There's a Policy for That ... or Maybe Not ...

A mailing sent out to Minneapolis residents around June 16 (6 days AFTER the incident with Nano)

Throughout all of this, it has seemed to me that something just wasn't right about how entrenched the USPS was in their position. I've spoken to attorneys, the Minnesota Attorney General, Keith Ellison's office, Al Franken's office, my own attorney, multiple MACC officers, and the animal behaviorist I'm working with as part of Nano's mandated training and they've all said essentially the same thing: We have never seen the USPS overreact so strongly to something like this. It's absolutely bizarre.

Another aspect of this that is very odd has to do with timing of the incident and the Zero Tolerance Policy I've been hearing about recently.

The incident happened on June 10.

On June 16, when I picked up my mail at Powderhorn (I was so afraid to go in there based on how I'd been treated over the phone by PH, the station manager, that I was shaking the whole time). So, I pick up my mail and sort through it when I got home. I found a postcard from the USPS about its Zero Tolerance Policy.

On June 19, I first heard the USPS Zero Tolerance Policy referred to by Ms. D. in relation to the incident with Nano.

I then informally polled a few folks who live in Minneapolis and they, too, had received the same postcard around the same time as me - June 16, give or take.

So, here's what's happening. This policy, which was just communicated out to Minneapolitans last week is being retroactively applied to the incident with my dog.

This cannot possibly be legal.

I actually asked PH, Powderhorn manager, how far back the USPS planned to go as they retroactively told dog owners who have had any kind of incident with a mail carrier that they need to kill their pets.

PH said we weren't talking about other cases, we were talking about mine. A classic, non-answer.

This just can't be right, though. A good question to add to my list of things to ask my attorney, I guess.

I can guarantee you that the USPS took none of the steps listed below. None. Not one. And when asked about it, they initially said something about "local stations can make their own policies", yet Powderhorn doesn't apparently have any of their "own policies" written down.

And then, once the Zero Tolerance mailing went out, they started relying on that instead.

For all you dog owners out there, just know that there is no policy. The USPS will do whatever they want to you and your dog. Even if you can prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that your dog did not bite, bark, scratch, looked cross-eyed at a mail carrier ... it won't matter.

It. Won't. Matter.

And that is a terrifying prospect. I am terrified of these people.

They are systematically boxing me into a corner where I have fewer and fewer reasonable options, which makes no sense when there are so many reasonable, no-cost, easy-to-implement options we could start doing tomorrow that would "obtain a safe environment in which carriers can do their work."

Here is what the USPS policies are around "animal interference" - this is from the Postal Bulletin, dated May 1, 2014 (PB 22388), which is hardly out-dated material.

For Postal Managers

Progressive Warning Letters and Thank You Letter

This section offers materials for you to use to help your letter carriers do their jobs more safely. You can use the progressive warning letters to alert dog owners to the possible loss of mail delivery if they do not restrain their pets. Additionally, don’t forget to send a letter of thanks when they do!

Warning letters, like collection letters, need to be handled tactfully. The first and second sample letters on the website tell customers what we want them to do. The third tells them we have taken corrective steps. The fourth and fifth letters detail the customers’ options. In using these letters, keep in mind that our purpose is not to police the neighborhood but to obtain a safe environment in which carriers can do their work. Though most customers will respond to your first polite request, be meticulous in following up if they don’t. Otherwise, your efforts will not be taken seriously.

Nondelivery of Mail Policy

The availability and use of the repellent does not replace the policy of nondelivery of mail where there is animal interference!

Collection and delivery service personnel are to report the name and address of the customer where such interference occurs to the Postmaster or authorized supervisor, who must immediately telephone the customer and request that the animal be confined during the usual delivery hours in the neighborhood. The Postmaster or authorized supervisor must further inform the customer that (1) no deliveries will be made until this is done, and (2) service will be restored upon assurance that the animal will be confined.