The day after a Nixa couple surrendered their 8-month-old Husky puppy, they regretted the decision and wanted her back.
But it was too late. Now, Dominic and Trisha Kimery say they’re confused about the policy of the Humane Society of Southwest Missouri and — to tell you the truth — they are mad.
The policy, says Sally Nail, director of operations, is that if you surrender rights to your pet — as the Kimerys did — you will not get it back.
But that is slightly different from the written policy, which was on the paperwork signed by Dominic: It states the humane society is “under no obligation” to return a surrendered pet.
Regardless, the Kimerys fully intended to surrender their dog because it had been aggressive regarding food and treats, and they have also have a 10-month-old baby in their apartment.
On Feb. 12, Trisha was feeding the dog by hand from its bowl to work on the dog’s aggressive behavior regarding food.
The dog bit Trisha in the hand. The bite did not break the skin.
Later that day, Trisha was feeding the dog again by hand when the dog apparently felt the baby was too close and growled at the baby.
Trisha later called Dominic, who works nights in security, about the dog’s behavior.
“I was at work and my instant reaction was we have to remove the dog to protect the wife and baby,” he says. “For safety purposes, we thought this was the best option.”
The next day, Feb. 13, Dominic took 8-month-old Luna to the Humane Society, a nonprofit no-kill animal shelter at 3161 W. Norton Road, in northwest Springfield.
He paid $30 to surrender the dog and filled out a “My Dog’s History” form in which he explained Luna’s troubling behavior when it comes to food.
More:Pokin Around: When prez and vice prez blow into town, no need to spread political smoke
Dominic did not check the Humane Society’s website before surrendering Luna.
It states under the tab “Giving Up a Pet”:
“Please exhaust every available alternative before surrendering your pet to the shelter.”
But Dominic, 31, has since read the information and points out to me that the Humane Society did not follow its own policy, which says: “In order to surrender an animal to the Humane Society of Southwest Missouri you MUST make an appointment.”
(The “MUST” is in all caps on the website.)
Dominic had not made an appointment.
This is one of several reasons why Dominic and Trish have concluded that — in their view — the Humane Society was in too much of a hurry to accept the dog and then adopt it out.
The dog is beautiful, they say, and probably worth a lot, up to $1,000.
They paid $350 for the puppy. It was about 8 weeks old at the time.
One eye is blue and the other is half blue and half brown. The dog understands 30 commands, they say.
“She is very energetic and likes humans,” Dominic says.
The day after giving up the dog — Valentine’s Day — they regretted surrendering her.
“The house felt empty,” he says.
They talked it over and decided that Trisha, 20, who works up to 30 hours a week from home doing computer-aided design, would drastically reduce her hours.
“She wasn’t getting enough exercise,” Trisha says.
They decided they also would get professional help with a trainer to work on Luna’s food aggression.
“We missed her greatly and agreed to make huge lifestyle changes,” Trisha tells me.
They would try to get her back. So, on Friday, Dominic called the Humane Society and asked if Luna was still there.
He says he was told that, yes, she was — and that she was on a five-day hold before she could be adopted.
Nail, the shelter’s director of operations, says it would have been “miscommunication” if Dominic was told Luna was on a five-day hold.
Only strays are placed on a five-day hold, she says, primarily in the hope that the owner of the stray will find their pet before it is adopted out.
More:Humane Society of Missouri awarded custody of six mastiffs rescued in Aurora
Luna was not a stray and therefore was not on a five-day hold, Nail says.
On Saturday, Dominic went to the shelter to plead his case that he get his dog back, believing at the time that Luna was still there.
He was told Luna was adopted on Feb. 14, her name was changed to “Nora” and that he must have been given wrong information when he called Friday.
“We thought it was really suspicious,” he tells me.
How so?
One possibility, he says, is that someone who volunteers or works at the shelter was smitten by Luna and quickly adopted her — despite the five-day hold that should have been in place.
Again, the Humane Society maintains there was no five-day hold.
“I do not think that anyone was intentionally misled,” Nail says. “But we are human beings, as well.”
Nail says she does not know who adopted Luna. But the quick adoption had nothing to do with the dog’s monetary value, she says.
All animals at the shelter are treated equally, she says.
“Our goal is to have the animal adopted out as quickly as possible,” says Karen Foutch, the shelter’s director of development.
“That goal has nothing to do with the value of any dog,” she says.
Regarding Dominic, she says, “I am very sad that he would feel that way.”
More:Pokin Around: Was there ever a time in Missouri when you could legally kill a Mormon?
These are the views of News-Leader columnist Steve Pokin, who has been at the paper seven years, and over his career has covered everything from courts and cops to features and fitness. He can be reached at 417-836-1253, spokin@gannett.com, on Twitter @stevepokinNL or by mail at 651 Boonville Ave., Springfield, MO 65806.
