September 25, 2007
To: The Oregon Veterinary Community
The purpose of this note is twofold. One concerns a recent tragic case in which Woody, a delightful American Pit Bull dog kept in solitary confinement at Yamhill County Animal Control since 2003 was ordered killed by Judge Stone. If asked to destroy Woody, we hope that you decline to participate in this travesty.
Judge Stone confirmed the order that Woody be destroyed in a recent hearing despite the fact that Woody by the report of all who knew him, including the agency dog control staff and a certified behaviorist, is a sweet natured robust young animal. Woody has been kept in solitary confinement denied company and play for 4 years now at Yamhill Animal Control following an isolated understandable incident in October 2003 that could be prevented in the future and had nothing to do with temperament. Despite the fact that he was offered permanent sanctuary by an esteemed qualified professional in Illinois as a humane alternative Judge Stone and animal control staff refused to even consider this. Judge Stone ordered instead that Woody be killed humanely by a local veterinarian as the staff after coming to know him declined to do so. There is absolutely nothing humane about Yamhill government’s order that an innocent happy sound animal be killed to satisfy a vengeful need to punish the owners. If your veterinary practice is asked to destroy Woody, we hope that you decline to participate in this travesty.
Shelter reform is long overdue in Yamhill County, an area known by the best of its citizens as humane, kind and generous, it can afford a kind progressive animal control agency and staff. That is not currently the case. Reports from citizens that the agency retaliates against those who speak out about this agency’s problematic history and failed public service are profoundly troubling. We hope as a member of the progressive veterinary community that you will ask for change at this agency. Nathan Winograd, a nationally regarded shelter reform expert will be speaking at the Lewis and Clark Law School on Sunday November 4 at 6:00 P.M. about how communities can establish and implement progressive animal shelter change. We hope that you can attend. If not his book, Redemption, outlining concerns and avenues for change is now available. Also he will be speaking on KBOO Radio this Wednesday morning, September 26.
We hope that Woody’s case is the last act of cruelty sponsored by Yamhill County government and that his needless killing spurs a brighter future for all of Yamhill County’s animals.
Sincerely,
Gail O’Connell-Babcock
Denali, Oregon's little Death Row American Pit Bull dog, was killed yesterday, May 24, 2007, between 4:00 and 4:30 P.M. on the order of Dan Ericksen, the Wasco County Commissioner and orchardist, the "judge" during Denali's kangaroo court proceedings, before a ruling was issued on a pending matter.
DA Nisley chose yesterday to play a fast end around the law by ordering Denali's death while legal proceedings were ongoing. He couldn't wait for the conclusion of the proceedings. DA Nisley notified Attorney Reb Babcock at !:00 PM the same day Denali was killed that unless he received an Order from the Supreme Court staying this matter, they would kill her immediately. That was the first part of the game "set up." Reb Babcock immediately responded noting that no appellate judgment had been issued and appellate rules provide 21 days in order to permit time for a petition for reconsideration. There was also a pending motion before the County Court. He advised DA Nisely that if he intended to proceed despite the lack of judgment and the pending motion, he would seek an "emergency relief" by facsimile communication the next morning. Three hours later they killed Denali.
DA Nisley advised Reb Babcock this morning at 10:30 AM that Denali was destroyed yesterday at 4:15 PM bypassing the legal system. DA Nisley's final request was "Please submit any comments or questions regarding this matter in writing. I will not receive telephone calls regarding this matter."
This conduct is not surprising given DA Nisley's and the Wasco County Commissioner's history of unethical behavior. As Denali was dying I was on the telephone with "Judge" Dan Ericksen who pretended throughout the conversation that she was still alive and that he was concerned about "security." Killing her while a motion was pending was his security "solution." Deceit, underhandedness, and bypassing the law are how this county government always operates especially when companion animals' lives are at stake. The following letter was written before I knew what Dan Ericksen knew: that he had already killed Denali with the help of his ethically disabled crew. Mr. Ericksen hung up on me after claiming that I had interrupted him while he was speaking. When I called back he demanded an apology for interrupting his speech. We and all who cared are owed an apology from orchardist Dan Ericksen and his government kin.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -
May 25, 2007
Wasco County Board of Commissioners
Mr. Dan Ericksen
Mr. Bill Lennox
Ms. Sherry Holliday
Regarding your Order to Kill Denali
Mr. Ericksen:
This is in response to the short conversation we had last yesterday (after you hung up on me demanding an apology for an alleged interruption) in which you addressed the reasons you insist that Denali must be killed. Although I appreciate learning your approach to these issues, all of the arguments you raised can be met with humane and rational solutions. Your refusal to consider these solutions demonstrates why the proceedings that create the opportunity for life and death decisions should not be conducted by individuals with no legal training. Your decision about Denali was made well before the "trial" began and your attitude now is one of commitment to that original despotic predisposition. Despite the fact that you have clearly elected to remain within a circle of ignorance, I will address your arguments one at a time.
The use of subjective catastrophic fantasies and exaggerated false accounts as a substitute for fact.
In order to compel your desire to kill Denali, you have exaggerated her misdeeds calling her a "vicious" dog who cannot survive outside the confines of the Home At Last's animal control. Nothing supports that false statement. I have read and summarized the entire record. Each of the less than 4 incidents described had clearly identified stressors, the most significant damage was an 1/8 inch puncture caused during an over enthusiastic doorway greeting (someone took the time to measure the puncture) that more than likely was caused by a nail puncture. Both of the other two incidents were quite minor involving Denali's getting over the fence. One was a grip to the hand of a senior citizen dragging a garbage can to the curb. It resulted in a minor skin break. The response was controlled. Your conclusion that this means Denali will attack and kill someone because noise makes her vicious is complete ignorant self serving nonsense. She is territorial. A good fence will do.
Your exaggeration of "security" needs, wildly out of place are again to create the image of an out of control unpredictable dog who must be destroyed. The staff play bowling games with her and she goes on car rides. How "vicious" is that? Was it an "armored" car, fitted with guards? Given these facts I remain confounded by your report that Ms. Janna Hage, shelter manager according to you advised you that she should be killed. There were no there options.
The hubris that would cause you to believe that Denali could only be kept safe inside a small stressful crowded shelter for three years where strangers and other animals come and go all the time is irrational. Wouldn't she have fared far better in a private home on sanctuary grounds with an experienced animal control officer and pit bull rehabilitation expert? The answer is obvious.
Furthermore, beginning in 2004, I offered to pay Home at Last for consultation and follow up visits with Dr. Jacqui Nielsen, now president of the Oregon Veterinary Medical Association, one of approximately 40 diplomates in behavioral medicine in the country. The offer was continuous and always open. Ms. Hage declined stating that they were managing "just fine." Dogs kept under constant confinement in unnatural shelter environments suffer from exacerbated stress. It affects but does not permanently define their behavior. That has been demonstrated over and over again. Why would Ms. Hage have rejected such an offer given your current report that she regards Denali as "vicious"?
Your statement that you wouldn't sleep well if Denali weren't killed should be reversed. How can you sleep well ordering a vengeful death that is so unnecessary? How can you sleep well when every objection and concern has been met with effective rational solutions? It isn't your "liability" if another takes it on. The individual taking this on, Laurie Adams, has an expert background and additionally all around us experts in behavioral veterinary medicine are available. Your response that you haven't come up with a policy is just stonewalling. Write up an individual contract. If all else fails and you still can't sleep what judge would place his idiosyncratic sleep disturbance above fairness and justice? I'll tell you: an orchardist masquerading as a judge. You shouldn't sleep well at night, your final excuse for killing. Try Ambien if you have a sleeping problem. Honesty and integrity however work better.
These are excuses founded in a desired to manipulate a desired predetermined outcome. They are based in rationalizations not reason. They are based in small minded bigoted government.
The rejection of real professional expertise for faux "homespun" government "in home analysis"
Animal Control Officer Brad Heinige has proven his dishonesty over and over again as a reporter. His assessments have intentionally been false, intended to mislead and deceive. He has wildly claimed that Laurie Adams, of Casa del Toro Pit Bull Rescue in Franklin, Indiana planned to rescue, rehabilitate, and covertly rehome Denali instead of keeping her for life as her personal companion animal. To convey this false impression Mr. Heinige went to Laurie Adams website and because she does rescue, rehabilitate and rehome pit bulls announced that Denali might meet the same fate too: rescue and rehabilitation. He never directly interviewed her, just went around Robinson's barn (a phrase surely familiar to an orchardist). However Ms. Adams very plainly stated from the outset that she would keep Denali as her personal companion pet in her home for life. Why lie? Why go through such a deceitful "process"?
From the outset in 2004 you proved your disinterest in any outcome but killing by never seeking out Ms. Adams, never interviewing her, never seeking personal or work references about her. You couldn't then and don't now care in the least about alternatives or the rights of others.
Instead of accepting a generous offer to include a nationally known expert on animal behavior to assist in options for Denali, you declared you needed no such expertise. Brad Heinge was a fine officer. You claim him as your "expert" on animal behavior science while rejecting those with true credentials. He is not an expert in animal behavior science. He just served your purpose.
The statement that you were greatly persuaded by Janna Hage, the founder and director of Home At Last No kill shelter that Denali is an irremediably vicious dog who cannot be rehabilitated compelled your decision to kill Denali.
Certainly one would want such a diagnostic/prognostic conclusion put to the test based on the known facts. There are indeed many expert options. You have simply rejected them. Ms. Hage runs a shelter. She is not an expert in behavior rehabilitation nor does she have any background about the effects of long term incarceration upon an animal and methods used to correct these. This is her first case. She works for you.
Ms. Hage also is in the unusual position of being under contract to Wasco County. She is paid by the county but according to her statement the contract specifies that she has no say whatsoever in the disposition of animal control cases. Yet on this occasion according to you, you have joined hands and both sadly believe that you must reject a viable realistic humane alternative and kill Denali. Home at Last is No Kill but "there are exceptions." Did you manipulate her acceptance as well or did she concede, go along, "for the greater good" because she works for you? It seems to be your administrative style. It certainly tarnishes their reputation.
The fact that you are killing Denali because of Janna Hage's reported views is not easily reconciled with her statements to others. At one point Ms. Hage noted that they would want to personally drive Denali to the Indiana Sanctuary to inspect it. They have cared for this dog for years in a difficult setting. Others can continue that care in a less difficult setting. Home at Last is not uniquely capable of caring for Denali. The staff of Home at Last were once strangers to Denali too. She can learn to live and play well with others. Home at Last would be perceived as a caring agency and be the beneficiary of the many nationally and internationally who have become aware of this case if any justified leniency were shown. They won't be now, especially after your calculated statement that they are one of the primary reasons that you insist upon Denali's death. I have no idea where the truth lies but certainly know who holds the monies that fund their operation. I have copied Ms. Hage as well in an effort to clarify these matters. Someone is reporting dishonestly. Denali need not be the political tug of war sacrifice between the county and humane sheltering that you have made it to be.
The apology of the young boy's father to Karissa Ball that he had overreacted, let his temper get the best of him and misreported the incident meant nothing at all to you in your need to be "right," be the "judge."
Denali has been the sacrifice. This is no different from an earlier death row case from Wasco County's dirty history September 1987, the case of Susie, a young Doberman Pinscher falsely accused of killing a turkey. The county knew the charge was false but insisted on killing her anyway. One of the principals on Denali's case, Scott McKay was party to this case as well. Susie's family was denied the rights of due process. So was Denali. Twenty years later there has been no change in this county's reckless disregard for the lives of animals and the rights of their owner/guardians.
Mary Oberst, Oregon's first Lady, summed up Denali and Karissa Ball's, her owner's, plight in February 27, 2007, letter to the Oregonian: " Babcock took this case pro bono because of his compassion for animals and to defend what we generally think of as common ownership rights, in an administrative process that left no room for these rights."
Citizens still have no rights in Wasco County. The county commissioners have resolved to continue to deny those rights by killing a small defenseless animal who simply needed a good home and by lying to achieve their goals. Their excuse is that they must kill so that they can sleep at night. The rest of us, common ordinary citizens, will not be sleeping well because of Wasco County's constant calculated abuse of its power.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.
Follow-up: Yesterday the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance requiring that veterinarians provide Multnomah County Animal Services officials with information about owners of nonlicensed pets. So much for client/veterinary confidentiality. Instead of improving services and adopting out rather than killing the inventory, as well as adopting promised but denied progressive shelter reform, Multnomah County decided the cure for a failed agency that can't afford its excesses is to turn veterinarians into unpaid county employees, bridging the budget gap with professional informants.
Many compassionate citizens have one or two animals over the allowed number. Some don't license because of the agency's high kill rate and refusal to honor the 2000 Citizens humane task force recommendations. Now they are going to be reported upon by their veterinarians. They will then be forced to surrender their additional animals or purchase an expensive facility license that allows their homes to be entered without previous notice 24 hours a day.
What is going to happen is that those who tend to use veterinary services the most,( rescues and conscientious compassionate persons) are going to go out of county for their animals' care. Apparently veterinarians are not permitted the expected client/veterinary privilege. The county government can void this. These clients will just go elsewhere. At the very least clinics should now post this information so that their clients don't get midnight visits at their homes prompted by their veterinarians' disclosures.
Programs that might be saved
Monday, May 28, 2007
The Oregonian
Cut: Dead animal pickup Plan: The prospect of dead animals rotting on streets because of budget cuts outraged Portland City Council members who were asked to take over paying for the program as part of a $2.6 million package of county services. City Commissioner Randy Leonard called the cut "blackmail" and urged the county to look at another option such as raising fees.
Under a plan put forward by three county commissioners, the county will pay for the $240,000 Animal Services Field Services program, which also responds to nuisance complaints, by using pet license fees. The county will try to increase the licensing of animals and the collections of fees -- just one in three dogs and one in 10 cats are licensed -- using information provided by veterinarians. Outlook: The plan was unanimously approved Thursday.
Was the veterinary community in Multnomah County consulted about the Commission's unanimous approval of a plan requiring their disclosure of how many animals their clients have and which are licensed/unlicensed?
This proposal violates the privacy clients expect from their veterinarians and breaches veterinary/client confidentiality. Using veterinarians as animal control enforcement informants is shocking. In any event many individuals who don't license their animals also can't afford veterinary care. Those that do may well go out of county for their veterinary care now. There will be no net monetary gain and an abridgment of an expected right.
Many kind individuals do own one or two more animals than is allowed under the county's pet numbers restriction. If reported they would have to surrender some of their animals or purchase an expensive facility license. The latter is not only costly but also requires that citizens permit the county access to their home 24 hours 7 days a week without prior notice.
MCAS proposals are often counter productive achieving a net loss not a gain. For example a number of independent rescue groups have declined to continue rescuing from MCAS because the agency requires a complete loss of their autonomy. Not only does the rescue organization agreement deprive them of rights, they are now also required to microchip their rescue animals to MCAS as the primary contact. The practical effect is that a lost animal is reported to MCAS first. Given their limited hours, it places MCAS' need for control over the animal's life. But also it allows MCAS through a covert process to track the person to whom the rescue adopted the animal. This is in complete violation of the promise of confidentiality guaranteed by the rescue organization to its clients. When rescue organizations declined to provide this information to MCAS they elected duplicity to obtain it anyway. The practice is what is troublesome. It is a familiar county practice. If you can't get what you want in a straightforward manner be underhanded. Use veterinarians to gather what the agency wants. If MCAS were admired the money would follow voluntarily.
This is how Multnomah County balances its budget and "fixes" problems. Ted Wheeler, instead of taking a hard look at internal inefficiencies, finding ways to correct a broken system, just passes the buck: first to Portland and now by using the veterinary community as enforcement informants.
First, licensing is not an avenue to profits. An effective functional agency is. Ted Wheeler has dodged that one. In the last 4 years, MCAS death rate for dogs alone has increased by 50%; its adoption rate has dropped by 35% (all lost adoption and licensing revenues). During his campaign he promised shelter reform ("Ted on the issues") then when the agency staff barked at him for proposing that any change was needed at all, he rolled over.
Instead of requesting a current audit (last year was the time scheduled for one) and an independent consultation of this agency's practices (two short studies in 2006 of agency records by Nathan Winograd, a national expert in shelter reform, concluded that their were significant temperament testing irregularities) Ted played the ritual "dead animal" on the streets card. It's embarrassing really.
The monies needed to pick up dead animals and improve services can easily be made available by altering agency priorities and internal efficiencies. Personally I would eliminate the MCAS Director's job. He has had a negative impact and is responsible for this agency's dismal performance. A coequal shelter manager (not the current one, he is always off judging dog shows) and enforcement director (not that one either, he is always parading around in his KGB suit) are all that is needed. They can meet over areas of common ground. The following summary identifies only a part of the problems at MCAS that Ted Wheeler will not be correcting. It makes you wonder if there are other internal efficiencies elsewhere that are not being addressed as well. Just be a union employee and bark at any effort that disturbs the status quo. The find someone else to pay.
By Gail O'Connell-Babcock
According to reports, Brad Heinige, the Wasco County Animal Control Officer, arrived at Home at Last shelter at about 4:00 P.M. yesterday, and without comment began removing Denali's collar and tags. He refused to tell staff where he was taking her. He then drove Denali to a secret location where she was immediately killed. No one was allowed to know where she was going or why.
During the time Denali was dying between 4:15 to 4:30, I was talking to Wasco County Commissioner Dan Ericksen on the telephone about her case. He accused me of being "rude" for allegedly interrupting his discourse on his personal need to kill Denali and hung up demanding an apology, never mentioning that she was dying at the time we spoke.
Together with DA Nisley and Officer Heinige, Wasco County Commissioner Mr. Ericksen, plotted the secretive killing of Denali before the issuance of the appellate judgment and while a motion to the County Court was pending. He obviously chose the holiday weekend hoping that during the Memorial Day weekend none could reach them and this would "blow over" by Monday. It won't. Lawful government out of concern for "security problems" doesn't abduct a small frightened animal from her caretakers deny them the right to say good bye and kill her at a secret location. Mr. Ericksen lied about Janna Hage's participation in the decision to kill Denali. Janna Hage apparently left Home at Last as director two months ago and knew nothing about this government scheme. Instead, Mr. Ericksen's "behavioral expert" was the fine man he admires so much animal control officer Brad Heinige.
Clearly this was orchestrated, a calculated plot made far in advance of killing Denali to silence any legitimate protests or remaining legal avenues. It is despicable behavior for government officials to secretly connive over the death of a young animal who all along had somewhere to go where she was wanted.
Animal Control Officer Heinige is now on "vacation" after his dirty heist and has notified his staff at the sheriff's office "he won't be taking voice mail." Too bad, he will be getting voice mail. I insisted on leaving one anyway. You don't hit and run over the helpless then high tail it like a dishonest coward. Mr. Heinige 's telephone number is (541) 296-5454. I assume he will be coming back to his "work" next week.
The Wasco County Commission Administrative Assistant Ms. Mcbride, urges all who call about Denali to take their concerns to the County Counsel's office. Mr. Ericksen too wishes to run and hide from any reaction to his despicable conduct. Call and Fax both parties. DA Nisley has instructed us that he only wishes written communications. Ignore his preferences. He paid no attention to ours for compassion and integrity. Feel free to communicate in as many different mediums as you wish: write, fax and/or call him. Pictures of Denali were posted on www.mcasstopthekilling.com. Karissa Ball also has many others. If you google Janna Hage + Denali you will see a video of Denali joyfully playing with a bowling ball on U Tube while Janna Hage attempts to justify that Denali was only fine in their environment not elsewhere.That is false. She needed a good fence and training, nothing more It is a tough time for little American Pit bull dogs. They are hunted down and killed just for being little pit bull dogs everywhere.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Governor Ted Kulongoski
160 State Capitol
900 Court Street
Salem,Oregon 97301-4047
Telephone:
Governor's Citizens' Representative Message line
(503) 378-4582
FAX: (503) 378-6827
E-Mail
fill out form at : http://governor.oregon.gov/Gov/contact_us.shtml
U.S. Representative Greg Walden
website for e-mail correspondence: www.walden.house.gov
address: 210 Longworth House Office Building, Washington D.C. 20515
WASCO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
mailing address:
Wasco County Court
511 Washington Street
The Dalles, OR 97058-2237
Telephone: (541) 506-2520
Fax: (541) 506-2521
District Attorney Nisley
same address as above, Suite 304
Telephone: (541) 506-2680
Fax: (541) 506-2681
Dan Ericksen, e-mail: DanE@co.wasco.or.us The "Decider" ( Mr. Ericksen is listed as a judge for the purposes of county commission administrative proceedings. This does not require a legal or judicial background. Mr. Ericksen is an orchardist. Forget about his fruit and nuts). Bill Lennox, newly elected Democratic Wasco County Commissioner, ,e-mail: BillL@co.wasco.or.us
Telephone: (541) 506-2523
Sherry Holliday, e-mail: SherryH@co.wasco.or.us
LOCAL PRESS
The Dalles Chronicle
P.O. Box 1910
The Dalles, OR 97058
Web: thedalleschronicle.com
Telephone News: (541) 296-2141
News Fax: (541) 298-1365
Letters to the Editor, e-mail: tdcnews@eaglenewspapers.com
The Oregonian, Regional correspondent: Matthew Preusch
Telephone: (541) 382-2006
Fax: (541) 610-1528
e-mail: preusch@bendbroadband.com
web: oregonlive.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
Wasco County DA Nisley in announcing the destruction of Denali after the fact to her Attorney Reb Babcock stated that he will only accept comments in writing, not by telephone. Mr. Nisley's telephone number is (541) 506-2680. His Fax is (541) 506-2681. The telephone number for the Wasco County Commissioners (Dan Ericksen, Bill Lennox, and Ms. Sherry Holliday) is (541) 506-2520. The Fax is (541) 506-2521. Bill Lenox has a separate number. It is (541) 506-2523. The e-mail addresses are on this communication.
LOCAL PRESS
The Dalles Chronicle
P.O. Box 1910
The Dalles, OR 97058
Telephone News: (541) 296-2141
News Fax: (541) 298-1365
Letters to the Editor, e-mail: tdcnews@eaglenewspapers.com
The Oregonian, Regional correspondent: Matthew Preusch
Telephone: (541) 382-2006
Fax: (541) 610-1528
e-mail: preusch@bendbroadband.com
What you don't know could hurt her: Fighting to save Denali
For quite some time I have kept quiet about the truth. Some of you may be wondering why I am still fighting for Denali. Why do I continue to try after what seems to be endless defeat?
Denali was born 12/12/2001. I had been anticipating all week to hear of the puppy's arrival. I picked her out, pick of the litter and brought her home a few weeks later. Denali turned out to be a beautiful girl, a companion and part of my family. She was very active, loved to go for rides, go swimming, dive for rocks and catch Frisbees. She loved snuggling under the covers with you and playing with our other pit bull Guapo to whom she acted as surrogate mother to. She's so cute how she cocks her head to the side when you talk to her. A lot of people do not know what a good, loyal dog she is and never gave her a chance because she is a pit bull.
I am fighting for her life because this case was built upon a lie. A lie that says Denali bit then 7 yr old Austin Keller. A lie that says that he was knocked to the ground, attacked, bitten, in turn making him deathly afraid of dogs. The truth is that Austin was greeted by an overly excited Denali, who jumped up on him scratching him and frightening him. The puncture on his hand most likely caused the same way the puncture on his chest, by her long claws. He was never knocked down to the ground and was not bitten. The truth is one of the first things that his mother asked him was "Did she bite you?" and he replied "No momma, she just scratched me." Meanwhile his father comes over, not to check the welfare of the child but to demand I let my dog out so that he can shoot her. With his wife telling him to calm down he then calls the police before finding out the facts and reports that Denali had bitten his son. Austin Keller's wounds were so minor that he didn't go to the hospital; in fact he didn't go to the doctor until 2 days later. After swimming in the Columbia River later that day and riding bikes out side with his brother the next day, it had become infected.
Approximately one year later in the summer of 2005, Jerry and Austin Keller came in to my place of employment. With other employees and customers around, he came to me and began to apologize. He told me that he was sorry he let his anger get the best of him, and that if he would have just calmed down then we wouldn't be in the mess. Austin then told me that he had seen Denali a few days earlier and that he visits the dogs at the shelter often. This is coming from a child that was portrayed as being "Deathly afraid of Dogs"
by Senior Deputy D.A. Leslie Wolff.
Interestingly enough, the Kellers just got a new puppy.
So the TRUTH is that people have let Fear, Anger, and Power get the best of them, forgetting what is right. Some of you have heard that I just flat out refuse to take responsibility. In Wasco County's eyes, taking responsibility is giving into what they want. I was taught to tell the truth and fight for what you believe. The TRUTH is that Denali should live. ***********************************
CASE SUMMARY DENALI'S PLIGHT, YOUNG OREGON PIT BULL ON DEATH ROW SINCE JULY 2004
Denali, a young tan and white female American Pit Bull, was impounded by Wasco County Animal Control in July 2004. She has spent two and a half years on death row in Wasco County, Oregon. Despite the fact that humane alternatives have been present from the outset, that the incident was minor, and that future incidents are preventable, Wasco County has refused clemency.
Janna,
I want to comment on your "great offense." The facts simply do not support your generous praise for Dan Ericksen and Animal Control Officer Heinige (and I use that phrase with enormous reservation) or your benign role in Denali's death. Denali's death was completely unnecessary. You could have prevented it but according to your great friend Dan Ericksen you advised it. He did include your input and you did make your feelings clear. Your statement:"We love Denali to pieces but she is a "danger" to society" made your position quite clear. While you state that you "wished" the Court (read county commission) had agreed with a sanctuary placement because you would have advocated such a placement, clearly you did not. Their duties to society were not incompatible with respecting the life of an individual animal. There were effective options and reasonable safeguards. None were explored, simply ignored. They were just annoyed about being asked to consider them. Wasco County teaches "responsibility" by killing. Ericksen claims that you agreed with him that Denali was incorrigibly vicious.
Dan Ericksen, Brad Heinige and Nisley's broke the law in their haste to kill Denali, rejected an offer from a qualified sanctuary, allowed no one the courtesy to say good bye to her and drove her off to a secret location to be killed alone. Then they lied about it. These are your kind friends? As I spoke to Dan Ericksen on the telephone last Thursday, Denali was dying. That was kind of him to talk to me then but never while she was alive during the past three years. When I questioned one of his responses he hung up, the Wasco habit. Wasco has hung up on the world. They do not permit disagreement; have no interest in the views of others. He insisted I apologize to him for interrupting him with a valid objection while he knew Denali was at that moment dying alone. He did not have then and has never had any interest in any views but his own. That is not how trained judges or fair minded persons behave. This is your version of compassion and wisdom? Your good "friend" Brad after removing Denali while leaving the staff in the dark about what his intentions were promptly went on vacation after achieving his grim satisfaction in her death and ordered employees to decline messages. Nisley lied to the press that Reb had not responded to his letter announcing his intention to kill Denali unless a stay was obtained. Do you admire the "Hit, Lie and Run" approach to "justice"?
While you claim neutrality over Denali's fate and state that you wish that the outcome had been humane your behavior consistently indicated otherwise. You expressed irritation that their was a case at all because Denali took up "space." She did. Many injustices have occurred as a result of county commissions attempting to function as judicial courts. It takes legal cases to challenge this. Otherwise nothing changes. There were other less than neutral behaviors. You informed Eric the Kind that you believed Reb was "forcing" Karissa to pursue the case for Denali's' life. Nisley tried to use that falsehood to obtain sanctions against Reb. You complained that Karissa didn't visit Denali. Denali couldn't go home with her and wouldn't understand. On U Tube ( What was that about, Janna, the U Tube experience?) you showed Denali vigorously and joyfully playing ball in the background then intoned ominously that she was "safe" at Home at Last but was a "danger" to society. Nonsense.
Territoriality does not require a death sentence. Denali was not dog aggressive. She had lived with other dogs. She didn't want stranger dogs on her territory. A good fence will do in those circumstances. And there are desensitization programs as well. She lived in a stressful crowded shelter. The behaviors she demonstrated were and are commonplace and correctable. Any responsible person could correct them. An 1/8 of an inch puncture wound, the reason given for her "necessary" death sentence by kind Mr. Ericksen, was described by the child himself as a consequence of Denali's jumping up on him, a view later supported by the father.Why didn't that information "count" unless we are back to no one in Wasco County can ever be wrong. Should jumping up require a death sentence? There were no significant bite incidents, no stitches, no big injuries requiring medical attention. If you weren't involved, Jenna, How come you were so involved with the constant drumbeat about Denali that we love and take care of her but no one else can because "she is a danger to society" so we have to kill her? Bull. You rationalized her death.
This is what you did not do. You declined our continuous offer to have Denali evaluated by a qualified diplomate in behavioral veterinary science who is now President of the Oregon Veterinary Society to help with and make recommendations regarding shelter stress. Three years of shelter stress is a lot don't you agree? It didn't have to happen. You had no interest. Neither you nor Brad Heinige are more qualified than a behavioral veterinarian or as a placement than Laurie Adams, a former animal control officer, who has years of experience running a pit bull rehabilitation center, to make judgments about animals. Any professional person dedicated to No Kill as you claim would have welcomed their input. You overruled it and went back to the drumbeat, only we can take care of dangerous Denali etc.
Denali didn't have to die. Finally let's look at the strawman: your statement that I criticized the staff's care of Denali, when in fact I praised it and objected to their treatment by the county in the surprise whisking away of Denali precisely because they had loved her. I went out of my way to not criticize Home at Last or the staff. What's wrong with you?
I did however say that their efforts would have resulted in significant generous donations from the public had Denali been allowed to live. That's a fact. No one rewards unnecessary killing. I did say that you did not have the credentials to analyze animal behavior that a behavioral veterinarian/someone with an advanced degree has. That is a fact. I also left a message asking to speak to you, in complete shock over your recommendation referenced by your kind sweet friend Dan Ericksen who implied or "did not know" that you were no longer there and who stated that your input was part of the decision to destroy Denali describing her as a vicious dog. It is certainly easier to make up a strawman that I berated staff when the opposite is true to divert from the real issues.
And finally I did try to put your ambivalent statements in context, stunned by Ericksen's statements about your involvement, by pointing out to your good friend Ericksen that perhaps you were in an awkward spot as the county paid you to run the pound and that while he claimed you had input on the fates of animals you claimed that you did not. That offends you? It might have been too fair.
I suspect that trying to appease the county while introducing humane sheltering wore you out. I well remember before you took over running the pound from the previous county employee that you were under constant attack. Trying to become No Kill given Wasco County's documented history toward companion animals (we've known about and have had several cases: one dog killed despite the fact that the agency knew the claim of turkey killing was false,( once again a rigid county commission was more concerned about being right, just looked bad to admit error; Nisley's ordering the killing of two dogs during an appeal time when exculpating evidence was uncovered) is no easy task. Overidentification with the county, assisting in excusing their bad behavior is not the answer. Their conduct is inexcusable. You can't advocate for No Kill then decline a responsible "live" option when all objections could be responsibly met. You can't engage in double speak or move forward by trying to ride two horses going simultaneously in different directions. It is an impossible balancing act. Employee loyalty shouldn't take precedence over the facts.
I will forward to you two factually based summaries. Meanwhile why don't you send me the exact statements that offend you? If you still admire the conduct of this trio, you've forgotten the principles you once advocated. Kind people don't behave this way ever.
By Gail O'Connell-Babcock
Denali is a young American Pit Bull dog, condemned to death for scratching a child in Wasco County, Oregon, in the summer of 2004. For two years, she has been incarcerated and held on death row pending an appeal to the Oregon Court of Appeals.
After two years, her behavior is now beginning to deteriorate, which is now an excuse on the county's part for "hurrying her death." Critics say the real criminal is the county.
Laurie Adams of Casa del Toro Pit bull Rescue in Franklin, Indiana has offered to take Denali. For two years, this county has been determined to kill her at all costs despite effective humane alternatives, and no liability risk to the county.
The appeal to the Oregon Court is due May 6, 2006. The findings will be out in August or September.
Critics say Wasco County's hope has been that Denali would be forgotten. Don't let that happen. Without your protest she doesn't stand a chance.
One hapless little pit bull's life does have a value. Please write, protest and strike Oregon off your list of tourist destinations until this state becomes progressive in its animal welfare attitudes.
More on Denali.
The Latest Diary of an Activist Entries
Diary of an Activist: The Older Entries