then dumping in a landfill. Even though Pets Alive is already an approved rescue partner, the fact that Oreo may have presented a special case didn’t mean the offer should have been rejected out of hand. The ASPCA could have visited Pets Alive; they could have checked veterinary references, community references, could have insisted on specific precautions and liability waivers. But instead, early that morning, before the “media circus got out of hand,” Ed Sayres, willfully, neglectfully, cruelly, and dishonestly, chose to kill Oreo instead. That is the true face of the ASPCA. And that is intolerable.
I’m not saying no dog alive isn’t just too unhappy and dangerous to live. I am saying that I have absolutely no confidence at all that Sayres and the ASPCA are qualified to unilaterally make that determination. And part of why I feel that way, and so strongly, is the self-pitying, self-serving email sent out by the ASPCA’s communications department after this incident blew up into a PR firestorm:
While Oreo’s plight has garnered a plethora of media attention due to the sensational nature of her injuries, the decision to euthanize her is not a novel one. These are decisions that we have had to make before—and will undoubtedly have to make again. And as painful as these choices are, they are the same ones that face dedicated shelter workers throughout the country each and every day. However, these outcomes are made all the more tragic because they are often preventable.
Yes, they are, Ed. You can decide not to kill them.
Animals that suffer cruelty at the hands of their owners often face tragedy beyond that which they have already endured.
[....]
Animals like Oreo are abused every day. Sometimes these animals are fortunate enough to escape the confines of their abuse and are placed in loving homes. Sometimes, they die as a result of the abuse.
And sometimes they’re killed by people whose mission is supposed to be to save animals.
And now the part that really makes my skin crawl:
We have done everything humanly possible to save Oreo’s life; yet, as a result of the abuse she suffered at the hands of Mr. Henderson, or for other reasons we may never know, she has come to a place where she can no longer be around people or other animals. We make this decision—and others like it– with a heavy heart and a complete understanding that had she been treated with love and respect, Oreo’s fate would be much different.
People know that the ASPCA is in the business of saving animals’ lives– it serves as the very core of our 143 year-old mission. Yet, the moment this statement is picked up, we will feel the repercussions of the difficult decision we know had to be made. We will receive angry phone calls… profanity-laced e-mails… and we will likely be vilified by tweeters and bloggers across the country. And the rallying cry of these missives will all be the same: the ASPCA failed this animal. If the ASPCA has failed at anything, it is shielding America from the true face of animal cruelty for far too long. Animal cruelty isn’t pretty and doesn’t always have a happy ending—it is ugly and sad and, ultimately, tragic. As a community of individuals committed to the welfare of animals, we have to be more proactive and insistent in raising our voices against cruelty—and hope that the nation is ready to listen.
Does anyone really think that this kind of whining and finger-pointing is a good PR move? You bet your butt this blogger is going to vilify you, ASPCA, because you’re a huge, wealthy organization that had options that you didn’t even explore. Because you killed this dog when it wasn’t necessary. Because you raise money off of rescuing abused dogs and then you kill them. Because Oreo is a victim, first of her abuser and then of you.
And you want us to feel sorry for you, and the burden you bear?
No sale.