Companion Animal Advocates NJ

10/11/2026

❓What Is Failing in New Jersey’s Animal Protection System?

⚖️ Enforcement: Municipal HLEOs have investigative and enforcement duties, but the petition raises concerns that cruelty matters may be left to animal control officers who are not acting as designated HLEOs. In one case, the records cited do not document cruelty warnings or summonses addressing the reported conditions, or whether they were corrected.

🏛️ Oversight: Questions remain about county notification and oversight, and whether concerns raised by advocates have received an effective response from responsible State agencies.

🏥 Shelter care: In one case, a dog reportedly did not receive emergency veterinary care as directed. She died. In another, a dog with a documented body-condition score of 2/9 remained at a shelter for six days over Thanksgiving before dying.

📹 Accountability: The petition describes a dog shot and left suffering, with prosecution initially declining to prosecute. They reconsidered after months of advocacy. Animal cruelty and illegal gun charges were eventually filed. In another incident, video shows an ACO dragging a dog on the ground by a catch pole, standing by and watching her gasp for breath until she died; municipal charges followed more than a year later.

🐾 Impoundment access: More than a dozen municipalities reportedly lack dependable access to appropriate facilities. This can leave officers without a reliable place for lost or stray animals, bite and rabies observation, or animals removed in cruelty cases. This causes a health and safety risk in those communities.

The petition asks Governor Mikie Sherrill to bring advocates and responsible State officials together to review these concerns and identify corrective steps.

💥🙏Will you sign and share the petition? 🙏🙏
[https://www.change.org/ensureanimalaccountability](https://www.change.org/ensureanimalaccountability)

10/11/2026

💔 ANOTHER SICK KITTEN TURNED REPORTED TO BE AWAY BY THE TRENTON ANIMAL SHELTER

💔 A sick kitten was brought to the Trenton Animal Shelter for help. The resident says she was turned away—and had to take the cats back.

🐈‍⬛ Around 3:30 this afternoon, a Trenton resident reported bringing a mother cat and kittens to the shelter after finding them outside while visiting a friend. One kitten’s eye was reportedly covered in pus.

📌 The shelter visit and conversation below are based on what the resident reported to us; we have not independently verified them. My call to Trenton Dispatch is firsthand.

😿 The resident said she told Animal Control at the shelter that the kitten was sick. She reports that they refused to take the cats, said there was no room, and told her: “You’re taking care of the cats, so the cats are now yours.” She said she could not keep animals where she lives, so she returned them to the place where she found them.

📞 The resident told us her earlier call to Dispatch resulted only in a message being passed to Animal Control. I then personally called Trenton Dispatch and asked that Animal Control check on the cats. Dispatch contacted Animal Control and relayed that an officer would respond if I could confirm the cats were contained. I could not confirm that, and Animal Control is not going out. We know where the cats were found and returned, but we do not know whether they remain contained there or whether the kitten received care.

⚖️ New Jersey law, N.J.S.A. 4:19-15.16(a)(5), directs a certified Animal Control Officer to take custody of an animal found off its owner’s premises when the officer is told or observes that it is ill or injured. The resident reports that she told Animal Control at the shelter that the kitten was sick. The City should explain why the kitten was turned away and what steps were taken to get it help.

🐾 This is not the first time we have raised concerns about kittens being turned away at the Trenton Animal Shelter. A sick kitten should not be left without a clear path to care.

❓ What should happen when a resident brings a visibly sick kitten to the shelter?
❓ Who should make sure help reaches an animal after Animal Control is contacted?
❓ How can residents get help when they cannot keep a stray animal?
❓How many more kittens must be turned away before someone steps in and changes this practice?

🙏Please comment and share. Your opinion is important.
☎️ You can also Call the Mayor and ask him: 609-989-3030

10/11/2026

💥 🐾 TAS Again: Cruel Conditions. HLEO Contact Delayed 💥 🐾

📄 The August 26 ACO report from Trenton Animal Shelter Manager Darcy Del Castillo documents dogs on “4-6 FT Tow chains attached to fences” and in “5x5 enclosures with Tow chains.” It states, “all dogs were Thin and dirty.”

📩 On August 27, 2026, the Director asked whether the situation could constitute animal cruelty and whether HLEO officers should be contacted for further investigation. Del Castillo described the dogs as “unadoptable and a risk,” said they were “unsocialized and aggressive,” and wrote, “Taking in via HLEO would be last option.”

🚔 Police responded on September 17, but the report does not document officers seeing the dogs or assessing their living conditions. The summonses were all issued by Animal Control—not HLEO—for dog licensing, rabies vaccination, alleged breeding activity, and lacking a kennel license. None was an animal-cruelty summons.

⚠️ As of October 9, 2026, not one animal-cruelty violation, notice of violation, or warning has been produced. This raises concern that shelter capacity and the added workload of taking in the dogs may have weighed more heavily than addressing the cruel living conditions described in Del Castillo’s own report.

❓ Can an ACO decide whether a potential cruelty concern reaches a Humane Law Enforcement Officer?
❓ When a concern is not referred promptly, what should the municipality do to ensure it is investigated, and
❓ Why has no cruelty-related notice or warning EVER been produced?

If you want, you can ASK THE MAYOR! CALL 609-989-3030

(We realize the situation could have been abated, but how long did that take? Under NJ Law it should only be UP TO 7 days..... But there is not a paper trail that they are producing)

Anyone accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

10/11/2026

10/11/2026

10/06/2026

📊 VINELAND ANIMAL INTAKES AND OUTCOMES: JULY–SEPTEMBER 2026

🏛️ Residents deserve clear information about what happens to animals handled by the City. Vineland’s supplied records list 168 intake entries: 90 dogs, 60 cats and 18 other animals.

📋 JULY — 52 intakes
🐾 21 reclaimed, 9 adopted, 6 transferred, 11 euthanized and 5 recorded as dead on arrival. None remained marked “On Shelter” when the list was prepared.

📋 AUGUST — 73 intakes
🐾 17 reclaimed, 5 adopted, 2 transferred, 2 released to the wild, 11 euthanized and 9 recorded as dead on arrival. Twenty remained marked “On Shelter.”
❓ Four cats were labeled “FDIC,” and three wildlife entries were labeled “Ofc PD.” The supplied lists do not define those terms.

📋 SEPTEMBER — 43 intakes
🐾 18 reclaimed, 2 adopted, 1 transferred and 1 released to the wild. Four cats were euthanized, four raccoons were recorded as “Put Down,” and four animals were recorded as dead on arrival. Nine dogs remained marked “On Shelter.”

📅 These outcomes apply to each month’s admissions. Some occurred in later months.

🔎 THE NUMBER REMAINING MUST INCLUDE PRIOR MONTHS
🐕 September’s nine “On Shelter” dogs represent September admissions only. They do not include animals remaining from earlier months.

🧮 Using actual outcome dates, these entries produce a cumulative balance of:
🐾 July 31: 11 animals.
🐾 August 31: 29 animals.
🐾 September 30: 30 animals.

📅 An October 1 adoption reduces that balance to 29, matching the combined “On Shelter” entries: 19 dogs and 10 cats.

⚠️ The arithmetic reconciles, but nine would not accurately represent the total remaining from these three intake groups. These calculations exclude animals admitted before July and treat “FDIC” and “Ofc PD” as completed outcomes, pending clarification.

📝 Both July “Shadow” dog entries were counted. Their matching intake dates but different codes and reclaim dates require reconciliation.

❓ EUTHANASIA REASONS REMAIN UNKNOWN
📄 Across these intake groups, 26 animals were recorded as euthanized and four raccoons as “Put Down.”

🐕🐈 Of the total recorded euthanasias, 25 involved cats or dogs. We do not know how many were euthanized due to medical or humane necessity, space, or other reasons.

📣 Residents should request that breakdown and the supporting records from their City officials.

⚖️ FACILITY LICENSING ALSO REQUIRES ACCOUNTABILITY
⚠️ We remain concerned that Vineland knowingly continues placing impounded animals in kennels that are not licensed to operate as shelters or pounds. I personally spoke with the City’s Health Officer about this licensing issue months ago, putting the City on notice of our concern.

📜 N.J.S.A. 4:19-15.16(k) restricts initial impoundment to “only a licensed shelter, pound, or kennel operating as a shelter or pound.” N.J.S.A. 4:19-15.8(b) requires the facility’s license to state its purpose. A boarding kennel license alone does not establish authorization to operate as a shelter or pound.

🏛️ These requirements apply to Vineland. Residents should demand that City officials identify every facility used for initial impoundment and produce its current license showing the authorized purpose.

⚠️ Lack of public awareness does not relieve the City of its responsibility to comply.

📣 RESIDENTS DESERVE TRANSPARENCY
🧾 Request a complete monthly inventory showing animals carried forward, new intakes, outcomes and animals remaining.

🔍 Ask for definitions of disposition codes, documented euthanasia reasons and proof of appropriate facility licensing.

🏛️ The City should regularly publish this information. Accountability begins with complete, accurate records.

10/03/2026

🚨 ANIMAL CRUELTY ISN’T ONLY WHAT SOMEONE DOES TO AN ANIMAL. IT CAN ALSO BE WHAT THEY FAIL TO DO.

⚖️ In New Jersey, providing “necessary care” is a legal obligation.

🐾 N.J.S.A. 4:22-17 applies to an animal’s owner AND a person otherwise charged with the animal’s care.

❤️ What is “necessary care”?
🍲 Adequate food
💧 Adequate water
🏠 Protection from the weather
🩺 Veterinary care to alleviate suffering and maintain health

🚨 Failure to provide that care can constitute animal cruelty.

⚖️ When someone purposely, knowingly or recklessly fails to provide necessary care and causes bodily injury, the conduct can rise to a criminal animal-cruelty offense under N.J.S.A. 4:22-17(c)(2).

🐕 And an animal does NOT have to die before the criminal law may apply.

💔 “Bodily injury” includes physical pain, illness or impairment of physical condition.

📖 New Jersey’s 2021 Model Criminal Jury Charge specifically explains what prosecutors must prove in a criminal necessary-care case.

🩺 The jury instruction also specifically includes veterinary care necessary to alleviate suffering and maintain health within the definition of necessary care.

🏥 SHELTER ANIMALS HAVE THESE PROTECTIONS TOO.
🐾 An animal does not lose the protection of New Jersey’s cruelty laws when it enters an animal shelter.

📋 Shelters also have separate disease-control and health-care responsibilities under N.J.A.C. 8:23A.

⚠️ A shelter regulatory violation does not automatically constitute criminal animal cruelty.

BUT...
🚨 When an animal is denied necessary care and suffers physical pain, illness or impairment, we should be asking more than whether a shelter regulation was violated.

👮 Was this potential animal cruelty?
📞 Was Humane Law Enforcement notified?
🔎 Was it properly investigated?
⚖️ If the evidence satisfied the elements of an animal-cruelty offense, was appropriate enforcement action taken?

🏠 Private home or animal shelter, the animal’s suffering does not become less important because its custodian changed.

🐾 Custody carries responsibility.

❤️ Necessary care follows the animal.

We will look at this and Pebbles and Cortez .... Stay tuned.

09/26/2026

🚨 BROOKIE IS “AT RISK” — AND ONE DOG-TO-DOG SCORE COULD COST HER LIFE

🐾 Brookie has been placed on the Trenton Animal Shelter’s “At Risk” list. The concern centers on one portion of her June 2 behavioral assessment: the Dog Social Test.

📋 Her SAFER scores were:
• Look 1
• Sensitivity 2
• Tag 1
• Squeeze 1
• Alternate Squeeze 1
• Food unable to assess
• Toy 1
• Rawhide 1
• Dog Social 4.
💥Every completed human-directed item was a 1 or 2. The Dog Social Test was the only 4.

⚠️ Under the ASPCA SAFER Dog-to-Dog criteria, a score of 4 corresponds to a dog that “charges the helper dog while growling or attempting to bite.” Brookie

🎥 But Brookie’s written assessment does not document that behavior. The video review shows dog-directed interest, arousal and frustration, with “nipping” once. It did not progress to repeated biting or sustained aggression. Brookie later approached the dog again without further aggression and eventually moved behind the person holding her leash.

🦮 SAFER also instructs that the dog be allowed choice of movement and that the leash remain loose on approach. Brookie was under substantial leash control during portions of the interaction, potentially affecting the behavior being evaluated.

❗ This is not a claim that Brookie should automatically be considered safe with every dog. It is a request that an irreversible decision not be based on a Dog Social score that the documented behavior does not clearly support.

🙏 Before Brookie is euthanized, ask the City of Trenton to provide her with an independent, properly conducted dog-to-dog reassessment.
👉 Mayor W. Reed Gusciora
📞Mayor’s Office: 609-989-3030
💻Email: [email protected] Trenton NJ

HERE IS THE LINK: YOU DECIDE! https://tinyurl.com/SAVE-BROOKIE

09/22/2026

🔎 WHAT THE RECORDS ACTUALLY SHOW

💰 Hamilton Advocates paid for Maria to independently assess several Hamilton shelter dogs after Laura’s earlier assessments were repeatedly challenged as inaccurate.

📋 Laura is a qualified behavior professional with decades of shelter experience. The written records show that Maria did not discredit Laura’s central findings. She largely confirmed them, and sometimes reached more serious placement recommendations.

🐕 GRAYSON
Laura documented severe leash biting, escalating arousal, difficult handling, and the need for two handlers and two metal leashes. Maria documented the same behavior at greater intensity, classified Grayson as Red, and identified him as a candidate for behavioral euthanasia.

🐕 REESES
Laura documented serious escalation during restraint and classified Reeses as Red. Maria also documented restraint-related escalation and intense resource guarding. Her behavioral-euthanasia recommendation was conditional on whether medical care, pain management, behavior modification, and further assessment could be provided.

🐕 MAVERICK
Laura documented unpredictable arousal-based grabbing and mouthing and classified Maverick as Red. Maria documented moderate-pressure mouthing and identified him as a candidate for behavioral euthanasia, subject to out-of-shelter observation. That later observation recorded repeated biting, bruising through clothing, damaged clothing, and difficulty settling.

🐕 JERRY
Laura documented social behavior toward people but severe dog-directed behavior and classified Jerry as Red. Maria documented the same distinction. Based on the recorded history, she declined to risk a neutral dog by repeating the dog-to-dog test and identified Jerry as a candidate for behavioral euthanasia.

⚖️ THE FACT-BASED CONCLUSION
The records do not establish that Laura’s assessments were wrong. Maria independently confirmed the principal concerns involving Grayson’s arousal and leash biting, Reeses’ restraint-related escalation, Maverick’s recurrent biting, and Jerry’s dog-directed behavior.

📣 There were differences in testing, classifications, and recommendations. Those differences matter. But the independently funded reassessments largely supported, not disproved, the earlier findings.

THESE DOGS WERE ASSESSED BY THREE (3) CERTIFIED TRAINERS AND ALL CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION - A COMMUNITY SAFETY RISK.

💥❓ 𝙎𝙊 𝙉𝙊𝙒 𝙒𝙃𝘼𝙏, 𝙃𝘼𝙈𝙄𝙇𝙏𝙊𝙉?????

If you are concerned about the decisions being made regarding dogs at the Hamilton Township Animal Shelter, contact Mayor Jeff Martin and respectfully ask "Now What? and Was All the Drama Worth It?"

Mayor Jeff Martin
Mayor’s Office: 609-890-3507
Email: [email protected]