Joshua Phillip Strother, age 6, killed by pit bull adopted from the Asheville Humane Society.
The Asheville Humane Society has been at the forefront of pit bull advocacy & adoption promotion
ASHEVILLE, North Carolina––The Henderson County Sheriff’s Office on July 9, 2015 confirmed that the pit bull who two days earlier killed six-year-old Joshua Phillip Strother in Hendersonville, North Carolina, had recently been adopted from the Asheville Humane Society.
The Asheville Humane Society has in recent years been at the forefront of pit bull advocacy and adoption promotion.
An adoption program promotion partner of both the Best Friends Animal Society and the American SPCA, both of which have long fought legislation meant to stop pit bull proliferation, the Asheville Humane Society apparently rehomed the pit bull who killed Strother during the first days of a “Project Pit Bull Awareness and Action Campaign” that started on June 19, 2015.
Kiss-a-Bull fundraiser
Earlier, on February 1, 2015, the Asheville Humane Society hosted a “Kiss-a-Bull Valentine’s Fundraiser,” the premise of which directly contradicted the standard dog bite prevention advice that people––especially children––should not put their faces close to the faces of dogs unfamiliar to them.
“The Criminal Investigations and Animal Enforcement Divisions of the Henderson County Sheriff’s Office have completed their investigation in regard to the pit bull attack that resulted in the death of six year old Joshua Strother of 163 Piney Ridge Drive on July 7th, 2015,” the sheriff’s office posted to Facebook.
Asheville Humane Society pit bull promotion.
“No charges will be filed”
“The investigation revealed the pit bull was adopted from the Asheville Humane Society approximately three weeks before the incident,” the posting continued. “It was noted this organization followed their adoption procedures and the dog was current on its rabies and other recommended vaccinations. Based upon this information, no charges will be filed.”
As of the end of the business day on July 10, 2015, the Asheville Humane Society had yet to respond to questions from ANIMALS 24-7, except to acknowledge on July 9, 2015, that the questions had been received.
Some of those questions, however, were answered by Asheville Times-News staff writer Emily Weaver.
Wrote Weaver, “A man found the pit bull on his porch one day and took it to Asheville Humane Society, according to investigators. The dog was held and monitored for about 30 days without exhibiting aggressive behavior.”
Another Asheville Humane Society pit bull promotion.
Asheville Humane Society statement
Elaborated the Asheville Humane Society in a prepared statement shared with local media:
“First and foremost, our hearts go out to both of the families involved in this tragic accident,” the Asheville Humane Society statement began, equating the death of the six-year-old child with that of the pit bull, who “was nearby and was acting aggressively and deputies who arrived on scene shot and killed the animal in order to give paramedics access to the boy,” according to WLOS television news.
“The dog involved was adopted out from Asheville Humane Society last month and did not exhibit any aggressive behavior while in our care,” the humane society statement continued. “This dog came in as a stray so we did not know his history, only his behavior while he was with us, which gave no indication that he would have any issue of this type.
Yet another Asheville Humane Society pit bull promotion.
“We try to accurately assess temperaments”
“We try to accurately assess the temperaments of all of the animals in our care before placing them in loving homes,” the Asheville Humane Society statement added. “We do a seven-point behavior assessment designed to predict a dog’s likelihood to bite in various situations,” apparently using the ASPCA-developed SAFER test, “and we also continue to assess the dog’s behavior while in our care. Our dogs also have a lot of one-on-one interaction with trained staff. If any aggression is reported, the dog is re-evaluated by our certified behavior department.
“All of the dog’s behavior/history documents in their entirety were given over to the Henderson County Sheriff’s Office,” the Asheville Humane Society statement finished.
“Pinups for Pit Bulls”
The Asheville Humane Society “Project Pit Bull Awareness and Action Campaign” opened on June 19, 2015 with a discussion session led by Deirdre Franklin.
Franklin in 2005 founded a pit bull advocacy organization called Pinups for Pitbulls, owns a business called Darlings Asheville that sells pit bull-inspired art, and is author of a book published in 2014, entitled Little Darling’s Pinups for Pitbulls.
The focus of the discussion was opposition to legislation against pit bull proliferation.
Pulled from web site
Observed Dogsbite.org founder Colleen Lynn, “Awareness and action campaigns usually last several months and possibly years. But the Asheville Humane Society pulled their entire Project Pit Bull awareness campaign from their corporate website less than one month into the campaign and, apparently, just after Joshua Phillip Strother’s horrific mauling death.”
Strother had apparently climbed the fence between his family’s property and the neighboring property, where the pit bull resided––but Strother had reportedly climbed the fence several times previously to pet and play with the pit bull, under the observation of his parents and the neighbors.
“You be the judge”
“You be the judge of why the Asheville Humane Society took down these parts of their website in the wake of a fatal pit bull attack,” Lynn continued. “You be the judge of why a humane society, in this case partly supported by taxpayers in their role of operating the county’s shelter, continues to delete posts from their Facebook page that mention this young boy.”
The Asheville Humane Society has operated the Buncombe County Animal Shelter since 1990.
New director on job since May
The “Project Pit Bull Awareness and Action Campaign” appeared to have been the first Asheville Humane Society initiative introduced by new executive director Tracy Elliott, who succeeded interim director Sarah Hess at the beginning of May 2015.
Tracy Elliott (Asheville Humane Society photo)
“Born and raised in the small town of Bremen, Indiana, Tracy Elliott, 54, comes to Asheville with three dogs and more than 30 years of nonprofit administration experience,” wrote Beth Walton of the Asheville Citizen-Times. “He has no professional background in animal welfare.”
Rather, Walton continued, “For five years, Elliott was executive director of AID Atlanta, the largest and most comprehensive AIDS service organization in the Southeast. Elliott also served as executive director of The Damien Center, a nonprofit HIV/AIDS clinic in Indiana. Most recently, he was the chief executive officer of College Mentors for Kids, an organization working at 26 colleges and universities across the U.S. Elliot also spent 14 years as a banker at First Source Bank in South Bend, Indiana.
Four executive directors in three years
“Elliot’s arrival signals the third leadership change the Asheville Humane Society since 2013,” Walton observed, “when former executive director Katherine McGowan Shenar left,” to become senior vice president of communications and community engagement at the San Diego Humane Society & SPCA in southern California––another organization that aggressively pushes pit bull adoptions.
Shenar, during her nearly six years at the Asheville Humane Society, including three years as chief executive, ramped up pit bull advocacy through forming a “community partnership” with the ASPCA in 2010 and making the society part of the Best Friends Animal Society’s No More Homeless Pets network.
On August 26, 2013, an Asheville Humane Society media release said, “The ASPCA and the Humane Society of the U.S., at the request of the United States Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, assisted in seizing 367 dogs in Alabama, Mississippi and Georgia in what is believed to be the second-largest dog fighting raid in U.S. history. At special request of the ASPCA, the Asheville Humane Society sent Jennifer Brehler, vice president of operations and government affairs, and Angie Wilt, animal compassion network department director, to assist with evidence collection and animal removal during the multi-site operation. Brehler and Wilt were escorted by the FBI to four different locations where they assisted the field investigation and response team of the ASPCA.”
Shenar to Brehler to Hess
Brehler succeeded Shenar as Asheville Humane Society executive director in October 2013, but in December 2014 followed Shenar to the San Diego Humane Society & SPCA to become senior director of the organization’s Escondido shelter facilities.
“Sarah Hess, a consultant for the Humane Alliance,” an Asheville-based national string of high-volume, low-cost spay/neuter clinics now finalizing a merger with the ASPCA, “then temporarily took the reins as interim executive director,” Walton recounted.
Hess was among more than 140 applicants for the permanent position of executive director, Walton reported, but was passed over in favor of Elliott.
(See also http://www.animals24-7.org/2015/02/20/aspca-and-the-humane-alliance-move-toward-merger/.)
“Save even more lives”
Said Asheville Humane Society board chairman John Haas in announcing Elliot’s hiring, “Tracy will take us to the next level and build on our successful programs to save even more lives.”
Strother was the 38th fatality involving U.S. shelter dogs from 2010 to present, in attacks involving 30 pit bulls, seven bull mastiffs, two Rottweilers, a Lab who may have been part pit bull, and a husky.
By contrast, there were no fatalities involving shelter dogs from 1858 through 1987. Two fatalities occurred, both involving wolf hybrids, in 1988 and 1989.
Asheville Humane Society 4th of July pit bull promo.
Ford Pinto
There were no further fatalities involving shelter dogs until 2000. Of the three fatalities occurring during the first decade of the 21st century, one involved a pit bull, one a Doberman, and one a Presa Canario.
Also of note, there were only 32 disfiguring maulings by shelter dogs from 1858 through 2009, 19 of them involving pit bulls.
From 2010 to present, there have been at least 138 disfiguring maulings by shelter dogs, 99 of them involving pit bulls. Nineteen shelter dogs have killed or disfigured people thus far in 2015, all of them pit bulls.
For every human killed in the past five years by shelter dogs, hundreds of animals have been killed: about 6,500 animals killed by shelter dogs per year in 2013-2014, more than 90% of them by pit bulls.
Cujo “kills” a Ford Pinto.
Only 26 fatalities associated with exploding Ford Pinto gas tanks, over seven years, were sufficient to kill the sales of what had been the top-selling car in history, ahead of even the Volkswagen beetle.
Once the public lost confidence in Ford as a maker of safe cars, the company spent decades, and billions of dollars, trying to regain it.
Please donate to support our work:
http://www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
No one held to account for Asheville Humane Society pit bull adoption fatality
Buncombe County, NC orders moratorium on pit bull adoptions
Animal losses low after Hurricane Laura––but worst may be ahead
Pit bulls & the humane community- Pit bulls & public safety
Dutch to push “vaccination for life” ––may end culls of healthy livestock
This is a sad horrible devastating event and my heart goes out to all involved, but making this about “pitbulls” is creating a smokescreen and preventing people from understanding how to prevent tragedies from occurring ! Parents need to educate their children on not entering neighbors yards; pools, animals, and construction are just a few prospective dangers. Dog owners need to understand the danger they create for their dog and people by leaving their unattended dog outdoors. Isn’t it better to educate than blame?
Joshua Phillip Strother had been educated that it was safe not only to play with pit bulls, but with this particular pit bull, and he had not only been allowed but been encouraged to climb the fence to do so. Had playing with pit bulls not been misrepresented to him as safe conduct, Strother would very likely still be alive. Of note here is the legal doctrine of “attractive nuisance,” which is invoked to oblige the owners of swimming pools to keep them fenced and covered. The fact that a pool owner kept the pool fenced and covered would not protect him from a lawsuit and from paying out substantial damages if he had also made a point of encouraging a neighboring child to climb the fence and the child then drowned.
The dog was not exactly “unattended”, being in a fenced enclosure. I do have an issue with amateurs mixing newly homed pit bulls with children they don’t even know. By allowing this boy to previously play with the dog, he was misled into believing he could do this when alone. His landing in the enclosure could have startled a sleeping dog or we don”t know what. Not the dog’s fault, not the boy’s fault, being so young especially. This was an accident pure and simple. But likely wouldn’t have happened if the adults involved had been cautious with a dog of unknown history and a young boy who was not taught caution, regardless of breed.
Safety is no accident. Of the 200-odd recognized dog breeds and common mixes, more than half have NEVER been involved in a fatality, including setters, among the 10 most popular breeds since the first breed surveys were done more than 130 years ago. Only one breed category, the large molossers, accounts for just 9% of the dogs but 90% of the fatalities, and among those, the pit bull group, accounts for just 6% of the dogs (two-thirds of the large molossers), but 75%-plus of the fatalities. Dangerous behavior occurs around all breeds, but consistently & often has fatal consequences only among just this handful.
This is NOT an accident. It is willful negligence at best, depraved indifference at worst, on the part of Asheville Humane. . Behaviorally normal dogs do not kill people….even when they are startled, even when they are scared, even when they are in their own backyards and a child hops the fence to pet them. This is a fundamental problem, with humane advocates making excuses and blaming the victim. You want to redefine what is behaviorally normal for a domestic “pet” dog.
Last night, while watching a movie on the couch, I forgot that my dog was sleeping on the other end and stretched my legs out, accidentally kicking him in the head, waking him from a sound sleep. He startled awake with a yelp/growl, looked over at me, realized what happened, and went back to sleep. He didn’t attack me, bite me, threaten me , or attempt to maul me. He is a behaviorally normal dog. If a dog cannot handle the typical day to day occurrences of normal family life, he shouldn’t be placed for adoption, because 99.999% of the people adopting dogs from a shelter are NOT professional dog trainers or behaviorists. According to most shelter dog apologists, it would have been perfectly acceptable for my dog to grab my leg with his teeth, and inflict wounds so severe I’d end up in the ER.
I REFUSE to accept the current redefinition of what a companion dog is, being shoved down the throats of the general public by so-called humane advocates. The “nice dogs” are quickly disappearing from shelters and rescues, while the lion’s share of resources go to “rehabilitating”, marketing, and promoting dangerous dog to the public. When the death of a child is met with a shrug of the shoulders and a declaration that the problem was simply supervision and containment, we have truly lost our moral compass.
Excellent comment..thank you.
“I REFUSE to accept the current redefinition of what a companion dog is, being shoved down the throats of the general public by so-called humane advocates. The “nice dogs” are quickly disappearing from shelters and rescues, while the lion’s share of resources go to “rehabilitating”, marketing, and promoting dangerous dog to the public. When the death of a child is met with a shrug of the shoulders and a declaration that the problem was simply supervision and containment, we have truly lost our moral compass.”
This is a critically important point. There is no question (as first suggested in an article in Animal People over 20 years ago), that differential response to S/N, has resulted in a proliferation of the dogs of choice in poorer urban areas which may have been resistant or not had access to S/N services such as pit bulls, Rotties, or mixes of these. In light of the loss of diversity in the shelter population and the proliferation of pit bulls and pit mixes, shelters have marketed (and in my view misrepresented) to the public, dogs that are not suitable for an average pet owner or family.
In any case, the behaviorally benign “mutt”, the once available dog in shelters and from rescues, has disappeared and in its place is the pit and pit mix. Since the “shelter community” apparently has defined its mission to home dogs, any dogs, even those confiscated in fighting raids, it is in fact redefining acceptable dog behavior. As far as I am concerned, is not only marketing and promoting for adoption the unsafe dogs in its shelters, but creating an ancillary demand for these dogs and promoting the breeding of these dogs in general.
This is indeed a redefinition of the companion dog. The inevitable result (especially given the resistance to BSL), will be a restriction on ALL dog ownership, and the restriction or banning of all dogs in any venue. The relationship of man and dog is considered one of the most successful symbiotic relationships in the history of the earth (it is suggested man could not have progressed beyond small hunter gathering groups without dogs to protect property and contain livestock, and that the relationship with the dog allowed man to sacrifice his olfactory ability and develop a larger cerebral cortex and enable the development of speech with the loss of sinus capacity in a “muzzle”.)
I do not think I am going overboard stating that I see the current situation with shelters duping the public and promoting dangerous dogs as “sweethearts” as a serious threat to the continued positive relationship with “man’s best friend.”
To be clear, I do believe that committed and informed people CAN responsibly own ANY breed of dog, including the fighting breeds (although why someone would WANT to own a breed bred specifically to fight escapes me). I am appalled, and CANNOT accept however, that shelters, rescues and humane societies are marketing and promoting these dogs as acceptable family dogs to any taker, and as you point out, blaming the victim and considering vicious, unprovoked attacks “normal” canine behavior.
Oh, come on. It wasn’t the pit bull’s ‘fault’ in so far as a pit bull is an animal and, as a domesticated animal created to be aggressive and violent for no useful purpose, not morally culpable in the same way a human would be. But it’s still the pit bull’s ‘fault’ in that there is zero reason for it to kill a 6-year-old boy. The child posed no threat to a dog in a large open yard which offered the pit plenty of room to escape if the boy was annoying it.
As to the unattended part – have you looked at the video? The new pit owners did have a fence. But it was a 4-5′ wire fence reinforced with diagonal wood strips. It was inadequate to keep a 6yo boy out, and it would never have kept a healthy 1-year-old pit bull in. Police basically pushed it down to reach the child’s body after they shot the pit. Leaving any dog alone in such a lightly fenced yard is to leave it essentially unattended. When the dog is of a breed which is readily aggressive or territorial, it’s gross negligence.
We have many wonderful dogs at St. Francis with several pits we think could be adopted but I always remember the words of one of our founders who said that the pit is not to be trusted so we make them comfortable and treat them as this is their home. I wish all the pits a lovely place to make home.
Unbelievably sad, it appears that the dog became very possessive of its fenced in area–very common in all breeds. No adult should have allowed a child to get into that situation of being alone with a large dog who was defending his area. I am in no way justifying what happened–it is beyond tragic that a small child who only wanted to play with a dog ended up dead. I place the blame on the original owner who allowed the dog to become homeless and end up in the shelter system with no history of it’s previous life. People who don’t take responsibility for their dogs, a microchip, a license, a name tag are pretty much the ones who cause the euthanasia of millions of dogs in our country at the huge cost of money and now the incredible cost of that precious child’s life.
What is NOT common in all breeds is that a dog who “became very possessive of his/her fenced area” kills the intruder. What normal dogs do in such a situation is bark. Well over 80% of the human fatalities in such situations are inflicted by pit bulls; well over 90% by pit bulls and closely related breeds, including Rottweilers, bull mastiffs, and other pit/mastiff mixes. Moreover, observation of this unique proclivity is scarcely new; it was noted 175 years ago by Lieutenant Colonel Charles Hamiliton Smith in The Natural History of Dogs. Serially published in 1839-1840 by W.H. Lizars of Edinburgh, Scotland, this was the book that formed the basis for describing most recognized pedigrees.
If this pit bull would have been a beagle or I could name 400 other dog breeds, this child would be alive with or without supervision. This child had played with this dog before on several occasions. Even if there was someone supervising, it is next to impossible to stop a pit bull mauling. 463 children & people killed by pit bulls. If you still think it’s the owner, not the breed, you’re part of the problem. http://www.fatalpitbullattacks.com/
Asheville Humane Society claims the dog passed their temperament test, yet it still was aggressive? Did they just admit that their temperament test is meaningless? Or are they lying about the results of the temperament test.
They want to educate the public on how safe it is to adopt a pit bull from them, yet their “temperament tested” pit bull kills a child shortly after being adopted…..either their temperament test is meaningless, or they are misinterpreting/ignoring the results when dogs fail.
It is the responsibility of the shelter to rehome safe pets. The family needs to find a lawyer and sue this shelter, so this can never happen to another family.
“Protecting” his owner’s property to point of killing a human being should not be part of the instinct or training of any truly safely domesticated dog. Nor should it be a point of pride or grounds for defense for other dog owners to stand on. If this dog could not communicate in a more effective/less lethal way…then he is NOT a ‘good dog’. Nobody wants to see a dog killed but public safety should come first.
I had the exact same thoughts concerning the temperament tests given this pit. Great comment.
I owned a Pit bull once. In many ways she was one of the best dogs I ever had, and I’ve had many. But I would never own another one. The liability is too high, and despite what many Pit bull supporters say, I believe they are simply too dangerous.
My dog was a lot of fun. She had more personality than any dog I’ve owned before or since. We got her just prior to all the bad press Pit bulls started getting. My wife was the one who wanted her because I worked nights and she wanted a dog that could protect her. She had to explain to me what a Pit bull was, because I had never heard of them. This was back in the 1970’s. So we got her and she was a great dog. Tons of energy and lots of fun, very friendly and loyal. When the Pit bull was about 7 we rescued a little Fox Terrier, and the two of them became great friends. The Pit bull was great around people, kids, pretty much anyone or anything, with two exceptions: The mail carrier and cats.
When she was a few months old I was getting her out of my car and she got away from me before I got her leash on. The mail carrier was just arriving, and she trotted playfully up to him. He panicked and maced her. Since that day and until the day she died, she HATED mail carriers and would have mauled them if she could have gotten to them. Later I moved to a new house that had a mail slot in a garage wall, but no box to catch the mail so it fell to the floor. The Pit bull also had access to the garage. After a few times returning home from work to find my mail on the garage floor in about a billion little pieces, I finally moved that project to the top of the “to do” list and installed a heavy duty box to catch the mail.
I don’t know why she hated cats so much. Maybe she got scratched by one at some point. One time my wife was walking her and she suddenly tore away from her when she saw a cat in a bush. There was a chain link fence behind the bush and the cat had nowhere to run. She caught the cat and quickly killed it. She was probably 8 years old at the time. I was sick. I was naive enough to think she’d never kill anything. I believe the cat was a stray. It had no tags, and this was prior to microchipping.
The Pit bull eventually died of cancer at almost 14 years old. It was like losing a child. I grieved. She was my girl.
But never again. I believe these animals were bred to fight, just as other dogs are bred to be herders, or trackers, or rescue dogs or whatever. I don’t understand people who think being a responsible and caring dog owner can completely supplant their genetic disposition. I don’t believe it. Maybe it works for some of them, but genetics is a very powerful force. I would not be willing to take the chance again myself. There’s simply too much at risk.
Thank you for sharing your story. A lot of pit bull owners never mention that their dogs have acted aggressively or killed other animals. It’s important that former owners such as yourself speak up, so we can hear from someone with experience.
Look at how much fuss is made about pit bulls. If I drank at the computer table, I might have spat water across the wall over that “Kiss-a-Bull” fundraiser. Diciest marketing I’ve ever seen when it comes to these dogs…and these dogs get marketed a lot. It’s about improving the image rather than the breed.
I found it interesting that you mentioned the Pinto. As a longtime professor in a school of business, I have discussed this now-classic business ethics case many times. The most appalling aspect of it was that Ford KNEW the issue involved, had statistics and actuarial projections, and coldly calculated that it would be cheaper to pay off the suits for exploding cars than to re-engineer the defect.
What doomed them was that they left a paper trail, and of course the question is, did companies learn not to be unethical and that it was not appropriate to quantify human life as a number in the debit column, or simply to document and/or NOT leave the paper trail?
Organizations promoting the adoption of dogs of unknown behavioral and genetic backgrounds, capable of killing or seriously maiming in attacks are in a comparable situation. The data is irrefutable, especially in the case of pit bulls, mastiff breeds, or dogs which may be wolf/dog crosses. To promote the adoption of these dogs is demonstrably an action which puts human beings and other pets at risk. Doing this, should be a violation of the mission statement of any HUMANE society.
I love dogs, but will unequivocally state that no dog, even one of my own, is worth a child’s life or even face. Dogs are animals and their behavior is not 100% predictable and not every incident can be avoided. That does not, however, justify the current blatant disregard for actuarial data available on the pit bull which clearly demonstrates heightened and predictable risk.
I am so tired of hearing, even from people who should know better….”It’s not the dog, it’s the PEEE-POLE. I agree with pit bull advocates that pit bulls are sweet, loveable dogs; where we differ is that I add, “Until the moment they are not.” Again, an irrefutable fact is that the dogs were developed not to show intent prior to attack (a pit that growled, raised hackles, showed expression, was culled), and to exhibit “gameness”, an unwillingness to stop an initiated attack no matter what the circumstances. This is not a dog you adopt out to the general public after a “temperament test”.
Beyond touting the pit bull as a safe and loving adoption choice, in spite of the evidence to the contrary, shelters and organizations are going a step further and misrepresenting their dogs for adoption. Case in point, take a look at a Lab/golden retriever mix advertised for adopting in the Sacramento Bee “At the SPCA” feature. The dog appears to be a “blue” (a color that could not result from a Lab/golden cross), and its morphology and coat type and color, best identify it as a pit or largely pit mix. http://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/living/pets/article26908459.html
Ford, and other corporate entities only took note when criminally prosecuted for their actions and omissions. Although, acquitted, criminal charges against Ford, were a wakeup call for industry. Perhaps it will take criminal indictments, or at least huge civil suits for humane societies to get a clue.
Somehow just saying “he passed our temperament test”, which obviously was not sufficiently reliable, should not be sufficient defense.
This is unbelievable, let alone the numbers of people mauled and animals killed by pitbulls. I’d like to know why this data is completely disregarded by ASPCA, Best Friends, and the media. Why are people so enamored of pit bulls to the extent that they care less if a 6 year old is mauled to death? If they only care about animals, what about all the animals these dogs maim and kill? And if as an organization, we publicly state the truth about pit bulls based on this data and our own experience dealing with some of these dogs, we’d be hung from the cross by the rescue ” community”. Thank you for having the courage to speak out.
The Asheville Humane Society explained quite clearly on their website why they were promoting pit bulls…… “These dogs are grossly misunderstood, along with many other breeds that have found their way on to breed restriction lists over the years. Until recently, this did not pose an urgent problem. However, as the “shelter mutt” evolves into a hybrid with pit bull-type characteristics, and Asheville tries to evolve into a no-kill community, steps need to be taken to ensure that these dogs can find forever homes—and stay home. ”
A quick look at the adoptable dogs page of Ashville Humane reveals that the majority of dogs in the shelter are pits and pit mixes. The shelter is overrun with a type of dog that most adopters don’t want, most HO insurers won’t insure, most HOA’s and landlord’s won’t allow. Many of these dogs are also dog/animal aggressive, so cannot go into a home with existing pets, making them even harder to place. The response from Ashville Humane and the ASPCA is to market and promote the breed to CREATE an even bigger demand for the dogs, usually amongst low income, young and transient pet owners who are least able to care for a pet.
The callousness of the response to this tragedy from Ashville Humane seems in keeping with the character of those promoting pit bulls over public safety. They do not say that they are reviewing their protocols and looking for better tools to predict behavior in shelter dogs, they don’t seem to really want to know what went wrong. The child is written off as collateral damage, a small sacrifice for their purported greater purpose…..recycling dumped pit bulls back into the community, regardless of the risk posed to the public.
Answer is simple- ban any and all breeding of pit bulls. Make it a 1st degree felony. Would take care if this and many other problems pretty quickly.
Thank you, Merritt, for staying on top of the current situation with regard to pimping pit bulls to families as “loving, loyal pets”. Pits, of course, were NOT bred to be pets and will NEVER be appropriate pets. It boggles the mind that this issue continues to be virtually ignored by those in a position to take legislative measures to protect the public from fighting breed dogs. Thank you again.
I have one more comment I would like to share regarding the ASPCA temperament test being used at Ashville Humane. The Animal Planet show Dogs 101 did an entire show on puppies, and in one segment Victoria Wells, aging punk rocker and self described “behaviorist” for the ASPCA, demonstrated their temperament test on a puppy.
http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/dogs-101/videos/picking-a-puppy/
The segment starts at approximately 2:08. The entire test seems arbitrary and subjective….she wiggles a toy in front of the puppy and declares that he has little prey drive, and “won’t want to chase small animals” when he grows up???? But the real shock comes at about 3:29, when she tests the puppy for resource guarding with food and a plastic hand. The puppy freezes, then aggressively attacks the hand with a full mouth bite. This is NOT normal behavior for an average puppy….that level of aggression in a dog that young is not normal. It is maladaptive for a small, weak, juvenile animal to show real aggression and attack a larger, stronger, adult animal, because in nature, the larger animal would easily kill the tiny baby. Normal domestic puppies, which is what should be going out to pet homes, should be incapable of this level of aggression. Imagine what will happen when that tiny puppy grows up and becomes larger and even MORE confident.
But, as Ms. Wells evaluates this puppy, she labels it a “purple,” which she claims is the “easiest” type of dog to own. An eight-week old-puppy who will quickly become an adult dog, who savagely attacks anything that comes near his/her food, and most likely any other resource he/she deems valuable: toys, bones, a spot on the couch. That is the kind of dog the ASPCA “experts” consider a safe and “easy” pet.
Does this explain why their poorly conceived temperament test failed to detect aggression in the pit bull that killed Josh Strother? If a test declares an eight-week-old puppy who tries to bite a person hard enough to inflict real damage is the “easiest” dog to own, what is considered a “difficult” dog? If that puppy isn’t aggressive, then how does the ASPCA define aggression?
I am so very sad for this family who lost their son. I am a shelter manager of a large municipal shelter and I will say that we certainly feel the pressure to place more, what we call “Sketchy” dogs for adoption. Our rescue community maligns us in their social media feeds for not doing enough. I am reminded of a dog that we did not make available for adoption because during the assessment, the dog lunged and growled at a group of children. This is not a normal part of our assessment and only happened by chance. The rescue group called media outlets and there were reporters on our door steps demanding to know how much time the dog had left and if it was true we were going to kill the dog (pit bull mix). It didn’t seem to matter that we had a concern. We are often treated like we do not know what we are talking about simply because we work for the shelter. I am very confident in the assessments conducted by our highly skilled and trained staff. As a manager, I know I have pushed going forward with adoption for dogs that show aggression, with full disclosure of course, in order to maintain a higher save rate. We do want to save these animals. And we do want owners to know that animals have aggression. I think the idea that all animals ought to be perfect and without aggression is unrealistic. I would argue that people behaved more safely around animals years ago because they knew they could be harmed. Remember the old saying, “let sleeping dogs lie”.
Part of the issue is that shelters have helped to incorrectly infantilize animals. For so long, we killed so many for very trivial reasons, that all you would get from the shelter was the “best of the best”. I do believe we should accept dogs that bite and cats that scratch. This is part of what they are and people should expect it, as our grandparents knew.
There is very little a shelter can do to assess an animal’s temperament. and if the shelter is telling you that they can, it simply isn’t true. We can never know this in a shelter. We can tell you if the pet is aggressive in our care and under which circumstances and what that could potentially mean. But we cannot tell you the personality of the dog. Not because we aren’t knowledgeable. Trust me. We are. Its that all dogs are individuals as are their families and its hard to know how things will play out. There are no tests for “child mauling”. Which means, all other indicators must be taken seriously, and certainly disclosed. I think it is absolutely possible that this dog seemed like a totally safe, friendly dog at the shelter, and also committed this horrible deed. Whether its a shelter, or dog trainer or certified behaviorist conducting the assessment, you can only know what is in front of you and sometime not every behavior a dog is capable of, will express itself because not every experience can be duplicated in a shelter.
Like this tragic story of Josh. I wonder if the shelter knew this dog would be left unattended in a yard. Because someone who does that, is not very aware of what is going on with their dog on a regular basis. They are likely not the best owners. So, Yard Dog is a big concern. These dogs are left without training and socialization and expected to make a lot of decisions on their own. All of which is a perfect storm for a dog who does not already have a solid foundation.
So what is the alternative? Kill all pit bulls? I don’t think it is that simple. Should pit bulls be killed because we, as humans, can’t 100% guarantee what will happen next? Should pit bulls be killed because their adopters won’t listen to trained shelter staff and behave responsibly, or even go to a tiny bit of effort to find out what they are getting into by living with an animal, especially the type and breed of their choosing? I think the assessment process needs to be re-evaluated as does adoption counseling. All of which are very time consuming in a shelter and questionable as to their value.
“Kill all pit bulls” approach would have saved Josh’s life. And, as a mom, I think it is one that I would have wished dearly for if my child was killed by a pit bull. How can we begin to ask ourselves how many pit bull lives are worth one child? That is a scarier question to ask. We obviously think that every pit bull from the beginning of time to the end of time is worth extinguishing if it could only prevent one more senseless death. But is that true? I don’t know.
What I do know is that there is a family that is suffering. Tormented forever. Everyone here is trying to find someone to pay the price, when really, it can never be paid. For me, as a shelter manager, I will keep this case in the front of my mind. I will remember it when we are making a tough call. I will think about Josh when I do adoption counseling and I will think of him and his family when we deal with “sketchy” dogs. And, I will remind our rescue “community” to do the same.
These families trusted the shelter to rehome a safe dog for the whole neighborhood.
This child had played with this pit bull before on several occasions. There was no reason for the families to think this pit bull would kill. That is why pit bulls are so dangerous.
You have proven to me by what you said, that most shelters have lost their moral compass. When rehoming a dog it should be safe for the whole community.
I feel this is a loud “boohoo” from a shelter manager who is responsible for murder. Either way: you do/did know pitbulls are different, or you did not. Both options are unacceptable for a professional dog shelter. The stated emotional one-liners are equally unacceptable. I will point both issues out.
Ignorant or deliberate?
Since you say your staff is trained and skilled, you and your staff should know that pitbulls and other fighting breeds are selected and bred for fighting and killing. They are bred to show no signals of normal aggression. A regular dog who feels threatened may growl, retreat, bare teeth. At a shelter you may call that an “aggressive dog” and kill the dog, but this dog is showing signals. Of course, we don’t want a normal dog to bite either, but if the dog does, the bite usually results in no more than a scratch or a pierced skin. Annoying but not fatal.
A pit bull does not show these normal threat signals. Maybe that is why shelter staff do not kill them. Pit bulls can be wagging their tail one minute, and the next minute jump to kill. That is what they do; it is what they have been bred for during hundreds of years. Denying these heritable traits shows a tremendous lack of knowledge and responsibility in the shelter staff, and certainly does not show anything that approaches “highly skilled and trained”.
As a shelter manager, you say “I am very confident in the assessments conducted by our highly skilled and trained staff”. Then you write: “There is very little a shelter can do to assess an animal’s temperament.”
This shows the contradiction in itself.
Did you know, or did you truly not realize pit bulls are a serious danger?
Maybe you really have/had no clue about the genetic danger of pit bulls. For a shelter manager, that kind of ignorance is a serious negligence that exposes innocent people to a deadly danger.
Maybe you knew deep in your heart that pit bulls are a danger, but silenced that knowledge in the name of “saving pit bulls” or whatever pathologic reason you had to expose the world to the danger of pitbulls. Again unacceptable.
You say “trust me, we are knowledgeable”. You are not. You suggest that all dogs kill children if they are kept in a backyard and not trained. This is not true and a downright insult to normal dogs who live a life as a beloved housepet. Tens of thousands of dogs are kept in the back yard; tens of thousands of dogs are not very well trained. They do not kill children as a result of this. You are damaging the position of dogs in our society, by suggesting that killing children is normal dog behavior that we all should learn to live with.
Personally, I think it is almost an extra crime that you try to deny your responsibility for this killing, by shifting it to the adopters, or even the child itself. Your shelter sold a dangerous pit bull and exposed the rest of the world to that danger. Either you really had no idea about the danger of pitbulls, which is unacceptable for a professional shelter, or you did know, which is even less acceptable.
Irrational misleading oneliners
What you do as a shelter, is put killers out in our society, with emotional, irrational cries that pit bulls are lovely pets who deserve to be saved. Innocent children like Josh become sacrificial victims to prove your love for dangerous mutants.
This is not about the emotional rhetoric “expecting all pets to be perfect.” It is about admitting that as humans, we have committed the serious crime of creating a certain type of dog that is significantly different from pet dogs as we know them. A dog who is actually not a dog but a psychopath, who mauls and kills for fun. Human criminals have done that, during hundreds of years. The best we can do is acknowledge that this is not a “dog”; it is a dangerous mutant.
If we encountered a new virus that would kill one child a day and hundreds of pets, we would be almost limitless in our actions to get that virus erased from the earth. If there would be one serial killer in the USA, running around to kill one child a day, we would have a full police and military force out to shoot this person.
“Kill all pit bulls is not that simple.” Again a rhetoric emotional cry that is misleading. Because actually, it is that simple. Yes, kill them all. And of course, enforce a wide and large breed ban asap, to at least reduce further production of fighting breed dogs.
You write “we do want to save these animals.” Another emotional rhetoric cry. Why? Would you go to these lengths to save a virus that kills at this rate?
You admit that if you wouldn’t have saved this pit bull, Josh would be alive. Not only Josh. The USA is now counting already 19 people killed by pit bulls in 2015 and numerous mauled, wounded, scarred, damaged for life. The amount of dogs, cats and other animals mauled and killed exceeds that number by thousands. The death of a euthanized pit bull is quick and painless. All the victims of pit bulls die an extremely painful, stressful and horrible death, or suffer for all the years thereafter.
Why do you not want to save all these victims, but only animals who bring this unacceptable danger and tremendous suffering to innocent people and their pets? Killing all pit bulls would have saved Joshua’s life and hundreds, thousands of others. Is that worth it? Again you cry the emotion, ”how many pitbulls are worth a child’s life?” A simple question with really a very simple answer: no pit bull is ever worth a child’s life.
On behalf of all the victims yet to come, I hope charges will be pressed against the shelter and against the responsible manager. Even though there is no compensation for a child’s life taken, I hope you will have to pay millions. Because I am sure that all shelters attempts to “save the poor pitbulls,” ignorant or deliberate, will fade very quick if they are held accountable for all the damage they do.
In more than 30 years of pointing out to the humane community the perils of pit bull proliferation, and of becoming part and parcel of it, I have never taken the position that it is necessary to “kill all the pit bulls,” or indeed to kill ANY pit bulls other than those who have actually killed or seriously injured another animal or a human, providing that a strict prohibition on the breeding, sale, or transfer of pit bulls is enforced. Under that prohibition, anyone who has a pit bull, including animal shelters and rescuers, would be obligated to provide humane care for that animal for the life of the animal, and could not lawfully dump that obligation on anyone else.
“Our rescue community maligns us in their social media feeds ”
Many people actually doing the work in the humane community, and certainly much of the media, have no idea that these attacks are orchestrated by charlatan “leaders” who do not have anyone’s interests at heart but that of their lobby
They goad naive and gullible people, and too many randomly hostile and even mentally disturbed people, into become attackers and even stalkers.
There is an entire business plan attached to this method, and the leaders know who they are and whose interests they are really working for, and it isn’t the dogs’ interest nor the public’s interest.
When did it stop being about the dogs and people, and turn into the money and control?
Everyone and every canine is losing this game, except the few who profit in the background.
” I do believe we should accept dogs that bite and cats that scratch. This is part of what they are and people should expect it, as our grandparents knew.”
Shelter Manager, I had high hopes when I started to read your post, but I’m sorry, I had some misgivings the more I read.
There is a reason for different breeds, which are selectively bred to enhance certain traits, including behavioral traits. Also physical.
Not all dog breeds are alike, and treating dog breeds as alike is often what is getting people killed and mauled, and many innocent pets the same.
The “all dogs bite” propaganda, initiated by pit bull breeders to escape responsibility, is a fallacy.
Pit bulls, fighting breeds, have been SELECTIVELY AND INTENTIONALLY bred by man for many hundreds of years to not just bite but to kill, to kill unprovoked, to keep on attacking until they are killed themselves. They not only are bred for these behavioral traits, but also the physical capacity to do the maximum damage. To be able to dismember, for example. To be able to inflict grievous bodily injury, not just “bite.”
THESE BREEDS ARE NOT PETS and should not be getting bred because dog fighting is illegal in the US. There is no reason to continue to breed breeds whose reason for existing as breeds is to kill and injure.
Trying to pretend that all breeds are alike, and trying to pretend that some training or “socializing” or certain circumstances will stop a pit bull’s genetics from kicking in is naive and dangerous.
This pit bull didn’t kill that child because of something wrong (the Yard Dog theory.) It killed that child because it was being a successful pit bull, fulfilling the breeder’s intentions. The pit bull did exactly what it was bred to do.
Tutus and training classes don’t wipe that out.
The biggest problem in the humane community is the current dominance by people who don’t have the faintest clue about dogs, dog breeding, anything more than a child’s storybook idea.
These people are literally killing with dogs. They are no better than the dog fighters, setting pit bulls up to kill and maul, just for different aims.
The humane community has become enablement for the fighting dog breeders and fighters,even lobbyists for them.
If only the humane community dealt with the real problem; the breeding of breeds that maximize killing and injuring traits. This problem could have been solved a long time ago, but the breeding lobby intruded and started calling the shots to protect their financial interests, and too much of the humane community became handmaidens to the breeders and fighters.
What will happen is that shelters and shelter personnel who persist in this are going to be getting hit with lawsuits and even criminal charges. Humane and rescue programs will get destroyed, and for what? To help some breeders and dog fighters perpetuate their profit motives?
The humane community needs to face reality soon, because they are going to be getting it hit over their heads in increasing numbers.
Excellent to point this out. I live in the Netherlands and we have the same problem. So does the UK. Pitbull lovers promote:
– shelters full of pit bulls (fighting breed dogs of any kind)
– maximized killing of pit bulls needed;
– dangers to people and dogs;
– normal dog lovers turning away from shelters as an option.
All in the name of pit bulls as part of society. Beats me! Why is this better than not existing of pit bulls at all?
Shelters should
– be liable for all damage their rehomed pit bulls do; and
– face criminal charges every time their rehomed pit bulls cause trouble; and
– be forced to keep a public accessible record where their agressive pitbulls are adopted, so people in the neighborhood know and can file a complaint.
If the shelter would have to pay for the damage their rescue pit bulls cause, I’m sure their advocacy would decrease very quick.
This is the same as saying Walmart should be held responsible for what is done with the products they sell. When you adopt from the humane society they go over everything imaginable to be sure you know what you are getting yourself into, whether it be a kitten or pit bull. If you don’t like it stay away from the shelter. Simple and easy.
First to be noted is that the family of Joshua Phillip Strother had no role or choice in adopting the pit bull who killed him from the Asheville Humane Society; their neighbor did. Second, Walmart, like most other major retailers, has paid substantial sums to settle product liability cases resulting from having sold allegedly defective and dangerous merchandise: $25 million, for instance, in December 2013 to settle cases originating from the sale of gasoline containers that exploded. Third, the reality that cumulative annual adoptions from U.S. shelters have not increased significantly in more than 30 years, remaining around 4.5 million per year despite ever more intense investment in adoption advertising, suggests strongly that people who are aware of the risks involved in adopting behaviorally “defective” dogs are staying away from shelters.
Most shelters and rescues do not tell the adopters the truth about true nature of pit bulls because of being naive or in denial. The reality is that it is not how you raise them, it is how they are bred. “Love” will not take away a pit bulls inherent drive to kill. I have not once heard of a shelter or rescue group educating people who adopt a pit bull that they should own a break-stick.
Pit-Bull Rescue Central, a leading authority on pit-bulls, recommends all pit guardians to have a “break-stick”,a wedge-shaped piece of wood used to pry open a pit bull’s jaw during an attack. “Since pit bulls have a strong fighting background, we recommend that owners also have a breaking stick as a precaution. Breaking sticks are not something to brag about and the general pubic might have the wrong impression if you walk around with a stick in your hand. Breaking sticks are not illegal, but they are considered dog fighting paraphernalia in certain states and/or with certain law enforcement agents.” http://www.pbrc.net/breaksticks.html
This person demonstrates how to use a break stick on a pit-bull: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfMVH4wY5Pg
According to Pit Bull Rescue Central, “It is a FACT that our pit bulls, AmStaffs and pit mixes come with a built-in fighting heritage. It doesn’t matter where we get them from, whether it be the pound, a stray we pick up, or a puppy we buy from a breeder. The majority of pit bulls will, at some point in their lives, exhibit some degree of dog-on-dog aggression. Yes, chances are that a “normal” pit bull will not share his affection with other animals. We cannot predict when or where it will happen and we can’t love, train or socialize it out of the dog. Pit bulls may not start fights, but they will finish them.” http://www.pbrc.net/misc/PBRC_dogpark.pdf“
A kitten does not kill people and it is nonsense to suggest that.. If a kitten would show any danger of killing a child, no shelter would dream of selling that kitten.
Pitbulls are not about what is being done with them, it is about their intrinsic danger.
If Walmart would sell products that kill people and pets at the rate pitbulls do, Walmart for sure would be held accountable. If Walmart sold some kind of toy that would by now have killed 19 people in 2015, the toy would be banned, or provided with a truckload of serious, fatprinted warnings, making newspaper headlines about the danger of this toy.
Stop pretending it’s the owner, or how you raise them. Pitbulls are dangerous and should be banned bigtime. Shelters denying this danger and therefore exposing us all to the risk of being mauled and/or killed, should be accountable in all possible legal ways.