By Victoria Fagan
Anna was adopted by my fiancé and me, along with her sister, Ava. At the time of first contact, Anna was a 10-week-old puppy who appeared alert, playful, and responsive. During our visit to the shelter, we were informed by a deputy that we had approximately three minutes remaining in our tour. Additionally, we were required to leave our mobile phones in our vehicle. I found these restrictions inappropriate and concerning, as they limited our ability to adequately assess the animals and the conditions in which they were housed.
Although I am currently a resident of Polk County, I am not originally from Florida. I have never previously encountered shelter conditions comparable to those observed at this facility.
The shelter lacked air conditioning. Numerous kennels contained multiple dogs sharing a single water bucket. There were no visible cots, bedding, blankets, toys, or enrichment materials provided.
At the time we expressed interest in Anna and her sister, the shelter informed us that the puppies were not yet legally available for adoption due to a mandatory holding period in case an owner came forward. Given their visibly underweight condition, fearful behavior, and apparent neglect, this raised immediate concern. After the holding period concluded, we were informed that both puppies would need to be spayed before release.
Both puppies were spayed and released to us the same day we were notified they were ready for pickup. No recovery or post-operative observation period was provided. Subsequently, Ava developed complications from her spay procedure, including infection, which required veterinary intervention at our own expense.
Upon bringing both puppies home, Anna and Ava were already exhibiting symptoms of a severe case of kennel cough, indicating exposure before adoption.
Within hours of bringing Anna home, she began passing blood in her stool. This occurred on the same day of adoption, and I possess video documentation of this condition. Anna refused to eat independently and required spoon-feeding to ensure minimal food intake. This continued for five days.
We returned Anna to the shelter for medical evaluation. She was tested for parvovirus, which returned a negative result. Shelter staff stated that Anna ate while in their care; however, after purchasing the same brand and formulation of food used by the shelter, Anna continued to refuse all food at home.
Due to her continued decline, Anna was examined at North Polk Animal Clinic. Initial treatment focused on a suspected gastrointestinal ulcer, and medications were prescribed. Despite this intervention, Anna’s condition failed to improve. She remained lethargic, barely consumed water, and slept for the majority of the day—behavior inconsistent with that of a healthy 10-week-old puppy. Her condition was notably different from her sister’s, who displayed normal energy levels.
Anna was admitted for further diagnostic testing. The final diagnosis was a diaphragmatic hernia. I was informed that her gallbladder had been displaced near her heart and that her blood pressure was critically low. Surgical intervention would have required transfer to a specialty facility in Tampa due to the complexity of the procedure. The veterinary team advised that her likelihood of surviving surgery was extremely poor.
Based on this prognosis, I was forced to make the devastating decision to humanely euthanize my puppy five days after adoption.
Veterinary professionals advised that a diaphragmatic hernia may be congenital or caused by blunt force trauma. Based on the totality of circumstances, including the shelter conditions, handling practices, and medical outcomes, I strongly believe trauma was a contributing factor.
Following Anna’s death, the shelter’s response was limited to informing me that she had been marked as deceased in their system. No apology, explanation, or expression of concern was offered.
Although I was unable to attend the public meeting in Bartow on the 16th, I submit this statement to formally document my experience and concerns regarding this facility’s standards of care, medical oversight, and animal welfare practices.
Anna was a 10-week-old puppy. Her death was preventable. Her life mattered.
Her sister Ava is now healthy and thriving, but the loss of Anna will never be forgotten. I submit this statement in the interest of accountability, transparency, and the protection of other animals currently in the shelter’s care.
Disclaimer: The newspaper does not necessarily agree with the opinions, ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints expressed in the letters and op-ed pieces the newspaper publishes. The newspaper does not endorse the pieces, nor do they reflect the newspaper’s viewpoints or official policies. The newspaper publishes the pieces as a public service to further public commentary and debate as space allows.
Inerudites in charge.