From: "Tom Morris" <morris2690@sbcglobal.net>
To: "Tommy Gonzalez" <tgonzalez@cityofirving.us>,
<mayor@ci.irving.tx.us>,
<ccouncil@ci.irving.tx.us>,
<cmiller@ci.irving.tx.us>,
<sstokes@ci.irving.tx.us>
Cc: "Pat Fowler" <pfowler@ci.irving.tx.us>
Subject: Fw: Appalling Incidents At The Irving
Animal "Shelter"
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 13:00:11 -0500
Mr. Mayor and Other Honorable Citizens:
Upon reflection, I realize there are other
practices and issues you should be made aware
of as you consider badly needed reforms at
theIrving Animal Shelter.
The first is that the current Shjelter management
authorizes the needless killing of healthy
animals on a systematic basis. As you know,
there are mandated "hold" times
before the City can kill a dog or cat at
the Shelter. What none of us in the volunteer
ranks understand is why Shelter management
insists on killing healthy, adoptable animals
at the earliest "legal" opportunity
when there are empty cages remaining unused
in the facility. I understand that overcrowding
is a real problem and in those situations
it is necessary to follow the "letter
of the law" when it comes to enforcing
minimum hold times. But when there are empty
cages this practice of killing healthy animals
as soon as their minimum hold times are up
is totally senseless and contributes the
the feeling by those of us interested in
seeing conditions Shelter conditions improve
that management cares nothing about "animal
welfare" and everything about "animal
control".
I have asked Mssrs. Fowler and Teel why they
feel they must adhere to this killing schedule
if cages are open. They have never given
me a logical response as to why they continue
the practice.
Another equally senseless practice at the
Shelter is killing animals on Sundays. The
problem with this is that it makes it impossible
for rescue groups to save an animal identified
for rescue on a Saturday but not removed
from the Shelter that day. John Teel's response
to this is that it takes a long time to kill
an animal, and they need the time to do so
when the Shelter is not open. The reality
is they currently kill animals when the Shelter
is open. Several witnesses heard Shelter
employees state that 21 cats were "put
down" last week while the Shelter was
open. If Shelter management is as committed
to to animal welfare as they claim, you would
think they would have policies in place designed
to save lives, not destroy animals prematurely
before they know if a dog or cat may have
a home.
The last thing you should know - if you do
not already - is that a former Shelter employee
has filed a suit against the City of Irving
pursuant to the Texas Whistleblower Act.
The plaintiff is Tarah Baumgarter. She worked
as an Officer at the Shelter for almost six
months before being terminated. Ms. Baumgarter
makes numerous allegations, including:
Controlled drugs missing from the Shelter
Dogs in Shelter not removed from cages during
cleaning but instead soaked in chemicals
and hit with hoses
Animal feces not cleaned from inside cages
Small dogs and puppies bounced around cages
during cleaning by being hit by hoses
Injured dogs left in cages without veterinary
care
Female dogs placed in cages with male dogs
Large dogs placed in cages with small dogs
Healthy dogs placed in cages with sick dogs
Cats killed in animal control trucks in the
back of the facility instead of being logged
into the Shelter and then euthanized
No sedation on cats killed in trucks
If person feeding dogs did not like a particular
dog, it would not be fed each day
If three dogs were in a single cage, food
only sufficient for one dog was placed in
cage, resulting in dominant dog obtaining
food and others going without
Plantiff was touched in a sexual manner on
two occasions and upon report to Shelter
supervisor no action was taken
Dogs not permitted to be placed in euthanasia
room because an employee used room to eat
his lunch
Dog pinned against back wall of cages with
boot to be given initial shot for euthanasia
Re-use of same syring to euthanize several
dogs and needle then repenetrated drug bottle
so as to cause contamination
Improper drug log book used and when Plaintiff
submitted proper form, Supervisor did not
implement
Plaintiff compelled to remove head of dog
to be tested for rabies by method of chopping
head off with axe without proper protective
devices, resulting in blood and body fluids
flying into Plaintiff's face and mouth
One or more persons not certified carrying
out euthanasia
Kicking dogs after brought into Shelter
Wild bobcat babies left in Shelter for two
days without food
Healthy dogs that are noisy, dogs held by
police department when owner arrested and
when dogs seized on abandonment or cruelty,
all placed in quarantine area with dogs suspected
of rabies disease.
Rabies cages and room not properly secured
If too many rabies case dogs came in, one
would be removed and place in general caging
with other dogs, even though quarantine time
not sufficient
No rabies quarantine policy/procedure manual
present in or at room
On dog bite calls, if owner alleges rabies
innoculation, proof not required
Cats placed in quarantine placed in cages
without litter box, food or water for days
My wife and I had occasion to interface with
Ms. Baumgarter in the days just after we
became active in assisting the Shelter and
just after she had started her job as an
Animals Services Officer. We found Ms. Baumgarter
to be a very energetic, enthusiastic employee
who was very excited to be working at the
facility. In the short time we knew her we
saw her do numerous things to assist the
animals in her charge, inclusing arranging
for animals to be transported to other facilities
where they would have a better chance at
adoption and repainting and carpeting a portion
of the cat room to provide a play area for
cats and kittens.
Strictly form a personal point-of-view, it
is difficult for me to believe Ms. Baumgarter
made all these allegations up. But that is
strictly my opinion. However, as City leaders,
you owe it to the citizens of Irving to keep
trck of this case. If even a fraction of
her charges are found to be true, it certainly
reinforces all the evidence others have brought
forward about shoddy and negligent Shelter
management.
I, and others like me who are fed up with
excuses as to why provable acts of cruelty
and negligence at the Shelter continue to
be tolerated by our City, demand action by
you on our behalf. If no satisfaction is
forthcoming, I will personally pay for advertisng
in the Irving Journal to inform the citizens
of Irving about these issues and tha fact
that elected officials are ignoring these
concerns.
Thomas E. Morris
972-556-1752
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Morris, Tom
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 4:18 PM
To: 'tgonzalez@ci.irving.tx.us'; 'mayor@ci.irving.tx.us';
'ccouncil@ci.irving.tx.us'; 'cmiller@ci.irving.tx.us';
'sstokes@ci.irving.tx.us'
Cc: 'pfowler@ci.irving.tx.us'
Subject: Appalling Incidents At The Irving
Animal "Shelter"
Mr. Mayor and Other Honorable Citizens:
I am a member of the Irving Shelter Reform
Group. I became aware of the terrible conditions
at the Shelter last Fall when I first went
to visit. Since then my wife, Clare, and
I have worked diligently to do what we can
to improve conditions in the Shelter and
improve the adoption rate of healthy animals
that end up in the Shelter.
I am not a “screaming animal rights activist”.
I am a senior officer in a large public company
where I am charged with making high level
decisions daily. I think others would tell
you that I am objective and level-headed.
And I understand the mission statement of
a city animal control operation starts with
“control”.
With that being said, I have been REPEATEDLY
disgusted by incidents that have occurred
over the past year where it has been obvious
that the Shelter management and staff have
ignored the welfare of dogs and cats that
have ended up in the facility while making
it as difficult as possible for volunteers
willing to give of their own time and resources
to ASSIST THE CITY in getting more animals
out of the facility alive.
The most recent incident in this sad saga
is the case where the needs of the little
dog named “Irving” were ignored based simply
on rigid adherence to bureaucracy. But unfortunately
– and needlessly – what occurred in this
case is merely the latest in a LONG series
of other totally senseless and avoidable
cases of inhumane treatment and/or flagrant
disregard for the well-being of the animals
by the staff.
Until recently I had been of the opinion
that it would be better to work with Shelter
senior management (Mssrs. Fowler and Teel)
in the hopes that by pointing out these issues
to them things would get better.
But they haven’t. Things are getting worse.
The Shelter staff continues to BLATANTLY
ignore the welfare of the animals and needlessly
put restraints on volunteers who only want
to help turn this hellhole into a better
place.
There are many issues/problems to be resolved
in the facility. But four must be addressed
immediately if things are ever going to get
better.
The first is to fire Susie Williamson, the
Shelter Supervisor. She does not possess
the leadership skills or temperament to hold
that position. Her demeanor is usually surly
or harassed. Her negative, bureaucratic attitude
and public moodiness combined with her lack
of compassion is a disgrace to the City.
Her lack of interest in aiding “Irving” is
not atypical. She should be removed immediately.
Second, you should demand that senior City
staff answer some very serious questions,
such as:
· Why does your staff continue to deny accusations
of mistreatment of animals when there are
multiple eyewitness accounts of these abuses
taking place regularly?
· Why do these incidents continue to occur
despite the promises of senior City management
that “they are committed to making things
better”?
· Why are needless obstacles and petty regulations
being put in place to make it even more difficult
for volunteers to assist in increasing the
adoption rate? For example, why is the Shelter
(acknowledging that they are already short
of staff) going to take on the task of taking
photos of the animals for Petfinders when
motivated, qualified volunteers have been
doing the job? I suspect it is because management
does not want volunteers to know what is
really going on with disposition of the animals.
Third, you should demand an outside audit
of the Shelter. Bad things are happening
in the facility daily. You and your fellow
citizens of Irving deserve an impartial third
party evaluation by nationally recognized
animal control professionals to delve into
current practices so that YOU can better
understand what is going right – and wrong
– with this facility. Once you really know
what is happening, you will be in a better
position to take corrective action.
Lastly, you should demand to review the credentials
of the part-time veterinarian recently added
to the staff. Too many reputable vets who
practice in Irving have already found fault
with many of her diagnostic conclusions.
There is a real question as to her competence.
As leaders of our City you have an obligation
to make Irving a model of civic excellence.
How we manage the Shelter is a direct indicator
of success or failure on this barometer.
Currently, we are failing. As a citizen of
Irving, I am appealing to you to take action
now to make the Shelter what it should be
– a “shelter” for unfortunate animals that
end up there – and not a holding pen where
the staff just counts the days until they
can euthanize another homeless pet.
Thomas E. Morris
972-556-1752>
<> > Subj: RE: Little White Dog
named "Irving" and
> Small Paws Rescue Org.
> > Date: 9/1/2006 8:57:19 AM Central
Standard Time
> > From: neuteress@yahoo.com
> >
> > Small Paws is one of the most highly
recognized
> > 501(c)3 groups in the country.
I have worked with
> > them in the past; they are a FANTASTIC
> organization.
> > They have a very significant membership,
and are
> well
> > known and respected on a national
level. There
> should
> > be NO REASON that an animal they
want to pull
> > shouldn't be given to them the
first time they
> ask,
> > let alone the third time! They
are NOT a second
> rate
> > humane group. I'm certain that
Irving will be
> hearing
> > from their membership.
> >
> > Do the problems at Irving have
to go "national"
> before
> > the necessary changes are made?
> >
> > Many ACO services across the country
are setting
> > successful, positive examples of
what a facility
> &ACO
> > team that truly cares about the
welfare of the
> animals
> > can do. Why is Irving having so
much trouble
> > resolving the problems when they
know what the
> > problems are and have so many resources/humane
> > volunteers (at NO COST) helping???
> >
> > I'm truly saddened to hear that
the new vet's
> actions
> > apparently haven't resulted in
better treatment
> for
> > those unfortunate animals coming
in to IACO..
> >
> > Count me in as a strong supporter
of an external
> audit
> > ASAP (like YESTERDAY)!! I also
want to say that
> I
> > strongly support Betty in her opinion
that
> "...Susie
> > Williamson should be removed from
her position
> > immediately,..."
> >
> >
> > Respectfully,
> > Kat Chaplin, (817) 379-0969
> > Ahimsa of Texas, Inc.
> > Classy Cats, Inc.
> > Roanoke, TX >
<Subj: A Little Dog named Irving
Date: 9/1/2006 3:38:40 PM Central Standard
Time
From: bettyy3@earthlink.net (Betty is the
President of the citizen's group for Animal
Shelter Reform)
To: mayor@ci.irving.tx.us, ccouncil@ci.irving.tx.us,
tgonzalez@cityofirving.us, pfowler@ci.irving.tx.us
CC: jcarroll@ci.irving.tx.us
Mr. Mayor, Member of the City Council, City
Manager, and Pat Fowler,
This has been a banner week at the shelter
and, quite frankly, I have not been able
to put my feelings into words until now.
I do not know about the State of Oklahoma,
but here in our great State of Texas, a veterinarian
is sworn to uphold the following oath as
adopted by the House of Delegates in 1969:
"Being admitted to the profession of
veterinary medicine, I solemnly swear to
use my scientific knowledge and skills for
the benefit of society through the protection
of animal health, the relief of animal suffering,
the conservation of animal resources, the
promotion of public health, and the advancement
of medical knowledge.
I will practice my profession conscientiously,
with dignity, and in keeping with the principles
of veterinary medical ethics.
I will accept as a lifelong obligation the
continual improvement of my professional
knowledge and competence."
Yesterday, Clare Morris and I made a trip
to Dallas where the little dog Irving lay
in a diagnostic hospital for animals. We
felt it necessary to be introduced to this
little guy personally and make certain we
had not been misinformed, as the shelter
staff is saying. Trust me on this one, Herb.
We were not misinformed. I held Irving in
my own arms, wrapped in a towel so as not
to bruise his protruding ribs, and looked
into his face. In my own hands they placed
a solid stone removed from his bladder: it
was the size of a golf ball (picture attached).
He had a second stone they did not show me;
however, the medical staff said it was somewhat
larger than the one I held. A healthy dog?
You do not need the use of sophisticated
equipment to see that this dog was suffering.
(my own picture attached)
Some may consider me silly when I tell you
that I whispered "I'm sorry this happened
to you on my watch" into his ear. He
was a tough little guy - he licked my face
and wagged his tail: he was going to be okay.
Small Paws would see to it. They delight
in helping animals who are Hospice patients
and to quote one of the rescuers there with
me yesterday "we hold their little paw
until they cross over Rainbow Bridge."
This group enjoys more than 6,000 members
internationally: when they flex, it shows.
Not only did Dr. King make a serious mistake
in evaluating this dog's medical condition;
but the shelter supervisor failed to recognize
distinct and basic symptoms of extreme distress.
This surprises me due to Ms. Williamson's
experience as a competitive dog breeder.
To deem this critically ill dog healthy and
place a "I'm ready for adoption"
card (picture attached) on his cage was ludicrous!
I believe if anyone mentions the 72 hour
hold period one more time I will scream.
This is not about the 72 hour hold period.
This is about the fact a skilled veterinarian
and shelter supervisor failed to see an animal
in extreme pain, the fact those individuals
were willing to let this emaciated and suffering
dog stay in that cage unmedicated and urinating
on itself from August 24th until August 31st,
and the fact that one of those individuals
was so focused on control that they refused
a renowned group of rescuers the opportunity
to pull the dog for emergency care! How many
times do I have to say it? We are NOT the
enemy. We've been told the shelter staff
has named themselves and our group the "Hatfields
and McCoys". That, sir, is what we deal
with as we spend countless volunteer hours,
such as yourself and the council, to help
OUR city shelter because the staff cannot
possibly do it all! Unfortunately, you get
what you ask for. Yesterday at 2:45 p.m.,
with a small little dog in my arms, I became
a Hatfield and the shelter became a McCoy.
They labeled us; we drew a line in the sand;
and they stepped over it. It is unfortunate,
because we are more determined and more dedicated
than ever before to oversee our shelter until
it is a polished jewel. Only then, will we
rest.
Just yesterday, Clare and I went to the shelter
at 4:40 p.m. to conduct a "head count"
of the cats and kittens. This was my first
time to actually experience a roll call of
this sort, and in that short amount of time
I assisted, I found two cats missing and
unaccounted for (again); and a cage with
four kittens with an identification card
marked "three". I see why animals
cannot be found; I see why an entire litter
of unweaned kittens were lost in July; and
I see how a box of unweaned babies could
be placed on a top shelf and forgotten. By
the way, at one minute until 5 p.m., Clare
warned me to hurry for Leticia would come
and tell us to leave when the clock struck
5. With 30 seconds to go; there were several
uniformed ASOs gathered at the front desk,
and just as Clare warned, the door opened
and Leticia announced "are you girls
ready to go?" Of course we were, just
let us make one more note of one more mistake
on the tracking system. We finished our tally
outside OUR shelter, standing on the sidewalk.
A young ASO walked past me carrying a "live
animal" box marked "Justin's Cat"
- I am hoping it is one of the missing ones:
I'd rather it be in the box and not properly
logged out, than MIA.
I should have pushed harder at City Hall;
but because of the respect I have for my
home town, for you Herb, and for my friends
on city council; I failed to focus as clearly
as I should have. My mistake. This is MY
shelter, run by MY taxes; and I am taking
ownership from this day forward. This is
YOUR shelter, run by YOUR taxes too - I'm
asking that you take ownership with me.
As a core member of the Irving Animal Shelter
Reform, I am asking for a full outside audit
from the Humane Society of the United States
- now. It would be very honorable for the
city to send them an invitation and put a
stop to all the negative publicity and ill
feelings from citizens.
The cost of an audit will probably be comparable
to a K-9 police officer that is imported
from another country, which is approximately
$20,000. I would prefer the next K-9 officer
be recruited from our own city shelter's
Death Row as seen in other cities, and the
money used to fund the audit. The result
would be an excellent blueprint of shelter
procedures to be used for Irving's new state-of-the-art
animal shelter.
I would appreciate a call, an e-mail, a cup
of coffee? Just something would be wonderful.
Signed,
Betty Yarbrough
Citizen of Irving>