Multnomah County Oregon: Killing Blaze behind closed doors

Petition updateIn solitary confinement for over a year, a family Shepherd is denied his last days at homeMultnomah County Oregon: Killing Blaze behind closed doors

Gail O'ConnellSherwood, OR, United States

Feb 6, 2021

Government cowardice and cruelty in Multnomah County

In September, 2020, Multnomah County Animal Services (MCAS) offered its first “explanation” of its decision to kill Blaze. After three and one-half years of incarceration and despite multiple offers that would have safely preserved his life, the preference was to kill him for preventable incidents occurring years ago.

While Blaze was alive, no life-saving offers were ever acknowledged. Silence and the refusal to respond to viable offers is the first weapon of choice for government bullies in power. The offer to pay for the impartial services of an admired and expert diplomate in behavioral veterinary medicine was ignored. While Blaze was alive, MCAS Director Wade Sadler and Department of Community Services Director Jamie Waltz hid behind a wall of silence. They refused to address humane alternatives and rejected consideration of compelling reports about Blaze’s positive interactions from those who worked directly with him. Blaze makes a deadly joke of their claim that “decisions about animals in the care of Multnomah Animal Services (MCAS) are never made without extensive and painstaking consideration for that animal and the community.”

MCAS’s false allegations for this instance of needless arbitrary killing – one of many in recent years – included the following:

That the Hearing Officer, the Circuit Court, and the Oregon Court of Appeals all agreed with MCAS’ application of the county law;
That MCAS’s in-house “experts” conducted a full and thoughtful evaluation of Blaze’s temperament before concluding that the only options were death or continued incarceration and it was kinder to just kill him; and
That MCAS never chooses to kill “without great consideration of all circumstances.”

Each of these statements is false; all are astonishing lies. The Oregon Court of Appeals expressly rejected the interpretation of county law upon which MCAS relied in bringing the original charges, i.e., that the owner was responsible for incidents that she did not cause. MCAS’s continued arguments for the interpretation that the court ultimately rejected greatly prolonged the litigation.

However, the suspension of ownership by the MCAS hearings officer subsequently affirmed by the Circuit Court and Court of Appeals was not a finding that death was needed or required to “protect society,” It was a ruling that “Simply put, this defendant demonstrated that she cannot be responsible as to controlling this dog so the county needs to intervene and do so for her.”

The hearings officer’s and courts’ decisions did not mark Blaze as a “Dangerous” dog with inherent irremediable characteristics. The risks were that the defendant lived in a multi resident home with inadequate fencing, a poorly secured doorway with frequent visitors coming and going daily, over whose behavior she had no control. The conclusion was Blaze was in a household in which he could not live safely. All of the risks were preventable.

There was no thoughtful consideration of options for Blaze and no rehabilitation efforts while the Court of Appeals moved forward. He was isolated in Security in a barren kennel without relief and there was no attempt to improve his environment. On July 29, 2017, two months after Blaze was impounded and placed in solitary confinement under conditions that the 2016 and 2018 Audits of MCAS described as failing to meet the recommended national animal welfare standards, Canine Specialist Andrew Mathias, decided to do a formal “behavior assessment” by approaching Blaze’s kennel despite noting Blaze’s distress. Blaze charged the kennel gate leading Mr. Mathias to proceed with his “evaluation” entering the following observation:

“Handler got a fake hand and reached into the kennel. Dog had hard forward posture sniffing the hand, if the hand moved dog would put hand in mouth with no pressure. Handler did not feel safe removing dog from kennel, ended behavior assessment.”

That was the only “formal” behavior evaluation Blaze ever received. It was nothing more than teasing a distressed dog and was in fact an example of MCAS’s deprivation of care for dogs confined in the “shelter’s” kennels. What was ignored completely as months and then years passed were the twice daily kennel monitor measures of his affiliative positive behavior and ongoing worker observations. They did not count.

The notes from the Shelter Review Committee ending his life are careless and general, exhibiting no thought at all: “killed due to bite history and behavior.” No careful assessment occurred because they did not want one. From the first, the plan was to kill him. At MCAS bite incidents are viewed as crimes against humanity and the dogs themselves are viewed as incorrigible criminals capable of intent, planning, and execution.

The “Canine Care Specialist” and its Shelter Review Committee are wholly incapable of accurately assessing animals’ behaviors. They forbid experienced credentialed outside experts and rescues from participation in disposition of animals’ lives because that is viewed as a challenge to their authority. MCAS frequently kills without any consideration of safe alternatives. MCAS kill rate is increasing without reason and explained away without evidence. MCAS’ system of risk assessment rejects animal behavior science and rehabilitation: You do the crime; you do the time. MCAS killed Blaze because it wanted to and could: no reason needed. MCAS in fact kills without any consideration of circumstances or alternatives.

Manipulated information substitutes for fact. It shows up in a dishonest presentation of a statement taken out of context and re-configured to suit MCAS’ purpose to defend Blaze’s killing as necessary. It always dishonestly seeks herd immunity as cover. Another example is found in a statement made by the MCAS’ hearings officer’s September 2017 findings. It was Information lifted out of context and re-tooled to facilitate killing Blaze. That statement was that

“Due to the nature and frequency of the unprovoked attacks he engaged in MCAS has concluded that if Blaze were to be released into the community, it is not a question of if but rather when he will present a significant danger to another community member.”

In making this statement, MCAS left out the principal focus of the Hearings officer’s own factual findings:

“It is rational to expect that the occurrence of a fourth incident, of equal or greater seriousness with the first three, involving the same dog and its owner, is simply a matter of time, unless substantial and effective measures are taken by the County to prevent that from occurring by affirmatively extinguishing any potential for continued interaction between the owner and the dog. Simply put, this defendant has demonstrated that she cannot be responsible as to controlling this dog so the county needs to intervene and do so for her.”

One can change owners and circumstances. But MCAS treats all dogs as hardened criminals who can never change and must be killed. Bites are crimes punishable by death. Animals cannot be rehabilitated.

What is occurring at MCAS now is very dangerous to the community and the community’s impounded animals. In a move toward absolute authoritarian and unilateral control; community values have been overthrown. The Director refuses to answer critical questions about the animal care policies and practices. Killing at MCAS under Wade Sadler’s directorship continues to escalate exponentially and is explained away without any evidence at all as “socially responsible killing.” Oversight by those in charge has ended.

An alarming fact is the exponential increase in numbers of animals becoming "unhealthy and untreatable" during their stay at MCAS. In the 2019 Asilomar Accord Report two (2) dogs were labeled "unhealthy and untreatable” upon entry into the agency. One hundred and seventy-eight (178) became unhealthy and untreatable by the time of final count. That means 176 dogs became “unhealthy/untreatable” during their stay at MCAS, an increase that cannot be "explained away."

It is well known that current agency policies, behaviors, and practices, including the toxic levels of stress at the shelter, are responsible for this shocking trend. Escalated killing has nothing to do with keeping the public “safe,” it is about hiding management incompetence. Shelter animals like Blaze will continue to be needlessly put to death because of an unchecked amoral agency. When a MCAS adoption or a rescue transfer fails, they blame and erase the victim, the dog, while never examining agency stress, poor adoption decisions, and the conduct of the MCAS Shelter Review Committee. One poor decision in a single case leads to a policy recommendation that more animals must be killed excused as " socially responsible" killing. There is no internal reflection; no acceptance of responsibility. It is just easier to kill.

Democracy is fragile. Without citizen activism it becomes a short slide to dictatorship and then it becomes too late to recover. MCAS will stop at nothing in its efforts to hide its incompetence and cruelty. Lies to the public, use of the public records laws to keep its actions secret, and practices that violate the laws are all used without repercussion.

Ask the MULTNOMAH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS to take responsibility for MCAS’s mission. It is their job and they are failing their duties. Their contact information follows:

Multnomah County Board of Commissioners

Mailing address

501 SE Hawthorne Blvd, Suite 600, Portland, OR 97214-3587

Chair and Commissioners

Deborah Kafoury, County Chair

Position term ends: December 2022

Phone: 503-988-3308, Fax: 503-988-3093

E-mail: mult.chair@multco.us

Sharon Meieran, District 1

Position term ends: December 2020

Phone: 503-988-5220, Fax: 503-988-5440

E-mail: district1@multco.us