Dog rescued from mountain top, owner now wants her back

rugcat said:

You don't abandon your dog.

Click to expand...

It just hit me last night: my dog would never abandon me in that situation. Not for anything.

And then I got all choked up, of course.

That's so true! When my dog Skye was dying of cancer, we took him for one last walk on the beach. My elderly mother's hip was hurting her, so she told us she'd wait at the edge of the sand for us. Skye flatly refused to go down to the beach without her. You could almost hear him saying, "Ohana means no one gets left behind."

frimble3 said:

In defense of the Katrina victims who did abandon their animals, they went under duress, and after being told, in many cases, that they would be allowed back, or someone would be sent, to look after the animals.

There were horrendous problems getting people out of that city, if you had a choice of getting Grandma on a bus, catless, or leaving Grandma in a disaster area, you lie, tell Grandma the cat will be looked after, and get her on the bus that will save her life.

If you have small kids, and the choice is a place in a no-animals shelter or leaving the kids to the mercy of the storm, you leave the dog food and water, and tell yourself that it's like going away for the weekend, and you get the kids to the shelter.

Click to expand...

And this is why I am a Prepper. Preppers have been branded with the unfair label of being in love with guns. But they are often never given credit for being in love with their animals. Having animals (such as hunting/guard dogs, barn cats, chickens, goats, pigs, rabbits, ducks, and even horses) is an important and huge part of achieving the goal of complete self-sufficiency. And the animals are CARED for with very humane and responsible routines. Preppers who are shitty to their animals get shunned by the larger Prepper community.

And preparations are made for taking care of the animals in the event of a disaster. If you intend to bug-out, then your bug-out plan MUST include your family dog/cat/gerbil/snake/whatever. Your long-term food storage MUST include a year's supply of food for the pet (as well as pet supplies like kitty litter or gerbil cage bedding, etc). And if the bug-out plan cannot accomodate the family pet, then you don't have a family pet. End of story. (As for goats and chickens etc, those aren't family "pets," they are livestock. But still, the humane treatment of those creatures should always be included in your plans for how to handle an emergency. With some exceptions, those creatures are never part of a bug-out plan, only a bug-in plan. Urban chickens prompt difficult decisions when it comes to fleeing the city with your family and your emergency preps in tow. Do you shove the chicken into a cage and shove the cage into your SUV and drive down the vehicle-choked highway with a chicken clucking away in the back? Or do you let the chicken loose and hope she fends for herself?)

frimble3 said:

Horrible choices that have to be made in a natural disaster are not in the same category in any way, as a stupid decision to take an animal into an isolated location and abandon it when things get tough.

And, for that matter, I live near tourist-laden mountains. Every year there are multiple incidents of unprepared idiots who wander out there, off the trails, no food, no jacket, no sensible shoes, but taking their small children, and getting lost and/or injured. Of course, some of these idiots would take their dogs. They're idiots. The kind of idiot, who would abandon that dog if things got difficult, however, and not even report it, or try to get help, is a someone who should be banned from owning another animal, and avoided by friends and family, because how far could you trust him when the chips are down?

Click to expand...

The couple in the story sent out an SOS to the world via Facebook and Twitter, begging for volunteers to come and help them rescue the dog. The response was immediate and overwhelming.

Why this guy couldn't contact even a cousin or a co-worker for help is beyond me.

Why he couldn't notify park ranagers is beyond me.

I am prompted to think of two stories--

The first story is the true-story basis of the fairly well-recreated movie Eight Below. That was the Disney film about the 8 sled dogs abandoned at the South Pole when the entire frigging continent of Antacrtica had to be evacuated with no exceptions about 20 years ago due to an unprecedented storm.

The second story is about the horse abandoned on a mountain top last year (or was it two years ago? I think we have a thread here in P&CE about it) by a guy, and the horse was later discovered by some folks (I think they were hiking and they accidentally discovered the horse), and then the local community all pitched in and spent over a week digging a path through the snow to get the horse down the mountain. But then the horse's original owner came forward and demanded his horse back. And that original owner was a frigging lawyer no less.

The first story about the dogs in Antarctica -- the evacuation of the continent was commanded by the military and so the dogs' owner had no choice. It was many months later before the dogs could be rescued because the owner had to raise some outrageous amount of money to charter an expedition back to Antarctica to try and find the poor dogs.

The second story about the horse left on the mountain is eerily similar to this story in the OP about the dog on the moutain. And the original animal owner in the horse story likewise did not report the lost animal to anyone, but only came foreward after the rescue was publicized in the news.

Maybe we need a Casey Anthony-type of law for missing animals. Maybe we need a law stating that you MUST report a missing animal within 48 hours of the animal's disappearance and/or separation from you. Failure to do so means you relinquish all claims on the animal if someone else finds and rescues it.

Yorkist said:

Christ Jesus, I'd never abandon my dogs. But you guys have no freaking idea what we went through down here to save our animals. Frankly, if I'd been in the center of the storm and had all my druthers, I'd have put a bullet through my dogs' heads myself - I can't carry 250 pounds of dog on my back. And I would never, ever leave them alone. (I was pretty smart. I fled north, to Memphis, with my pups.)

Click to expand...

You were smart. Hats off.

I can only read about what you and your neighbors went through. (Thank God for that wondedrful specimen of the human race called a "writer" who can convey important human stories to others via their marvelous gift.)

You had a PLAN, my friend. I'm glad you had options. I glad you and the doggies got out.

It pays to plan. Outside of plans and preparations, all you have left is the mercy of God, the whimsy of the laws of averages (aka luck), and the kindness of strangers.

DreamWeaver said:

That's so true! When my dog Skye was dying of cancer, we took him for one last walk on the beach. My elderly mother's hip was hurting her, so she told us she'd wait at the edge of the sand for us. Skye flatly refused to go down to the beach without her. You could almost hear him saying, "Ohana means no one gets left behind."

Click to expand...

Aw! It's kind of mind-blowing when you think about it. How others-centered/family-centered dogs are.

Unconditional love, too. Dogs have perfected it. Thanks for sharing that story.

I found the news story. It happened back in December of 2008 in Canada on Mount Renshaw, BC. Local volunteers pitched in and dug a trench through the deep snow --mostly by hand-- over a kilometer in length (and sometimes 6 feet deep) to free the horses.

http://www.inhumane.org/data/FMackay.htm

Snowmobilers first discovered the horses on the side of Mount Renshaw, near McBride, B.C., one week ago. But they couldn't bring the animals off the mountain because of deep snow.

"A decision had to be made whether the horses should be put down or if it was possible to get them out. Were they well enough? My brother made the decision that he was going to get them out," Gordon Jeck told CTV.ca on Wednesday from his B.C. farm.

For the past week, Jeck, his family, and other volunteers have been digging a kilometre-long trench to the nearest trail to get the animals out.

Late on 12/23/08 the horses finally made it out of their snow-bound prison and were put on a trailer and taken to a farm.

Gordon Jeck's nephew, Logan, and a friend first discovered the horses and initially thought the most humane thing to do was to shoot the starving horses

Instead, Logan returned with his sister, Toni, who said the horses were fighters because of what they endured.

The next day, Gordon's brother Dave returned to the mountain with a shovel and began digging. As word of the trapped horses spread, volunteers began showing up to help shovel.

Jeck says he doesn't understand how anyone could leave them behind. "That's a bit of mystery," Jeck said. "There were apparently three of them. One of them was never found ... They were doing just fine until the heavy snow hit. There was grass up there. But then the snow came and they couldn't get anything to eat."

The horses have frostbite, are missing hair because of rain scald, and are severely underweight. "They look rough. They've been standing around that snow for a couple of weeks. Obviously they had enough heart that we thought we could bring them out," Jeck said.

CTV News spoke to the horses' owner who requested his name not be used. He said he and the horses were delivering supplies to hikers on the mountain in September (9/12/08) when he became separated from the animals.

The owner says he went back to the mountain three times to find the horses. The first two times he got stuck in the snow and even rolled his truck and trailer and the third time he was able to locate the animals, but couldn't get them out of the snow.

"It was sort of a hopeless situation, we couldn't even see the bottom of the mountain, we didn't know which way out was out," said the owner.

The owner was expecting to bring Sundance and Belle back to this Edmonton home, but the B.C. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has seized the animals while they conduct their investigation.

They are investigating to determine whether the owner took the necessary precautions to ensure the horses wouldn't suffer. "Once our investigation is completed, if the elements of an offence have been met, which by all accounts at this point looks like it has been, charges would be forwarded to Crown," chief animal protection officer Shawn Eccles told CP....

Click to expand...

Just like in the current situation wiith the dog named Missy, the horse owner didn't notify anyone and didn't ask anyone for help. He merely tried to do it on his own (like Casey Anthony alleged she tried to find her daughter on her own).

Not asking for help when ample truckloads of help is more than available ... that seems to be what is really grating at everyone's nerves here, my own included.






.

Plot Device said:

Just like in the current situation wiith the dog named Missy, the horse owner didn't notify anyone and didn't ask anyone for help. He merely tried to do it on his own (like Casey Anthony alleged she tried to find her daughter on her own).

Not asking for help when ample truckloads of help is more than available ... that seems to be what is really grating at everyone's nerves here, my own included.

Click to expand...

That actually brings up the possibility that, since some people have a mindset that "you don't ask other people for help" (for anything), they could have viewed it as, they did everything they could and felt (in their minds) that there was nothing more to be done.

(Whereas I'd be calling 911 and shrieking into the phone for someone to heeeeeeeeelp meeeeeeeeeeee!!!)

These animal owners could still have loved and grieved for their animals. I'm speculating, mind you, but I don't think it's a for sure thing that these people were "worthless pieces of shit" and guilty of "cruelty" (at least, the way I define cruelty).

What strikes me in both of Plot Device's examples is the difference between people who make the effort and people who don't.

And also the really base and craven personality defect that allows some people to walk away from their responsibilities until other people do all the hard work and then try to claim their "property rights."

One of the problems that, in my opinion, has held back the progress of cruelty laws and regulations to ensure good and responsible animal ownership and husbandry is the persistent attitude that animals are property. But if the law is going to treat living creatures like property, then why isn't it consistent in how it does that? When you put your garbage out on the public street and walk away from it, it is legally abandoned and other people are free to take it, if they want. If you vacate and ignore a piece of land or a building for a certain time, it will be deemed abandoned and the local government will take it and sell it off. Why should anyone have the right to claim ownership of a animal they clearly abandoned in a public place? Why can't the hikers who find these animals claim ownership of them and have the primary right to keep them or pass them on to someone else? If laws will treat them as property, then I say that dog and that horse were obviously abandoned property.

Mind you, I do not believe animals should be treated as mere property, the same as land or cars. Not only does that lead to cruelty against animals, I think there's a historical argument to make that the same attitude gets pretty freely applied to people, too. It should not be encouraged in any way. But I am saying that the law is inconsistent and feels arbitrary to me in how often people seem to get away with asserting property rights while not keeping up property responsibilities. It heartens me to see how many local governments and individual judges make the right judgment calls in cases of animal cruelty, but I wish laws in general backed them up more reliably.

kikazaru said:

Imo and I'm sure in the opinion of animal lovers everywhere, if you make no effort to rescue your dog then that actually does make you an evil horrible person.

Click to expand...

Agreed. It does make you evil.

My pups don't leave me when I need them, either out on the trail or when I'm upset. It's a bond that can never be broken.

rugcat said:

I have a friend who was hiking in the back country in the middle of nowhere. He came across a dog that had been caught in an animal trap and packed it out (40 lb dog) for twenty miles. It lost its front leg, but that never seemed to bother it much, A wonderful sweet dog, too.

You don't abandon your dog, not if you're a dog person. I saw heartbreaking videos of Katrina where they wouldn't let a dog on a rescue bus and it had to be left behind. I would have taken my dog on the bus and they would have had to fight me to get him off, and if they tossed him off I would have got off the bus and stayed with him

You don't abandon your dog.

Click to expand...

Due to circumstances during Katrina and the horrible choices people faced, laws were changed regarding being able to bring your pups and cats. Rescuers understood that people were not going to leave their animals behind even if it meant their very lives.

Like I said, it's a bond.

DreamWeaver said:

There were people during Katrina who flatly refused to go with rescuers to shelters because their pets were not allowed. It's one of the reasons many hurricane-prone states now have designated shelters that allow pets.

ETA: I'm not saying the people who refused to leave their pets were right or wrong; just that their intransigence helped change the rules.

Click to expand...

Many other states, including fire prone ones have instituted the same as well. Here in CT, where we have terrible wind/rain storms, power outages for days, they've got shelters open for pets to stay all as a result from Katrina.

DreamWeaver said:

That's so true! When my dog Skye was dying of cancer, we took him for one last walk on the beach. My elderly mother's hip was hurting her, so she told us she'd wait at the edge of the sand for us. Skye flatly refused to go down to the beach without her. You could almost hear him saying, "Ohana means no one gets left behind."

Click to expand...

The pup on my left side, the guy laying down, is no longer w/ me. Neither is the poodle. I've 2 new pups, one is a yellow Lab and the other is a mix; Lab, hound & Husky, a black & tan fellow who was found on the side of the road w/ the rest of his litter mates in Arkansas. I adopted him from Petfinders just shy of 3 years ago when he was 3 months old. And that was a month after the white husky mix passed away, one of the toughest losses I've ever experienced w/ a pup. He was diagnosed w/ cancer and a week later, I had to put him down. It came about so quickly, we were sitting at the bottom of the street, overlooking a pond. He wouldn't move. He kept looking side to side, taking in the scenery, as if for the last time, then nosed me and we got up after sitting there for 20 minutes. It was uncanny. The trip to the vet was horrid, but it was the right thing to do.

I hope the judge throws the book at this couple. In CT, they do.

Plot Device said:

It pays to plan. Outside of plans and preparations, all you have left is the mercy of God, the whimsy of the laws of averages (aka luck), and the kindness of strangers.

Click to expand...

muravyets said:

What strikes me in both of Plot Device's examples is the difference between people who make the effort and people who don't.

Click to expand...

Part of being a Prepper is that you MUST come to the realization that in a true crisis, it's not very likely that anyone, especially the government, will help you. Thus "the kindness of strangers" is not something to count on.

But these two crises -- the horses in Canada back in 2008, and now the dog on 2012-- were not continent-wide disasters of Mad Max proportions.The lone-wolf-option wasn't necessary. There were hundreds of other people in the vicinity whose lives were intact enough and whose hearts were big enough to be willing to lend a hand.

Preppers as a whole vehemently oppose anyone relying upon the kindness of strangers as Plan A. But for God's sake, NEVER discount it as Plan B. Wise Preppers don't rule it out completely, instead they shove it off as a last resort. The trick is to have one fucking awesome Plan A, and then in the event that it fails, be very smart and very adult about your pathway into Plan B.

Chrissy said:

That actually brings up the possibility that, since some people have a mindset that "you don't ask other people for help" (for anything), they could have viewed it as, they did everything they could and felt (in their minds) that there was nothing more to be done.

(Whereas I'd be calling 911 and shrieking into the phone for someone to heeeeeeeeelp meeeeeeeeeeee!!!)

These animal owners could still have loved and grieved for their animals. I'm speculating, mind you, but I don't think it's a for sure thing that these people were "worthless pieces of shit" and guilty of "cruelty" (at least, the way I define cruelty).

Click to expand...

Nope. Still a POS. The horse abandoner apparently didn't just 'not ask for help'. He didn't say anything. He just snuck out of town and went about his business. Either he was supposed to take the horses with him, and he drove the empty trailer away, or he had arrangements to leave the horses somewhere. Presumably he made some excuse as to why the horses weren't coming back?
There's no mention in the story of the locals being aware of the horses, no "Oh, they must be the horses that fellow lost up here." Horses do go astray, or escape, or mooch off. The whole town apparently knew about the rescue, and no-body seems to have connected the horses with this guy.
He's billed as a 'lawyer and a hunter' so he owns some sort of firearm.
If he could locate the horses,and by his own admission, he did, he could at least have humanely killed them, instead of leaving them to die of starvation. After a couple of unsuccessful attempts to locate them, surely he considered that option?
The rescuers were prepared to do that, at least, if they had determined they couldn't get the horses out. (And the smug bastard of an owner would probably have tried to sue them for the cost of the horses, if he had found out.)

Every couple of years a story like that hits the papers here. Usually it's some guy running a two-bit horse-packing operation, decides at the end of the season to just turn out the horses rather than 'waste' money feeding them. Sure, they eat grass, but you have to check to make sure they've got enough, even in the snow, and a place to shelter out of the wind.
One of the things that made cars popular was that you didn't have to care for them between uses.

frimble, that's really terrible. I didn't know all of those details; I just read PD's quoted portion about the rescue and the brief blurb that the guy tried 3 times.

As far as the OP case, since I can't get a feel for the dog owner's attitude from the information given, my opinion is that he was definitely negligent, but not a POS for sure. I don't think he should get his dog back, even though it's possible he really did love her and has regrets for the way he handled it (thinking there was nothing he could do and the dog was dead, when it turned out there most certainly was something he should have/could have done and dog was not dead). Which would make me feel a bit sorry for him, because that is a very sucky position to find oneself in. That is my best case scenario.*





*Which for some strange reason I always feel compelled to come up with when a person is summarily written off as pond scum.

What strikes me is not just deserting the animals, but having such a lack of shame that you think you can demand to get them back. If they had called up confessed to the being the owner and offered to take them back, that would be one thing. But you have abadndonned the animal, no matter how provoked--it is not yours anymore. You are in no position to make demands.

robeiae said:

But that doesn't make him an evil/horrible person. Maybe just a stupid one.

Click to expand...

The hell it doesn't. If doing something like that doesn't make you a horrible person then the term 'horrible person' has no meaning.

He's filth.

sassandgroove said:

Chrissy, it is nice that you want to see the best in people.

Veinglory, right on.

Click to expand...

Thanks Sassy, that's really nice of you say, because I know I irritate the hell out of people.

I get what Veinglory is saying too. One would think the shame of such a mistake (if that's what it was) would be coming through somehow.

Plot Device said:

The first story is the true-story basis of the fairly well-recreated movie Eight Below. That was the Disney film about the 8 sled dogs abandoned at the South Pole when the entire frigging continent of Antacrtica had to be evacuated with no exceptions about 20 years ago due to an unprecedented storm.

Click to expand...

I'll just leave this here.

(The Disney plot is based on the Japanese film Nankyoku Monogatari, which is more historically accurate, if you're interested. Also, it was fifteen sled dogs, eight of which broke free from their chains. The two survivors are Taro and Jiro, and there's a statue of them at the base of Tokyo Tower.)

muravyets said:

I know that many people in LA tried to do exactly that but couldn't because either the flood or some assholes in uniforms stopped them.

Click to expand...

I understand. Sorry, guys. Sore point.

I'm actually from Mississippi and not quite coastal - people forget that the coast was leveled. It's just that there were so many factors going on that made that an institutional cluster-you-know-what, and there was a lot of "you stupid, why would you choose to live in an area that's subject to natural disasters?" As if any part of the U.S. isn't vulnerable to natural disasters.

I'm a dog rescuer, and I tend to end up with the large/problematic dogs because no one wants them (or I get too attached after I've rehabilitated them). I've got a ten year old arthritic mastiff mix that was the product of someone else's piss-poor ego extension choice, a lab mix that was found abandoned in a dumpster, and a collie mix that my husband and I found on the side of the highway in the middle of nowhere starving to death and with both types of mange. She was so jacked up that I wasn't positive that she was actually a dog, except that the embedded collar indicated such. She tends to panic and seek other humans if dinner is even a second later than she expects. My mastiff mix, in such a situation? Ah, we'd be so screwed.

On the topic of awareness, if you can't find a pet in need that fits your lifestyle in your local area, the euthanasia rates down south are still 70-80% in many local pounds. It's possible to coordinate transports and rescue organizations, though it can be a major PITA.

My mom got her current cat from a southern rescue group that coordinated an adoption outreach to Massachusetts. Petfinder.com is invaluable. We never would have known they were in our area for the given month, nor would we ever have become aware of this cat who was so traumatized and terrified that we knew we had to get her into a quiet home environment and out of the kennel situation. For months, she was the invisible cat who never let herself be seen, but now she has bonded amazingly with my mom, is playful, curious, even bossy and critical (as a cat should be). She's still jumpy and hates strangers and big changes, but she adapted quickly after my mom moved in with me and now is hopelessly in love with my cat (who is not that into her, sadly) and has engaged me as a second body-servant-in-training.

It can be a pain, but if you can give the right home to the right animal, and ease even a little of the burden on an overloaded rescue system down there, I say it's worth it.

veinglory said:

What strikes me is not just deserting the animals, but having such a lack of shame that you think you can demand to get them back. If they had called up confessed to the being the owner and offered to take them back, that would be one thing. But you have abadndonned the animal, no matter how provoked--it is not yours anymore. You are in no position to make demands.

Click to expand...

Sentiment aside, people do own their pets. Pets are property. If they had abandoned a vehicle, it would not automatically become the property of whoever found it.

Roger J Carlson said:

Sentiment aside, people do own their pets. Pets are property. If they had abandoned a vehicle, it would not automatically become the property of whoever found it.

Click to expand...

Not quite. You can't take a vehicle away from someone who doesn't maintain it properly.

You can go to jail for abusing your pet.

The idea that pets are simply property is not accurate, legally as well as morally.

rugcat said:

The idea that pets are simply property is not accurate, legally as well as morally.

Click to expand...

Virginia Code Section 3.2-6585

§ 3.2-6585. Dogs and cats deemed personal property; rights relating thereto.

All dogs and cats shall be deemed personal property and may be the subject of larceny and malicious or unlawful trespass. Owners, as defined in § 3.2-6500, may maintain any action for the killing of any such animals, or injury thereto, or unlawful detention or use thereof as in the case of other personal property. The owner of any dog or cat that is injured or killed contrary to the provisions of this chapter by any person shall be entitled to recover the value thereof or the damage done thereto in an appropriate action at law from such person.​

An animal control officer or other officer finding a stolen dog or cat, or a dog or cat held or detained contrary to law, shall have authority to seize and hold such animal pending action before a general district court or other court. If no such action is instituted within seven days, the animal control officer or other officer shall deliver the dog or cat to its owner.​

The presence of a dog or cat on the premises of a person other than its legal owner shall raise no presumption of theft against the owner, and the animal control officer may take such animal and notify its legal owner. The legal owner of the animal shall pay a reasonable charge as the local governing body by ordinance shall establish for the keep of such animal while in the possession of the animal control officer.​

Click to expand...

That there are additional laws with regards to the treatment of pets does not diminish the fact that they are property.

Paragraph two above presumes that a dog or cat will be returned to its owner.

Roger J Carlson said:

That there are additional laws with regards to the treatment of pets does not diminish the fact that they are property.

Click to expand...

You compared the ownership of a vehicle with the ownership of a pet, as if there is no difference.

But there is, as in my example. Pets are not simply property -- they have rights that trump ownership claims. There are laws that address exactly that.

I have no idea why you would even bring this up in the first place.