Claws come out over Katrina dog rescues

[Contrary1]

This could have been avoided. if the victims of Katrina had been allowed to take their pets,

"It started as a dispute over the custody of Sandy Marie and Coco Ree, two dogs brought to Montgomery County last year after being rescued from a suburb of New Orleans ravaged by Hurricane Katrina.

But the attorneys involved in the spiraling fight are dueling about more than ownership of the female shepherds. It has become a battle over the legal complexities of rescuing pets in disaster zones, disparities in social class and the incendiary effect grass-root campaigns waged on the Internet can have on people's lives.

On one side is Belinda Sumrall, a New Orleans evacuee who left her pets behind. On the other are the Montgomery County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and two of its volunteers.

In the middle are the dogs' new owners, who adopted them from the society and now might have to return them to Sumrall.

A judge in Louisiana has ordered the society to return the dogs to Sumrall. The agency and the two volunteers have struck back with a defamation lawsuit in Maryland, in which they contend that the Louisiana attorney representing Sumrall has unfairly characterized them as elitist thieves who took advantage of Katrina victims...."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14335994/

[bluestateguy]

1. People magazine had a good story about this too

The lesson to be learned from it all, unfortunately, is to be cautious about adopting a Katrina pet rescue. It's not worth it if you are only going to get slapped with a lawsuit months later!

I do agree with you though about allowing people to take their pets into shelters.

[pitohui]

2. all they have to do is return the lady's property

it's usa law in all 50 states -- they cannot legally adopt dogs or receive ANY property that belonged to somebody else -- this is nothing special from katrina, people whose art was stolen by nazis in world war 2 are still able to reclaim artwork when it is found even tho that war ended 60 years ago and by now innocent third parties had bought the art

when the owner of the dogs was found alive and wanted her dogs, the right thing to do was give her the effin' dogs

what? they just wanted the lady to have drowned and never return for her animals? that's fairly shitty


i took in a katrina evacuee (human) for a few months, didn't mean i planned to be his "mom" forever

[sandnsea]

3. I'm with you on this one

My gawd, rescue dogs and then refuse to give them back!?!? How big an asshole does somebody have to be to do that, criminy.

[never_get_over_it]

4. I can actually see both sides of this story

and have very mixed feelings on the solution.

The MD SPCA volunteered to go down and rescue these dogs and had an agreement that if the owners did not claim them by Nov 1 that they belonged to the SPCA who could then adopt them out or I guess put them down if they couldn't find homes

So someone adopted them and has cared for them for several months and I'm sure loves them very much

but on the other hand the original owner has been through hell and wants her dogs back so I lean a little towards her

which is one of the reasons why I would NEVER EVER LEAVE without my animals...which is not a criticism of those who did but my personal choice

the legal issue might be a whole other ball game sicne MD SPCA had an agreement that if they were not claimed by Nov 1 the dogs belonged to them - you know if they hadn't found a home for them more than likely they would have been put down long before now - so the SPCA isn't all rotten in this case after all they did save the dogs lives.

[Virginian]

5. You are all missing part of this. It isn't the new owners refusing.

Sumrall, the original owner contacted Montgomery County, Maryland SPCA about getting her dogs back in mid-December.

SPCA volunteers told her no with a callous brushoff.

It is not clear that the new owners even know that the original owner of the pets has been found.

Nov 1 was the cut off date for Katrina victims to find and claim their pets. It seems like that is too short in this extraordinary situation. If NO was back to normal by last Nov, maybe, but lives have been too unsettled. All the unclaimed pets should still be considered to be in foster care.

[Lorax]

6. Those dogs had untreated medical conditions

At first, my tendency was to side with the original owner of the dogs. But then I found out that both of the dogs had to be treated for heartworm and one had surgery to remove a mass from it's salivary gland. I guess you could argue that maybe the dogs picked up heartworm if they were wandering after the hurricane. But I'll bet that mass on it's salivary gland existed before the hurricane. I can appreciate that the original owner might not have had the money to get surgery for her dog - but I don't think that's an excuse. You don't own an animal if you can't properly care for it, including providing for it's health needs.

These dogs were found and given health care that they needed. Now they supposed to be surrendered to the person who didn't provide that care (at least in the case of the surgery) in the first place? I don't agree with that.

[aquart]

7. Good grief.

Volunteers HELP. That's what they do. They care for the sick, the injured, the dying. THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THEY ARE OWED ANYTHING FOR IT.

Either the intention of the SPCA was to help, or it wasn't.

As for the new owners, they have my sympathy. But pets are not merely property. Their bonds with their owners are emotional and it is important for the well-being of both that those bonds be maintained.

The Katrina pet situation has been an outrage from day one and doesn't look to be getting better.

[REP]

8. Perhaps The Dog Had an Aug 20, 2005 Vet Appointment

In cases like this, we just can't know. Unless the owner had been cited for abuse of these animals and they had been removed from her care prior to the hurricane, the ONLY decent thing to do is to give her back the dogs.

It isn't easy to give back an animal to whom you've become attached, but when returning an animal companion to their original caretaker - especially one who has been though such a horrible thing - surely there must be some happiness in knowing that you've kept their animal friends safe and happy, and that they are being reunited. I can't even imagine being separated from my animals like that, not knowing what has happened to them, and knowing that their lives are not valued by many. It must be horrible beyond all belief, and this woman's relief at knowing that her dogs are alive and healthy must be a tremendous relief. I hope she regains their custody.