Animal Shelter Caught in the Crossfire

I have posted the pics of this mess online! You are welcome to examine them and make your own decision. The animals are living in their own excrement at Durbin. They were moved from a sparkling clean facility and taken to a place that doesn't even have a true shelter. You can judge for yourself what is going on. It is going to be interesting to see what the sheriff is going to do about the animal cruelty complaint.

http://thepocahontascommentator.blogspot.com/

The moral of the story seems to be ;the lowest bid may not be the best one. Can dog waste contaminate the springs which are the source of Durbins water? An inspection tour of a tax supported dog pound would not constitute trespassing.

Mike and I were concerned about the growing controversy over conditions at the Shelter; we have "no dog in this fight," but feel compassion for the pets who are discarded once they are an inconvenience. We decided to visit the County shelter at Mallow's unannounced today, Saturday, to see the conditions firsthand. We arrived at 3 PM, and spent approximately 30 minutes touring the shelter area and Mallow's private yard/animals. She offered to show us all of the areas and responded to our questions. While the shelter area is not fancy, all dogs had clean spaces, shelter from sun and weather, water and appeared healthy. There were three young dogs together in one pen, but had ample space to run and jump around. We went into the building where cats were caged singly, in pairs and in trios. The spaces were clean and all of the cats appeared clear-eyed and healthy except 3 in one cage, which Mallow described as arriving with eye infections, but improving on the meds she is dispensing. She showed us a refrigerator that held dozens of boxes of medications. While the building had an odor, it was well-ventilated by two screened windows, one of which had a fan pulling air out.
Mallow then offered to show us her own animals; we saw two adjoining runs with individual doghouses that held two dogs, one of which was the husky pictured in the paper. The dog is elderly and receiving numerous medications. The runs were clean. Then we saw a separate shelter that housed about 6 dogs, mostly hounds that belong to Mallow's family. The dogs were on chains (definitely longer than 3 feet) fastened to the ceilings of the runs which allowed the dogs free movement about each fairly large area, as well as access to their raised doghouses. The floors were relatively clean. The doors of the runs did not have sufficient locking mechanisms to contain the jumping dogs, hence, the tethers.
Mallow's horses did not look emaciated; actually, they looked quite healthy for elderly horses, one of which was 30 years old. The run- in shed, while not fancy, offered adequate protection from sun and weather.
Is the shelter pristine and polished? No. Are unwanted animals treated humanely and cared for? It appeared so today, or I would be adding my voice to the dissent. My big question is how many animals can Mallow be expected to house on the current budget, and who sets the guidelines on euthanizing unadoptable dogs and cats; this is the reality, as the County has limited resources. Pocahontas County has a choice of unpopular tax increases to fund a state-of-the-art shelter, or making due with conditions that meet the basic needs of unwanted, discarded animals.
My own unanswered question is this: in these 2 County inspections, why did Commissioner Walker allow the losing bidders and their legal agent to accompany him and grant them access to not only the shelter, but also Mallow's private property?

I believe that in matters that are important to me, the most accurate picture is the one I see for myself. Today we drove 2 hours round trip to form our own impressions, which I shared in my previous post. If what I saw today is not indicative of the standard of care the animals can rely on, perhaps the Commissioners should make several unannounced visitations per month to establish reliability. If visits reveal inadequate care, then Mallow should be held accountable. If she is caring for the animals adequately, leave her alone. Harassment won't serve anyone, including the animals.
Impartiality assures authentication; surely the businessmen who lost the contract should not be the ones to have this responsibility. The primary interest they are serving is their own, not the animals.

I see the inspection of animal shelters to be in the domain of the health department;what about flies and groundwater contamination? Rabies and other infectious diseases? Are commissioners well versed in these areas? Bidders who lost could still have an interest in humane care of animals.I agree that they are taxpaying citizens and have a right to visit a dog shelter. The privately owned quarters of the keeper should be marked so no one could intrude accidentally.What is the salary for this unpleasant job?

At Marlinton there is no need for a distinction between private and public property. It is all public property! The Durbin site is not a humane place for the animals. They were moved from a facility owned by the county and one that had "washable" floors and walls. This is a downgrade from the past.

I visited the shelter on Monday. Although it was not housed in the million dollar county owned building in Marlinton, which added much gravitas to the previous shelter, it was in my opinion adequate and every one I spoke with in the Community there said and confirmed that Ms. Mallow had the heart for the job which is apparent to me.

Just because animals are housed in a million dollar County facility doesn't mean they are going to receive million dollar care. As Mr. Saffer stated, Sandy Mallow does have the heart for the job. If she didn't, she wouldn't have devoted 13 years to the County as Animal Control Officer.
She also provided the County with a monthly statement, accounting for her expenditures and providing a disposition for each animal (adopted, euthanized etc.)as opposed to Fitzgerald who did not.

Sandy Mallow provided proof that she had a %95 adoption rate for County animals. What about Fitzgerald? In the 18 months he held the position, how many animals did he take to the Vet to have put down and how many were adopted? He was given large amounts of money by both the County and Humane Society for the care of the animals. If he wasn't required to account for his expenditures, how are County taxpayers to know if the money was used properly?

A tempest in a teapot doesn't even begin to describe how this debate has affected Ms. Mallow and her family. I agree with RML that it has done an extreme amount of harm. Ms. Mallow is being maligned now by Norman Alderman on his Commentater webpage, which is filled with lies. For example, Alderman (among others) claims Ms. Mallow is neglecting County animals because she has a full time, 40 hour week being employed at Snowshoe and she doesn't have the time to take on another position with the County.

Ms. Mallow is NOT employed at Snowshoe and hasn't been since June 30th of this year. She had employment with Snowshoe after she resigned her Animal Control Officer position with the County
last fall, but handed in her resignation at Snowshoe and gave them notice that her last day would be June 30th. Well before she turned in a bid to the County.

What good does it do for Alderman and other's involved to perpetuate those kinds of falsehoods? Other than ruin Ms. Mallow's reputation?

Alderman also printed photographs that show he trespassed on Ms. Mallow's private property. He takes credit for the photos which show, quite clearly, a "NO TRESPASSING" sign.

Since when do people have the right to ignore posted property and invade someones right to privacy, then brag about it?

There's obviously no fear of consequences from law enforcement and a complete disregard of an individuals civil rights.

It's also rather curious that Alderman promotes the fact that Ms. Mallow does not have an indoor sheleter with "washable floors and walls" and finds that is a "downgrade from the past" when in fact, Alderman, according to his prior statements on his other website, finds nothing wrong with Joel Rosenthal or David Cassell housing their woodland and exotic animals in outdoor facilities.

What's the difference between keeping a coyote in an outdoor kennel cpmpared to a Husky?

Ms. M. certainly has a pr expert in her corner: Mr Alderman does not seem to have one.The photos as shown do indicate squalor or at least a bit of untidyness.I reiterate that public health is the issue,not the extolling of a female St. Francis. Love of animals takes second place to protecting the public from rabies, water contamination and the general danger and nuisance of stray and abandoned dogs.Dog owners should be taxed and if they have more than 2 or three, then they should pay a kennel tax as is done in Charleston. That would bring in sufficient funds to have a modern, clean,humane dog pound which would be inspected weekly by a health officer knowledgeable about disease and its vectors.I do not know the dangers ,if extant,of housing an occasional exotic animal in outdoor structures.Mr. Rosenthal is a person of great scientific knowledge and would be aware of them.

Love of animals DOES take "Second place" when it comes to "Protecting the public from rabies, water contamination and the general danger and nuisance of stray and abandoned dogs."

What reason do you have, freeholder, to make veiled innuendo that Sandy Mallow does not do those things?

While her facility may look like "Squalor" and "untidy" to you, it does protect the public from the nuisance of stray and abandoned dogs, not to mention the fact that Ms. Mallow isolates those dogs from the public, so there's not much chance of infection the unsuspecting public from rabies.

Unlike Fitzgerald's operation, the dogs at her facility are not housed in a PUBLIC building where a large population of the PUBLIC go to shop at a farmer's market. Someone even had a FOOD COURT in the ARC building where the animals were being housed. How's THAT for exposing the public to contamination?

As I said once before, pictures don't tell the whole story. If you're basing your information on photos posted by Norman Alderman and "description" provided by him, then you're basing your judgement on someone who isn't telling you the whole story in words AND in pictures. Norman Alderman has a "private pique." If I do, it's not because I'm supporting one side or the other. It's because I took the time and effort to make that personal visit you said you didn't want to make, and I saw first hand that Norman Alderman is feeding you a line of crap. Showing and telling only one side of the story.

That "public health officer" that's supposed to investigate Sandy Mallow's facility is a Veterinarian. The Vet already did an inspection and although I don't know what his/her finding were, I guarantee that Norman Alderman will dispute the findings if the Vet doesn't determine the matter in Fitzgeralds favor. In other words, if the Vet says there was no evidence of animal abuse or neglect, Alderman will claim that the Vet was prejudiced and didn't write about the case objectively. Or the Vet was paid off, or whatever other lie he can make up to explain why the Veterinarian didn't find abuse and neglect.

I am not aware that a Veterinarian was asked to spot groundwater contamination or any other type of health hazard that isn't in the realm of experience. I do know that Sandy Mallow ran the County shelter for 13 years prior to ARC ever existing, and up until now, not a single person in this County (including Norman Alderman) has ever taken any interest in whether the groundwater is being contaminated. Matter of factly, no one has ever so much as asked the County Commission to have any "professional" even check her facility for any kind of health concern.

But all of a sudden it's an issue? And where were you and your concerns during County Commission meetings? If it's a great concern, why didn't you address the County Commission sometime during the last 13 years and ask them to investigate?

Fitzgerald was never "investigated" when he had the animals at his shelter, nor did anyone ask a health official to ascertain that his facility wasn't a health hazard. No one ever trespassed on his private property and took photos of his personal animals or bothered to go to the County landfill and demand to see how many pounds of dead animals Fitzgerald paid to have deposited there.

It's a double standard being imposed on Sandy Mallow. Now. Is that a double negative or a double positive?

I do agree with one thing you said. The County does need a modern animal control facility. With all the money they socked into ARC, they could have built a brand new facility from the ground up and let the Humane Society run it...the same way the other Counties in our State do. At least we'd be assured the Humane Society's priority is the animals rather than the salary.

Durbin, with its propensity for unpleassing press, does not need an unsightly animal sanctuary perched atop its spring fed water supply: Move the thing back to Marlinton. I do not understand the remark "being fed a bunch of @#@#!.It is not in the best interest of polite conversation.I look askance at being told to go to a commissioners meeting : If I communicate with them,I fax or use the services of the P.O.To aver so many "facts" about inspection,habits,cleanliness level about a dog pound suggests a great amount of time visiting them-- which I regard as unusual behavior at best.I believe that in Pokey as elsewhere, animal shelters are inspected by the public health authorities. The person who picks up lost or abandoned animals and gives them a modicum of care, though ,is to be admired for doing a dangerous but necessary job ; he/she needs to be paid well and be given paid assistants. In closing, I do not doubt the authenticity of the pictures nor see baleful motives on the part of Mr. Alderman .

Stop by the ARC building and all questions will be answered. It is so much nicer there and it is a million dollar building.

Animals get old. Some get sick. Old or sick animals can appear to be neglected even when well cared for.

Before he died, my dog Topper looked like a poster dog for animal abuse. His fur was ratty and he was so frail that I had to carry his 75-pound frame outdoors twice a day so that he could do his 'chores'. Regardless of how it looked, Topper was cared for with great love and tenderness until his end.

Reality can be far more complicated than what is captured in a photograph. All of us will eventually become old or sick. When we do, which is more important: A clean, empty room? Or a gentle, caring friend? -- Rich

Eyesores in Durbin are not situated atop the large spring which is located out of town and thus under the jurisdiction of the state or county health department. The refuse in the Greenbrier would contaminate the water of those who live down stream, also in the purview of state officials. These are important matters but not relevant to dog dung above the spring which is the topic of (discussion)!!!??

Bunny, check out the junkyard at Green Bank and look for the erosion restraints!!

I do not know Norman,It is near the spring which is fed by groundwater and well--- gravity is gravity except in durbin which has an unusual kind. I refer to the two houses on the hill, side by side,one is on the sewer, the other is on a septic tank , owned by an installer of them.