Agenda - 10-28-2002 - 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

but one that will conclusively determine the success rate of the adoption program, allow us to follow up on adopted animals, and provide test data to other organizations on its merit. The APS not only has a responsibility to the animals but also to the public and their safety. When Judith Reitman insisted on adopting a dog proven dangerous through three separate temperament tests, she was denied by the shelter staff. She was then directed to the appeals process where she was again denied by a panel of four including a veterinarian and the director of Orange County Animal Control. A videotape of the dog proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the animal would be a danger to any neighborhood in which it might reside. During the appeal, Ms. Reitman was given every opportunity to explain how she could provide a safe environment for the dog and her neighbors. She instead chose to bring an attorney who never gave an argument for the adoption of the dog but questioned the legal rights of dogs to be adopted as compared to children's rights. Ms. Reitman also brought a veterinarian to speak on her behalf even though the veterinarian had never met the dog. He could only say that some dogs become less aggressive once neutered which the APS doesn't dispute but that would not have had any bearing on the adoption of this particular dog. During the appeal, Ms. Reitman was offered the opportunity to view the videotape which clearly showed the animal attacking a dog trainer but she refused. In addition,APS received a petition from Ms. Reitman's neighbors requesting that the adoption be denied. Several members of her neighborhood visited Laura Walters in person to express their concerns about safety of children and other animals. The APS full adoption procedures as approved by Orange County are available for any member of the public to read. There are currently parts of the procedures posted around the animal shelter including a summary of the appeals process. In the past year, there have been 13 appeals and 10 of those were overturned by the appeals committee allowing the animals to be adopted. The ones that were overturned were in regard to families with children under the age of 6 years who wanted to adopt a young animal or someone who had roommates who wanted to adopt. In all overturned cases Ms. Walters recommended to the Appeals Committee that the decisions be overturned because the adopters were responsible and would provide good homes. The three denials that were upheld included • A teenager trying to adopt a pit bull • An elderly person who had returned a kitten because it was too rambunctious and then wanted to adopt another kitten.-(It was recommended that she adopt an adult instead which she did) • A woman who wanted to adopt a known dangerous dog into a neighborhood where there were complaints received by animal control from her neighbors that she allows her dogs to roam off leash. The APS Board feels strongly that the appeals process is very fair and has done what it was intended to do—ensure that animals and citizens are safe. TRANSPARENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES All APS policies and procedures in regards to the visiting public are very clear. Signs are posted throughout the animal shelter and staff is available to answer any questions. With the exception 4