A Lesson in the Opposite of Proactive Redemptions via MAS

This dog was on the Memphis pound’s PetHarbor site for months:

Screen capture of MAS listing for dog #240103 on August 1, 2012.

In fact, she had been reclaimed by her owner on the day of impound, May 1. Obviously the records were never properly completed, leaving her to linger in the system.  To make matters worse, the dog was needlessly impounded, as records obtained via FOIA request show:

Proactive redemption is one of the essential programs of the no kill equation. It saves money and pets’ lives. Basically, if an ACO can find where a loose pet lives, the pet should be RTO’d in the field. If the owner is not home, the ACO may be able to secure the dog in the owner’s yard or with a neighbor or possibly even meet the owner somewhere nearby to deliver the dog. If the ACO feels it’s appropriate to issue a citation, that can still be done but keeping pets out of the pound should be a prime directive for any ACO.

In this case, the ACO appeared determined to impound the dog, despite knowing where she lived and even having a resident at the home attempting to intervene. I would go further and opine that threatening the resident who was trying to help with a citation is a bullying tactic.  This dog was impounded due to a power trip to my mind and that is an abuse of authority.

Why is MAS not just failing at proactive redemptions but actually wasting manpower impounding owned pets? They are continually killing animals because “space is needed” and because pets in the pound get coughs. Why needlessly bring in another animal when lives are at stake?

16 thoughts on “A Lesson in the Opposite of Proactive Redemptions via MAS

  1. “Why is MAS not just failing at proactive redemptions but actually wasting manpower impounding owned pets?”

    Because they are MASsholes?

    1. I see that the ACO who picked up this dog was non other than D. Johnson. Guess the cya theory didn’t quite work out the way he intended.

      1. guess we should be grateful aco johnson didn’t put a raccoon in with the dog or leave the dog in the truck in the memphis heat for a few hours . . .
        this is one lucky pup – she made it home alive

  2. A good ACO would not want to subject the dog to a shelter environment if they don’t have to. Johnson could have easily done differently in this situation, but made the conscious choice not to.

    1. “A good ACO” and “MAS” are contradictory! :) I’m just glad the dog wasn’t killed on intake the way others are before the owner had the chance to reclaim her. Thank goodness for small miracles!

  3. Ah, DUH, the power trip of issuing a CITATION and, therefore, showing he’s the MAN bringing in the money! What a complete JACK@SS!

  4. Our local ACO are great about giving dogs a ride back home. If the officer is unable to find someone at home and they have contact information, the shelter will make every attempt to CALL the owner. They leave messages, call their vet, etc.

    “Frequent fliers” are impounded and those owners are cited for failing to abide by the leash laws.

    And personally, I love that they know and like the “frequent fliers” – they wouldn’t have a fighting chance in Memphis.

  5. Different question – same answer:
    In fact, it seems to me they are on a bully/power trip.

  6. Why? Because they can. Why? Because they want to. Why? Because they clearly see it as their function in life (and for the city) to teach people a lesson about responsibility. This is not about animal welfare or about serving the interests of the public at all. It is about control plain and simple. And not animal control. The control of humans using the tax dollars of the people of Memphis. I’m waiting for the day when the people who live in Memphis and work in Memphis get angry enough to band together and demand a complete overhaul of this broken institution. It makes me ill to even think about going near that city. Just living in an adjoining state is a bit too close for comfort.

  7. They have to make sure they replenish the cages so they have more animals to kill! That’s the primary function of MAS, as they’ve proven time and time again. On the off chance the owner didn’t reclaim this dog, MAS could have used her to keep their numbers up. :(

  8. It is just more income for the city of Memphis if the owner has to pay a citation and a fee to get the dog out of MAS!

    1. I agree that’s the mindset. But , it’s not really more income , is it? I mean , after the time and labor to catch ,transport , and hold the dog , seems the *possible* reclaim fee/citation , would be a wash. Same kind of attitude where I live.

Leave a Reply