Denver CO

Wow, Mike Dorney, you could not be more wrong.

Update:  the comment below was deleted by the poster on FB but this when he had posted.  The blog is based on his claims, but if you click on the link to FB at the bottom of the page, you will no longer see this comment, his other comments or the replies others posted to it.  This is the only on that remains.

Wow, Mike Dorney, you could not be more wrong.

I am referring to your comment at the Stop Fremont County Humane Society where you state:

“The problem is, most people that want change at an animal shelter have no experience with anything other than being busy body’s. They volunteer a little, or even a lot, but have no idea what goes into running a shelter. No idea that sometimes it’s for the greater good to put animals down. They think all animals can and should be saved. That is no what is best for the shelter, the individual animals, or the people that adopt them. I have NEVER seen anyone with real animal medical, behavior, shelter experience complain about shelter conditions. It’s always the crazy cat, (or dog) ladies that cause problems. People can think they know what’s best, but until they have some real experience and knowledge, they know NOTHING!”

(See post he commented to at the bottom of the page.)

Just a few examples of a complete turnaround of facilities by people that had never run a shelter before.

1 –Ryan Clinton set about to make Austin stop killing 1 in 2 pets, more than 15,000 a year.  He never worked or even volunteered in a shelter.  He worked to influence lawmakers and assemble a team of people to make it happen.  Austin now save more than 90% of all homeless pets since January 2011Ryan is a lawyer.

2-Sargent Karl Bailey of Seagoville.  Sargent Bailey was a police office that was assigned a shelter killing more than 90% of animals entering the shelter.   He took it over and less animals died in his first year in charge than the week previous from when he started.  No shelter experience.   He could teach some long time directors a thing or two.

3-Mike Kitkoski never even took over the shelter, but he did make Rockwall save more than 90% of all animals just by implementing a lifesaving off site adoption and marketing program and working with the local community.  He still owns a marketing company and it is what he considers his core competency.  No previous experience.

There are more but I would think three would suffice.  Point is, if it already happened it cannot be impossible.

In addition, other organizations were turned around by current management.  They looked at the outdated regressive policies and procedures that were ineffective of saving lives.  Often this was done through outsiders looking in and talking to them about lifesaving programs and services.  They realized they had been looking at the problem wrong, were transparent about deficiencies, asked for help, got it and started saving more than 90% of all homeless pets.  Today more than 170 communities do so.

Again, you cannot say it isn’t possible if it already exists.

We can save every healthy/treatable animal.  Euthanasia and killing have two very different definitions, do look them up. All healthy treatable animal can be saved and that is more than 90% of the live animals entering a shelter.  You don’t need to help, just get out of the way.

I am sure if you needed to live in an overcrowded shelter, you might be uncomfortable with someone else telling you that there just wasn’t enough room and they were going to have to “put you down”, sorry, just no room for you.  I would not be comfortable making that choice for you or anyone, and I am damn sure you would not agree that you would be comfortable having that decision made for you.  Do correct me if I am wrong.

I also don’t think you would say an organization such as that choosing to kill a person was acting in the best interest of the shelter, the individuals, or the people that might be willing to help them out.  But for some reason you feel this way about homeless cats and dogs?  As a human, I do not feel as you appear to feel about these creatures to decide their right to life.

If you have NEVER seen anyone with real animal medical, behavior, shelter experience complain about shelter conditions, you need to get out more.  Labeling these people crazy cat or dog ladies does not put forth a valid argument.  Nor does discounting that they may know what’s best (or NOTHING!) As you state).    See my examples above if they have slipped your mind.  Or look at the people agreeing and joining us.  Two veterinarians, animal control officers, people that HAVE worked at shelters, people that have worked at rescues, many that have worked at rescues, or currently work at rescues.  Some of them weren’t paid, but it does not change the work experience.  But for you edification, the first three groups mentioned worked and were paid to work in shelters or in shelter support work.  As much as I don’t think that is the criteria, you are completely wrong in your assessment of the people on this initiative.

What I do know is that I have never killed a healthy/treatable homeless pet.  And intend never to do so.  And I will stand in the way that anyone who does.  Call me crazy for believing a healthy animal should not be killed for lack of a home.

I believe using the label of “crazy” for someone that chooses not kill healthy animals may turn around on an instigator who says killing healthy animals is the best thing to do.

One thought on “Wow, Mike Dorney, you could not be more wrong.”

  1. This was an excellent response, but also full of good information useful in the quest to reform the Fremont County Humane Society. The person to whom this reply was written has since either deleted, or had deleted, his statements. Since your write-up was posted as a reply, it too has been deleted. Could you please repost on the STOP FB page?? Thanks ~

Bark Away!