Waikato pounds can put any dog down, but how do they decide?

Published on Stuff.co.nz and in the Waikato Times

Whether your dog lives or dies depends on which pound it is taken to.

An investigation for Stuff has found a dramatic difference in the number of dogs put down versus rehomed depending on which region they are picked up and impounded.

The lack of a standardised behaviour assessment and no legal requirement for pounds to rehome dogs in their care, mean it is down to councils to decide the future of the dogs.

In Tokoroa, senior animal control officer Kerry Beckett does not fill out a checklist or a behaviour assessment of dogs in her pound, like people might see on reality television shows.

"We don't do it like on Animal Planet, with the hand on the stick and all that type of stuff," she said.

Beckett and the officers observe the dog's behaviour while they are impounded and Beckett makes a judgement based on those observations and her instincts.

They make a note of any noise or aggression problems.

"I just pick up things I know about dogs. I can just read them. You look into the eyes of an animal and I connect with them. I see things about them and I can just tell if they're fearful, if they're friendly and just not sure what is going on.

"Those sorts of things are just inbuilt in me and I don't know how to put them on paper and make it a regulation," said Beckett.

Out of 396 dogs that came into Beckett's care between June 2014 and June 2015, 9 per cent or 35 dogs were rehomed. The fate of 97 dogs is unknown.

Hamilton City Council has developed its own temperament test, which leads to 84 per cent of dogs in its care being euthanised - the highest percentage out of seven Waikato councils.

The council couldn't explain why its number was higher than most, but in a statement said: "Hamilton is an urban centre whereas the outer districts are rural and small towns - so it's a little like comparing oranges with apples."

Hamilton's animal education and control team leader Peter Crocker said the behaviour assessment was developed by the team over the past few years to ensure no dangerous dogs were rehomed.

"We don't adopt any dog out that's showing aggression, whether it's fear aggression or any other kind. We don't want to be investigating attacks from dogs that have been adopted out."

Last year, Sylvie Gallizzi paid $513 to rescue four-month-old collie cross Jessie from the Hamilton pound who was due to be put down because she had failed a behaviour test.

Jessie was then fostered by Rini Vandenheuvel who has been breeding collies for 30 years.

Vandenheuvel said far from exhibiting anti-social behaviour, Jessie had been around other dogs and children while in his care and had not shown any signs of aggression.

Thames-Coromandel District Council has the second lowest put-down rate with 44 per cent being euthanised.

Council's compliance team leader Steve Hart said his team work closely with the SPCA to rehome as many dogs as possible.

"We've got a second chance dog programme and do everything we can to give the dog a second chance as long as it passes the test to make sure they're quite safe."

The test takes into account the dog's breed and history and an SPCA inspector carries out the assessment with a council officer.

"As far as our council's concerned, we always try to rehome them. The majority of the dogs we put down are menacing by breed, pitbulls."

The council recently prosecuted an owner whose dog seriously injured an elderly woman, but the dog had no history of dangerous behaviour.

"There can be any reason why a dog can all of a sudden snap and become aggressive, there are not always warning signs out there," said Hart.

But Waitomo District Council do not appear to have the same difficulties, putting down 11 dogs last year and rehoming 50.

In a statement the council said: "We have a proactive team of animal control officers and pound staff who are approachable and have good connections within the community. The use of social media has

also assisted with the rehoming of dogs."

Several small rehoming charities have popped up recently to help find "forever homes" for animals in need.

Paws 4 Life founder Rachael Maher works closely with Hamilton city pound to help find families for dogs and she does her own behaviour assessment with them.

"It's difficult in a pound situation because you've got a dog in an abnormal environment that is very stressful and even the greatest dog, the most loved dog, may or may not cope in a pound situation. The stress levels are high so you can't simply look at a dog in a pound and make a call, it's a bit more than that."

Although she observes the animals' behaviour while they are fostered to decide if an animal can be rehomed, she expects the councils to be certain that any dogs released to her are safe.

"I wanted a pomeranian, a tiny little dog, from Hamilton city pound that failed its temperament assessment and was not fit for rehoming. I was upset about that because I know pomeranians and I know how to work with them.

"But [the council] own the dog so it's their call. There is nothing I can do about it. But you have to trust their policies and procedures."

She noted that the core business of a pound is not to rehome animals, "so for any animals they do rehome is out of the goodness of their heart".

"Ratepayers are paying for councils to exist and pounds to exist and I wish they would rehome more but that's not what they're payed to do."

'SHODDY PAPERWORK'

The council which put down wrong dogs, twice, is trying to fix the procedures that led to the fatal mistakes.

The Tokoroa pound, under the South Waikato District Council, had 669 dogs in its care over the last year (June 2014 - 2015) but did not officially record the fate of 97 of those dogs.

It also accidentally put down two dogs that were arranged to be collected by their owners.

The six-week reports showed that 66 per cent of canines that were not collected by their owners were euthanised and 9 per cent were rehomed.

The fate of 25 per cent of the remaining dogs was unknown.

Sharon Robinson, the council's group manager regulatory, said the numbers above excluded the dogs that stay in the pound over the reporting periods.

"What we haven't done is put them into the three sections, being rehomed, euthanised or picked-up, and we need to do that."

Details of every dog that is impounded are hand written into a book in the order they come in. At the end of the six-week period senior animal control officer Kerry Beckett totals up all the dogs that were collected, rehomed, euthanised and those which remain in the pound.

When the next report is due, it is only for the last six-week period, so any dogs on the pages before are not included - the 97 unaccounted for dogs.

Due to this discrepancy and the Fairfax Media investigation, the pound staff are trialling a new electronic database to keep those records this week but the book will remain for the staff's reference.

But records are also kept in two other places.

Internal pound communication, about dogs that currently reside in the kennels, is kept on pieces of

paper which are held with bulldog clips and hung on the wall.

Official communication about the dogs between owners and the council is kept electronically.

Newa Winikerei had her dog, Balls, accidentally put down because the officer in charge that day did not check the electronic records that detailed conversations with Winikerei who had the intention to pick her dog up.

But it wasn't the first time.

Two years ago, Rob Luatua and former partner Jamie-Rae Takiri went to pick up their dog, Vato, from the pound but were short by $20.

It costs owners $10 for every day their dog is held by the council.

"She [the pound worker] forgot to write it down in the book that we had paid [$150] and that we would be back on Thursday to pick him up," Takiri said.

The couple returned two days later with $20 and four dog rolls but they were too late.

Takiri said they were compensated with a $200 Warehouse voucher and a Crunchie bar.

"It didn't seem very sincere…it seemed like a bribe not to go any further."

Robinson said the council is doing what it can to prevent the mistake happening a third time.

"In regards to Miss Winikerei's dog [Balls] that was put down that was easily preventable. We have no excuses for that."

Robinson explained that, although it is Beckett's responsibility to decide the fate of the dogs, both herself and Beckett were away that week.

"We had an officer step up in her absence and unfortunately that officer didn't do a full, complete research of our live [electronic] file."

All paper records indicated to the officer that there was no agreement or payment from Winikerei.

Robinson said the officer had driven to Winikerei's house that morning but there was no one home.

"So he did actually go out of his way but he didn't check the live [electronic] file."

The officer didn't have the authority to decide whether the dog could be rehomed, so instead it was euthanised.

"What should have happened, if there was a concern around that, the dog would have just been held over for the next week. We had space in the pound and Mrs Beckett would have been back at work.

"There was no urgency to [euthanise] the dog."

The South Waikato District Council staff are in the process of fixing those procedures that led to the fatal mistakes.

"I immediately sent out an instruction to all animal control officers that no one is to authorise euthanasia when Mrs Beckett is away, that's now to come to me. But if Mrs Beckett were here on that day, those errors would not have occurred."

By the numbers

June 2014 - June 2015

Hamilton City Council

686 dogs impounded which were not collected

576 put down, 84 per cent

110 rehomed, 16 per cent

Otorohanga District Council

64 dogs impounded which were not collected

54 put down, 84 per cent (eight were aggressive)

10 rehomed, 16 per cent

Matamata-Piako District Council

107 dogs impounded which were not collected

86 put down, 80 per cent

21 rehomed, 20 per cent

South Waikato District Council

396 dogs impounded which were not collected

264 put down, 66 per cent

35 rehomed, 9 per cent

97 unaccounted for, 25 per cent

Waipa District Council

109 dogs impounded which were not collected

59 put down, 54 per cent

Remaining 50 in foster care, 46 per cent

Thames-Coromandel District Council

97 dogs impounded which were not collected

43 put down, 44 per cent

38 rehomed, 39 per cent

16 remain in pound

Waitomo District Council

62 dogs impounded which were not collected

11 put down, 18 per cent (four were aggressive)

50 rehomed, 81 per cent

1 remains in the pound

#investigation