Robert Lebzelter needs to step back, take a deep breath, and try to recover a newspaperman’s objectivity. He’s way too close to the APL situation to be able to think clearly as far as they are concerned. He sees certain issues in terms of black or white, with no gray areas, and he can’t continue to let this affect the way he gives stories priority in the Star Beacon. I’m glad that he found something that made him think in the private correspondence he intercepted and used without my permission, as the Farm section was finally moved up to section A in Monday’s paper, for the first time in a very long time. Hurrah! I hope this continues weekly and wasn’t just a one time thing to give his recent column credibility.

Bob abused the power of the press and his position at the Star Beacon by using an email that was not submitted for publication, not addressed to him, chopping it to pieces, and adding my real name without asking. If he wanted to use the email in its ENTIRETY, there is no reason whatsoever that he couldn’t have emailed me and asked for my permission, except that then he couldn’t have molded it to fit his own agenda the way that he did. This email contained my observations about a trend toward animal activism in this newspaper and heavy coverage of one particular organization. It was addressed to the editor and copied to two female reporters. It was not sent to Bob, didn’t mention his name at all, and I have no idea of what methods he used to obtain it. He changes only two words between his blog version of the story and the Star Beacon version in his blog version that I printed out, he claims that the email was sent to “my edito,” but in the newspaper version he says it was sent to “the office.” Either way, it wasn’t sent to him, although he would lead readers to believe it was.

Readers may decide for themselves how ethical it was for Bob to choose excerpts from this without my permission and then add my real name. It began with a salutation to the editor and ended with my name and email address. Whenever I write a letter to Opine for publication, I always include my full home address and phone number, to meet publication guidelines. He admits that “she didn’t submit the comments for publication.” yet uses tidbits of them anyways. Somebody more inclined to sue could probably find a lawsuit in there somewhere, but I’m confident that his lack of journalistic integrity will speak for itself. Bob should get a grip on the way he operates before he brings financial ruin to the paper in the future, however.

Lebzelter apparently felt the only way to give his column any teeth was to twist things around and bash my animal-loving “credentials,” in an effort to build himself up as the better person. OK, Bob, you’re a saint. You run with the dogs and have one at home. You deserve lots of gold stars. All better now?

Since “a picture is worth a thousand words.” the thinking public is invited to Google my name to see for themselves how Bob has misled readers. The Video Viper thought it was cute to cut the rest of the paragraph following my “Animal Planet” comment to give his column a kicky ending and readers the impression that all we do is watch TV shows about animals, with no interaction with real life breathing creatures. Take a few seconds to go to my photo gallery (the first link if you search my name), and enjoy all the photos of our beloved pets that have been published all over the world in magazines, television, billboards and the web. You should know that our kids have curried horses, washed dogs, held newborns, raised chicks, etc. right here at home. We don’t just give lip service to loving animal, we live it every single day. We think it’s wonderful that our daughter’s favorite channel is Animal Planet and that she wants to be a veterinarian when she grows up.

Bob may pick and choose and warp the truth with his sarcasm and spin, but he has never been to our home and he owes me a public apology. It’s only fitting that we line our puppy’s sleep crate with his column. Anything he writes from now on is suspect to me.

During last year’s APL media blitz, I was charmed by one of Margie’s stories and went up to the Shelter to surprise my husband with an older Sheltie that I had seen on an earlier visit. The Sheltie was gone. So I spent at least an hour trying to talk myself out of a puppy, with no success. Puppies are the most expensive at the APL, and they are not “done” when you take them home. They require at least four more vet visits within the next few months to get them up to speed on shots, plus housebreaking, training, etc. (Lebzelter tends to pitch the older dogs with issues and downplay the “cute little puppy” adoptions.) We already have two wonderful adopted dogs and really didn’t need another. Nevertheless, Bob walked RIGHT by me after his morning run, while I signed on to 24/7 duty with an additional pet. I also volunteered, both in a 12-1-07 letter to Opine and at the Shelter in person, to take cuter photos of the animals, outdoors without the red-eye and the bars in front of their faces, for their Star Beacon ads. I’m not a runner like Bob, so I offered my best talent to the APL. They told me, “The paper does that.” Not interested.

The email Bob chose to shred never mentioned beagles. We are not opposed to beagles. We have a neighborhood beagle that frequently urinates on our yellowing evergreens, as a matter of fact.

My email did refer to the Michael Vick pit bull stories that somebody at the Star Beacon likes to give front page photo status. I asked that the paper be more responsible than to encourage inexperienced pet owners with kids to go out and get this breed.

Lebzelter locked his jaw onto my comment about hunting and shook that for all it was worth. Yes, Bob, we think hunting is OK and our son enjoys it, like most of the people we know. The only “hunting” I do is with a camera, but I find it acceptable. Because Bob takes his notions to an extreme that seems out-of-touch in a rural community, he cannot comprehend how a hunter can also be an animal lover.

I am not anti-APL. I think they do a great deal of good, but I also like to ask questions when I see an imbalance or things don‚t make sense. Many other readers have written to Opine asking the tough questions about the APL, but we won‚t see these kind of questions coming from Bob, because he handles them with kid gloves. People who have adopted animals and donated money to the APL like myself, who dare to ask questions, should not be shouted down just because Robert Lebzelter doesn’t like the question. These tactics turns potentially powerful advocates of the APL into doubters who may never donate again.

There’s often confusion in this county as to whether the APL is open or closed, kill or no-kill. There was an adorable letter in Monday’s paper from a little girl who is under the impression that the APL is going to close. One of our neighbors once brought that same roaming beagle I mentioned above to our door, to ask if we knew who owned it, and he also said that he heard the APL was closed. It wasn’t. I think the reason we see such confusion is because the Star Beacon is so quick to print APL stories and not give the organization time to count up all the donations and figure out how to make them work. We often see photos of the APL accepting thousands of dollars in donations from a company, and then very soon afterwards there will be another story with the threat of them closing their doors. This is why people call for an audit and ask the APL to be held accountable for their funds. It doesn’t add up. Nobody in a position to do anything about it even seems to notice the discrepancy.

I’m also confused as to why the APL claims no responsibility if an adopted-out dog bites its owner, while they do have you sign a contract agreeing that the APL has the right to see and inspect and remove your adopted animal at any time? According to my contract, I could never “Sell, give away” our puppy to a friend at any time in the future, even after we paid to adopt him and paid vet bills and he’s supposed to belong to us. Pick up an APL contract to read the entire document and you’ll understand my confusion. I would like the APL to tell the public which they choose, responsibility or no responsibility? It seems like they want it both ways.

Bob writes: “Joy was happy we published a story critical of the APL, recently, about a woman angry because the APL wouldn‚t take back an animal after several months.” “Happy?” I was saddened by the Holman’s predicament. Their adopted dog bit a family member, and Melissa Holman did what the contract says one should do: call the APL. Sh’s not allowed to give it away, remember? They declined responsibility because the dog didn’t know the timeframe, so it was left to her to pay for quarantine and possible euthanization. What I actually wrote in my email was that Shelley Terry’s story was “a more balanced view of the APL,” with ”no follow-up.” The only follow-up we saw was the Star Beacon’s own editorial suggesting a solution and showing more sympathy for the dog than the bite victim. I wanted to know what eventually happened and how the Holman’s fared. I hope they’ll write in with an update. Shelley reported the original story professionally, with none of her own opinion or emotion, complete with quotes from both Melissa Holman and Michael Riffe. If Lebzelter finds the facts “critical of the APL,” then that’s his own bias.

Bob may be blind to the excessive APL coverage because it is his own pet project. Or maybe it was his deliberate doing, and that’s why he got so defensive and chose a personal attack on me? Who knows? I would challenge him to name just one other charity that has received equal time. I searched “Star Beacon, APL” and the list went on and on. It is great for the animals, but doesn’t this area have additional needs?