Betrayal by the ASPCA?: Oreo's Story
Published November 19, 2009
There are some stories about animal rescue that arrive in my email box each day that warm my heart and reaffirm my positive feelings that there are many people out in the world that love animals and deeply want to help them.
Folks dig deeply into their pockets and contribute their hard-earned dollars to help needy, abused and neglected animals in order to find new, forever loving homes, or adopt special needs pets that have been overlooked and remain neglected in overcrowded shelters.
Of course, I am always overjoyed when I hear about the many happy outcomes in which our forsaken and rejected animals are given a second chance to receive the care they so richly deserve.
But yesterday was not a day in which my heart overflowed with joy. In fact, when I read the story which was sent to me by a dedicated and passionate animal rescuer, I could hardly contain my rage and anger. The subject line in her email simply read, "Betrayal by the ASPCA".
Oreo after being rescued
Dubbed by the ASPCA as their "miracle dog" last June, shortly after the ASPCA quickly responded to reports that a one-year-old dog named Oreo was intentionally thrown off a sixth floor Brooklyn building roof top, by her abuser, she was rescued. She had also appeared to have been beaten in the past, which was substantiated by several neighbors residing in the building who reported sounds of the dog being struck.
The ASPCA nursed Oreo back to health and arrested the perpetrator. But here the "happy" part of the story abruptly ends.
According to the "San Francisco Animal Shelters Examiner", in an article entitled "The Meaning of Oreo", last Friday, the ASPCA killed Oreo, in spite of the fact that a No Kill shelter had offered to save her. Ed Sayers, the President of the ASPCA chose to kill the dog instead of handing her over to Pets Alive in Middletown, New York who offered to keep her.
Pets Alive is a member of the Mayor's Alliance for New York City. The ASPCA is also a member of the alliance. The public was in favor of Oreo being saved, and the No Kill Shelter had offered her lifetime care. Sayers claimed that the dog was aggressive and dangerous. What animal lovers nationwide are incredibly furious about is that most aggressive dogs, with patience, kindness and special training can be rehabilitated.
Sayers issued a press release in which he claimed, "We are all upset by this", and emphasized that Oreo was truly vicious. He went on to claim that a lifetime in a sanctuary would provide a poor quality of life for the dog, so the decision was made to euthanize her. Even though Pets Alive is a facility with experience in rehabilitating aggressive dogs and is a highly respected and credible shelter Sayers chose to take this dog's life, prematurely. Additionally, Middletown, New York is only a little over an hour's drive from New York City.
I cannot understand how the ASPCA could act in such a reckless and irresponsible manner. If they truly respect the lives of helpless animals, and are dedicated to save them, why would they disregard the compassionate invitation made by Pets Alive? No matter how I try, I cannot get my head wrapped around their decision to kill the dog without offering her another chance at finding love and protection.
To say that I am upset about this is a huge understatement. I am livid!
Read the full story by visiting: http://www.examiner.com/x-16635-SF-Animal-Shelters-Examiner~y2009m11d16-The-meaning-of-Oreo
What are your thoughts about Sayers' action? Leave a comment and share them with us.


Leave a Comment
No account? Sign up here.
Your Privacy
Comments (9)
I can see both sides of this. The ASPCA has no desire to be responsible for allowing an agressive animal to be kept alive in a cage when the probability of it changing is minnimal. An animal like this would consume the efforts of people who could be working with other animals that are more amenable to training.
I had a dog that I had to make this same choice with - she was a papered Rottwieler that I intended to use as a breeder - she intentionally snuck up behind a friends 8 year old son as we stood in the driveway and bared her teeth at his back. She had no reson to behave in this manner as she had been playing with the child just minutes before. I decided to put her down as she was , in my oppinion, an accident waiting to happen. It was a painful choice as she had been my companion for two years.
I will also say thaty my local shelter took in a parrot and completely failed to provide important information on its history and training that caused it to be horribly misunderstood at at least three new homes ... haven't found where it ended up at this time - hope it is not just shut in a cage!
The people who are saying the aspca had no choice are obviously not getting the point. There was someone willing to accept responsibilty for her, to care for her and to rehabilitate her. Are you deaf and dumb? When someone is saying "No please dont kill her Ill take her" How sick is that? , that the man would kill her anyway?
I think it's nothing short of disgusting. This man isn't human in my mind. I gave money to aspca for two years until I lost my job, I have always planned on giving again once Im employed again, but after hearing this story,I seriously am not sure. It sounds to me like he has a problem with control. So sad. Why put her through all of that and then kill her? As a matter of fact, I have seen stories on tv about how they rescue animals and then if the animal attacks the fake hand when they feed him or her, they kill them. Well before I started giving to them I wrote them and they assure me that hardly ever happens, well why put those episodes on tv? If a dog is abused, neglected, starved, doesnt it make sense that they might be "food aggresive"? Does to me. This sickens me.