We know D.C. Get our free newsletter to stay in the know.
Thanks for doing the article about my cat Mugoddai (City Desk, “Feline Blue,” 9/2). I am grateful that you gave a description and listed the Mugoddai Web site. But you got a few things way out of context.
Your story reports that I’ve spent $5,000 on pet detectives.
I believe I told the reporter I’d invested in numerous ads in newspapers, posters, mailings, and pet detectives as well as paid listings with nonprofit animal-advocacy organizations that assist animals. This has not undermined the contributions I make to the human community, either.
You quoted a shelter employee who gave a time period for which success in finding a missing “family member” might occur. She is misinformed. My search is fairly passive—mostly keeping a few posters up around town and animal organizations notified. But I wouldn’t think even that was worth it at this point if it weren’t for the many people who have called and e-mailed me with stories of pets recovered months and years later. The director of the D.C. Humane Society has told me he has reunited missing pets with their owners after a year or more—key to his success was that the owner kept the missing report up to date.
I never referred to myself as a “pet activist.” I did tell you the reporter that I have been active in animal advocacy and that I have been involved in animal rescue. I mentioned that many people have contacted me for information about their missing pets and offered me encouragement. With 15 million pets going missing a year, information as to what I’ve learned in the time my cat has been gone has been helpful to others.
Finally, mentioning the two prank calls I have gotten did nothing for the story. In fact, it was gossipy and irrelevant, and it undermined what could have been helpful, compassionate reporting.
Nevertheless, I do appreciate your efforts. Thanks again.