Submitted by DrkFoxxx at: December 31, 2009
Sanctuaries are NOT the end-all-be-all for terrified/scared/abused/untrusting dogs as you all think they are. Try spending time at one to learn what really goes on. Considering the thousands of pits dying every day in shelters near all these wonderful sanctuaries, why is it they all just wanted to save OREO? Better to have gone in her honor & saved others sitting around them. Everyone just wants to jump on the publicity bandwagon. I've known Mr. Sayres for years, this decision for Oreo was NOT made lightly. People need to stop making animals suffer like this. Putting dogs on Prozac and making them deal with humans when they are terrified of them is inhumane. Its time we stop putting our HUMAN emotions on these poor animals in our care & make the right decisions for them. Stop using your hearts & start using your heads. Dogs like Oreo are better NOT being forced to endure more fear, more anxiety & more terror by having to endure human contact that she obviously did not want to receive. Do things in her honor but stop berating the ASPCA for this. Put your anger where it belongs -- to the 19 yr old maniac that did this to her - may he rot in a jail cell!

Submitted by glenn elliott at: December 17, 2009
My wife and I were going to donate $50 each amonth, but after reading this I think ill donate to my local shelter.

Submitted by sharon at: December 5, 2009
I am so completely sickened by the decision that the ASPCA and Mr. Sayres have made that I am withdrawing my monthly donation to this organization. I will also encourage others that I know to give their dollars to other organizations who have proven themselves to be more humane in the decisions they make regarding life and death. Poor Oreo.....given so little time to heal mentally and emotionally from such horrendous abuse. Unless I hear something from the ASPCA that changes my mind I will be on a mission to make sure that anyone I know who donates to this organization or is even thinking abt. where to donate strongly considers some other animal welfare agency. I am feeling something close to shame to think that I have donated on a monthly basis when my $ could have been going to someplace more deserving.

Submitted by vincent andrews at: December 4, 2009
Why does the ASPCA just ignore the question asked by so many... why not have allowed an agency willing to take Oreo, to take her? Pointing out the "good works" ASPCA does willnot make this issue go away. Mr Sayres, why not answer the question, and demonstrate a hint as to why y ou might be worth the $500,000+ a year salary you take for your job..

Submitted by 4them at: November 25, 2009
Despite all the support for Oreo and begging to save her life Mr. Sayer took it upon himself to euthanize her. If you think Sir that the blog above from Peta will change anyone's mind you are sorely mistaken. This will be the last time I bother to come to the ASPCA site,it no longer has any ring of truth to it. Knowone has even bothered to answer the questions many people have asked in reference to Oreo. I can no longer support the ASPCA and hopefully someday the truth will come out.

Submitted by ms at: November 23, 2009
What troubles me is this: why did not the ASPCA hand over Oreo to other caring and reputable groups who so readily offered their assistance? I believe that the ASPCA did everything humanly possible and exhausted every avenue to help Oreo, but why choose to put him down when others, who are are also professionals and experts, were willing to take him in? Euthanizing Oreo was an irrational decision and it makes me question the reason for ASPCA's existence. I do not revere the ASPCA as I used to -- I see you now in a different light. Why not give Oreo another chance or chances at rehabilitation? What did the ASPCA have to lose? – The decision to euthanize was in the process of being made – why go through with it if helping hands were reaching out? – I’m stumped by this! Chances are Oreo needed much more time -- chances are Oreo would have benefited from a different environment and additional expertise of others – even a slim chance is better than death – once again, what did the ASPCA have to lose? I think a mistake was made -- a nonsensical, irrational decsision -- by putting Oreo to death. And because of this, we will never know what his true outcome would have been and could have been.

Submitted by Davide Pastore at: November 21, 2009
John Lennon said Love is the answer... not Death. I won't donate a penny to you!

Submitted by Carm at: November 20, 2009
Just a few words to the folks defending Mr. Sayres decision to murder a dog who was so desperately in need of emotional rehab as much as she received for her physical rehab. Are you aware that well run sanctuaries spend a lot of time re-habbing dogs just like Orea? Are you aware that some of their seemingly most hopeless dogs thrive in learning to trust again under their care? Did you know that thriving for a sanctuary dog means they actually spend more time around people and other dogs, than dogs at the ASPCA? Are you aware that Mr. Sayres completely ignored the desperate attempts by one of NY's most reputable sanctuaries who wanted to assume full responsibility for Oreo's emotional re-hab? Instead, Mr. Sayres played God and chose to ignore the public, a second chance sanctuary, and, allegedly, some of his own employees at ASPCA who felt Oreo was not "vicious" and deserved a change at learning to trust again. I have always respected the ASPCA and the original compassionate vision this organization has always stood for. However, Mr. Sayres shattered that image for many when he ordered Oreo to be put to death last Friday. Perhaps Mr. Sayres needs to go to a more rural shelter, maybe in the deep south where killing is the only option, particularly for any dog resembling a pittie breed. He is not a good fit with ASPCA. Nor is he any longer supported by a public who has contributed greatly towards providing the ASPCA to carry on its tradition of compassionate animal rescue.

Submitted by R. Sossaman at: November 17, 2009
The ASPCA ignored offers of redemption of this animal by qualified groups. Two months after tragic injuries is not enough to rehabilitate such a mistreated creature. And how "nice" of you to give the doomed animal "premium kibble" before killing it. Barbaric. I have cancelled my monthly donations to the ASPCA forever. Shame on you, Mr. Sayres for not doing EVERYTHING that could have been done to save this innocent dog. I hope for your sake that God is not a dog because you'll never make to heaven if he is.

Submitted by janegael at: November 17, 2009
Was Oreo evaluated for a head injury. The broken legs may have been the least of her problems. I have a pit bull with a severe head injury caused by a beating from a dog fighter. She too has aggression issues, but is on Prozac which has made a world of difference in her behavior. It was recommended to euth Gloria numerous times, but her savior is a trainer and chose to work with her. I adopted her and the vet and I put her on Prozac. Yes, she still gets aggressive but it passes quickly and can be diverted. I'd like to know if Oreo received an evaluation for brain injury and if any medication was tried. She was used as a poster child for donations, so those of us who donated for her care deserve to know what evaluations were done. I have no problem with euthanasia if it is truly warranted. I just want to know what avenues were pursued first because dead is forever.

Submitted by Andrea at: November 16, 2009
It is unbelievable how many people are misguidedly berating the ASPCA about this case. Do you really think it's more humane to prolong the life of a dog who was so clearly suffering? If Oreo had gone to some other rescue group for rehabilitation, he would probably have spent the rest of his life in isolation from other dogs and from humans. Is that really a life for a dog? We can't know all the details of Oreo's rehabilitation, and I certainly don't think I'm more of an expert than the ASPCA on what's best for an abused dog, as some of the outraged seem to. I'm glad to know that an abused animal has now been spared any further pain, both physical and mental.

Submitted by RIP Oreo at: November 16, 2009
What a senseless loss. I will not longer donate to the ASPCA as I had done four countless years; every single month. Glad I found about this before I made any more donations.

Submitted by Carly at: November 16, 2009
ASPCA - Why did you kill Oreo when a sanctuary offered to save Oreo and rehabilitate. It makes no sense. You are a cruel organization. The truth will come out.

Submitted by vivian at: November 16, 2009
I am sorry, but in this situation help was offered to take Oreo and attempt to rehab her as many other aggressive dogs have. I think the ASPCA should have allowed this other group to take her and handle the situation and honestly, anyone putting that needle in a dogs vein each day I am sure does not feel bad, otherwise, they would not do it. I would not ever do it for all the money in the world!!!! I would have another job. I know that for some time she was being 'evaluated' at the ASPCA but they should have also asked other experts for asssistance in hope she could be saved...that is what the ASPCA should have done...they are supposed to save dogs' lives, not end them.

Submitted by Nancy Vernand at: November 16, 2009
ed Sayres, Why don't you enlighten the public with the truth about Oreo? Why don't you tell all the people you are conning how many e-mails you have received begging you not to euthanize him as it WAS NOT NECESSARY! WHY DON'T YOU LET THE PUBLIC KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING ASPCA BECAUSE OF THIS. THERE'S A LOT MORE TO IT THAN YOU ARE LETTING THE PUBLIC KNOW. I THINK IT IS REAL CUTE THAT YOU MANAGED TO FIND THE NICEST BLOG TO POST FROM A GIRL WHO DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO KNOWING THE RUTH ABOUT OREO AND OF COURSE BLAMES THE ABUSERS AS THEY SHOULD BE. HOWEVER IT IS YOU AND YOU ALONE THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING OREO. COME ON, LET'S POST THIS BLOG AND ALL OF THE OTHERS!!!