Home » News » Court Decides Pablo Goes Home!...

News

Court Decides Pablo Goes Home!

March 09, 2007, 12:0AM MT

By Michelle Buckalew

March 13 at 5:00 MST: Court decides Paula Duming should have her dog Pablo back.

March 13 at 5:00 MST: Court decides Paula Duming should have her dog Pablo back.

Court Decision Handed Down!

Pablo will be reunited with original owner/Katrina victim. Stay tuned for more details to be coming soon. Please read:
Click Here

March 13 Update:[/b

[b]Pablo's Trial: A Spectator's View

I was in the courtroom throughout the trial over who should have possession of Pablo, the dog.

Best Friends Animal Society and Paula Duming brought an action for conversion against Wendy Shieh and Dustin Jones, the people who had been caring for Pablo since December 6, 2006. The only relief requested was an injunction for the return of the dog. Animals Benefit Club, the shelter where Best Friends placed the dog in foster care after his rescue from a home flooded after Katrina, was initially named as a defendant. Best Friends and Paula Duming dropped ABC from the suit once its attorneys named the people with whom they had in turn placed the dog.

It’s difficult for anyone to imagine how they would react to a once in a lifetime catastrophe like Katrina. Few people live their lives with the kind of planning and foresight some in hindsight have expected from the people of Louisiana and the Gulf Coast. No one aside from the politicians expected the levees to break.

Also, there was nowhere for thousands of people to take their pets. Many people had no friends or family where they could stay with pets. They had no money for a motel on higher ground. Without the benefit of hindsight, they did not take their pets or, as in Paula’s case, they stayed with them.

Paula Duming loves her dog, Pablo. She brought him home as a six week old puppy on Christmas Eve, 2004. She called him her “best friend”. She refused to leave him when the few belated warnings about Katrina were issued. She had nowhere to take him.

As Dr. Karen Dashfield stated in a posting below one of the stories on the Best Friends site about the case, it made sense for Paula to get help, to get out, when the levees unexpectedly broke and filled the first floor of her house in Chalmette, Louisiana with water. Not really water. Toxic soup. Paula hoped rescue crews would take her dog as well.

When a rescue helicopter approached Paula's house nearly a week after Katrina, the friend staying with her grabbed the American flag and ran out, waving it. The helicopter crew spotted them and sent a rescuer in to evacuate them. Despite Paula’s pleas, he refused to allow her to take Pablo.

Paula did not leave Pablo tied to the railing or the roof as some have reported. She left him in the second floor of her house with food and as much water as she had.

Paula was airlifted to a couple of different shelters and within a few days found a place to stay in a mobile home north of Baton Rouge. The person who opened her home to Paula took her immediately to the Lamar Dixon and LSPCA animal shelters where they walked the aisles, looking at every dog, hoping against hope that one of them would be Pablo.

Paula had no internet access at that time. She was able to get back into her home in October, 2005. The place was covered in muck so deep she sunk to her knees in it. Nonetheless, she made it to the second floor. She retrieved photos of Pablo in the hopes they might help her search. Pablo’s vet records were in her car which was so filled with toxic muck, she could not get inside. Anything in there would have been ruined anyway.

Paula did find some check registers in a drawer upstairs. She found records of checks she had written for Pablo’s neuter in August, 2005, just 3 weeks before the hurricane. She also found a record of a check she had written for surgery for Pablo on his eyes that summer. She had recorded on the check records the number of the rabies tag issued to Pablo by St. Bernard's parish.

Paula has a very limited income. But Pablo wanted for nothing including good veterinary care.

While she was in Chalmette at that time, she went to the local animal shelter, but all the animals had been taken by rescuers.

Paula lost everything in Katrina and left her ruined house that day basically with some photos, mostly of Pablo.

Throughout her testimony, there was not a dry eye in the courtroom. Even some pretty tough reporters covering the trial ran out, their eyes filled with tears.

Paula did not know where else to look until December 11, 2005 when someone showed her petfinder reports on the Internet. She had not heard about petfinder. She saw petfinder reports of animals rescued by Best Friends Animal Society. She spotted Pablo’s picture on a Best Friends petfinder report. Paula was ecstatic.

She immediately called the Animals Benefit Club in Phoenix where the report indicated he had been placed in foster care. Paula finally reached the director, Dee Kotinas, on December 12, 2005.

Kotinas had given Pablo away, though, just 6 days earlier to a couple under a contract called “Companion Animal Adoption Contract”. Kotinas, testified she believed she had the right to adopt out the dog after 90 days. But the evidence was she only kept him for about 6 weeks before placing him with Wendy Shieh and Dustin Jones.

It was obvious Kotinas then did everything she could to protect the adoption. She had no interest in helping the poor victim searching everywhere for her “best friend”.

Curiously, Kotinas testified she had never seen the petfinder report for Pablo. She then said her assistant might have put information on the report to help an owner find the dog. She later said she was not sure anyone at the shelter had looked at the report or posted any information there about this dog. Yet, ABC was supposed to be helping to try to find the owner.

It was clear Kotinas began putting off Paula with misstatements about the dog’s appearance and behavior. In the hopes of encouraging her to allow a reunion with her dog, Paula sent Kotinas pre-Katrina photos of Pablo.

One reason Kotinas then said they were not the same dog is that Paula told her Pablo has pink in his ears. Bright pink. Light pink. Pink. She changed Paula’s description when she felt it was appropriate to bolster her argument the dogs were not the same. Kotinas claimed repeatedly even through trial that the dog sent to her by Best Friends had black inside his ears. She persisted in saying this even though intake photos shown to her by Wendy Roberts, a volunteer helping Paula at the time in December and January, 2006, revealed quite a bit of pink inside the dog’s ears.

When Russ Mead, Best Friends general counsel, picked up Pablo on Wednesday, March 14, after the court ordered him returned to Paula, he noticed immediately the pink inside the dog’s ears. “The pink inside his ears actually glows,” said Mead. “It’s a noticeable feature. It makes sense Paula told Kotinas about the pink in the ears because it was a good way to identify him.”

I cannot help but think that Kotinas’ denial the dog had pink inside his ears was a purposeful deception.

Kotinas also said at the time the dog did not recognize Paula from a photo! She claimed Pablo had black spots on his back legs and the dog she had did not have such spots. Yet the photos of Pablo and the dog rescued by Best Friends show both have black back legs with no spots. Kotinas obviously felt she could say anything to this poor woman in her effort to get rid of her.

To try to establish other alleged differences, Kotinas would compare, for example, the photo of the right inner leg of Pablo and a photo of the right outer leg of the dog rescued by Best Friends. Because the dog’s right inner leg was different from his right outer leg, she would tell Paula they were different dogs!

She would also point to photos of the dog where a feature in one photo might not be visible in another because of the way the dog was facing or posing and then claim it was a different dog.

Kotinas claimed the dog she had “sits differently” than Pablo.

Kotinas refused initially to confirm the gender of the dog she had or whether it was altered. She finally conceded the dog was male and had been neutered prior to Katrina.

Though she initially said the dogs might be littermates, Kotinas later said the dog she had adopted out to Shieh and Jones was much older than Pablo. She claimed two veterinarians and an animal behaviorist would testify at trial to the age difference. No such experts appeared at trial, however.

When Paula remained unconvinced the dog was not hers, Kotinas snapped to the effect, “It’s over. It’s adopted and it’s legal. Move on. Get over it.” This was in late December, 2005.

Kotinas never called Best Friends during this time to let anyone there know an owner had come forward to claim the dog. She never bothered to get the file Best Friends had for this dog to determine if there was other information in order to make a match.

When Best Friends Animal Society learned of Paula’s effort to be reunited with her dog, Pablo, Amy Hogg, the Best Friends Katrina Foster Care Coordinator, contacted Kotinas. Kotinas refused to discuss the matter very much and said as far as she was concerned they were not the same dog, that she had adopted out the dog rescued by Best Friends.

Here is what Kotinas as well as Jones' and Sheih's attorney knew well before the lawsuit was filed in June, 2006: The dog rescued by Best Friends was found at the same house where Paula left Pablo. The dog rescued by Best Friends was wearing a choke collar and twine, just like Pablo was wearing in a photo taken 2 days before Paula was evacuated. The dog rescued by Best Friends has identical markings to Pablo. The dog Best Friends rescued is the same size as Pablo. The dog rescued by Best Friends was neutered pre-Katrina, just like Pablo. The dog rescued by Best Friends had a rabies tag with same number as Pablo’s.

Before ever filing suit, Best Friends implored Kotinas and Jones and Shieh's attorney several times to return Paula's dog to her. Kotinas as well as Shieh and Jones not only refused; they insisted through trial these were two different dogs.

Amy Hogg testified at trial that foster groups were expected to keep the animals rescued after Katrina for a minimum of 90 days. The goal was and is always to reunite animals with their owners. Kotinas finally more or less admitted under questioning during trial that under the foster contract with Best Friends, there was no right to adopt out or give away Pablo as she did.

Nor could there be. Best Friends had authority from the National Guard and St. Bernard’s Parish to rescue and care for animals in that parish. Best Friends only had the right of a temporary custodian. Even if it released its interest in the dog, Best Friends could convey no greater rights than that of a temporary custodian. Best Friends could never give away ownership of these animals. And, Hogg was adamant Best Friends never even released its interest in Pablo.

Judge Christopher Whitten concluded in this case that Pablo and the dog rescued by Best Friends were one and the same. The judge found as owner of the dog, Paula Duming, was entitled to possession of him.

Under both Louisiana and Arizona law, a dog is property. Under Louisiana law an owner has 3 years to make a claim for a lost dog. In Arizona the time limit is 2 years.

It is not Paula Duming’s fault that the law views dogs as property. It also does not mean that the best interests of the dog would be served by keeping him with Shieh and Jones. Shieh and Jones knew in mid-December, 2005 that Paula Duming had let Kotinas know that this was her dog. Anyone who is truly a foster knows they must be able to give up a dog often after more time than this. Yet, they refused to let Paula know who or where they were. She had to file this suit to get that information. They claimed during trial that they told Paula she could “fly out” and see the dog. They testified they told her to get in touch with Kotinas to arrange that trip. What they forgot is that just an hour earlier, Kotinas acknowledged during her testimony she had said at the time it would be “pointless” for Paula to travel there and see the dog.

There was no intention to return Paula’s dog to her. Kotinas did not want to upset the adoption.

It’s hard to imagine they would have even let Paula see the dog had she gone there. After all, she had to get a court order to require them to let her see the dog during this case.

Dustin Jones claimed at trial the dog did not know Paula during the court ordered visit. It’s hard to say. Despite the court's order that the time and place should be mutually agreeable, Jones and Shieh would only bring the dog to a dog park near their home. According to Russ Mead who was present for the court ordered visit, the dog was clearly distracted by all the other dogs there in the park. He had not seen Paula for 14 months because they hid him from her. Also, I’m sure the dog felt the tension between the parties.

What Dustin didn’t need to add during his trial testimony was that the dog tried to get away from Paula during that visit. That was not true. It only hurt Paula.

One other thing. Jones and Shieh appear to have kept the dog in a large cage they called a “playpen”. They said they trained him, but when Russ Mead picked him up and as he has spent time with Pablo since Wednesday morning, he said the dog cannot walk on a leash and knows no commands. Even though Pablo weighs only 17 pounds, he is so poorly trained, he needs a gentle leader. How much care and attention did Jones and Shieh really provide?

What makes some of you so certain it was in the dog’s best interest to remain with them and not with the person who has loved him since he was a baby, the person who raised him and the person who has never stopped searching for him? Especially when you consider the lawyer for Jones and Shieh wanted to explore the possibility of Best Friends paying $10,000 for the return of the dog. Yes, that did happen though it’s not clear Jones and Shieh knew about that.

According to Russ Mead, Pablo is a little character, a playful, loving dog who has already made friends with him. I just believe Paula Duming had a lot to do with how this little guy has turned out. They deserve a chance to be together again.

______________________________________________________
Best Friends issued the following news release on March 9:

Kanab, UT -- 03/09/2007 - A disabled Hurricane Katrina victim, fighting for the return of her dog, will be in Phoenix on Monday, March 12, to pursue the case in court against the fosters that refuses to return Pablo to her.

Paula Duming, who now lives in Lafayette, Louisiana and Best Friends Animal Society will be in Superior Court of Arizona for Maricopa County. Pablo was one of the 6,000+ pets rescued and transported by Best Friends after Hurricane Katrina.

The defendants are Wendy Shieh and Dustin Jones, who lived in Phoenix when they started fostering Pablo. They moved to San Diego, CA when the lawsuit was filed.

Shieh and Jones contend that Pablo has now bonded with them. But they were alerted to the fact that Pablo’s person had been found more than a year ago, and well before the standard 90-day foster period ended. Rather than return the dog, they contend that they are better suited to provide for Pablo than Duming, who is on a fixed income.

“Are they really saying that less affluent people are not suitable to have pets?” said Michael Mountain, president of Best Friends. “Paula brought Pablo home on Christmas Eve 2004 when he was six weeks old. She has loved and cared for him all his life.”

And now, in a strange twist, it was suggested the case could be settled for $10,000.”

“We are outraged by this ‘offer’,” said Mountain. “If these people truly cared about the dog, they would be offering to help Paula, rather than demanding money in exchange for him.”

When New Orleans flooded, Duming was one of the thousands of people who were ordered to leave pets behind during the evacuation. The last thing she did, as she was airlifted from the roof of her house, was to snap a photo of Pablo. That photo, along with the dog’s unique markings and his rabies tag number, would later identify him as Duming’s missing dog.

“For Best Friends and other humane groups, it was the biggest pet rescue in history,” said Mountain. “And for many people like Paula, their beloved pets were literally all they had left. We promised them that we would do everything in our power to reunite them.”

Katrina pet rescue leads to changes in evacuation laws

In the early hours of Monday, August 29, 2005 a powerful and frightening hurricane, which had worked its way up through the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico, hit New Orleans and hit hard. Preparation and planning came far too late, and nothing could be done now to help ward off mass destruction from this hurricane named Katrina.

When Katrina was approaching the Crescent City, then-director of the National Hurricane Center, Max Mayfield said, "It's capable of causing catastrophic damage. New Orleans may never be the same." He was right on target just like the hurricane he was predicting. Sadly that prediction was not taken seriously enough.

We would all learn afterward that the planning efforts waged were too little and too late. The massive storm that had been building steam over three days hit ground with a such a powerful punch that levees broke, and the city soon flooded. Chaos followed as disbelief and shock set in.

Electricity and communications were cut off, families were displaced and in the wake of the confusion, government leaders in Louisiana, seemingly were at a total loss on what do. They said no to family pets being evacuated with the families who had not left the city yet. What would ensue as a result is heartbreaking and history-making.

Over the next week thousands of people lost lives, homes and their community as they once knew it. Companion animals, numbering in the thousands were left in homes, chained to doghouses and many left on the streets to simply fend for themselves. Thousands of family pets helplessly watched as their humans left and the water rose.

Over 20,000 people, who had been housed in the Superdome as the waters inched up in the city daily, and who had no way to leave, were finally evacuated out of the city by buses. However they were not allowed to bring their pets. Many would later explain that the more affluent were able to take their pets in personal vehicles while the poor were not allowed to bring their animals by public transportation.

These citizens, along with others being airlifted and others boarded on barges, were devastated when they were told they could not bring their 4-legged family members with them. So, in a leap of faith, many confused and fearful families left their pets expecting to return within 48-72 hours. They were just following evacuation orders set out by the New Orleans mayor and Louisiana governor.

We all now know what happened in the aftermath of Katrina... complete devastation and loss of life. Louisiana, Misssissippi and Alabama were hit the hardest. Images of hurting people and suffering animals that followed will haunt us forever. Many thousands of innocent animals died from drowning, starvation, toxicity and dehydration. Had it not been for the leadership of Best Friends and other animal welfare organizations, the tragedy would have been multiplied many times over.

Since that fateful day, many families have been happily reunited with their beloved pets. But there have been a handful of cases where rescued pets were not be returned to their families by foster families. If you were to count all the pets who died, suffered in some measure and/or were separated from their families, the number would be staggering.

As a result, Louisiana would pass a law in 2006 that ensured this kind of disaster would not happen again. click here for story

National legislation was also passed in 2006 which allows families to evacuate on public transportation with their pets during disasters.
click here for story

Best Friends values your feedback. Please tell us what you think by posting a comment. If you are not a member, it is easy to join. See the upper right corner of the page where it says Join the Network Now. If you need help in joining, please email us by clicking on the feedback bar on left side menu, and we will be happy to help you join!

Visit the Hurricane Katrina community on the network.
Click Here

To learn more about animal law, visit Animal Law Coalition.
Click Here

Visit Louisiana on the network
Click Here

by Michelle Buckalew and Barbara Williamson, Best Friends Animal Society

Comments

Posted March 14, 2007, 1:41PM by ajanimallover

WONDERFUL news. Give Pablo time to remember momma and everything will be fine. Horray for Best Friends and Paula

Posted March 14, 2007, 1:53PM by katrinacough

I believe Paula is lying when she claims not to be able to evacuate with her pet. Then she says she didn't think the levy would break, it was a MANDATORY evacuation zone. I feel very concerned for the future care of that poor dog considering the selfishness and poor judgement of its owner.

Posted March 14, 2007, 1:57PM by cattees

So, extortion is OK in your book?

Posted March 14, 2007, 2:30PM by ChefsNoCook

Yeah Paula! I'm very happy for Paula and Pablo. It will only take a short time for Pablo to get all settled in with Paula again.

Posted March 16, 2007, 10:49PM by mangolynn

Bogiedew: You might have missed the link I posted from the Arizona Republic. The relatives of the Jones family says Mr. Mead of Best Friends brought up the $10,000 by offering it to Dustin Jones and Wendy Sheih. They rejected the offer and then he put a spin on it. Apparently it was his way of trying to settle out of court. It probably would have been a cheap resolution for all concerned if they'd taken it.

Posted March 16, 2007, 11:16PM by Kelly_Mac

THANK YOU BEST FRIENDS!!!

Posted March 12, 2007, 9:49PM by carrie_fosters

Any news on how things went in court today?

Posted March 13, 2007, 11:0AM by Kelly_Mac

Any updates?

Posted March 13, 2007, 1:6PM by lucysmom

According to the local news last night, the judge has taken the matter under advisement and is expected to make a ruling by Friday.

Posted March 13, 2007, 8:50PM by sue12paws

Hooray for Pablo and Paula!! This is such wonderful news. Pablo will remember his mom once they have time together. I wish them many years of happiness.

Thank you Laura, Amy, and Best Friends for making this possible. You guys are the BEST!

Posted March 13, 2007, 10:37PM by cattees

Whee!

Posted March 14, 2007, 10:39AM by rmlamasney25

Much as I love BF, I have a bad feeling about this. This dog did not look happy in the photos, he looked stressed and anxious, and did not know Paula. I don't think anyone should be demonized in this case, but I wonder if the dog's best interests were served.

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:44AM by CCorbin

This is unbelievable to me. I have a friend who fostered a Katrina dog for 87 days, and fully intended to adopt her at the end of the 90 day period. On the 87th day, her owner turned up. Although the return of this Katrina dog involved a broken heart, weeks upon weeks of tears, and an unconditional love, still my friend returned the dog. One of the hardest things she ever had to do was load the doggie in the car and drive her to the area of dogs being transportedback to Louisiana. The person to whom the dog belonged was also on a fixed income. My friend continued to provide food and medicine for the dog, having it shipped to the owner in New Orleans. She kept in touch with the owner every month, asking not only if the dog needed anything, but also if the owner needed anything. At the end of a year, and due to changes in her personal life, the owner asked my friend if she would take the dog back. Without a moment's hesitation, the answer was a resounding yes, and the dog is now back with my friend. It's unbelievable to me someone would claim they were better caregivers, and yet demand a ransom of $10,000!!!! Who do these people think they are kidding? I hope the owner will be awarded her doggie - what a tragedy this seems to be for everyone involved. Thank you, Best Friends, for helping this person in her attempts to be reunited with her doggie.

Posted March 09, 2007, 1:16PM by ratmom

I was fine with this story until the part where the original owner wanted $10,000 for her dog. Sounds like extortion to me.

Posted March 09, 2007, 1:42PM by anabravo

Hello,

I have a dog and two cats, as well as a feral colony of six.
I don't think I could ever leave my pets behind, if something happens, I would rider all to be together.
This case is a very sentive one, but since you mention on the story this people( foster family) it seems they care more about the money than the dog.
My advise is let Pablo choose how he wants to go with. It haven't been that long so I am sure Pablo will remember his Mummy.

Posted March 09, 2007, 4:12PM by judylew

I fostered a Katrina cat for 3 months. I acknowledged from the very beginning that this was not my cat. I was the caretaker until his family could be found. Yes, I cried when I gave him up, but I was happy, too. I would do the same thing again in a heartbeat.

Posted March 09, 2007, 4:17PM by cattees

$10,000??? I'd like to know where they came up with that figure? These people are really messed up.

Thanks BF for sticking up for Paula. Prayers and crossed paws for the correct outcome.

Posted March 09, 2007, 5:0PM by pitbull

One of my favorite stories was of a Katrina dog who ended up in a shelter in Iowa. The owner attended the Best Friends Locate Your Lost Katrina Pet event in December and was able to trace her dog to that shelter. It was a Sunday, so she had to wait until the next day to make the call. When she called the shelter, they told her that her dog had been adopted - and they refused to call the new family to let them know the owner had been found. So a story was run in the Iowa town's local paper. She described her dog, and the family who had adopted her dog saw the article. They knew immediately that the dog being described was the dog they had adopted.

Thankfully, there are some very compassionate people in the world. They called the woman, told her they thought they might have her dog and arranged to have the dog returned to her on Christmas Eve 2005.

Those are the kind of people I'm grateful to have in our world.

During the aftermath of Katrina, I learned not to judge the people who evacuated without their pets. Perhaps it takes sitting down and crying with one of these heartbroken people...people whose whole lives have crumbled around them. No house, no job....and all they care about is finding their beloved pet.

It changed me.

Posted March 10, 2007, 7:44AM by atuttle32

It breaks my heart that this dog is being held hostage for money by a greedy couple who turned fostering into a money-making scam.

My heart goes out to Paula Duming, and my thoughts and prayers are with all who are fighting to reunite Pablo with his real mom.

Posted March 10, 2007, 11:46AM by Dcastillo

I have mixed feelings on this - with the exception of the adopters offering to exchange Pablo for money. That is horrible. We have a dog that was stranded in Katrina when he was 9 months old. We have had him since October 2005 and it would be very difficult to give him up. No one has ever tried to claim him, so I hope I dont have to face that tough decision some day. Just because Pablo's original owner is on a fixed income doesnt mean she can not give as good, or better care than someone more affluent. As long as they are loved, fed and cared for - animals could care less how much money their owners have. I would do the opposite - I would offer $10,000 and a puppy of her choice, if she would let me keep Pablo. If not - I would give him back - and pay for his food and medical care to make sure that Pablo was always cared for.

Posted March 10, 2007, 1:36PM by tamarad

The people that are fostering Pablo should be deeply ashamed of themselves. How dare they judge another's ability to care for and love a dog!! Love and care is what counts the most, with money being secondary if that. I've seen many cases of abuse and neglect where the person was wealthy.

They need to remember what the word foster even means. How heartbreaking for the original owner and lover of this dog to lose so much during hurricane Katrina, but now to have to spend some of her fixed income on battling a situation that should not be happening.
I have fostered many animals before and yes, have bonded and fallen in love with them and they with me, but if their original owner is found and the relinquishment of the animal was not due to mistreatment or neglect, but due to other of life's sometimes catastrophic circumstances, I would gladly return the animal, crying all the way. That is part of fostering: giving away part of your heart to help an animal in a TEMPORARY need.

I also hope these folks are not allowed to foster again for any other rescue group -- it's obvious they don't understand the point.

I hope and pray that Pablo is reunited permanently with his original rescuer and that some day these foster folks realize how horribly they're behaving.

Posted March 10, 2007, 4:53PM by LMR9949

These people should be ashamed of themselves.
You should post this story, with all the postings listed below, in the San Diego newspaper, and get them out there. Paula, we are behind you and your darling Pablo. We all wish for a happy ending, and I will say a prayer.

Posted April 12, 2007, 7:36AM by katrinalynn

I couldn't sleep tonight, as I can't many nights here in New Orleans. So I started viewing some of the lost Katrina/Rita pet sites, just to see if any of the pets I was looking for had shown up. I ended up visiting the Best Friends Network after a very long hiatus, to check some forums and see what has been happening this last year on their website. And I just cried my eyes out, until they were dry enough to respond to this post. I'd like to first say how happy I am that Paula got her Pablo back, and secondly, thank you Best Friends for standing behind her and for the work you have done for our people here. Your group is amazing and I've met so many people who gave up their families & their lives, and are still doing so to look for our lost pets.
I, too, am facing the very same dilemma with a Siberian Husky that was stolen from New Orleans East after Katrina. The husband & wife stayed behind with their 2 Siberians, because of their dogs, and made it through the hurricane, but then the levee failed, one block from their home. They had 7 mins. to get into their attic, with their Siberians, and their preparations were already in the attic, which included food, water and an ax. They were there for 3 days, in their attic and on their roof, in near 100 degree weather & 100% humidity. That heat is deadly, as we soon found out at the Convention Center. They, too, were rescued by boat, and forced to leave their pets behind, for an uncertain fate.
After I assisted during the Best Friends New Orleans event in Dec. of '05, to log in nearly 800 missing pets during one weekend, we had 2 cell phone photos of their dogs to enter on Petfinders, and I found their male Siberian about 10 days later, he ended up in VA through Best Friends, and he was brought home to Tylertown within 4 days for his reunion. The owners had adopted him from the LA-SPCA in Jan. of '05, so he had only lived with them for about 8 months. And it was the beginning of a greater New Year for them, finally. Their older female, who they owned since she was a 7 week old pup, had been loved by them for 5 years. I found a photo of her head on Petfinder one day after I located their male in VA, and that is when the nightmare began. This female Siberian was handpicked by this "alleged rescuer" when she and her father launched a boat and went into N.O. East, without permission or credentials, when the city should have been completely evacuated, except for certified rescue personnel, such as my husband, a New Orleans Fire Captain of 32 years who rode out the hurricane with his crew, and began a 2 week stint of round the clock work in deadly heat and multiple fires. These 2 thieves handpicked a few dogs and possibly some cats, not sure of the latter. They handpicked an 80 lb. Siberian Husky, not an easy task to bring into a flatboat, and proceeded to do this trip a few times. Even claimed to have gotten lost all the way to the Superdome downtown, which is about 10 miles away from the area they chose to enter. Sorry, but I've lived here since 1969, and I know every nook and cranny of this city, and you don't get lost in a flooded city and end up downtown unless you are trying to. These thieves live 2 and 1/2 hours from N.O., and even after the owners met their dog, about 80 miles away, late at night, the thieves took these owner’s pet away and said she didn't recognize them. The owners world came crashing down again on them, and the wife became deathly ill and was in ICU for over 2 weeks.
While I was researching not only the thieves, but the AKC identification of their female, I discovered that her sire has a DNA profile on file with AKC. Being an exhibitor of Siberians for over 27 years, I know all about DNA profiles. Every one of my dogs are profiled with AKC. All we need is a cheek swab with a little brush, like a mascara wand, and we can prove he is her sire, and that she is the dog

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:25AM by DorothyD

These people are monsters. They don't care about the dog if they are willing to give him back for money. And it doesn't matter that they have bonded with the dog... they should have given him up as soon as his owner was located.

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:43AM by lucysmom

I agree. This is outrageous. I've fostered several dogs and cats, one of them for several months, and I know how bonded I became to them. But as every animal foster knows, you have to put your emotions aside and do what's right. It's unconscionable for them to refuse to return Paula's dog when she has already lost everything.

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:52AM by JAK

The offer of the money for exchange says it all, its not the dog but what they can get out of it. That would make me more determined than ever to see that Pablo ends up with the Paula.
I pray that this ends happily.

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:56AM by bogiedew

I can understand the foster parents being upset about losing the dog after caring for it. That is totally understandable and I would feel the same way. (but they did loose my sympathy when they asked for the money ). But it is not Paula's fault that she had to leave her dog behind and if she could have brought him with her, she would have. If I was fostering one of these animals and had to return him to his owner, I would be sad as well, but I would and I would be happy they were reunited with their original parents. And I would make a point of keeping in touch. Just because you dont have the dog living with you anymore, does not mean they cant still be in your life..and you have also gained a new friend, the dogs parent.

Posted March 09, 2007, 1:28PM by KimBl

Well said, Michael Mountain. You are exactly right!

Posted March 09, 2007, 4:30PM by ajanimallover

I can't believe what I just read. GREED GREED GREED!!! I applaud you Best Friends for being by her side. She deserves her dog back!! It's HER DOG!!! I would fight tooth and nail if someone pulled this on me. GO GET EM PAULA & PABLO!!!!!

Posted March 09, 2007, 6:7PM by ajanimallover

I agree with Pitbull. I know those people were grief stricken having to leave their pets. They had no choice.

Posted March 09, 2007, 7:48PM by jennifer

My husband & I adopted a Katrina cat, and even now - if his people turned up and wanted him back - even though it would be heartwrenching - we wouldn't hesitate at all, it's something we discussed when we adopted Zane.

The fact that they put a monetary amount on their condition to return the dog really destroyed any sympathy they're going to get here!

My prayers go to Laura Allen and to Paula & Pablo.

Posted March 09, 2007, 8:20PM by dommidad

I have a feeling that we need to point an accusing finger to:
"the Animal Benefit Club of Arizona, which placed him with Jones and Shieh in violation of an agreement it had with Best Friends."

This animal rights group should be held in violation by the court also. My next guess is that those who adopted the dog did some underhanded means to get the dog, and now have a creepy lawyer bloodsucker to fall back on.

Shame on these people and shame on the Animal rights group that screwed this up in the first place!

Posted March 09, 2007, 11:2PM by jci2cats

So let me get this straight - the dog these people have and call Boots is not Pablo (according to them). Yet they will return this dog (that is not Pablo) to Paula for $10,000. If a judge doesn't see right through the lying going on and the extortion on the part of these people, then he/she do not deserve to be a judge. Paula - we are rooting for you and Pablo to be reunited and kudos to Best Friends for helping in the fight. I just sent in my donation. Jones and Shieh should be ashamed of themselves and the Animal Benefit Club should be fined as well for violating the terms of their agreement. Sadly - people never cease to amaze me.

Posted March 10, 2007, 11:14AM by Celeste

Well, I don't know if it would be helpful, but here is a piece I did about why disabled & low income folks "deserve" pets:

http://network.bestfriends.org/Blogs/PostDetail.aspx?bp=273

I hope you like it!

For the furries,
Celeste Crimi
No More Homeless Pets
Best Friends Animal Society

Posted March 10, 2007, 12:33PM by randilee

Thank you for keeping us updated. It is very clearly outlined in this situation who is right and who is very wrong. Asking for money for Pablo solidified any possible doubts. Thanks to Laura and Best Friends for jumping right in to help set this straight.

Posted March 10, 2007, 5:42PM by sue12paws

Thank you Best Friends for standing up for Paula! And thank you to the millions of fixed-income individuals who give loving forever homes, and great care, to THEIR furkids. Thank you also to all the non-fixed-income individuals who do the same for THEIR furkids. And nothing but disgust to Shieh and Jones, regardless of income, because Pablo is PAULA’S FURKID, not theirs. They had the opportunity to do something wonderful, but instead they chose to be selfish and cruel— traits that make them ill-suited to care for any animal. These dognappers should be fined punitive damages for the 13 months of heartbreak and suffering they’ve caused Paula. But the only important thing is freeing Pablo and reuniting him with his mom. Good luck to Laura, Paula, and Pablo on Monday!! Positive thoughts that the little guy will soon be in mom’s arms.

Posted March 11, 2007, 11:6AM by ChefsNoCook

This article haunts me because I may have to give up my Katrina dog one day. I understand the bonding that happens when you take in a dog like this. I took in a victim of a hurricane, a flood, bad government decisions, even an owner that may have loved him, but didnt provide vet care. He had no known owner and he was a 50lb old black smelly skinny dog with advanced heartworms. I just asked for the dog that was least likely to get adopted and I got Chef. (found on Chef Menteur Highway)

I have been fostering Chef since September 23, 2005, less than a month after Katrina hit.

Eventually, I found his owner. The owner was not looking for him, but cried when I told him I had his dog. He told me he wanted his dog back, but had no place for him.

Every day, since the day I brought him home, Chef has been getting bellyrubs. He seeks me out every morning to get his bellyrub. He starts my day. I often put my nose in the fur behind his head and smell him. I love his smell.

I am guilty of not wanting this man to call, but know what I must do if he does call. I must give him his dog back.

Posted March 11, 2007, 11:22AM by careyb

I was in New Orleans with Best Friends the last week of September 05, rescuing animals. At first I was angry with all the the people who left their pets behind. I was judgemental, AND I was not alone in my judgements. I knew I would never leave behind MY loved companions, and I couldn't see any reason why anybody else would. But as I saw the devastation of the city and as I talked to returning residents and as we had reunions in Tylertown, I began to see that I'll never understand what it was like to be in that situation. I have no right to judge whether someone is a good pet parent based soley on the fact that they weren't able to evacuate with their pets.

There were some terrible things I saw that DID show that certain people were not good pet parents, but that was the exception. Most people were just not prepared, and once caught up in the storm, events took over and we already know some of the stories of people forced to leave their pets behind at that point.

I adopted a beautiful dog, Maggie, from New Orleans, and if ever her people come to claim her, it will break my heart, but how wonderful that I can care for her until that reunion, or for the rest of her life.

Pablo and Paula deserve to be together again, and I hope justice prevails.

Posted March 13, 2007, 2:49PM by ajanimallover

GO PAULA!!

Posted March 13, 2007, 7:56PM by lucysmom

Here's another link from KPHO (the Phoenix CBS affiliate). They covered the story extensively, and were very sympathetic to Paula.

http://www.kpho.com/news/11231730/detail.html

Posted March 13, 2007, 8:40PM by jennifer

I am so happy for Paula - she must feel like she's gotten a big part of her life back.

Posted March 14, 2007, 11:52AM by rusty

I am so happy for Paula!! I (and most others) can't ever imagine having to leave an animal that we love so much behind in such a devastating situation. I hope none of us ever have to be in a situation like that! Paula is not to blame for the decision she was FORCED to make - thank heavens that the situation has been brought to light and efforts are being made to include pets in any rescue operations in future disasters.
Congratulations, Paula - I hope you & Pablo have a wonderful life together.

Posted March 14, 2007, 6:48PM by ajanimallover

Paula was forced to leave Pablo, as all the other thousands of people. Why would you say she's lying. And why after this long would she continue to get custody back if she didn't care? Just a thought.

Posted March 14, 2007, 6:56PM by bogiedew

If she did not care about Pablo, wouldnt she just go get another dog? And how much did the foster parents care about the dog? If they cared so much, why did they ask for all that money?