Posted on 08/17/2012 11:47:30 AM PDT by Mountain Bike Vomit Carnage
Two Denver hikers are locked in a bitter battle over the fate of a German Shepard named Missy, who was abandoned by one and then rescued by another at 13,000 feet.
Scott Washburn found the dog bloodied and near-death atop Colorado's Mt Bierstadt and then organized a search and rescue party to save her.
He wants to keep the dog, alleging that Anthony Ortolani lacks the ability or compassion to care for the creature, which went without food and water for eight days.
But Mr Ortolani says he didn't abandon the animal, an oncoming storm forced him to choose between staying by her side and perishing, or going down the mountain without her.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2189640/Canine-custody-battle-Hiker-climbed-13-000ft-rescue-Missy-German-Shepherd-wants-owner-forced-leave-dog-mountain.html#ixzz23pYWurwx
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Bierstadt is a very popular 14er to climb in the summer season. It’s basically a strenuous hike. That’s why these people were able to assemble volunteers so quickly.
The owner didn’t even try to get help and go get her. He thought she was dead - well, she would be dead except for the rescuers. What he has is a dead dog - what the rescuers have is a live dog. He can keep the dead dog in his mind and they get the live one.
My Yorkie trusts me to do the right thing for her. I am all she has, her life is bound to my life. If she was in trouble, I’d get rescurers immediately to help me save her life.
When I had cataract surgery and came home from the surgery center, she sat in front of my chair and stared at me all day. She knew something was wrong with me and stood watch the entire day. She wouldn’t have left me and I wouldn’t leave her. Now, if I can teach her to punch 911...
Ortolani posted on 14ers.com that he called search and rescue and was told they would not go up to rescue the dog. Does this mean he posted that his dog was missing to some internet bb? I don't understand why there was no offer of search help at that time if so. I don't also understand how the search was eventually organized, I guess.
I think we all can sense that the dog would be better cared for by the couple who organized a rescue party but that, once the publicity dies down, the dog may likely be returned to the weasel who abandoned the dog on the mountain and now wants his property back, thank you very much. That injustice we all feel won’t wipe away the value of the good deed of the rescuers. They know they did what was right, it was their joy to do it, and you can see it in their faces in the photos. They are better people for having rescued the dog, and that will stay with them and influence them toward more good acts whether the dog lives with them or not. The original dog owner, in contrast, is continuing to dig himself a hole he started when he abandoned the dog and didn’t try to go back.
“I don’t even like to leave my dog home alone when I have to go to my office.”
I am so like that. I am at home all day but when I have to go to an appt. or the grocery store, I rush so I can get back home to her. I can’t carry her around in the car in hot Texas summer so I have to leave her at home.
My son and I were staying in a hotel that didn’t take dogs. We put the Yorkie in a shopping bag and took her to my room. This little 4 lb. Yorkie wasn’t going to tear up that hotel.
>>As another poster said it, he gave up his rights to it when he didn’t go back for it, in my opinion.<<
100% agree.
But for eight days he did nothing to go back for the dog!
First, he probably shouldn’t have had her up that high without more resources, but then to just abandon her and tell himself that she’d just died up there—despicable!
If he really understands the gravity of his error—and is appreciative for what these other people did for her—then there’s no question but that he should let her go.
To not lift a finger to rescue her for eight days and then battle to have get her back is inexcusable IMO.
Agreed.
It’s not some hunk of inanimate property, but an animal we are talking about. The animal’s welfare in such a situation does—and should—come into play.
I've been up Bierstadt and agree - just a hike mostly on good trail.
If the idiot owner had just taken her up Bierstadt and back, the dog would have probaby have been fine. But the moron decided to also attempt to take the dog across the class-3 hike The Sawtooth over to Mt. Evans. Class 3 means you need handholds much of the time. Dogs don't have hands for free climbing. The dog probably had a horrible time on such a scramble.
IMO the guy is too dumb to own an animal. He should have reversed course as soon as he saw the dog starting to have problems with the class 3 terrain.
And that raises another question - why would you also be taking a younger person on a class 3 hike at that altitude and that kind of terrain?
Yes, a human life is worth more than an animal’s. But when the owner got to safety, he did not lift a finger or contact anybody to try to get help for his dog. In eight days, he didn’t go back up himself, either. He just walked away. No, he doesn’t deserve her. He deserves a beating for his laziness and selfishness. And he should be sued for the cost of the rescue mission.
It is hard; but I agree with the guy who rescued her. He said he understood; but didn’t understand why he didn’t find some way to go back and get her.
I agree. This guy who didn’t even know her managed to get her.
The owner’s post was to a post-rescue discussion about the controversy. He didn’t do anything after he was told search and rescue doesn’t go up for animals.
Count me among those who would never leave my pets behind under any circumstances. The man who rescued her has earned the right to keep her, imo.
Then animals are no longer private property, they are community property, and thus every pet owner is now immune to any lawsuits involving dog bites.. Legally, it is property. It is private property. Animal or not, this does not change.
And from what I can tell, with the scant information provided, is that the only dumb action by the owner is taking the dog on such a hike in the first place. Everything else seems very much like the actions of a concerned pet owner, including the desire to get his pet back.
Now, if there's any evidence of direct intentional abuse, that's another matter. But until such evidence is provided, I gotta say: The guy's gotta pay for his dog's rescue. He also should get his dog back.
I agree with your comments, dirtboy. This is one of those that leaves you shaking your head wondering what that guy was thinking. Of course, in most such situations they weren’t.
OK, I see, I didn’t read it that way the first time I read it, but I understand now. Thank you.
Thank God for Facebook, and the same goes for tattoos: They broadcast to the world the douchebag-ness of so many people. I sure am glad that they've started using Facebook accounts in court against people. It's a wonderful thing.
The man who abandoned her left her for dead. In short, the dog was “dead” to him. The rescuer went to find her assuming she may be alive. The dog belongs to the rescuer (that’s my vote and I’m sticking by it).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.