Popular Posts

Thursday, July 31, 2008

More Information On The Wicomico County Humane Society

"Dr. Mr. Albero,

I was recently (a few months ago) included in an article about the Humane Society written by Joe Gidjunis of the Daily Times. Although we like Joe and found him to be a nice person, it was more than obvious that his article had been subject to severe censorship. Needless to say, the article was very disappointing. Linda Lugo was given the last word and the article ended with her false account of what really happened in our case and casting a shadow on our reputation as "responsible animal owners."

I can tell you that we own a rabbit and two dogs, one of which was rescued locally. We spend hundreds of dollars a year on a modest income to care for our animals in vet bills and grooming. Our dogs live as family pets, sleeping indoors every night, receive heartworm and flea preventatives on schedule, never suffer a cold or hot day outside and are never subjected to abuse or neglect. Even our bunny lives indoors and runs free and interacts with our children daily.

What I find interesting about the comments written in the blogs is how many Lugo supporters use the defense of "responsible ownership," turning the table and making the complaints look like what is really happening is everyone else's fault but the Humane Society's. I can tell you that I personally was blatantly lied to by Linda Lugo herself as well as several of the other employees at the Humane Society, namely Tom (I wish I knew his last name). My interactions with Lugo were completely downhill from there. She is the rudest person I've ever had to deal with. She made several empty promises that to this day have yet to be filled. Her ability to spew lies says enough about her character.

We took our complaint to several different levels, Comegy's included. Our complaint went no where. We have gotten no closure in the matter. I guess we never will. I can only hope that the community's awareness be raised for the corruption taking place at the Humane Society. The average citizen has no idea. As avid animal lovers and supporters of rescue, I would never attempt to bash the Humane Society as an organization. We wish only that all animals that enter the doors be found loving homes. I can only hope that someday it will be run by someone with respect, compassion and a little more "people" skills than the current director. It's very sad to think about the people and funds she has lost with her poor attitude (read the blogs, there are a few!).

On one last note, I read another blog entry that discusses in detail the treatment of ringworm and other such common puppy issues. I have information about a case dealing with a litter of abandoned puppies. The litter was not caught all at once. The first half of the litter was turned into the Humane Society, under Linda Lugo's watchful eye. They were "humanely euthanized" for reasons (given by the Humane Society staff themselves) being ringworm. Interestingly enough, this was after another employee tried to lie about the puppies by saying they were nursing with their mother (note: the puppies were abandoned!). Later, Lugo tried to say that the puppies all had Parvo. At this point, it's important to discuss the second half of the litter. Though it took a few days to catch them all, the rest of the puppies were caught by a good Samaritan. One had died in the woods, most likely from anemia due to the fleas. The others were taken to the vet, treated for fleas, were taken home by the good Samaritan (who also footed the vet bill for the remaining four puppies). She kept them for a few weeks while they recovered and found them all loving homes where they still reside (she kept one "Lucky" puppy). Even more interesting, her vet informed her that if the puppies had Parvo, they would have long been dead, and since they were all together, feasting on the same thing, the litter as a whole would have perished.

My point in telling you all of this, we personally know of 4 cases (including our own) where the employees at the Humane Society have mishandled animals. We know of allegations (from others) that animals are walking out of those doors for money being pocketed by...... well, you can imagine the scandal if that were found to be true. It is my hope that there is an investigation surrounding the Humane Society. For the sake of the animals losing their lives unnecessarily, we hope there is change brought to the Wicomico County Humane Society.

Thanks for your efforts to bring the corruption and lies at the Humane Society into the light for the public to see.
Sincerely,
Rae Murphy"

Dear Rae:

First of all, thank you for sending in this message. It should be known to everyone reading this particular article that I did get permission to publish it, including Rae Murphy's name at the end. It's VERY important people put their name to messages like this for credibility. Keep them coming Folks.

23 comments:

  1. I have a few questions for this person that has the complaint. First, I am NOT an employee of the Humane Society nor do I volunteer there, however, I do have a working knowledge of Humane Societies. What exactly was your complaint other than rudeness which is NOT acceptable? You rambled on and on, but gave us no details. I find this unacceptable...except for the rudeness. More info so we can understand. As far a ringworm goes, IF you have never encountered, it is horrible and especially to children and older people. Also, you cannot detect it immediately and it can be just starting when a puppy or kitten leaves. It takss awhile to treat as well and the animals need to be by themselves. SO, folks, if you don't know about these things you need to "Google" them. Now again rudeness is another story. Thanks for letting me air!!!Spice

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are you that dense? The puppies that were brought to the Humane Society were killed. The other puppies collected by others are still living and healthy today.

    I guess if I were to find an animal/puppies/kittens, I wouldn't bring it to the Humane Society, that's for damn sure.

    They should rename that place the Salisbury Zoo.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of the families mentioned in the article have had two "lost" dogs since the one discussed in the article. Thankfully, the dogs were recovered. This is probably not the same people, though.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I remember the story in the daily times, and if only a portion of the story was reported, then there are some serious concerns about what is going on there. The story was about a dog and a bird, in which the families were not given the chance to save them. I only hope that that story has led to an investigation, and some sort of oversight has been established. Until then, all you can do is hope that someone, somewhere, is looking out for these animals.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous 1:04
    How about researching the ENTIRE story before you come on and act like you have all answers to this topic.Research the story in the daily times and then look at the recent blogs that have been posted. If you can't figure it out that there is a real problem, wether it be with care of the animals, or customer service. Then come on and pose the questions!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous said...

    Anonymous 1:04
    How about researching the ENTIRE story before you come on and act like you have all answers to this topic.Research the story in the daily times and then look at the recent blogs that have been posted. If you can't figure it out that there is a real problem, wether it be with care of the animals, or customer service. Then come on and pose the questions!


    A google news search of Linda Lugo and Rae Murphy yields nothing.

    In the letter Rae mentionse the paper didn't give the full story.

    What good is "researching" the Daily Times going to do for giving full coverage?

    How about having all that info provided via links or direct quotation of it here for the sake of thorough discussion?

    Regarding ring worm, once again it isn't a serious threat to anyone's health, but it is highly contagious. Even though it is readily treatable, once it is in your home there can be difficulty getting totally rid of it.

    As far as the ringworm puppies contracting parvo, it is highly possible that they got it while in the shelter, not prior. I have said before that a shelter is a good place to catch an illness due to the very nature of its operation. Therefore it is quite possible that the pups not taken to the shelter would have remained free of disease.

    Anpther reason to euthanize those puppies is that the shelter may have been overloaded.

    I don't know, I don't work there and have no knowledge of the situation.

    Having Rae Murphy's full details of the story along with the news article (they go into archive after a while and aren't readily available IIRC) would be really helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  7. A few years ago my son found some abandoned kittens...yes they were left there by someone these kittens were very clean to clean to be outdoors cats and they came right to them. My son tried to take them to the humane society so they could find them homes they told him they would charge him 25 dollars per kitten to take them. If this policy still around? How many people can't pay that and just dump the animals anywhere?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Don't know, but strongly suspect the investigation spoken about is by P.E.T.A.
    Hope they are looking into the zoo, as well.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1:46
    The bird was showing signs of stress at the Humane Society and was placed in a loving home where he was thriving. The issue was that the people who had given up the bird said they had been told they would have some input about where or even if the bird would be placed. There was disagreement about whether that right had been given to them, whether you can surrender an animal to the Humane Society and still "control" its placement. There was no disagreement over the basic facts that the original owners could no longer keep the bird, had surrendered it and the bird had been placed in a wonderful home.

    ReplyDelete
  10. One of the families cited in the article has had two dogs "lost" since the article was printed. Happily, the dogs have been found and returned to them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If P.E.T.A. is investigating,their history isn't great.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Once you sign your animal over to the Humane Society, you lose all rights to the animal. You have no say.

    ReplyDelete
  13. maybe theres room on barries broom stick for lugo too! maybe both of them can fly away together and never be seen again

    ReplyDelete
  14. 9:24:
    were they not made for one another?

    ReplyDelete
  15. 8:07 PM
    That makes perfect sense to me. I don't see how the Humane Society could call everyone who had given up an animal, tell them about the possible new placement, and get "permission" to follow through. The woman who had owned the bird and turned it over to the Humane Society said that "special right" had been given to her, though. I'm not really sure why finding a wonderful home for a bird that had been given up was worthy of mention in an article about the shortcomings of the Humane Society.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The lady with the bird was told in no uncertain terms that he would never be addopted out and or if a situation ever did arrive when they thought it might be necessary the previuos owners would have the option to take there bird back or at least meet with the possible cantidates, both Linda and Tom told (promised) guarantied they would be consulted first.These lies are a regular practice. personnel are told to LIE!!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. 10:17
    That's what the article said. I know of no other case where a pet owner has been told they could "interview" the prospective new owners or take the pet back if they chose. It seems, if the previous owners could have taken the bird back in the event it was going to be placed in a new home, why couldn't they have just kept it in the first place? The ability to take the bird back makes it sound like keeping it in the first place would have been an option. I thought there was an issue about lack of ability to control the kids when the bird was in the home. If that was the reason, how could the original owners have taken the bird back? Had the Humane Society agreed to just board it for them? People are confused because we didn't know they offered that service.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I can tell you for a FACT that the family initially called the Humane society to see if they knew of any potential families intrested in the bird. It was never about giving it to the Humane Society. The phone calls began with the HUMANE SOCIETY calling the family back to show intrest in the bird as a PET of the humane society. A GENTELMAN'S agreement was made that if it wasn't going to work out, then the family would take it back and find a family that they could trust in taking care of the bird, and to have comfort that it wouldn't be a money making tool for anyone. No paper work was ever signed by either party as to giving up the bird! When the children asked to go visit after christmas, which the HUMANE SOCIETY encouraged from the begining, They only left in tears to find out that the bird had been placed elsewhere. HINT:There is no known evidence that an official adoption had taken place! Put 2+2 together with that info!!!!!!!By the way, I know that a bird like that -minus that cost of the cage=$3000, At least!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. 1:04
    The part about the money and the "unofficial" adoption is new information for me. Surely, the Humane Society could produce the adoption papers for the bird, couldn't they? Didn't the article say the name of the new owner was given to the original owner, or not? I can't remember.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The bird story sounds like a load of BS to me. It is a humane society, not a boarding facility. To expect them to hold a pet for you indefinitely and to consult you on its every bowel movement is just not reasonable.

    Once you release your "beloved" pet to the care of a humane society it ain't yours. You should also be ready to accept the fact that you've just turned it over to an environment that by the very nature of its operation increases the chance of your FORMER pet getting exposed to a contagious disease.

    Most psitticines are very social birds. These need to be in a house not in a shelter full of barking dogs. They need contact with a regular caregiver, not the onslaught of various volunteers that do not necessarily know the peculiarities of bird handling and behavior.

    I find it difficult to bring up any sympathy for the people that gave the bird up in the first place. If I was going to be critical of the humane society at all it'd be for taking the bird in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  21. " To expect them to hold a pet for you indefinitely and to consult you on its every bowel movement is just not reasonable. "

    I would agree, If that were not part of the agreement they made with the family. Honesty is the key issue here.If they did not intend on consulting with the family, and used that tactic to gain control of the bird , then what do you think the issue should be?
    This was a special agreement that should have never been pusued by employees of the Humane Society.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Honestly, if this "bird placed in a good home without the approval of the former owner" is supposed to be a huge scandal, I just don't see it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. i think the staff is very cold,like a power trip,6 years ago my wife found a tramatized kitten in the engine compartment of her friends car,mouth and ears burned,we took the little girl in,got her to the vet and all her shots and fell in love with her,we take care of all our animals,i blew my back out in early 2009,had to file for disability,we were broke,getting food from the joseph house,this kitty got a lump,came to a head and started seeping a month ago,i called vets,they wanted cash,no payments,i used neosporin and antibotic cream,then she started bleeding bad,i called wchs,they agreed to put her down but had to give me till pay day to give them 50 dollars,i prayed,and cried as i took her,asked if she could get check and fixes if possible,brfore death,sandy said no!!!accussed me of neglecy,said its a felony,and i went to kiss her goodbye,sandy said dont open the cage i dont deserve to say goodbye,im so sad my life fell apart and i could not afford the vet,she was soooo creul,mean,broke my heart,i always took care of my pets,i said should i rob somebody,she made a face and shrugged her shoulders like saying yes,i was stunned by the unprofessionanl attitude,and hearing her put me down,ive been catching strays,and getting permission from the wchs,so the can get warm and hopefully adopted,she treated me like i was a horrible person,and i have nothing but love for all animals,i pray for this woman,the power has gone to her head,she needs to be removed,im 58,have had dogs and cats all my life,they can check vet records for the last 30 years,now because we are broke,sold almost all our posessions,a lot of furniture and just dont have the money,it was very hard,i was very sad,and i prayed all the time for the lords help,i cant believe this lady has permission to rip the heary out of me.how can that be justified.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.