Update On Tucker
Please, if you are sending an e-mail to the humane society, cc it to me at sexyserverbabe@sbcglobal.net. All e-mails sent will be forewarded to Jo who is giving them to her attorney to use.
My friend M did this already, and he recieved a response:
Thank you for your email. Since the HSBC is working to bring this to a happy conclusion for all parties and is working with attorneys from all parties,I cannot comment in the details of the case.
Best wishes.
Karel I. Minor
Executive Director
Humane Society of Berks County
Berks County's Leader In Animal Welfare
1801 N. 11th StreetReading, PA 19604
Phone: 610-921-2348 ext. 10
Fax: 610-921-5833
I say we all start sending correspondance directly to Ms. Minor in the hopes that she gets this message.
Best wishes to you all,
Waitress
My friend M did this already, and he recieved a response:
Thank you for your email. Since the HSBC is working to bring this to a happy conclusion for all parties and is working with attorneys from all parties,I cannot comment in the details of the case.
Best wishes.
Karel I. Minor
Executive Director
Humane Society of Berks County
Berks County's Leader In Animal Welfare
1801 N. 11th StreetReading, PA 19604
Phone: 610-921-2348 ext. 10
Fax: 610-921-5833
I say we all start sending correspondance directly to Ms. Minor in the hopes that she gets this message.
Best wishes to you all,
Waitress
posted by Jennifer at 4:14 PM
24 Comments:
I got the same response to my email, which was a simple plea to correct the mistake and return Tucker to his original and rightful family.
I just read the previous entry, and I'm appalled at the way that the "Humane Society" treated Jo. Animal shelters nationwide have enough of a problem getting dogs and cats to good homes. This kind of deceit is unbelievable.
This is shocking. Utterly shocking. The comments left by your readers urging media action are correct. This man is clearly out of his mind.
I live in Australia, my adored Bouvier, when a puppy, twice went missing. Both times a stranger picked him up and left him at a vet, it's the law here. Both times I collected him within a few hours. Both vets - he managed to get dropped off at two different ones - were lovely and everyone was happy (including Thomas, my dog, who appeared to think it was a personal party).
She is obviously not going to get any satisfaction from dealing with this animal shelter. I don't think emails will help, he's an obvious nasty nut. She needs to make a BIG FUSS, go the the newspapers, etc, as your other readers have urged.
I am originally American, from NYC. I know if she makes a big enough deal the dog will be returned. She can't deal with this nicely, which it seems as if she has done. She has to get the guns out. Please pass this mail on to her.
I wish her all the best.
Best regards,
Pamela
Regarding the end of the previous post - "Mr March and Mr Minor have defamed me as a "bad owner" for not having my dogs microchipped" - microchips are a great backup for getting your dog home, but no one (including the humane societies!) should feel that they are foolproof. My dog escaped from home one day and ran off to the local dog park. After a couple of hours of great fun time, he was taken to the city shelter. My dog WAS microchipped and in fact I had adopted him from this same shelter not more than nine months before this - they put the chip in themselves. Nevertheless, I was not notified that he was there until I called the next morning to find out what dogs had been brought in! They said that they hadn't been able to scan him because he was "snappish" .. I later talked to the couple that had taken him to the shelter from the dog park (they recognized my dog), they said this was not true at all. I don't know why my shelter couldn't or didn't scan the chip, but it seems the BCHS shouldn't be using microchipping as an excuse.
Ok I FINALLY found the article. The girls name was Chavisa Woods and she had a cat named Oliver. Here is one article:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/375035p-318706c.html
Google her name with "cat" and you will find out about it.
Good luck to your friend. This is making me so sad.
I got the same e-mail back. I also sent an e-mail off to the main Humane Society to have them check in on the Berks branch.
Having read all the posts and comments, I wonder if the anonymous adoptive family isn't somehow connected to a staff member of the HSBC. Two hours in to be adopted out does not sound like someone just wandered in off the street and fell in love immediately. Was the dog neutered? If not, maybe an employee decided the dog was of monetary value and kept it for themselves or resold it later on. Maybe this isn't the first time this has happened. Call me an Oliver Stone conspiracy nut but the refusal to try to correct the situation seems to me that there is likely more at stake than just one family pet here. If you have any sneaky friends good at lying and getting people to talk see if they can get HSBC employees talking while on hidden camera.
I emailed the Reading Eagle newspaper. I suggest others do the same, with some basic info, and maybe why the readers would be interested. I think that getting the media involved will help Jo quite a bit.
I strongly suggest that she contact local media like crazy- ever local TV station, radio station, and newspaper.
And get all her pets chipped.
Actually, it just occurred to me that I can write a story on this and submit it to some media outlets... can you please ask Jo to email me? reptilegrr at 00goddess dot net .
Maybe SCServer could forward our emails to the paper. . . I sent one last night.
Do you have a 'human interest' news show that shows before the 6pm news? We do, it's called Live@5, and a show like that would go crazy with this story. The show is like a precursor to the news with personal stories of people in the region and local news. . . If you have that, I'd call them asap.
You'd all be a lot less surprised about this case if you had any of the actual facts.
This underscores the desperate need for animal owners to license and vaccinate their dogs, and use permanent identification like a microchip. Now it's the big, bad Humane Society's fault, and not the dog owner's fault.
Just sent my e-mail! Hope her inbox is flooded.
What also saddens me about this situation is that there are lots of animals in need of homes. Tucker has an owner who wants him back, if he hadn't been available to adopt perhaps another dog would have gone home with this family. That would have been another life saved.
The Reading Eagle has a staffer who has a blog that involves pets, and even mentions that Minor person:
http://www.readingeagle.com/blog/paws/index.html
Wonder if you could tell her the story and see if she can help?
I live in Nebraska, and this is bothering me quite a bit. Best of luck to Jo on Tucker's safe return.
Another alternate theory is simply that this fellow is trying to save face. It's very probable that he made a mistake, lied to cover it up, and now finds himself in over his head where he (and the rest of the humane society there) has to keep telling bigger and bigger lies in an attempt to save face.
So, it starts out with failing to check if the dog has an owner. Then they lie about the dog having been in there in the first place (to cover up the mistake). Then they lie about Mr. March being in the office or in charge of the situation (to cover up the first lie). Before you know it, they're shoving off blame on the owner for their own mistakes.
A lot of times folks dig themselves into a hole just trying to save face for a minor mistake that they could've corrected way back. The best strategy, I think, is to step up the legal -and- social (media, e.g.) pressure until their only option to save -any- face is to do the right thing. K
Not that it'll help get her puppy back, but I would also urge Jo to contact the Better Business Bureau. This could help somebody else in the long run.
I wrote a letter too!
This story made my eyes well up as I was reading it. I have 3 cats currently (I live in an apartment and can't have a dog) and I would be heartbroken if I even had to give the cats away to someone I knew! I wrote a letter, so we'll see what I get as a response, probably the same thing as everyone else.
I emailed them, and got a response that was cc'd to Damon March, so now I happen to have his email address:)
Which I am going to post:
Damon March: mrnotdr@aol.com
Perhaps the pressure should be on him as well.
I hope some news gets written on this. SC: please post it if there is.
Me too - I got the same email.
I owuld send you a copy of the email I sent, but didn't save a copy, sorry.
If it helps I will gladly send all my info to you.
Is it okay to link to you so anyone who might read me and not you will know about this? [you have a lot more readers than me! but still....]
Let us know - because this is simply an injustice.
Oh, did Jo post this on the website Craigslist.com? She should go to the major markets DC, New York and San Fran and post in the pet sections - those folks would be beyond incensed and they would definitely want to help -
They are UBER pet owners of the world...
Hugs to you both!
http://www.readingeagle.com/blog/paws/index.html
There is a blog that could really help the cause, I think. This is a blog about pets at the Reading Eagle online site.
Anonymous at 6:20 am, you obviously haven't been paying attention. Tucker WAS microchipped. Jo said so in these comments, just a few above yours. This IS the Humane Society's fault.
What I find interesting can be found in the article someone linked to from above..
"As someone who adopted a shelter cat this summer, I know the application to adopt is extensive and requires references, so it wouldn't be too easy pull one over on the shelter folks."
I would think that this process takes more than a couple of hours.
Tucker was NOT chipped, sorry to say. chips are fallible, often they cannot be read by the scanner, they move/shift and also can be erased without breaking the skin. Tucker DID have a collar on, which was laying by the 5 ft high fence that he jumped after being scared by a loud pop in our burn barrel, which my husband was tending while playing with the dogs.(theres almost 16 acres to Tucker to run in) the horses bolted in the pasture and all but one of the dogs ran into the house, my husband assumed they had all gone to hide under beds. Tuck jumped, and he (husband)never knew it. When they (doggies)were called for dinner and Tucker didnt come, thats when panic set in, and we immediately started looking on our side of the mountain, which is forest covered and orchards, spot lights, pick up trucks and 4 wildly barking dogs in a subaroo (yes I did that on purpose...) we stopped looking at almost 12 am. we started again the next morning. I did NOT go on the internet, because I have dial up, and with the fliers we had posted I didnt want to miss THAT CALL, the one that never came. I called vets, I called everyone LOCAL I could think of, including the state animal control warden. I called police stations (we only have state cops up here in the sticks). I called the SPCA. I had NO REASON to ever think he would have been taken to the city, I still cant imagine why they chose to. But I cannot blame the family who took him there, they did what they thought was the right thing, they live on the oposit side of our mountain, they didnt know the dog....
so here I wait... the suits been filed (tuesday), now they get served and the 30 day wait begins. why they didnt just make it right at the beginning I simply dont understand.
and to the guy who posted to waitress that she didnt know the whole story, dude, if YOU KNOW IT, then speak up,defend your opinions, and be brave and sign your name.
since I'm 99% sure YOU DONT KNOW SHIT about the situation, stfu! on the off chance its Damon...huh...well then we all know you aint brave, you hide from 125lbs housewives....behind WOMEN & walls...AND LIES.
I feel better now, ty :)
GJ
this is outrageous. honestly though, since i've dealt with BCHS before, i think they believe they're doing what's best. which is bullshit. i also wouldn't be surprised if they haven't even notified the adoptive family about the situation at all. it's real easy to say they can't get the dog back if the new family has no idea tucker's "real owner" wants him returned. then again it is reading, so i wouldn't be shocked if the family just refused to return him. some people have no conscience. i'd feel TERRIBLE if i found out the dog i just adopted was actually someone else's pet. i would want a refund (or a different dog) from BCHS though.
they're not all that great. i actually adopted a dog from them over the summer and he only lasted one day at my place before i had to return him to the shelter. according to BCHS he was safe to have around cats....well turns out when i got him home he wasn't second day i had him he tried to bite my cat's leg off. definitely not cool. i'm just amazed that they never did a cat temperament test on him. i thought that was protocol. they were nice about it, but it definitely struck me as odd.
it kills me that BCHS basically said that people are bad owners if they don't get their pets microchipped. that's such a crock of shit. if my dog hadn't been chipped before i got him i doubt i would have ever done it, and he's a rare breed with an amazing temperament. he'd be adopted in a heartbeat. that doesn't make me a bad owner. i never had my cat chipped and she's spoiled rotten. how dare they make those assumptions when they don't even know jo.
"As someone who adopted a shelter cat this summer, I know the application to adopt is extensive and requires references, so it wouldn't be too easy pull one over on the shelter folks."
you'd be very surprised. it IS easy to pull one over on the BCHS, because their adoption process is practically nonexistant. it's just paperwork. one single form. when i went in to get the dog i mentioned in my previous comment (the one that attacked my cat after being supposedly cat safe, even though he was never tested with cats) the process literally took 10 minutes. they didn't check any references, visit my house, or anything. they simply took my word. not that i would have protested them checking, but still. they are VERY lax when it comes to prospective owners. maybe they do check if the people seem outwardly questionable, but i don't think they do regularly. i'd hate to imagine some of the homes animals have been adopted to from that place, just because the family came in looking normal. appearances can be deceiving.
Post a Comment
<< Home