Five years ago, it wasn't a problem with any of the officials in Porter County, when the Portage PD unlawfully entered my home with my ex-husband... When the Portage PD gave my beloved fur babies Abbi and Bailey to my ex ... And, when my ex had my fur babies euthanized - instead of returning them to me.
The tragic deaths of Abbi and Bailey at the Hobart Humane Society were my lesson in life that it was wrong for me to report Magistrate Johnson to the Indiana Judiciary Commission, for his failure to protect domestic violence victim / uphold state DV laws.
But now - five years later - pet euthanization is a startling problem at the Hobart Humane Society?
So, does anyone want to explain why Abbi's and Bailey's lives didn't count - five years ago?
Pet euthanization figures startle Portage, Porter County
Chicago Tribune
September 11, 2015 - 6:15 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-porter-animal-st-0913-20150911-story.html
As talks continue to build a new animal shelter for Porter County, officials there were aghast to learn that almost 60 percent of the animals picked up by Portage Animal Control and taken to the Humane Society of Hobart are euthanized.
According to statistics provided by Portage Clerk-Treasurer Chris Stidham, from June 2014 through June 2015, almost 59 percent of the total animals were put down, and about 9.3 percent of the total were euthanized after they were deemed dangerous.
But Portage Mayor James Snyder said he checked with the humane society and the figure is not only from animal control. Residents from mobile home parks are bringing in feral cats to be euthanized, driving up the statistics, and the majority of animals brought in by animal control are redeemed by their owners, he said.
"We get billed if Portage takes an animal there," he said.
The high rate still outrages county officials.
"These numbers are going to paint a very ugly picture," said County Councilman Jeremy Rivas, D-2nd, whose district includes Portage. "Every day it's not built, animals are not being the chance to live by the city of Portage."
Portage has its own animal control officers and has taken its strays to the Hobart shelter for as long as anyone remembers. But as the Porter County Board of Commissioners plans for a new shelter – an announcement of those plans could be made in the coming weeks – whether the county's largest city will participate remains to be seen.
Over the past few years, county officials have come up with, and then nixed, an assortment of plans for a new shelter to replace the one at 2056 Heavilin Road, off of Ind. 2. Officials have long considered the facility outdated and too small to handle the number of animals the no-kill shelter receives. Commissioners announced late last year a new shelter would be built on Indana 49, just north of the Porter County Expo Center, but no details have been forthcoming since then.
Complicating matters between Portage and county officials is what appears to be an almost complete lack of communication to bring the two sides together to determine if or how Portage would participate in a county facility.
Information on the number of animals taken in and euthanized from the Hobart Humane Society was not available.
Brenda Slavik, the shelter's director, said the numbers from Portage were wrong and she didn't know where they came from.
"I don't know what numbers they're talking about," she said, adding numbers are only sent to the cities the shelter serves if they ask for them.
One of the society's board directors said it's not required to release information on euthanazations and the information could be retrieved from the cities it serves -- Portage, Hobart and Lake Station. Several city departments in Hobart said they didn't have that information and an employee at Lake Station City Hall said a public information request was needed to obtain the information.
According to the humane society's website, it takes in an average of 5,700 animals a year. The site claims the animals have a 75 percent chance of adoption.
Board member Chris Skrenka said the number of euthanazations at the Hobart shelter would be higher than at other shelters because it is the only one in the area that serves as animal control for three cities and it also euthanizes animals for residents who can't afford to pay to for the service for their own dying animals.
"Portage animals should be going to Porter County," Skrenka said. "If people criticize, they can go out and build a better mousetrap."
Board president Laura Labadie said the length of time an animals is kept at the shelter varies. She said there was a black Labrador at the shelter for about two months.
Board members said the animals are euthanized if they are very sick or contagious to other animals at the shelter with a deadly virus, severely injured or very aggressive.
In Portage, Rick Henderlong, the city's animal control warden, said the city doesn't deem an animal as dangerous. Cases where dogs attack people go through city court. The city also does not euthanize animals.
"Once we drop an animal at the Hobart Humane Society, we lose complete control over that animal," he said.
To reclaim lost dogs, Portage residents pay a fee to the city and retrieve their animals in Hobart, Henderlong said. The shelter sends a monthly report of the numbers to the city so the city knows how much it owes the humane society for its services.
He called the euthanization rate "really high."
Also calling the number "a lot" was Toni Bianchi, interim director of the county animal shelter. The shelter has euthanized 7 percent of the animals it's taken in so far this year, and Bianchi said national no-kill advocates set a threshold of less than 10 percent for shelters to be considered no-kill.
Because the shelter is often at or beyond its capacity of 81 cats and 50 dogs, Bianchi works with rescue groups to take the animals and get them adopted. Sometimes they call her asking about specific breeds or older dogs, for example, or she contacts them, or they come through and see which animals they want. The county does not charge rescues for the service.
"I look at it this way," she said. "If you do take a dog from us, that's great because it creates an open kennel and it's one more dog we can take off the street."
Council President Dan Whitten, D-At-large, called the euthanization rate "pretty staggering."
"It just seems as if your animal is a stray in that jurisdiction, it starts walking the 'Green Mile,'" he said, referring to the Stephen King book and movie about Death Row. "They need to find a way of not doing that, and one of the ways is to join discussions about the animal shelter."
Whitten said Snyder "has made zero effort" to reach out to the county to be part of the discussion about a new shelter. He suggests Snyder and the city council, as well as the county council and commissioners, get actively involved in the county's plans.
"The kill philosophy does not mesh with the county," he said. "Those numbers shock the conscious."
Commissioner Laura Blaney, D-South, who's spearheading efforts for a new county shelter, called the lack of communication with Portage frustrating.
"There needs to be a commitment," she said, adding commissioners, who oversee the shelter, are considering two options for square footage for a new building so there will be room if Portage wants to be thrown into the mix, but it would be easier to know now than have to build an addition later.
"We are maxed out in our current facility. If we can help reduce that euthanization rate and get the Portage animals in our shelter, heck, we're interested," she said. "But we need that dialogue and it's going to cost more, but it could be a win-win."
"I'm on the record 50 times saying they need to get the shelter built," Snyder said.
He and City Councilman Ted Uzelac said the city council has sent two letters to the county council about the shelter and received no response, in addition to informal discussion about the need.
Neither Whitten nor Rivas said they have received those letters. Rivas said he's also talked to city officials in general but had no specific meetings on the topic.
Regardless, Snyder said the animals from his city would overrun the county shelter as it is now, creating unsafe and dangerous conditions, even though Portage residents help pay for it through county taxes. He added that he is waiting on the county to get the shelter built.
"The county continues to operate like we're not here, and my residents are the biggest block of taxpayers and they get no service," he said. "Until Porter County gets something done, there's nothing Portage can do."
Portage residents are paying twice for animal services, Uzelac said, adding their tax dollars support both the county shelter and the Humane Society of Hobart. The city pays $25,000 a year to the Hobart shelter.
Still, he said he's not being critical of county officials, and added if they were able to get together, they could resolve the problem.
"Portage is proud to be part of Porter County, but we would like to be more a part of this mix," he said. "My goal is to have some dialogue."
His proposal is for Portage to keep its animal control officers and their trucks, and continue to pick up animals in that city. Animal control could house them for five days, so people have a chance to find them, and if the animals weren't claimed by then, they would be transported to the county shelter.
The plan would include an investment by the city to house the animals temporarily.
"Sure, they're going to have to build a bigger facility but we should have been involved from Day 1," he said.
Chicago Tribune
September 11, 2015 - 6:15 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-porter-animal-st-0913-20150911-story.html
As talks continue to build a new animal shelter for Porter County, officials there were aghast to learn that almost 60 percent of the animals picked up by Portage Animal Control and taken to the Humane Society of Hobart are euthanized.
According to statistics provided by Portage Clerk-Treasurer Chris Stidham, from June 2014 through June 2015, almost 59 percent of the total animals were put down, and about 9.3 percent of the total were euthanized after they were deemed dangerous.
But Portage Mayor James Snyder said he checked with the humane society and the figure is not only from animal control. Residents from mobile home parks are bringing in feral cats to be euthanized, driving up the statistics, and the majority of animals brought in by animal control are redeemed by their owners, he said.
"We get billed if Portage takes an animal there," he said.
The high rate still outrages county officials.
"These numbers are going to paint a very ugly picture," said County Councilman Jeremy Rivas, D-2nd, whose district includes Portage. "Every day it's not built, animals are not being the chance to live by the city of Portage."
Portage has its own animal control officers and has taken its strays to the Hobart shelter for as long as anyone remembers. But as the Porter County Board of Commissioners plans for a new shelter – an announcement of those plans could be made in the coming weeks – whether the county's largest city will participate remains to be seen.
Over the past few years, county officials have come up with, and then nixed, an assortment of plans for a new shelter to replace the one at 2056 Heavilin Road, off of Ind. 2. Officials have long considered the facility outdated and too small to handle the number of animals the no-kill shelter receives. Commissioners announced late last year a new shelter would be built on Indana 49, just north of the Porter County Expo Center, but no details have been forthcoming since then.
Complicating matters between Portage and county officials is what appears to be an almost complete lack of communication to bring the two sides together to determine if or how Portage would participate in a county facility.
Information on the number of animals taken in and euthanized from the Hobart Humane Society was not available.
Brenda Slavik, the shelter's director, said the numbers from Portage were wrong and she didn't know where they came from.
"I don't know what numbers they're talking about," she said, adding numbers are only sent to the cities the shelter serves if they ask for them.
One of the society's board directors said it's not required to release information on euthanazations and the information could be retrieved from the cities it serves -- Portage, Hobart and Lake Station. Several city departments in Hobart said they didn't have that information and an employee at Lake Station City Hall said a public information request was needed to obtain the information.
According to the humane society's website, it takes in an average of 5,700 animals a year. The site claims the animals have a 75 percent chance of adoption.
Board member Chris Skrenka said the number of euthanazations at the Hobart shelter would be higher than at other shelters because it is the only one in the area that serves as animal control for three cities and it also euthanizes animals for residents who can't afford to pay to for the service for their own dying animals.
"Portage animals should be going to Porter County," Skrenka said. "If people criticize, they can go out and build a better mousetrap."
Board president Laura Labadie said the length of time an animals is kept at the shelter varies. She said there was a black Labrador at the shelter for about two months.
Board members said the animals are euthanized if they are very sick or contagious to other animals at the shelter with a deadly virus, severely injured or very aggressive.
In Portage, Rick Henderlong, the city's animal control warden, said the city doesn't deem an animal as dangerous. Cases where dogs attack people go through city court. The city also does not euthanize animals.
"Once we drop an animal at the Hobart Humane Society, we lose complete control over that animal," he said.
To reclaim lost dogs, Portage residents pay a fee to the city and retrieve their animals in Hobart, Henderlong said. The shelter sends a monthly report of the numbers to the city so the city knows how much it owes the humane society for its services.
He called the euthanization rate "really high."
Also calling the number "a lot" was Toni Bianchi, interim director of the county animal shelter. The shelter has euthanized 7 percent of the animals it's taken in so far this year, and Bianchi said national no-kill advocates set a threshold of less than 10 percent for shelters to be considered no-kill.
Because the shelter is often at or beyond its capacity of 81 cats and 50 dogs, Bianchi works with rescue groups to take the animals and get them adopted. Sometimes they call her asking about specific breeds or older dogs, for example, or she contacts them, or they come through and see which animals they want. The county does not charge rescues for the service.
"I look at it this way," she said. "If you do take a dog from us, that's great because it creates an open kennel and it's one more dog we can take off the street."
Council President Dan Whitten, D-At-large, called the euthanization rate "pretty staggering."
"It just seems as if your animal is a stray in that jurisdiction, it starts walking the 'Green Mile,'" he said, referring to the Stephen King book and movie about Death Row. "They need to find a way of not doing that, and one of the ways is to join discussions about the animal shelter."
Whitten said Snyder "has made zero effort" to reach out to the county to be part of the discussion about a new shelter. He suggests Snyder and the city council, as well as the county council and commissioners, get actively involved in the county's plans.
"The kill philosophy does not mesh with the county," he said. "Those numbers shock the conscious."
Commissioner Laura Blaney, D-South, who's spearheading efforts for a new county shelter, called the lack of communication with Portage frustrating.
"There needs to be a commitment," she said, adding commissioners, who oversee the shelter, are considering two options for square footage for a new building so there will be room if Portage wants to be thrown into the mix, but it would be easier to know now than have to build an addition later.
"We are maxed out in our current facility. If we can help reduce that euthanization rate and get the Portage animals in our shelter, heck, we're interested," she said. "But we need that dialogue and it's going to cost more, but it could be a win-win."
"I'm on the record 50 times saying they need to get the shelter built," Snyder said.
He and City Councilman Ted Uzelac said the city council has sent two letters to the county council about the shelter and received no response, in addition to informal discussion about the need.
Neither Whitten nor Rivas said they have received those letters. Rivas said he's also talked to city officials in general but had no specific meetings on the topic.
Regardless, Snyder said the animals from his city would overrun the county shelter as it is now, creating unsafe and dangerous conditions, even though Portage residents help pay for it through county taxes. He added that he is waiting on the county to get the shelter built.
"The county continues to operate like we're not here, and my residents are the biggest block of taxpayers and they get no service," he said. "Until Porter County gets something done, there's nothing Portage can do."
Portage residents are paying twice for animal services, Uzelac said, adding their tax dollars support both the county shelter and the Humane Society of Hobart. The city pays $25,000 a year to the Hobart shelter.
Still, he said he's not being critical of county officials, and added if they were able to get together, they could resolve the problem.
"Portage is proud to be part of Porter County, but we would like to be more a part of this mix," he said. "My goal is to have some dialogue."
His proposal is for Portage to keep its animal control officers and their trucks, and continue to pick up animals in that city. Animal control could house them for five days, so people have a chance to find them, and if the animals weren't claimed by then, they would be transported to the county shelter.
The plan would include an investment by the city to house the animals temporarily.
"Sure, they're going to have to build a bigger facility but we should have been involved from Day 1," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment