No Kill group puts pressure on animal shelter
EUGENE, Ore. - A group that opposes euthanizing sick or dangerous animals is applying pressure to the humane society that holds the public contract for animal control in Eugene and Lane County.
Greenhill Humane Society took over animal control in a contract signed by city and county leaders, replacing Lane County Animal Services as the operator of the shelter on 1st Avenue in Eugene.
A group called "No Kill Lane County" wants the shelter to no longer put down sick or dangerous animals.
"Greenhill has said they are not a no kill shelter, they have said that many times, and that's what we want them to be," said Molly Sargent with No Kill Lane County. "And if they would just do that, if they would just do that one thing, it would make all the difference."
Sargent said the group is concerned about veterinary care at the shelter.
"They are being held without medical treatment for so many days without medical treatment before they are being treated," she said.
And No Kill Lane County questions the practice of putting down sick and dangerous animals.
Greenhill said there isn't a problem.
"Most of the time we are able to adopt the animal out, if it is not returned to its owner," said Jacklyn Semple with Greenhill. "That's the vast majority of situations."
Kelly Darnell with the City of Eugene said city staff visit the shelter unannounced two to three times a week and report they are seeing well fed and exercised animals.
Darnell said that, although the city receives regular emails from a half a dozen community members with shelter concerns, the City of Eugene is not hearing concerns from the larger Eugene community.
"We truly believe that we are making the best choice the most humane choice for every animal with experience staff, with professional experience," Semple said. "We have multiple veterinarians that work for us, and they are the ones that make those decisions."
No Kill Lane County said they are preparing to sue Greenhill over access to information.
The City of Eugene and Greenhill said they just want to concentrate on continuing to adopt out the animals that come into their care.
In this report here, you have completely misrepresented what our goals are. We do not want Greenhill to stop euthanizing sick and dangerous animals, that would be inhumane. The No Kill Equation clearly states that the euthanization (used in its proper meaning) of irredeemably suffering animals and those that are truly dangerous to people is allowed. A certified behaviorist should be making these determinations. Greenhill uses their unqualified dog trainer. This is not acceptable for an un-certified person to be making life and death decisions.
What we want is Greenhill to stop withholding treatment from animals they don't think are adoptable. What we want is Transparency, Accountability and Contract Compliance.
For years, Greenhill staff has told the community they are No Kill to increase donations. Of course they are not a No Kill facility.
Considering that California is dumping dogs on Oregon, "rescues" are bringing more into the state while others die in local shelters, why is No Kill complaining?  http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/5a45e0aa49774df6990a5831c501e13a/CA--Pet-Transport
@Harve Morgan I am an animal rescue networker and I can guarantee you that the number of dogs being transported to Oregon is NOTHING compared to the suffering that goes on there. However, the rescues that do bring out of state dogs here very often adopt them out to people who DONT LIVE IN OREGON. So their participation in saving the lives of dogs contributes little to our problems here. AND the number of dogs is not the issue with 1st Ave and Greenhill. The quality of their care and the lack of professionalism of the people that determine which dogs live and which die and the lack of credentials on the behalf of both institutions with which to make those decisions is what is in question.
These uninformed fanatics have gotten far too much media attention as it is. Ignore them and they will eventually get lives of their own and wander off.
Â
And like Runfast says, if you don't like the way it's being handled, open a shelter and do it yourself.
@OregonOrator There are verifiable facts concerning every allegation that No Kill has brought to the attention of the taxpayers of Lane County and if you took the time to READ them you might get an education that would open your eyes to the truth. People who make these kinds of sweeping generalizations are neither educated nor do they possess the empathy or intellect required to do so.
You simply CANNOT save EVERY animal. It's a sad and hard fact that everyone in animal welfare must realize. If Greenhill would simply just "do that one thing" and not kill dangerous, unadoptable dogs the whole world will be a better place right? And do what with these dogs? I much prefer Greenhill to spend their precious resources working on the animals that can be placed in permanent, loving homes.
Â
What I really want to remind NO KILL LANE COUNTY is what Greenhill was like when I volunteered there 25+ years ago. Where a large percentage every animal that came into the shelter was put down, where many puppies never even made it to the kennel for a chance at adoption. If you think that didn't happen back then I can tell you worse stories than that about what it was like in those days. To spend your time and money bashing this organization that has done a 180 degree change over the years is disgraceful and disgusting.Â
Â
I suggest that the good people at No Kill Lane County open up their own shelter specifically to house the dangerous or sick animals they are concerned about.
Â
I have personally had some very good experiences at the West First Shelter. I took in what I thought was a very sick stray cat, expecting him to be euthanized. I was surprised that he WAS NOT euthanized and in fact was put into foster care, then on to an organization that spent several hundred dollars correcting his eye defects. I have fostered kittens for Greenhill that I thought would be put down, but instead every effort was made to give them a chance at life and adoption. My current relationship with Greenhill is that of a foster parent and I know how much time, money and care goes into giving these animals every opportunity to be adopted.
Â
So go ahead No Kill Lane County and sue Greenhill for access to information. Spend valuable financial resources and negative publicity to drive to their knees the very organizaiton that is doing the most for animal welfare in this county. But while you are at it please be sure to cover your faces because your ignorance is showing.
@Runfast159Â Just because an organization is doing "basic" care of animals does not mean it cannot be improved upon. There is verifiable proof that 1st does not give comfort/pain medicine to animals that they deem unadoptable, and yet does not euthanize these animal immediately! Is THAT humane? It is also documented that they do not properly exercise dogs that are at risk without proper handling and this mishandling causes those dogs to get a thing being called "sheltercraze" where the dogs get pent up and aggressive from inactivity and then 1st puts them down because they deem them unadoptable. This is totally preventable and many experts on dog behavior and training have told them so. So just because you cant save every animal doesn't mean you shouldn't TRY. There are many shelters that are NO KILL and the system works IF the people CARE ENOUGH to implement the proper procedures. 1st and Greenhill do neither and I for one don't wish my tax dollars to support anything but the best for the animals that sadly end up in their (NOT) care.
I think it is a shame that a so-called "progressive" city treats their lost, feral and homeless animals this way. LCAS was not humane and the 1st St location, even less. There is a No-Kill solution but it takes participation by the city, county, and most of all, residents. I agree with Molly Sargent...Greenhill could do a much better job but not without help from city and county officials. That we only have ....wait, do we even have ANY officers anymore to take pit bull attack complaints or farm animal cruelty or hoarders who have 67 cats? I mean, we sure can't ask the Sheriffs for help and the city is not much help either. Pretty sad. We can spend money on "art" but not on animal welfare?
@Just Duckee SO AGREE!!!
@Just Duckee Then you volunteer your time, your dollars and your space to put these animals up indefinitely...oh and the professional medical care to treat them as well. Do you fanatics think money grows on trees?
@OregonOrator many people in this area and all over the country do just that! They truly care about animals and the overpopulation problem and are trying to make a difference. I myself have taken in two senior dogs, both with expensive health problems and I wouldn't trade my boys for anything in the world. These two dogs were abandoned and dumped because they were old and probably considered too expensive to care for. People treat animals as if they were disposable paper plates and the animals suffer horribly. If you choose not to adopt a pet or contribute to a rescue or foundation that tries to help abandoned dogs and cats that is your business, but don't you dare belittle the people that do. They help keep your taxes down by taking up the slack with their own funds or they get the funds from other caring people who willingly donate to keep the humane treatment of animals possible. It is this humane treatment of creatures that cannot care for themselves that makes us HUMAN. Get it??
Honestly, there's so much conflicting and sketchy information on both sides that I'm not sure who to believe.Â
Â
I do think it's a SERIOUS problem that Eugene basically no longer has animal control. Greenhill doesn't accept strays. Animals have to be owner-surrendered, you have to pay a fee to surrender an animal, and Greenhill and pick and choose who it wants to accept or not. Considering that Oregon has had 2 cases of plague this year acquired from fleas on stray cats, I see this as a serious issue. Who deals with stray dogs? Dangerous ones? Rabid dogs? Not Greenhill. It is my understanding that the people behind NKLC are the same people who had a problem when LCAS had a kill rate of 30 something percent. Guess what? That's what happens when you take in ALL animals. You're receiving the dangerous, the diseased... and you put them down and focus on the ones you can save. That's a better system than what we have now; just leaving the strays on the street and hoping that it will be fine.Â