Forsyth Co Punishes Elderly, Suffering Dog for Reacting to His Pain, and Other Horror Stories

The terrible Forsyth Co pound in NC continues to be terrible.  The NC Department of Agriculture failed the facility on its March inspection and this month, fined the county $5200 for numerous violations of state laws.  Among the violations outlined by the state:

  • Animals whose records contained no indication of serious illness or injury were being killed before the 72 hour mandatory holding period.
  • A cat with a leg wound was left for 2 days without veterinary care then killed.
  • Another cat with an injured leg was left without vet care for 2 days, then had instructions issued for vet care and was then immediately killed.
  • A dog with her uterus hanging out was left in a cage without veterinary treatment for nearly 3 full days before someone finally sent a photo to the vet to inquire if she needed any medical care.
  • A sick, one month old kitten whose records contained the notes “eyes possibly blind” and “cat can not eat on its own” was left without vet care to suffer in a cage until she finally died 3 days later.
  • An elderly dog who was barely able to move, exhibiting neurological symptoms, urinating in his bowl, vomiting and having diarrhea in his cage was scheduled for euthanasia 3 days after being surrendered.  While handling the dog in preparation for the euthanasia, a staff member said she was bitten.  The decision was then made to leave the suffering dog in a cage for an additional 10 day rabies hold with a plan to cut off his head and submit it for rabies testing.  The dog was found dead in his cage 9 days into the hold.  He never received any vet care.
  • A dog who was struggling to breathe and unable to move after being run over by a car was left without veterinary care to suffer for more than 24 hours before being killed. Another mangled dog was similarly neglected.
  • A nursing dam was seized for a 10 day bite quarantine along with her litter of 7 puppies.  Pound staff killed the mother and all her puppies after 9 days.  No owner surrender form or other records could be found for the puppies.

While these violations of state code may seem disturbing to some, it’s all in how you look at it:

Tim Jennings, Forsyth County’s animal control director, said after reviewing the violation notice Monday, “It looks like we have some things we need to focus on, prioritize and deal with pretty quickly.”


“They’re outlining some serious issues, and we have to correct those problems,” Jennings said.

He said they strive to keep animals from suffering.

[County manager Dudley] Watts said the civil penalty “comes as an unfortunate surprise to us,” because the county has some years of solid inspections.

“We just haven’t had these kinds of violations emerge. … But we certainly want to make sure that we’re in compliance across all of these issues,” Watts said.

Everybody calm down. It’s not Eyes Possibly Blind kitten left in a cage to starve to death or Dog with Insides Falling Out left to suffer – it’s just issues.  Plus, they’re striving.  So there’s that.

I hate that the county had this unfortunate surprise.  You know who else got an unfortunate surprise?  That cat with the hurt leg who finally got to see a vet after 2 days at the pound but instead of getting treatment, the pound staff decided to give him death.  Treatment sounds like work, amirite?

(Thanks Clarice and Lisa.)

14 thoughts on “Forsyth Co Punishes Elderly, Suffering Dog for Reacting to His Pain, and Other Horror Stories

  1. “Issues” to deal with. Yes. Yes, you have some issues to deal with.

    But hey, it’s nothing that can’t be fixed by FIRING ALL OF YOUR ASSES and burning that hell hole to the ground, so let’s get started on that, shall we?

  2. Well see, the great and benevolent State of North Carolina requires that an ill or injured animal receive immediate attention, either medical or just guess the alternative. So rather than have the sick/injured animal seen by a vet, these lazy, cheap-ass shelters simply kill them. My county shelter doesn’t even have a vet, except one who consults by phone (I think it’s still Ralph Houser, aka Dr Death (just google him) ), so you got it: They kill ’em. That’s unless some community resident just happens to find out about the animal and gets it out, which of course is against shelter policy but which does happen. But hey, my county shelter kills all feral cats as a matter of policy so, even though they tout themselves as making progress and wanting to help the animals … well, you know. They’ve been killing animals with impunity for a long time and they’re gonna keep killing ’em, one way or another, no matter what we say.

    1. No matter what you say? Where is that at? That is one powerful government you got there. You better find some pet friendly attorneys.

      1. They could not possibly care less what I say or what anyone says including attorneys. The State has already spoken. The Counties are within their rights to not make feral cats available. They are in compliance with State law to kill an animal rather than give it veterinary care. They are within their rights to not have a vet on staff or personally on call. North Carolina doesn’t give a shit.

    2. Although I would strongly advocate for giving sick and injured animals veterinary care if there is a reasonable hope of recovery, I believe there is a big difference between killing an animal because it is sick or injured, and just letting it die a prolonged death from whatever illness or injury it has.

      1. Oh yes, I definitely agree. I certainly would not want to see any animal left to suffer. And that is why the State requires “immediate attention,” which the shelters interpret as a license to kill. Or at least this one does.

  3. I’m glad we don’t have to pick a “best example of wanton cruelty” from this lot, but my nominee for “most incredibly stupid” is the dog who was surrendered specifically for euthanasia to end its suffering. Maybe there is an incredibly stupid law that requires the shelter to deliberately let an animal surrendered for euthanasia suffer for 3 days before administering mercy. So after 3 days, this dog allegedly bites someone. And they think that if he is rabid, it could not be detected if the dog were euthanized then? That he will be even more rabid after an additional 10 days? That although the dog was already in custody 3 days post-exposure if in fact it had been infected, 13 days would be better than just 10 to determine if the person bitten needed treatment?
    Since there is not even the most remote factor of logic in this scenario, the only explanation I can see is that they thought an additional 10 days of suffering for the dog would at least be a measure of justice or comfort for the person who was bitten. That is on my Top Ten list of the sickest twists I’ve ever heard of in the name of animal welfare.

    1. That was my interpretation too – they wanted to punish the dog for biting by leaving him to suffer for as long as possible. But remember: don’t criticize, don’t be divisive, we all love animals…


  5. this is disgraceful!
    basic needs are not being met in these facilities & what is being done about that? I’m dismayed at how often I hear that those in charge of an animals well being are serving their own agendas rather than helping to ease discomfort & pain. if you can’t follow the law, or feel compassion for another living being… perhaps your talents should be employed in an incarceration facility for convicts & not in an animal shelter. these injured discarded animals have don’t nothing to deserve this callous treatment. you should be ashamed.

Leave a Reply