By Lesley Mills

I was WAIF’s Executive Director from June of 2003 to June of 2006. I came to WAIF with a solid history of for profit and not for profit experience in both large and small operations. I did not leave WAIF because I was unhappy. I left WAIF because at the time my soon to be husband and I relocated to San Diego. My husband and I still have a home on Whidbey Island, along with family and friends we dearly miss.

I have read a great deal of the press regarding the matter of Smiley, a long-term WAIF resident and suspected pit bull mix. I have also read the legal pleadings that have brought this unfortunate matter to the public domain in addition to the letters to the editors written by a number of citizens as well, some positive and some not so positive. I am responding to a number of points made in these venues, many of which I found to be petty and vicious and unfounded.

I am the longest running Executive Director for WAIF since its inception. I say this as a statement of fact, not as a badge of honor. I am acutely aware of the joy, angst and heartbreak animal welfare work evokes. My husband and I have five animals, three of which came from WAIF and two from other shelters. Given my three year tenure at WAIF, I have intimate, first hand and daily knowledge of the politics, heartfelt devotion and painstaking dedication that has been exhibited by its lay leaders, staff and volunteers. It was not always easy forging change. Complex is one word that comes to mind when describing this organization, still very young by some standards and still trying to balance the heartfelt passion of its grassroots beginnings with its need to also stabilize and build its operations so it can ably meet the growing needs of the community which it serves.

During my time as Executive Director, I participated in several pivotal moments in the organization’s history. The Gift of Light and Spring Fling were launched. We vied for and were awarded the Oak Harbor contract. We secured land for a future island shelter with the help of loyal and generous donors. We were hopeful that we were finally turning the tide towards a brighter future.

Simultaneously, we worked hard with what we had. With limited means we tried to make improvements to both shelters while we made plans for a new one. We got excited by the new paint or the new washer or the new door. We watched our board president operate a tractor and set a new landscape for the Coupeville shelter front. I saw staff and volunteers gather on a cold Saturday morning to clean, paint, and sweep the small remote building that had just become the Oak Harbor Shelter. Our dogs got baths for the first time in weeks, maybe months, and the cats got new beds. These are but examples of a spirit that was committed to doing what was best for the animals.

What people forget, unless you work day in and day out in the world called WAIF, is that we faced the difficult task of trying to make do with facilities never intended to be a shelters. Staff were packed into spaces intended for one, not four. During winter months staff took breaks in a broken down trailer, so they could have a few moments of reprieve from a weary day that involved cleaning kennels, locating the owners of lost pets, or running a cat to the vet who came in with a broken limb.

There was little privacy to afford dignity to customers and staff alike when engaging in a discussion about adopting a pet. Overcrowding was a constant issue where the number of unwanted animals far outweighed our capacity to house and care for them. At certain points of the year, Coupeville cats occupied hallways, cages stacked on top of each other, each mewing because they too would have preferred differently. Oak Harbor technically could only accommodate 18 cat cages, but often we faced the need to accommodate 40 plus. It was not that we wanted it this way, but how do you turn away several cats just picked up in a home where the owner, unable to care for himself, let them run wild in deplorable and filthy conditions?

Air quality was also a problem at the Coupeville location, which if you’ll recall is located adjacent to a county dump site. As for the Oak Harbor shelter, it is positioned on a remote section of the Navy Seaplane base. Sometimes in the winter the waves crested over the rocks and flooded the shelter floors. The bathroom facility was an outhouse that occasionally blew over in the wind. We dealt with rats and cold in both facilities.

Giardia, which stemmed from a septic problem, became an intermittent but persistent enemy to the county owned Coupeville shelter. Under Shari’s leadership, the staff worked countless hours cleaning cages that would repeatedly get soiled as a result of the parasite. We would get it under control and then it would happen all over again. It was very tough on morale and very tough on the animals. It took standing in front of the county commissioners and the resulting newspaper press that highlighted our plea to finally get anyone to look at the issue.

These were but a few issues on the daily agenda and not ones that came with neat and tidy resolutions. Funding was an issue. Time was an issue. Getting help was an issue.

As I visited other shelters, I became familiar with the many approaches to animal care in shelter environments. Shelters with so called “no kill” policies selected and chose which animals came under their care. Many do good work but their “no kill” philosophies made it easier for them to present animals that had a greater chance for adoption. These shelters may not by contract have to take in an animal whose chances for adoption are less than optimal, so they can give you the public face of a homeless animal who may be more desirable than most. Possessing ample funding, space, tools, specialists and staffing to both measure need and implement behavioral correction programs, these facilities are also able to take these animals and better socialize them, increasing their chances for adoption.

In comparison, many animal control facilities must maintain policies which require euthanization to make room for incoming animals. Some may have good facilities –more spacious than WAIF could ever offer with its present facilities — but they inevitably and quickly returned to the decision of the animal’s fate, because space required it.

From the outset, the early organizers of WAIF embraced the philosophy of “minimal kill” where euthanization is not driven by space but by animals considered dangerous or otherwise unadoptable. This is a very challenging mandate for any organization but never more so than the organization that also operates as an animal control facility. Couple this with inadequate facilities and limited funding and you have a formidable task.

Kennel stress particularly becomes a constant reality for such an operation, but WAIF took that on too. They implemented a foster program, a dog walking program, to name just a few. Cats craving attention thrived under the loving touch of volunteers who came religiously every week to clean cages. A Cat Adoption Center was opened in Oak Harbor where prospective adopters could meet cats in a cage free environment. Dogs were brought into the office for socialization time with the staff. Special needs cats like Willie became mascots. Adoptathons, parades, Wag ‘n Walk were great forums to showcase our animals. WAIF did as much as was humanly possible. It still does.

All of these programs and protocols were intended to combat kennel stress while we tried to find our animals a forever home. Stacks of blankets and beds came in from donors to keep them comfortable. Vets offered reduced fees and pro-bono care on many fronts. Navy personnel cleaned the grounds. It is an amazing tribute to staff and volunteers that WAIF does so much with so little.

To the matter of pit bulls. It was emerging as an issue in my final months at WAIF as we faced an increase in the pit bull population at the shelters along with a growing societal discomfort with the breed. Individuals and families relinquished them to the shelters because their new housing prohibited the dogs or they could no longer handle the dog’s needs. Other pit bulls were left to fend for themselves, abandoned by owners who would rather let them loose than deal with the dog’s care responsibly. We tried to find homes for those deemed adoptable, but there were few if any takers who were willing to consider the special needs of these dogs. We reached out to Pit Bull Rescue organizations too, but they could not accommodate our needs because they were inundated with more than they could handle.

Some of the stories broke my heart. Does anyone remember Dan, who came to WAIF with a bullet lodged in the side of his head? The bullet, believed to have been inflicted by his “keeper”, crippled his body but not his spirit. Dan did not deserve what had been done to him. Staff and volunteers came to love him very much, but eventually he had to be put to sleep because of the affliction.

How about the three pit bulls (two male and one female) pups brought in by animal control that had been found as part of a ring of dogs trained to kill? Their aggressive behavior was so severe that we had to put to sleep the two males. Shari worked hard to save the female, the frailest of the group who was like prey to the stronger males, and had the best chance for adoption. Sometimes Shari sat down in the kennel to encourage the frightened female to come to her, which she eventually did. This young female pit eventually found a forever home with an owner who already had experience working with pit bulls and was willing to give this female her best chance.

These stories illustrate the special consideration given to any dog of unknown origin entering the shelter environment. I have a Rottweiler mix who is 130 pounds in stature named Tucker. There was a time his breed was considered a public concern. I am not naïve about his strength. I have seen him come close to killing a dog. I am careful about the situations in which I put him and over which I can control. This applies to my family and other animals. Equally true, I also want to make sure that Tucker can be part of our family unit where he will flourish as opposed to just existing in a pen.

The matter of public safety is an issue no shelter can ignore. It is not personal to an individual or family regardless of how one may feel. The reality is you cannot approach shelter operations in the same manner as your home. You have to ensure both safety and an adoption policy that is sustainable across many fronts.

Shari is not a control freak who insists on getting her own way with out regard to animals or others. Shari Bibich is a consummate professional with whom I had an excellent working relationship. I would gladly work with her again. She always discussed with me in advance her euthanasia decisions, not only to share the factors she was weighing and to get my perspective, but to provide me a heads up should I receive a call regarding her actions. She presented not just her view, but contrary opinions as well. When appropriate, she consulted with appropriate veterinary professionals. She listened calmly to my questions. Rarely if ever did I disagree with her reasoning. It was her well rounded perspective and willingness to weigh all the elements that engendered my trust. Shari may not have a degree in veterinary medicine, but she had something perhaps even more valuable. She had the experience of dealing in the front ranks, day in and out, season after season, against odds some would have given up on long ago. She also had tremendous integrity. I would entrust my animals to her again and again. She took the public trust placed in her seriously. She regarded the animal’s welfare just as much.

In a recent statement to the press, current WAIF Executive Director Stephen Paysee pointed out that the matter of Smiley was not a pit bull issue but a behavioral one. His statement rings very true from my own experiences. I can vouch in my three years at WAIF the matter of breed was not a factor in matters of euthanization. Behavior was.

After all is said and done, what is disturbing in the challenge being presented by the plaintiffs, their lawyer and advocates who don’t offer their names to their public voice, is that they present but one narrow side of a very complex picture and sometimes incorrectly so. Despite their representations to the contrary, the plaintiffs and their supporters are not offering an informed and unbiased insider view.

None of us are perfect, but this barrage forwards no benefit to the animals. In fact if not stopped it could ultimately destroy an organization that has done more for canine companions on this island than any organization can ever claim. Do we really want to return to a time when there was no WAIF?

Smiley is not the victim of an inflexible WAIF policy. Smiley is the victim of a society that has forgotten its obligation to care for those creatures unable to care for themselves. Rather than address that issue, the critics resort to blame and belittling behavior of people who deserve our respect and gratefulness for doing an important and some times heartbreaking job. Operating a minimal kill operation takes not just taxpayer and donor dollars alike to thrive, it takes a community with heart and a willingness to treat each other with the same level of nurturing and respect they demand for the animals.

My hairy brood is an outcome of individuals who believed they could care for their chosen pets but who failed to do so. To this day, my husband and I are perplexed why every one of them was left as a “WAIF” on the roadside and never claimed by their original owner. I admit that part of me does not miss some of the heartbreaks that working at the shelter brought, but I will forever be changed by the animals and the staff and volunteers who worked tirelessly on their behalf. I learned what real love is about on those long days at WAIF. I learned this especially from Shari Bibich. Despite the long hours and challenges, it was all worth it.

Lesley Mills is a past executive director of the Whidbey Animals’ Improvement Foundation, or WAIF.