It's in the left-hand column, down low, under Brindi's close-up.
The most media coverage we got was when total strangers called and emailed the media directly. It's worth a try!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Posting the media list
I don't know why I didn't think of this before. It may not be well received, but I'll wait and see.
It's in the left-hand column, down low, under Brindi's close-up.
The most media coverage we got was when total strangers called and emailed the media directly. It's worth a try!
It's in the left-hand column, down low, under Brindi's close-up.
The most media coverage we got was when total strangers called and emailed the media directly. It's worth a try!
Monday, November 10, 2008
What if? (off the subject, just this once)
I was thinking about the recent tragedy at the SPCA, when a staff person accidentally backed her car over a kitten and a pregnant cat someone placed behind her wheels. Both kitties succumbed to their injuries. The staff were understandably upset, and the unknown person behind it is now the target of anger and hatred.
Now that my own horror and shock are beginning to subside, a few nagging thoughts have floated up that I'd like to share here, as an exception to my Brindi focus. The prevailing assumption in this story is that it is the result of an intentional act. But something else occurred to me, mainly because I can't help asking, is it really true? Is there a Nova Scotian so incredibly mean and cruel that they'd deliberately do such a thing? How awful would it be if they had a very different intention, and just messed up royally? What if they meant to bring the cats to the SPCA for adoption - and for some reason choked, because they were too shy or ashamed to go inside, and just left them in the parking lot and ran off? Or similarly, what if they had gone in, were told the shelter doesn't accept "owner surrenders", and didn't know what else to do? Did they take a chance that the SPCA would have to take the cats in as strays - and the bag or box ended up getting shoved too close to the car as others walked by?
Frankly, I don't know which scenario is better, on purpose or "on" accident. But if in fact it was unintentional, I doubt that person will never be able to come clean. Nobody would believe it or forgive them.
Aside from this unpleasant speculation, the story also made me aware that the Metro Shelter doesn't accept "owner-surrendered" pets. They estimate an additional 30 extra cats a day would turn up. Where do all those cats end up instead?? Does it mean that every day, people are drowning litters of kittens - or dumping a dog on the highway - because they can't drop them at the shelter? I don't know. What also stuck with me was the judgmental - and a bit contradictory - overtone about those pesky "irresponsible owners" who want to give up their pets. The term always hits me hard, having been called an irresponsible owner myself lately. I realize lots of people have a low opinion of their fellow humans, even their neighbors. But surely not every person wishing to give up an animal at a shelter is just a selfish, shallow twit who failed to grasp or appreciate what pet ownership really means! I mean, come on!!! And even if they were - is that a legitimate basis for turning them away? Who really suffers then? A.: The animals.
The truth is, however, there are plenty of good reasons for giving up a beloved pet. Work schedules make keeping a dog impossible; allergies crop up and/or become more severe from one day to the next; a new member of the family, by birth or marriage or adoption or whatever, has allergies; the household budget can no longer afford a pet due to job loss or the addition of new family members, young or old; seniors become too weak, ill, or poor to care for their animal companions; single people of any age contract an illness and/or disability; couples divorce, both move into apartments that don't take pets; employees transferred out of town for a year or two with no one to take their pet; and so on. These are all legitimate scenarios that any "responsible owner" may have to confront one day, and in my opinion, somebody ought to be there to help. Like many others, I had always assumed that somebody is the shelter.
Saying goodbye to a pet is awful enough; having no shelter to bring it to is a sad discovery indeed. Sure, there are private shelters, but too often they're filled to the brim (and no wonder). Running an ad in the paper or online is all well and good, but doesn't always work, and how do you invent your own screening process? And if illness is the reason, how do you find and interview prospective owners, or even use word of mouth?
What's the answer? Fortunately, many others have gotten there before us. When there's not enough room in a shelter, they continue to accept animals, and send them to foster homes, which are vastly preferable to a kennel. (That's how I ended up with Princess Amelia - I fostered her when she had her kittens, and we found we just couldn't part.) There are networks of shelters across the continent that can help redistribute the extra "animal wealth" instead of destroy it. This cooperation happens a regular basis, not just after natural disasters.
I don't have any way to learn the truth about those poor cats at the SPCA last week. We may never know. I just so hate the image of some poor soul mustering up their courage and strength to give up their pet, walking into the shelter, ready to face disapproving looks and answer a lot of personal questions, only to be turned away. What do they do then? I hate to think. But somebody better!
Now that my own horror and shock are beginning to subside, a few nagging thoughts have floated up that I'd like to share here, as an exception to my Brindi focus. The prevailing assumption in this story is that it is the result of an intentional act. But something else occurred to me, mainly because I can't help asking, is it really true? Is there a Nova Scotian so incredibly mean and cruel that they'd deliberately do such a thing? How awful would it be if they had a very different intention, and just messed up royally? What if they meant to bring the cats to the SPCA for adoption - and for some reason choked, because they were too shy or ashamed to go inside, and just left them in the parking lot and ran off? Or similarly, what if they had gone in, were told the shelter doesn't accept "owner surrenders", and didn't know what else to do? Did they take a chance that the SPCA would have to take the cats in as strays - and the bag or box ended up getting shoved too close to the car as others walked by?
Frankly, I don't know which scenario is better, on purpose or "on" accident. But if in fact it was unintentional, I doubt that person will never be able to come clean. Nobody would believe it or forgive them.
Aside from this unpleasant speculation, the story also made me aware that the Metro Shelter doesn't accept "owner-surrendered" pets. They estimate an additional 30 extra cats a day would turn up. Where do all those cats end up instead?? Does it mean that every day, people are drowning litters of kittens - or dumping a dog on the highway - because they can't drop them at the shelter? I don't know. What also stuck with me was the judgmental - and a bit contradictory - overtone about those pesky "irresponsible owners" who want to give up their pets. The term always hits me hard, having been called an irresponsible owner myself lately. I realize lots of people have a low opinion of their fellow humans, even their neighbors. But surely not every person wishing to give up an animal at a shelter is just a selfish, shallow twit who failed to grasp or appreciate what pet ownership really means! I mean, come on!!! And even if they were - is that a legitimate basis for turning them away? Who really suffers then? A.: The animals.
The truth is, however, there are plenty of good reasons for giving up a beloved pet. Work schedules make keeping a dog impossible; allergies crop up and/or become more severe from one day to the next; a new member of the family, by birth or marriage or adoption or whatever, has allergies; the household budget can no longer afford a pet due to job loss or the addition of new family members, young or old; seniors become too weak, ill, or poor to care for their animal companions; single people of any age contract an illness and/or disability; couples divorce, both move into apartments that don't take pets; employees transferred out of town for a year or two with no one to take their pet; and so on. These are all legitimate scenarios that any "responsible owner" may have to confront one day, and in my opinion, somebody ought to be there to help. Like many others, I had always assumed that somebody is the shelter.
Saying goodbye to a pet is awful enough; having no shelter to bring it to is a sad discovery indeed. Sure, there are private shelters, but too often they're filled to the brim (and no wonder). Running an ad in the paper or online is all well and good, but doesn't always work, and how do you invent your own screening process? And if illness is the reason, how do you find and interview prospective owners, or even use word of mouth?
What's the answer? Fortunately, many others have gotten there before us. When there's not enough room in a shelter, they continue to accept animals, and send them to foster homes, which are vastly preferable to a kennel. (That's how I ended up with Princess Amelia - I fostered her when she had her kittens, and we found we just couldn't part.) There are networks of shelters across the continent that can help redistribute the extra "animal wealth" instead of destroy it. This cooperation happens a regular basis, not just after natural disasters.
I don't have any way to learn the truth about those poor cats at the SPCA last week. We may never know. I just so hate the image of some poor soul mustering up their courage and strength to give up their pet, walking into the shelter, ready to face disapproving looks and answer a lot of personal questions, only to be turned away. What do they do then? I hate to think. But somebody better!
Sunday, November 9, 2008
News from Nowhere
Many people call and write to ask me how Brindi is doing. Not allowed visits, I rely on reports from others. These are usually one or two words long, until recently.
This is part of a series of emails I received. I've placed them in chronological order. They start with a letter from a Facebook member to Mayor Kelly. I forwarded her letter to SPCA board member Sean Kelly. He replied to both Jen and me. It is the most detailed information I've received to date, after a note from Sean about two weeks ago answering my questions. Sean included the vet’s letter as it appears here.
I am, as may be imagined, utterly and absolutely grateful for these and all reports on Brindi's welfare. I hope it turns out to be a step in the right direction. And in that spirit, Jen's reply raises very pertinent questions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jen [mailto:]
Sent: Samstag, 1. November 2008 19:18
To: kellyp@halifax.ca
Cc: rogier@eastlink.ca
Subject: Save Brindi!
Hello Mayor Kelly,
I am writing you with my heart on my sleeve. There is a desperate issue that needs to be addressed right away, it is a life or death matter, which makes it all the more urgent.
Brindi is a dog being held on death row at the Nova Scotia SPCA in Burnside. No one is allowed to visit her, including her owner. Her owner rescued Brindi and gave her a loving home. Brindi was removed from her home for doing what comes naturally to her - defending her property. No one was hurt by Brindi, yet she was taken from her safe and loving home and put into a cage to await her fate.
Please, visit Brindi's Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35473542760) and read the history for yourself. Brindi needs all of our help, financial or otherwise. I can't help financially but I believe, Sir, that you can step in and be a hero for the animal community, and a positive role model for children.
Please Mayor Kelly, please help Brindi in her desperate time of need. She is scared, she is lonely. She's been locked up since July 24 with no visitors.
I used to work at the SPCA where Brindi is being held. I know what kind of attention she is getting - none. Dogs in those holding pens are not allowed to interact with the public at all. Brindi will get walked once a day, twice if she's lucky. She will have to live in a pen that is bleached out daily, that is cold, that is lonely. It's a very scary place for dogs. Having come from a nasty home in the first place, Brindi is no doubt reverting to old behaviours, behaviours that humans themselves display when they feel unloved and forgotten about. She is pacing in her pen, panting, searching desperately for any way to escape, eagerly awaiting the humans who will feed her twice a day and take her outside for 10 minutes while her pen is being scrubbed with harsh-smelling chemicals and a fresh piece of scrap fabric is placed on the hard floor for her to sleep on. alone. in the dark.
It breaks my heart and if you're the empathetic person you appear to be in public appearances, you will help Brindi be reunited with her one and only loving owner she's known. Help her escape the awful cycle she's been living in, being in and out of shelters. Be her rescuer, her hero, and mine.
Please.
Jennifer Burtch
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Kelly Sent: November 7, 2008 6:31 AM To: 'Francesca Rogier' Cc: Jen Burtch
Subject: RE: Save Brindi!
Hello Francesca,
I just wanted to pass on some information. Last night I was out with Brindi in the backyard. She was having a great time we tossed the ball, she mainly played keep away J The people at the shelter are doing a lot of training with her to keep her mentally stimulated. Her weight is good she is eating very well. I have attached a letter from Dr. Pauline Giffin who is one of the vets we use. I can assure you that the information that is in Mrs. Burtch's email is incorrect!! It may have been that way in the past but it certainly is not now. I hope this information helps you in this difficult time.
Cheers, Sean Kelly Chair of the Shelter Management Team
Dr. Pauline Giffin's email is below:
I am a local veterinarian who was asked to address your concerns regarding Brindi's emotional and physical well-being during her time at the Metro SPCA. I am pleased to inform you that Brindi has adjusted well to her surroundings, showing no signs of stress-related problems. Her weekly physical exam by a veterinarian indicates no health concernsat the present time and her vaccines have been updated. Brindi has been given a quiet kennel that gives her some privacy from other dogs. She sleeps on a Karanda Bed with a blanket and has access to a large dog run. Her daily routine consists of a minimum of two 30-minute walks (during which time she is unmuzzled) allowing her an opportunity for interactive play with shelter staff. It should be notedthat a catch pole is not being used during Brindi's exercise/play time. Brindi is also provided with enrichment tools every day in her kennel to give her the opportunity to chew/play on her own while shelter staff is performing their daily duties. In conclusion, Brindi has adapted very well to her surroundings. While I realize this is a very difficult time for you, I assure you that Brindi's emotional and physical well-being is of utmost importance to the Metro SPCA and we will endeavor to continue to address all of her needs.
Sincerely, Dr. Pauline Giffin Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
-----Original Message-----
From: Jen [mailto:eastlink.ca]
Sent: November-07-08 10:30 PM
To: 'Sean Kelly'; 'Francesca Rogier'
Subject: RE: Save Brindi!
Hi Sean & Francesca, I am very glad to be proven incorrect! I am also very glad to know that conditions are much improved compared to when I worked there.
Sean, while Brindi seems to be adapting to her situation, what is being done to free her and send her home? I only want to see her happily returned to her home, and not needlessly killed. It was mentioned in the vet's email that she is being trained and worked with easily and without a muzzle. Why can she not be returned to her home? Her home has all of the necessary adaptations made to it to ensure she is safe and kept penned in her yard. Why is she still being held? Her execution date may have been pushed back, but has it been disregarded in light of how wonderful a dog she has proven herself to be?
Sincerely, Jen
This is part of a series of emails I received. I've placed them in chronological order. They start with a letter from a Facebook member to Mayor Kelly. I forwarded her letter to SPCA board member Sean Kelly. He replied to both Jen and me. It is the most detailed information I've received to date, after a note from Sean about two weeks ago answering my questions. Sean included the vet’s letter as it appears here.
I am, as may be imagined, utterly and absolutely grateful for these and all reports on Brindi's welfare. I hope it turns out to be a step in the right direction. And in that spirit, Jen's reply raises very pertinent questions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jen [mailto:]
Sent: Samstag, 1. November 2008 19:18
To: kellyp@halifax.ca
Cc: rogier@eastlink.ca
Subject: Save Brindi!
Hello Mayor Kelly,
I am writing you with my heart on my sleeve. There is a desperate issue that needs to be addressed right away, it is a life or death matter, which makes it all the more urgent.
Brindi is a dog being held on death row at the Nova Scotia SPCA in Burnside. No one is allowed to visit her, including her owner. Her owner rescued Brindi and gave her a loving home. Brindi was removed from her home for doing what comes naturally to her - defending her property. No one was hurt by Brindi, yet she was taken from her safe and loving home and put into a cage to await her fate.
Please, visit Brindi's Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35473542760) and read the history for yourself. Brindi needs all of our help, financial or otherwise. I can't help financially but I believe, Sir, that you can step in and be a hero for the animal community, and a positive role model for children.
Please Mayor Kelly, please help Brindi in her desperate time of need. She is scared, she is lonely. She's been locked up since July 24 with no visitors.
I used to work at the SPCA where Brindi is being held. I know what kind of attention she is getting - none. Dogs in those holding pens are not allowed to interact with the public at all. Brindi will get walked once a day, twice if she's lucky. She will have to live in a pen that is bleached out daily, that is cold, that is lonely. It's a very scary place for dogs. Having come from a nasty home in the first place, Brindi is no doubt reverting to old behaviours, behaviours that humans themselves display when they feel unloved and forgotten about. She is pacing in her pen, panting, searching desperately for any way to escape, eagerly awaiting the humans who will feed her twice a day and take her outside for 10 minutes while her pen is being scrubbed with harsh-smelling chemicals and a fresh piece of scrap fabric is placed on the hard floor for her to sleep on. alone. in the dark.
It breaks my heart and if you're the empathetic person you appear to be in public appearances, you will help Brindi be reunited with her one and only loving owner she's known. Help her escape the awful cycle she's been living in, being in and out of shelters. Be her rescuer, her hero, and mine.
Please.
Jennifer Burtch
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Kelly Sent: November 7, 2008 6:31 AM To: 'Francesca Rogier' Cc: Jen Burtch
Subject: RE: Save Brindi!
Hello Francesca,
I just wanted to pass on some information. Last night I was out with Brindi in the backyard. She was having a great time we tossed the ball, she mainly played keep away J The people at the shelter are doing a lot of training with her to keep her mentally stimulated. Her weight is good she is eating very well. I have attached a letter from Dr. Pauline Giffin who is one of the vets we use. I can assure you that the information that is in Mrs. Burtch's email is incorrect!! It may have been that way in the past but it certainly is not now. I hope this information helps you in this difficult time.
Cheers, Sean Kelly Chair of the Shelter Management Team
Dr. Pauline Giffin's email is below:
I am a local veterinarian who was asked to address your concerns regarding Brindi's emotional and physical well-being during her time at the Metro SPCA. I am pleased to inform you that Brindi has adjusted well to her surroundings, showing no signs of stress-related problems. Her weekly physical exam by a veterinarian indicates no health concernsat the present time and her vaccines have been updated. Brindi has been given a quiet kennel that gives her some privacy from other dogs. She sleeps on a Karanda Bed with a blanket and has access to a large dog run. Her daily routine consists of a minimum of two 30-minute walks (during which time she is unmuzzled) allowing her an opportunity for interactive play with shelter staff. It should be notedthat a catch pole is not being used during Brindi's exercise/play time. Brindi is also provided with enrichment tools every day in her kennel to give her the opportunity to chew/play on her own while shelter staff is performing their daily duties. In conclusion, Brindi has adapted very well to her surroundings. While I realize this is a very difficult time for you, I assure you that Brindi's emotional and physical well-being is of utmost importance to the Metro SPCA and we will endeavor to continue to address all of her needs.
Sincerely, Dr. Pauline Giffin Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
-----Original Message-----
From: Jen [mailto:eastlink.ca]
Sent: November-07-08 10:30 PM
To: 'Sean Kelly'; 'Francesca Rogier'
Subject: RE: Save Brindi!
Hi Sean & Francesca, I am very glad to be proven incorrect! I am also very glad to know that conditions are much improved compared to when I worked there.
Sean, while Brindi seems to be adapting to her situation, what is being done to free her and send her home? I only want to see her happily returned to her home, and not needlessly killed. It was mentioned in the vet's email that she is being trained and worked with easily and without a muzzle. Why can she not be returned to her home? Her home has all of the necessary adaptations made to it to ensure she is safe and kept penned in her yard. Why is she still being held? Her execution date may have been pushed back, but has it been disregarded in light of how wonderful a dog she has proven herself to be?
Sincerely, Jen
Saturday, November 8, 2008
calling out #2
Once again, I am asking for daily calls to Mayor Kelly and especially to Animal Services. The numbers are (902) 490 4010 and 490 1791, respectively. Email gets deleted. A human voice is harder to ignore, somehow.
Call every day if you can, it doesn't take long, and it can really help. What to say? Please request that they meet with me, and that they let Brindi go, and if they keep listening, ask them to scale back a bit on their interpretation of A300, because a muzzle order is NOT a mandate to automatically euthanize for violations, not under that law - not by any stretch of the imagination. Fortunately so, for other people: Brindi is not wearing a muzzle when she is walked at the SCPA. And she was not wearing a muzzle when they seized her.
The administrative and legal situation is unexpectedly complicated. What's important to understand out of all the details is that Animal Services does not actually have to meet with me or anybody in order to let Brindi go. It has sole authority; it needs no judge to act for it other than provide warrants based on Animal Services' reports. It can review its own decision and the process leading to it, anytime it likes. There is no law or rule or policy or limit on their ability to do this - despite what they may tell the public. It may be hard to accept, but it's a lot easier and simpler than anybody having to testify in court. The system needs changing, agreed. Let's all fix it. I'd prefer it, however, if I could just get my dog back first, please.
Call every day if you can, it doesn't take long, and it can really help. What to say? Please request that they meet with me, and that they let Brindi go, and if they keep listening, ask them to scale back a bit on their interpretation of A300, because a muzzle order is NOT a mandate to automatically euthanize for violations, not under that law - not by any stretch of the imagination. Fortunately so, for other people: Brindi is not wearing a muzzle when she is walked at the SCPA. And she was not wearing a muzzle when they seized her.
The administrative and legal situation is unexpectedly complicated. What's important to understand out of all the details is that Animal Services does not actually have to meet with me or anybody in order to let Brindi go. It has sole authority; it needs no judge to act for it other than provide warrants based on Animal Services' reports. It can review its own decision and the process leading to it, anytime it likes. There is no law or rule or policy or limit on their ability to do this - despite what they may tell the public. It may be hard to accept, but it's a lot easier and simpler than anybody having to testify in court. The system needs changing, agreed. Let's all fix it. I'd prefer it, however, if I could just get my dog back first, please.
Not my job - thankfully
Two different people sent me a job ad recently for what I believe is a new position in the HRM Regional Police for a "Regional Coordinator Animal Services". I hope they weren't thinking I should apply; it sounds like a very difficult job, starting with being available 24/7 to handle emergencies, plus supervising nine employees, and working on legislation. The full list of job duties falls into the three categories of management, customer relations, and operations, and it is impressive to say the least. And this person's boss will be Andrea MacDonald, the manager of Animal Services.
I just can't figure out how somebody with the qualifications requested, if there is such a person, can possibly do a good job with the duties expected of them. That is, a good job in terms of both animals and people. The duties are so wide-ranging, and several have wide-reaching consequences. I really worry about which of them will wind up getting the most emphasis in the final choice of applicant, because the list of "Competencies" already gives the animals the least emphasis.
Just glance at some of the job duties listed under "Management" in the HRM job description:
• ensure veterinarian care of animals in the care of the HRM
• ensure that services are delivered in the most efficient and effective manner
• participates (sic) in setting and recommending benchmarks and performance measures
• responsible for the standardization of case file management practices
• document and address performance deficiencies
Added to this under "Communications" is the duty to: "serve the corporation as the subject matter expert in animal related matters."
Why do I worry? Simple: the job qualifications lack any requirement for actual knowledge of animal behavior, experience in the care and training of animals, or, heaven forbid, certification in animal control, let alone any other animal-related certification.
Without one or more of these, how can anybody serve HRM as an expert in animal-related anything?? How can they set standards, review the work of others, or monitor vet care?
Having a degree in business administration and experience in program management is fine - provided you're in charge of licensing limousines, parking fines, or the like. But it's not enough, if you've got power of life and death over people and animals. This job is full of pitfalls. Failing to prevent a dangerous animal from attacking people is as grave a concern as seizing and killing the wrong animal.
Without basic knowledge and understanding of animals (and by animals, I mean primarily dogs), the poor person walking into this position will surely find he/she truly "continually addresses concerns raised by Regional Councillors and disgruntled citizens" - emphasis on continually - because there are bound to be a whole lot of concerns and loads of disgruntlement.
Given that roughly half of Halifax owns pets, certification and training in animal control is an excellent idea. It so happens that the National Animal Control Association in Kansas City offers workshops and all kinds of resources and assistance. The NACA tells us:
"An effective program is no accident. No program was ever successful without well trained personnel. Personnel cannot be held accountable for making mistakes if they have not been instructed on what they are to do and trained how to do it properly.
The National Animal Control Association (NACA) was formed in 1978 for the express purpose of assisting its members in performing their duties in a professional manner. One method of accomplishing this goal is to make personnel training programs available. This training must be designed to prepare animal control personnel for the challenges of solving the animal/people problems in today's world."
Granted, the NACA is an American organization, geared to the American legal system. And I may not even agree with all of their policies. But I know NACA training would not be wasted on HRM's staff. The NACA Policy Statement states:
All Animal Control personnel should receive minimum training and seek certification in compliance with state law. Training should include ongoing in-service training in animal control.
BASIS FOR POLICY
Training provides Animal Control personnel with the minimum skills necessary to adequately prepare them for the duties they are about to perform.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
A certified training program, preferably the NACA 100 Level 1 and Level II Training Academy which would include all aspects of animal handling, disease detection, report writing, constitutional law, and professionalism.
Proper training should be a concern for any municipal government, since, as the NACA wisely points out, "Animal Control Officers make four times the public contact of other law enforcement officers . . . 4 times the exposure = 4 times the liability."
The new Regional Coordinator will manage a budget of $700,000. Implementing a program of certification for animal control officers is a great way to use some of that money. And/or, for a few thousand dollars - less than I've already spent on legal costs!! - the NACA will even come and review the entire HRM animal control program, and make recommendations for improvement.
Seems like a great idea to me. But as Dennis Miller says, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Interview with Andrea Macdonald, Manager of HRM Animal Services
...and Taxi and Limousine Licenses
Andrea MacDonald was interviewed for Live Haligonia. The interview is about 24 minutes long. It has many bearings on Brindi's case.
Joan Sinden's comments on the interview received further comment.
Meanwhile, sorry to say, looks like the well pump is broken - can't get it to turn on, no restart switch, no sparks. Not relishing the idea of replacing it, but not much choice is there?
The epier.com online auction is going slowly - more items are available now, though!
And the running total of funds donated directly is about $1850.
Andrea MacDonald was interviewed for Live Haligonia. The interview is about 24 minutes long. It has many bearings on Brindi's case.
Joan Sinden's comments on the interview received further comment.
Meanwhile, sorry to say, looks like the well pump is broken - can't get it to turn on, no restart switch, no sparks. Not relishing the idea of replacing it, but not much choice is there?
The epier.com online auction is going slowly - more items are available now, though!
And the running total of funds donated directly is about $1850.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
below basics
Pipes froze a few days back and didn't burst, but something happened with the well pump, so it didn't restart in today's warmth. No water. No resident or visiting male around to get it going again, and insomnia made it tough to get at one during business hours.
Probably needs re-priming or resetting. Can't do it, although I consider myself fairly handy around the house ("If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy," as Red Green says - just before trying out a home-made elevator). I knew how to fix the old red cast-iron pump, ever since Charlie (?) Webber showed me. Sometimes the water would run out mid-shower, and it was necessary to exit the bathroom wrapped in a towel, climb down the contorted wooden stairs to the dirt cellar, switch it off, play around with the flywheel in a Zen fashion - not attached to outcome - switch it on, and over again from the top, till it restarted its comforting chugs. The preposterous connection to the ancient switchbox I won't describe here; certainly disturbed some plumbers on occasion, but works fine. But I draw the line at jet pumps. I know that air can get into the line, I sort of know the elements of the pump, but that's it. I have no problem being a classic helpless chick after that.
For pipe-freeze remedies I shopped at the mammoth Dartmouth Corners to Canadian Tire for a long while. But before that, a medical appointment and a stop at the pound. To prepare I took a shower at a friend's house so I could get to the oral surgeon more pleasant smelling, which made me a bit late (thanks, Otis!). The visit took only minutes - those digital x-rays are practically instantaneous; the implant is AOK - so I was off again to Burnside. I wanted to drop off soup bones with some solid beef chunks on them for Brindi as a treat. They had long since thawed in the fridge and sat around longer than I'd prefer, but I knew, as I explained to the woman at reception, Brindi's doggestion will have no problem with' em. They'll be gone in five seconds, of course, a bone-pulverizing workout to follow. One at a time dosage. (BTW, I am a stalwart vegetarian - okay, fishitarian - but Brindi makes her own choices about meat-eating; I'm not imposing my beliefs about meat on my dog. Some do; it's a choice.)
The white-coated woman chuckled at the beef, at my explanation, and looked at me kindly. She promised she would deliver the treats as requested, adding that she was very sorry about what I'm going through with Brindi. Who is doing great, by the way.
Well heck, if they wanna play rough! I mean, kindness? No fair! And what a great and rare thing in these parts, especially when sincere; how welcome. My face instantly got all crumbly and threatened to dissassemble into tears as she spoke. I couldn't keep it under control and speak at the same time, so I just nodded, then turned and left. Forgot - I guess I did manage to utter something in response; all that came to me was "I miss her so bad," however. Impressively put, Francesca...
Once back in the car, testing out the feeling, I noted once again that on these brief SPCA incursions lasting only about ninety seconds on average, I never think about Brindi actually being in that building. Try as I might, I can't place her there at all in my mind, or connect the spot I occupied to her actual location, breathing and sensing. It is not possible to visualize. My brain can only struggle under the sight of stacked metal cages of kitties looming into view in the next room, framed by the photos of dogs on the entrance walls.
I have no cognitive understanding of her location, of the space where she actually exists. I often wish I did. To cope with what that comprehension might feel like, my mind simply sets aside the question, as when a loved one has gone out of the world. That's how it is for me; she is no longer in my world. When your world is seriously off balance as a consequence of this removal, everything in it goes off balance, and setting it to rights again requires enormous capacity - not only for survival, but maintaining self, in every possible sense of the word. It may be impossible to convey what that's like, I don't know.
So then, anyhow, as I leave the parking lot, I have a dim sense that somewhere, she's enjoying a boney, without being cognizant of where it. Yet for a split second, I can feel a tad better. Then I beat it out of there before other thoughts mug me.
On many occasions, however, I must add, not far down the road from the pound, the tears overwhelm the comfort of the bone treat fairly quickly. I am getting a bit better at not giving in to it all the way at such times. Ormaybe it's truer to say that I am physically unable to. In any case, that massive impulse, the dread feeling, embeds itself firmly just below the skin and steadily draining energy and awareness past Wright Avenue and on to the highway connecting to Route 7. Sometimes I'd make it that far, though, without any trouble, and suddenly that mass would burst and expand. It's a gamble. No wonder I can't get back out and do any grocery shopping later on.
Probably needs re-priming or resetting. Can't do it, although I consider myself fairly handy around the house ("If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy," as Red Green says - just before trying out a home-made elevator). I knew how to fix the old red cast-iron pump, ever since Charlie (?) Webber showed me. Sometimes the water would run out mid-shower, and it was necessary to exit the bathroom wrapped in a towel, climb down the contorted wooden stairs to the dirt cellar, switch it off, play around with the flywheel in a Zen fashion - not attached to outcome - switch it on, and over again from the top, till it restarted its comforting chugs. The preposterous connection to the ancient switchbox I won't describe here; certainly disturbed some plumbers on occasion, but works fine. But I draw the line at jet pumps. I know that air can get into the line, I sort of know the elements of the pump, but that's it. I have no problem being a classic helpless chick after that.
For pipe-freeze remedies I shopped at the mammoth Dartmouth Corners to Canadian Tire for a long while. But before that, a medical appointment and a stop at the pound. To prepare I took a shower at a friend's house so I could get to the oral surgeon more pleasant smelling, which made me a bit late (thanks, Otis!). The visit took only minutes - those digital x-rays are practically instantaneous; the implant is AOK - so I was off again to Burnside. I wanted to drop off soup bones with some solid beef chunks on them for Brindi as a treat. They had long since thawed in the fridge and sat around longer than I'd prefer, but I knew, as I explained to the woman at reception, Brindi's doggestion will have no problem with' em. They'll be gone in five seconds, of course, a bone-pulverizing workout to follow. One at a time dosage. (BTW, I am a stalwart vegetarian - okay, fishitarian - but Brindi makes her own choices about meat-eating; I'm not imposing my beliefs about meat on my dog. Some do; it's a choice.)
The white-coated woman chuckled at the beef, at my explanation, and looked at me kindly. She promised she would deliver the treats as requested, adding that she was very sorry about what I'm going through with Brindi. Who is doing great, by the way.
Well heck, if they wanna play rough! I mean, kindness? No fair! And what a great and rare thing in these parts, especially when sincere; how welcome. My face instantly got all crumbly and threatened to dissassemble into tears as she spoke. I couldn't keep it under control and speak at the same time, so I just nodded, then turned and left. Forgot - I guess I did manage to utter something in response; all that came to me was "I miss her so bad," however. Impressively put, Francesca...
Once back in the car, testing out the feeling, I noted once again that on these brief SPCA incursions lasting only about ninety seconds on average, I never think about Brindi actually being in that building. Try as I might, I can't place her there at all in my mind, or connect the spot I occupied to her actual location, breathing and sensing. It is not possible to visualize. My brain can only struggle under the sight of stacked metal cages of kitties looming into view in the next room, framed by the photos of dogs on the entrance walls.
I have no cognitive understanding of her location, of the space where she actually exists. I often wish I did. To cope with what that comprehension might feel like, my mind simply sets aside the question, as when a loved one has gone out of the world. That's how it is for me; she is no longer in my world. When your world is seriously off balance as a consequence of this removal, everything in it goes off balance, and setting it to rights again requires enormous capacity - not only for survival, but maintaining self, in every possible sense of the word. It may be impossible to convey what that's like, I don't know.
So then, anyhow, as I leave the parking lot, I have a dim sense that somewhere, she's enjoying a boney, without being cognizant of where it. Yet for a split second, I can feel a tad better. Then I beat it out of there before other thoughts mug me.
On many occasions, however, I must add, not far down the road from the pound, the tears overwhelm the comfort of the bone treat fairly quickly. I am getting a bit better at not giving in to it all the way at such times. Ormaybe it's truer to say that I am physically unable to. In any case, that massive impulse, the dread feeling, embeds itself firmly just below the skin and steadily draining energy and awareness past Wright Avenue and on to the highway connecting to Route 7. Sometimes I'd make it that far, though, without any trouble, and suddenly that mass would burst and expand. It's a gamble. No wonder I can't get back out and do any grocery shopping later on.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
ASPCA Policies and Positions: What a difference an "A" makes!
(Another "compare and contrast" - to the SPCA guidelines and Halifax By-Law A300)
ASPCA Position Statement on Dangerous Dog LawsBackground
The ASPCA recognizes that there are dogs who by virtue either of training, or lack of training and socialization, especially in combination with a genetic predisposition to be wary of strangers, aggressive toward other dogs and/or predatory toward other animals, may pose a serious threat if inadequately supervised and controlled by their guardians. In order for dogs to live harmoniously with people and with other companion animals, it is critical to hold guardians responsible for the proper supervision of their dogs and for any actions on their part that either create or encourage aggressive behavior.
At the same time, laws that address “dangerous dogs” must be mindful of the rights of pet guardians and must afford them due process. They should target only those dogs who truly pose a serious, unjustified risk to other animals or to people, and they should recognize that there are situations where aggressive behavior is justified, such as when a dog is protecting himself or herself, her guardian, her offspring or her home, or where the dog has reason to fear a person or animal who has harmed her in the past.
ASPCA Position
The ASPCA believes that dog guardians should be held responsible for unjustified harm or damage done by their pets. Guardians who breed dogs known to be aggressive, or train dogs to be aggressive, or to fight, should be liable not only civilly for damage done by their dogs, but also under criminal provisions that prohibit such conduct. The ASPCA opposes “dangerous dog laws” that designate/define specific breeds of dogs as “dangerous,” “vicious” or potentially “dangerous” or “vicious” without regard to the temperament or behavior of the individual dog.
Dangerous dog laws should be narrowly drawn to define dangerous dogs as those who without justification have either attacked a person or other animal, causing injury or death, or who exhibit behavior that creates a grave risk of such an attack, as determined by a certified applied behaviorist, board-certified veterinary behaviorist or other trained and experienced expert.
Dangerous dog laws should focus on the behavior of the dog and all of the circumstances surrounding it, including those that may justify the dog’s actions. The law should ensure that common puppy behaviors such as jumping up, rough play and nipping are not deemed evidence of dangerousness.
Once a dog is deemed dangerous, the court should have at its disposal a range of dispositions from which to select those that suit the needs of the particular case. The choice of dispositions should include:
- Evaluation by a certified applied behaviorist or board certified veterinary behaviorist and completion of any training or other treatment as deemed appropriate by that expert;
- Spaying or neutering;
- Secure humane confinement in a manner that permits the dog adequate exercise, protection from the elements and that prevents escape and unauthorized contact with the public;
- Direct supervision by an adult eighteen years of age or older whenever the dog is on public premises;
- Restraint on a leash whenever the dog is in public;
- Muzzling in public in a manner that prevents the dog from biting any person or animal but that does not injure the dog or interfere with his vision or respiration;
- Microchipping.
Euthanasia or permanent confinement of the dog, being the most extreme remedies, should only be utilized when the dog, without justification, attacked a person and caused serious physical injury or death, or where a qualified behaviorist who has personally evaluated the dog determines that the dog poses a substantial risk of such behavior and that no other remedy will make the dog suitable to live safely with people.
Dangerous dog laws must accord pet guardians adequate due process to challenge the charges, including a full opportunity to be heard, the right to appeal a dangerous dog finding, and a stay of the disposition pending such appeal.
Enforcement of dangerous dog laws is ultimately the responsibility of local government authorities, and it is important that they exercise their responsibility with vigor and discretion to protect both the public and responsible pet guardians.
° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °
This position statement, pubished on the website of the ASCPA in New York, is respectfully directed to Mayor Peter Kelly, the HRM Council, the SPCA, and the Animal Services division of HRM Regional Police. The document's many points of departure from the current version of By-Law A300 strongly suggest the desirability of, and offer an appropriate basis for, a comprehensive review of the latter. Such a review may be taken up and conducted by groups constituted within HRM bodies as part of administrative or legislative processes, or by HRM citizens in advisory and/or advocacy roles.
In other words: there's an awful lot of work to do out there. Thoroughly necessary, eminently doable work. The road map is there. What could be easier?
Monday, November 3, 2008
Going, going, gone! (home, hopefully)
Big news today:
A new fundraising venture! At present, there are a couple of fundraising efforts already underway. The goal is somewhere around $12,000, a breathtaking sum. It might be more or less; so far, however, I have already paid over $7,000 for legal counsel alone.
First, I have asked for direct donations, and so far, they total $1750. There is a paypal account and a special account at Royal Bank.
Second, a very kind offer came along a few weeks ago, which was posted on the Facebook Save Brindi page. Until November 8 (extended from the fifth), a jewelry company in Montreal called "Love, Montreal" is donating 15% of sales to the fund. The designer herself volunteered this generous offer, and the jewelry is very pretty indeed, with semi-precious stones and silver.
There is talk of a possible benefit concert, which would be absolutely wonderful. I'm crossing my fingers for that to work out.
And today, a third new venture begins: an online auction at epier.com!
Three items are already posted, and more are on the way. Donations are very welcome!Anything from a toy to a yoga class is welcome! We can even auction off dogwalking services, or dogsitting, or training, by the hour, if someone is so disposed.
The first item is a weeklong stay next June at a beautiful lakeside cottage not far from the South Shore, on Nine Mile Lake. There is also a Royal Doulton figurine, and an antique model train set. All you have to do is click here to see them:
A new fundraising venture! At present, there are a couple of fundraising efforts already underway. The goal is somewhere around $12,000, a breathtaking sum. It might be more or less; so far, however, I have already paid over $7,000 for legal counsel alone.
First, I have asked for direct donations, and so far, they total $1750. There is a paypal account and a special account at Royal Bank.
Second, a very kind offer came along a few weeks ago, which was posted on the Facebook Save Brindi page. Until November 8 (extended from the fifth), a jewelry company in Montreal called "Love, Montreal" is donating 15% of sales to the fund. The designer herself volunteered this generous offer, and the jewelry is very pretty indeed, with semi-precious stones and silver.
There is talk of a possible benefit concert, which would be absolutely wonderful. I'm crossing my fingers for that to work out.
And today, a third new venture begins: an online auction at epier.com!
Three items are already posted, and more are on the way. Donations are very welcome!Anything from a toy to a yoga class is welcome! We can even auction off dogwalking services, or dogsitting, or training, by the hour, if someone is so disposed.
The first item is a weeklong stay next June at a beautiful lakeside cottage not far from the South Shore, on Nine Mile Lake. There is also a Royal Doulton figurine, and an antique model train set. All you have to do is click here to see them:
And if you have anything around the house that you've never really used, that somebody else might like, why not add it to the auction? All that is needed is a brief description of the item, a ballpark price, and if possible, an image. Once the item is sold, the shipping costs will be paid by the buyer, and you'll be assisted in all the arrangements.
You don't need to live anywhere near Halifax, Nova Scotia, in order to donate to the auction. I only need the information and an image. You ship it directly to the buyer when it's over, and the buyer pays for shipping. The listing includes a city location so bidders can estimate the cost. Theoretically, this auction could be span the globe -barring currency differences.
What would be really helpful for the auction is for people to send the word around. That way there's a greater chance of finding caring bidders. I'm learning as I go, so this is a big experiment right now. And I'm really excited to see how it does!
Meanwhile, I have to figure out how to warm up my frozen pipes, so I can take a shower... Canadian Tire, here I come.
ONE HUNDRED DAYS
of solitude. Not solititude with anything to recommend it.
One hundred days of terror and grief and sadness and fear and disappointment, right, the whole "pity party" that some people seem to love to accuse unfortunate others of, should they have the audacity to speak of their plight, and risk ruining the party everyone else is at.
In the first excruciatingly painful days after they took Brindi, in a state of horror, I was even more horrified to learn about a dog that was held in the SPCA pound for eight months or so in 2007.
My reaction to the rest of the story was filtered by a visceral response to the gut-slash of those words that hasn't left me since.
The rest of the story got worse with every word. I've mentioned it here before. And sorry to say, I am no closer to connecting with the owner of this poor creature than I was back then, not for lack of trying, either.
The story goes, this unknown dog, mixed-breed, had an unfortunate encounter with another dog, which happened to be a greyhound. The greyhound is fine today; the mixed-breed is dead.
The dog was accused of one attack on another dog. Never attacked or threatened a human being. The other dog however had some sort of a minor bite, The bigger problem was a number of skin lesions it sustained. Apparently, greyhounds have very thin skin,that easily tears off during a scuffle just from rolling around on the ground. I saw the photo: the dog was covered with roundish patches where the skin had been lost, like big polka dots. It was a mess. But unless an infection set in, the injuries were not likely to be fatal.
One hundred days of terror and grief and sadness and fear and disappointment, right, the whole "pity party" that some people seem to love to accuse unfortunate others of, should they have the audacity to speak of their plight, and risk ruining the party everyone else is at.
In the first excruciatingly painful days after they took Brindi, in a state of horror, I was even more horrified to learn about a dog that was held in the SPCA pound for eight months or so in 2007.
My reaction to the rest of the story was filtered by a visceral response to the gut-slash of those words that hasn't left me since.
Months? Months?? NO WAY.
The rest of the story got worse with every word. I've mentioned it here before. And sorry to say, I am no closer to connecting with the owner of this poor creature than I was back then, not for lack of trying, either.
The story goes, this unknown dog, mixed-breed, had an unfortunate encounter with another dog, which happened to be a greyhound. The greyhound is fine today; the mixed-breed is dead.
The dog was accused of one attack on another dog. Never attacked or threatened a human being. The other dog however had some sort of a minor bite, The bigger problem was a number of skin lesions it sustained. Apparently, greyhounds have very thin skin,that easily tears off during a scuffle just from rolling around on the ground. I saw the photo: the dog was covered with roundish patches where the skin had been lost, like big polka dots. It was a mess. But unless an infection set in, the injuries were not likely to be fatal.
The rest of the story is that this dog waited eight months or thereabouts during a court case mounted by the owner against the city. It may be that like me, he was never charged with any offense. He lost the case, but went right back to court to appeal.
Then he lost the appeal. And he decided enough was enough. He had to give in.
He was never granted the right to visit his dog at the pound. He was given two days to spend with his pet, nd then animal services (as in funeral services, I suppose) came and took the dog away again - where? - and put it down.
This story is so horrific one doubts it is true. But I know it's true: my first lawyer represented the owner. And I saw the photos.
Then he lost the appeal. And he decided enough was enough. He had to give in.
He was never granted the right to visit his dog at the pound. He was given two days to spend with his pet, nd then animal services (as in funeral services, I suppose) came and took the dog away again - where? - and put it down.
This story is so horrific one doubts it is true. But I know it's true: my first lawyer represented the owner. And I saw the photos.
What I will never understand is why this story didn't go anywhere. It never made it into the papers or the TV or the radio or the blogs of animal advocates or anywhere that I can see. It is simply not to be found. Unfortunately, my lawyer declined to give me the name of his former client.
When I heard that awful story I was absolutely determined to make sure my dog would not even spend a month behind bars, let alone be put down. Not this dog. I would rather die first. I will go to the pound and stand in line for the injection.
So now where am I? One hundred days - perhaps a day more or less, I cannot sit with a calendar and count precisely, I don't have the strength. One hundred days of utter agony with no end in sight.
One hundred days for Brindi, one hundred days for me. In many ways I suffer more, having the great misfortune of being able to understand human language. I don't understand humans, though, at all.
When I heard that awful story I was absolutely determined to make sure my dog would not even spend a month behind bars, let alone be put down. Not this dog. I would rather die first. I will go to the pound and stand in line for the injection.
So now where am I? One hundred days - perhaps a day more or less, I cannot sit with a calendar and count precisely, I don't have the strength. One hundred days of utter agony with no end in sight.
One hundred days for Brindi, one hundred days for me. In many ways I suffer more, having the great misfortune of being able to understand human language. I don't understand humans, though, at all.
Brindi certainly knows something is up, I suppose she must feel my agony, too. Fortunately for her, she doesn't know all the intentions involved; she probably thinks she'll be there forever, as she must have believed after spending two years in a shelter. And she'd accept that with good humor, knowing her.
But I have other knowledge of what is going on and what is meant to happen, and it is incredibly damaging to my soul. It is already a soul-killing experience to be forced to live without her. To suffer and know she is suffering, yet have to move forward, for one hundred days and who knows how much longer? I am suffering in more ways than I can talk about, and for more reasons than I am able to reveal. In more ways, in fact, than I even want to reveal to myself.
Does the city intend to actually destroy dog owners along with their dogs? Well, it's working.
Does the city intend to actually destroy dog owners along with their dogs? Well, it's working.
In case anybody wants to help, I am asking for daily calls to Mayor Kelly and especially to Animal Services. The numbers are (902) 490 4010 and 490 1791, respectively.
Email does nothing; they delete it. A human voice is harder to ignore.
Call every day if you can, it doesn't take long, and it can really help. Please request that they meet with me, and that they let Brindi go, and reign in their free-wheeling interpretation of A300, because a muzzle order is NOT a mandate to automatically euthanize for violations, not under that law - not by any stretch of the imagination.
Keep in mind: Animal Services does not actually have to meet with me or anybody in order to let Brindi go; it needs no judge or jury. It can review its own decision and the process leading to it, anytime it likes. There is no law or rule or policy or limit on their ability to do this - despite what they may tell the public. It may be hard to accept, but it's a lot easier than having to testify in court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
