“MCAS has a long-standing, nationally recognized record as a leader in healthy and humane treatment of animals.” --- Deborah Kafoury, Multnomah County Chair of the Board of Commissioners This is false. MCAS destroys the lives of stray animals surrendered to its care refusing any transparency about how life and death decisions are made. Worse still, it will not allow any participation in or questions about those decisions. Decisions about killing are made by MCAS staff with little or no formal canine behavior training. Euthanasia is ordered when humane decisions indeed exist and are justified in deliberately vague terms reflecting personal preference, not logic: killed for “behavior conditions” and “aggressive to people” regardless of circumstances or frequency (for example a single frustrated re-directed minor bite to a person after seeing another dog while on leash ). Since October 2015 when Jackie Rose took over as MCAS director, the terms “treatable/manageable” and “treatable/rehabilitatable” completely disappeared from the lexicon. The population did not change. The practices did. Companion dogs are now designated and killed as “unhealthy/untreatable” despite every evidence to the contrary. This allows MCAS to claim that no healthy or treatable animals are killed, a boon to propaganda and public comfort. It also eliminates the need to seek rescue or any other options. Most importantly it is easy. MCAS’s hash tag “Work that matters” should be revised to “This work does not matter.” There is one canine specialist who has no shelter experience background while MCAS demographics demand a Behavior and Training Department, not just one specialist. The current canine specialist is now gone, off for 7 weeks. No one is standing in for him but killing continues. Even minimal expertise is unnecessary. After all, a requirement of expertise would mean the trains would not run on time. Efficient dispatch, not a qualified decision is the goal. As an example, the scared female grey American pit bull impounded 8.20.17, and killed 9.15.17 denied foster and rescue options by the shelter manager who wrote: The Shelter Review Committee “recommends humane euthanasia due to severity of behavior condition.” What is a behavior condition? It could be anything. It is clear from notes that this dog was terrified while trapped in a kennel space and confronted with someone always trying to enter it. She was experiencing acute shelter stress caused by MCAS but, however scared she was, she was still able to respond to treats. The impound note read: “2 x vacc. Weighed and pic. taken, sweet and calm girl” on entry to the “shelter”. Less than a month later she was judged untreatable and could not be rehabilitated. Nothing at all justified that decision. It was a dramatic change from her baseline behavior. Killing her corrected management stress by requiring them to work. Another example is Dexter, a Boxer Labrador mix, who entered MCAS on 8.22.17, and was killed 09.08.17 as “Unhealthy Untreatable,” aggressive towards people. One bite incident should not qualify for the generalization “aggressive towards people.” Bites to toddlers are unfortunately common because toddlers are at face level. But Dexter did not cause lasting harm. Placement in an “adult only home” would have been a very good solution. In fact the staff person who evaluated Dexter recommended precisely that: His assessment read: “Handling: softy body, eyes, ears. Rolls over and exposes belly. Knows sit, down and shake. Fearful of noises like cabinet door opening, tape dispenser. Food: allows food to be taken away. Playful… Strangers: engages. Some cowering…” Recommend MTA in adult only home.” But strangely the shelter manager sought out the family who understandably could not take him back offering no other options. He was euthanized when that stupid proposal was understandably rejected. It is quite clear the correct designation should have been “Treatable/Manageable” not “Unhealthy/Untreatable.” However that would require work, contacting a few rescues. MCAS would have to acknowledge publicly they chose to kill a treatable animal. Dishonest entries leave less responsibility and require less work while “looking good” for the purpose of image and propaganda. Think about Asher, a six year old Rottweiler killed because “he would bark and bounce on his front legs” and caused a staff member to be “ not comfortable.” Certainly Asher was more than qualified for rescue or a special understanding home after being surrendered by his family for separation anxieties. The dismissive general note from MCAS management when they discarded his life, never seeking rescue, is shocking in its generality and poverty of thought: The 09.06.17 notes read: “Attempted to get Asher from his kennel. Stiff, whale eyed, ears back, at front, would could come up and sniff my hand, When I tried to open kennel, he backed away and began barking and bouncing on his front legs. Could not get him to come back to the front for me and was not comfortable entering kennel at that point.” Asher was not “unhealthy /untreatable.” MCAS tried nothing: no rescue, no foster, no review for humane options. He was killed because MCAS can, in a climate of government indifference and abuse of authority given in trust. Nothing about Asher’s reported traits were “untreatable and unmanageable.” MCAS just preferred efficient disposal behind closed doors, killing based upon subjective fantasies just because it can , taking liberties with the authority with which they have been entrusted instead of involving experts in treatment planning and placing no trust in objective facts. This is a shocking local government reality No one reviews MCAS’s behavior. Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D. Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog