Tensions escalated at the Cayman Islands Humane Society last week after a dog was euthanised.
Juliette Heath, a dedicated volunteer, was devastated to hear that Ning Ning, a dog she walked regularly and shared a close bond with, had been put down.
“I cannot tell you how much I loved this dog,” she said. “She and I and her kennel mate, Bingo, went for walks every week. Everybody there knew that they were ‘my dogs’ at the shelter, and they would leave them for me to walk if I arrived later than the other volunteers.”
It appears that the decision to euthanise Ning Ning was the result of one individual witnessing the dog becoming involved in a fight with another dog, on two occasions.
“I understand in some very sad circumstances some dogs may have to be euthanised due to being aggressive to people,” Ms Heath said. “But Ning Ning has never been people aggressive. She’s such a loving dog.”
“They said she got in a fight with another dog and that is why she was euthanised,” she added. “But most dogs are territorial and they will protect their space. That’s why when you go there on a Saturday to walk the dogs, you take one kennel at a time.”
“My biggest issue is that these people who authorised this dog to be killed do not know her and have spent no time with her,” Ms Heath said. “If they had, she would not have been sent to be euthanised.”
Twila Escalante, shelter liaison, explained that all decisions to euthanise are made in the best interests of the animal and the shelter as a whole.
“In the event of terminal illness or injury, the decision is made after consultation with the shelter liaison, manager and the vet. Decisions to euthanise an aggressive animal are similarly made with the addition of consultation with our volunteer dog behaviour expert, Mr. Kenneth Morgan.”
She went on to say, however, that in this case, Ning Ning was euthanised without consultation.
Humane Society Director Carolyn Parker was off island when contacted and said that from overseas she was unable to review policies in order to respond with accuracy.
Ms Heath has since received e-mails from two board members expressing their regret about the incident. Board member Kevin Sedgwick has further confirmed that he has agreed to offer his resignation to the board at the next board meeting, although he does not state the reason.
Waivers
Volunteers’ emotions were already running high following the introduction of a waiver the week before that all volunteers were required to sign before taking dogs for walks or otherwise caring for them.
Clause 3, which reads, “No Compensation – I agree to provide my services without compensation. I agree that I am not and will not become an employee, agent, contractor or principal of CIHS upon execution of this agreement” has caused some controversy.
A number of volunteers have refused to sign away what they interpret as the possibility of ever becoming members of the board.
Ms Escalante clarified the meaning of the controversial clause.
“This clause simply relates to compensation and should be read in its entirety,” she said.
“It is not related to the insurance coverage. This clause simply means a volunteer does not gain the rights of an employee by signing it and will not be paid for the services performed.
It certainly does not detract from future employment by the Cayman Islands Humane Society or becoming a director of the same. The clause has been grossly misinterpreted.”
Ms Escalante urges those volunteers who have questions about it to approach her directly to discuss their concerns.
However, no official explanation has been given and the problematic clause has not been re-worded at this point.
“I don’t understand why it’s still in existence and why it hasn’t been changed,” Ms Heath said.
“It’s not the Humane Society I have a problem with. They have some fabulous staff – especially Jason, the manager – and they really care about the dogs. The Humane Society should not be made to look bad because of the decisions of some people.”
Related Videos
I’ll give an example of how badly run the Humane Society is, with an ironic twist:
About 2 years ago an event was held that raised 1600 for the purchase of microchips to help identify lost and abandoned animals. So 2 years later what’s happened ?????
the microchips are still sat in the box, that’s if they still know where they are, 1600 wasted, and the irony??? the event is the picture they use as their banner on their FB page!!!!!
A little off topic but just an example of the poor management of the shelter.
It really is time the people in charge of the shelter stepped aside and let people who really care have a go.
Where is Carolyn Parker during all of this discontent? Why won’t she be interviewed by the media? Also – ”Humane Society Director Carolyn Parker was off island when contacted and said that from overseas she was unable to review policies in order to respond with accuracy” why is she unable to review policies in order to respond with accuracy? This is nonsense, clear evasive response as she knew what she did was terribly wrong. She shows no respect for her volunteers. A petition has been set up to ask her to resign so someone else can take over please read and sign if you so wish. There are so many unhappy people out there with the way things are being run –
https://www.change.org/petitions/petition-for-the-removal-of-carolyn-parker-as-the-president-of-the-cayman-islands-humane-society?utm_campaign=friend_inviter_chatutm_medium=facebookutm_source=share_petitionutm_term=permissions_dialog_true#
Please continue to support the Cayman Islands Humane Society’s animals despite the bad press they need your help more than ever!
As a former member of the Humane Society board, I am appalled and ashamed. There are too many animals in that shelter for it to be considered humane. Previous boards developed very clear policies that limited the number of animals per cage and processes for dealing with euthanization, which sadly, must continue until Cayman gets its act together to limit the unwanted pet population.
The Ning Ning story is very sad indeed and only indicative of the sorry state the Humane Society finds itself in.
How many thousands of dollars of donated money does the Humane Society spend on keeping so many animals in overcrowded inhumane conditions? Humane Societies worldwide are NOT pet shops. They are supposed to promote animal welfare.
How on earth can you expect someone to adopt an animal as a family pet when the animal is stressed out and potentially aggressive living in such conditions? And when the shelter is overcrowded, it closes its doors to people who want to drop off unwanted pets…..so they drop them off on the road side. How is this helping the problem?
The Cayman Humane Society needs to get back to basics and start promoting spay/neuter and abiding by its only principles of animal welfare. And please remember the value of many dedicated volunteers who are the lifeblood of the organization. You can’t afford to alienate them too!
Thank God for other groups that have sprouted up to help ship our lovely Cayman animals oversees to loving homes. The Cayman Humane Society has lost its way and better shape up quick before someone calls PETA or other recognized animal welfare advocacy groups.
In the meantime, think twice before donating to the Cayman Humane Society because I’m certain most of that money is being spent on housing animals in overcrowded and inhumane conditions, instead of promoting spay/neuter and improving the welfare of these lovely creatures.
P.S. The answer is not to stop donating towards the animals at the CIHS. Things would improve if there was a change in leadership and a change in attitude towards it’s volunteers.
CarpeDiem1 – I did raise the point about improving volunteer relations but you are correct about the need for new leadership. When is the next AGM to vote out these bunch of jokers? Re the donations….money talks….NO money talks louder. But things WILL NOT improve if they continue to maintain the numbers of animals in the shelter now.
@CarpeDiem1. I absolutely agree. The shelter will need donations now more than ever.
I agree with Carpe Diem. Why would you stop donating to the animals? That is a total contradiction to helping them. Get in a brand new team to manage the place and focus on spay/neuter, education at the grass roots and put energies into getting great volunteers who are treated with respect to support the Directors in what they need to do. Stopping donations coming in only hurts the poor animals more
CEbanks: you raise some good points but I don’t agree that dogs (who staff and volunteers have grown to know and love) should be destroyed to make space for new dogs to come in. Its not that they are unadoptable – there just not many adopters right now.
It doesn’t help when anyone interested is made to sign the controversial waiver document before they are allowed to even enter the premises.
It is the poor leadership and decision making at the shelter that has led to this – the animals are the innocents in all of this.
You are right that the members need to exercise their right to choose and remove the directors that represent them in managing THEIR (the members’) shelter. However the board are in a position to ‘manage’ the memberships and proxies that may vote against them. For example, new applicants who they don’t know are being asked questions about their volunteering and supporting activities (in the name of ‘due diligence’ under a Charities Bill which has not yet been passed into Law), some are being denied without reason and the register of members is not forthcoming when members request it, as they are entitled to.
CEbanks you raise some good points. I do not agree though at all that people should stop donating. Isn’t this an oxymoron? So we want to help the animals but we want to stop donations to help them? Sorry I don’t agree on this at all. I will continue donating where I can afford it. Jason and his posse are a great group of staff too.