BY JAMES RUSSELL
jrussell@record-eagle.com
TRAVERSE CITY — The Cherryland Humane Society is rebounding from a dire financial situation, but a decision to change how its board is elected is drawing criticism from donors and animal rights advocates who want the shelter to adopt a no-kill policy.
Cherryland, the region's largest animal shelter, announced in May that it needed $200,000 to continue operations until the end of the year. Jess Reed, Cherryland's board president, said the agency surpassed that goal and expects more donations from other fundraising campaigns.
"This was a huge indicator that the community approves of what we're doing and sees the value," Reed said.
But some donors and animal rights activists aren't happy with a decision by Cherryland's board to change its election bylaws. In the past, the group's general membership elected new members, but the change allows the board to directly elect its own members.
"I think they ought to be more of an open organization, rather than a less open organization," said Joan Murray, who recently contributed $500 after learning of Cherryland's financial struggles. "It just kind of has the ring of, they want to do what they want to do and they're not necessarily open to other viewpoints."
Reed said the board will continue to be accessible, and Cherryland members can apply for a spot on the board.
"That move was not in any way meant to be exclusionary," Reed said. "It's important that the public and members of Cherryland Humane Society understand that. We remain very approachable; our doors are always open."
Reed said the change mirrors procedures at other nonprofits to protect board integrity. The old election process left open the possibility of what he called a "hostile takeover" by groups with marginal ideas.
"We do have detractors who want to do things in different ways. The board firmly believes we're doing the right things for the right reasons," Reed said. "Our biggest concern is people that want us to do some rather marginal ideas that don't fit with the mainstream of our operation. That would actually cause us to lose the support of the community."
Debbie Schutt, chair of the Michigan Pet Fund Alliance, said she was "disheartened" by Cherryland's decision. Her Bloomfield Hills-based group encourages shelters to adopt "no-kill" policies. She offered to help Cherryland adopt such a policy in November 2009, but the board said no.
"It just appears to me as though they're moving backwards instead of forward," Schutt said. "It's really dangerous what Traverse City has done ... you know they'll select friends, neighbors or colleagues. You don't get a person, or two or three people, that say, 'We're doing something wrong.'"
And Schutt contends something is wrong at Cherryland. In a Michigan Pet Fund Alliance report, the shelter ranked 101st of 152 shelters in 2009 for its "save rate," or the percentage of animals they received that found new homes.
Cherryland's save rate was just 45.65 percent in 2009, but improved to 62.73 percent in 2010. Still, 46 percent of cats at Cherryland were euthanized in 2010.
Another critic of Cherryland's policies is Jennifer Isbell, of Traverse City. Isbell is editor and publisher of Pet Friends Magazine and a Cherryland member; she unsuccessfully ran for a board position on a no-kill platform.
"With many of the same board members for more than a decade, Cherryland has lacked the creativity and foresight to bring the shelter policies up-to-date with the other progressive humane societies in Michigan and the rest of the country," she said. "Refusing to be a no-kill shelter has a direct impact on volunteers and donors and the number of cats that are killed each year is quite heart-wrenching."
Reed said a no-kill policy is a laudable idea, and that while Cherryland doesn't advertise itself as a no-kill shelter, it finds homes for all adoptable animals. The only ones they euthanize are those that are "extremely aggressive, ill or very old," he said.
"The cat rates are way too high to make claims like that," Schutt said. "My observation is, when you have a kill rate like they have, something is not working right."
Donor Joan Murray said that despite her concerns, she still supports Cherryland. She said "it would be a disaster" if Cherryland closed.
"Let's face it. Cherryland Humane Society -- they're the big guys," she said.
