LA ANIMAL SERVICES SINKS FURTHER UNDER BRENDA BARNETTE AND PAUL KORETZ

Well, folks, just when we thought LA Animal Services couldn't sink any lower, guess what? It hasn't bottomed out yet! Now Koretz squirmed himself even further into the Barnette's World of Breeders and so that he, as new head of the Personnel Committee, will have sole oversight of "animal welfare:. Yep, it's now the LA City Personnel & Animal Welfare Committee. Quite a stretch, huh? Where's the Homeless Children Committee or the Elderly Poor in the Streets Committee? Is he talking about city personnel & animals as one group that need welfare? Well, what ever it is, it certainly is a manipulation and wouldn't you say, a conflict of interest for Koretz?  Isn't this the proverbial fox in charge of the hen house?

 

Here are the facts. Before Barnette got here, Koretz ran to the Mayor and whined his way onto the selection team. Since MV is always glad to share the blame, he jumped on that. So there was Paul Koretz, looking like the proud papa introducing Barnette at a press conference and talking about her being the best thing to ever happen to LA animals.

 

What did he base that on? Well, she was a breeder and the AKC Legislative Rep in Seattle. I guess that was good enough for him, since some of Koretz's best friends are breeders, according to a letter sent to him and posted by a big-time Encino breeder. (Remember that one? "We MUST have this increase in animals...Louis Krokover of the Encino Neighborhood Council wrote to Koretz as Koretz pushed for 10 adult animals and all the pups and kittens you want to breed in every yard in Los Angeles.). By the way Krokover also seems to have a little thing going with one of Koretz deputies! It's sort of incentuous, just like dog breeding.. Koretz, who thinks he is the expert on animals because he has a cat and had a puppy mill dog he got from a pet shop, he says.. So that qualifies him as an expert?

 

Now with LA Animal Services under his thumb, Barnette can continue torturing her staff and screwing up the department and getting what she really wants--Destroy LAAS! Remember in Seattle, Claire Davis replaced her on the committee and wrote to the CAO of Seattle, "We have spent 1-1/2 years trying to destabilize King County AC." Well, looks like that's about how long it's taking in LA but now Barnette has had some practice. And she has "Sleazy" Salazar who already proved he knows how to wreck the workplace and get the City sued.

 

So now, with Koretz, Barnette and Slazar in total charge, watch out City Council. The Big One may be coming. I heard it cost Riverside several mil. With the larger harassed staff at LAAS, let's see how that would add up.

 

And to get back to that conflict of interest, Koretz hired Barnette, has used her to try to get the animal increase for his buddies and can we say probably his best campaign contributors???? They are joined at the hip on all the stupid and useless things Koretz wants passed and Barnette gets to continue whipping the employees in her department while Mr. Personnel Committee Koretz turns a blind eye. It's just so perfect! And so sadistic! Pity the Animal Services Department. They are sinking like that Italian cruise ship, sunk by a City Council that doesn't care whether there are officers in a fire or earthquake disaster or out keeping the bad assed pit bulls from attacking people in LA. Well San Diego had three deaths by pit bull and a lot more attacks in just last year. With Koretz, Barnette, Salazar and pit bull loving Best Friends in charge of this city, L.A. will be doing better than that pretty soon. But as long as it's not their kid, will anyone on the City Council even care? 

WHY DID YOU LEAVE TOMPKINS COUNTY, NATHAN WINOGRAD?

Winograd used the excuse that he had to go back to California to care for a sick/dying father in law. Well, the father in law was not dying and is going strong enough to have lawsuits chasing him. The real reasons Winograd left Tompkins was that his program was about to catch up with him. He was caught not busting a cruelty situation with a breeder and that was questioned. Numbers were being questioned by his board, contracts were questioning him about services, and then there was this. Note the date, just before he left Tompkins County, unexpectedly too.

Humane officials see jump in animal abuse complaints

The Ithaca Journal - Ithaca, N.Y.

Author:	Diana LaMattina
Date:	Apr 7, 2004
Start Page:	B.1
Section:	Local
Text Word Count:	469

Document Text

Journal Staff
ITHACA - Local animal humane officers - alarmed at a recent increase in the number of animal abuse cases reported - hope the trend only reflects communities becoming more aware of an existing problem.


"My hope is that we aren't seeing an increase in the level of violence," said Nathan Winograd, executive director of Tompkins County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. "I think, especially in Tompkins County, there has been an increasing intolerance of violent behavior to animals. Animals have been so powerless for so long, people are just becoming much more vocal about protecting them."


The Tompkins County SPCA responded to 51 reports of animal cruelty in March, Winograd said, though the average for the past three years has been about one call per day. In each case, one of the two SPCA investigators responded to the complaint within 24 hours of being notified.


Of those reported, Winograd said about 10 cases a year turn out to be aggravated cases of animal abuse - for example, animals suffering from gunshots or knife wounds or from a severe beating.


The Stray Haven Humane Society and SPCA Inc., in Waverly has also reported a significant increase in the number of animal cruelty complaints. In 2003, the agency received 140 reports of animal cruelty, and as of Tuesday, the agency had responded to 63 calls reporting instances of animal cruelty this year, said Patrick Cartwright, animal cruelty investigator at Stray Haven.


"Probably only a third of the cases go onto the courts," Cartwright said. "In most instances, people just need to be told how they need to comply with the laws. They may not know any better."


Due in part to the increased number of complaints, Cartwright has gone from the agency's only volunteer investigator to be the only full-time employee working solely on responding to animal cruelty complaints.


The number of animal cruelty cases reported at any given time depends on several factors, Winograd said.
"It tends to spike after a big case or a case gets media attention," Winograd said. "It also depends on what time of year it is and if people are outside where they can see these kinds of things happen." (That's his tale, I sit on mine!)


In accordance with a national trend, initiated in part by American Humane, the Tompkins County SPCA is cooperating with the county's social service providers. The theory is that if animals are being abused in a home, other types of abuse may also be occurring, possibly to humans, Winograd said.


"If we go in on an animal cruelty compliant and find children in need of care, we let social services know. They do the same for us," Winograd said. "Children and animals are the two most vulnerable parts of our society. We need to watch out for them."

AS USUAL, BRENDA BARNETTE NOT DOING HER JOB

As she drifts along, Breeder Barnette continues to show her love for the breeding community. First she wants to increase household limits and the only ones to benefit from that are breeders. Certainly not normal pet owners. You might not understand that if you haven't lived in LA. We, if anything, have problems with too many dogs now, in backyards, on the streets. Feral cats abound in LA. So we don't need more, Barnette.

Then she turns around and addresses barking dogs after attempting to put more barking dogs out there? Try as I may, I don't see this making good sense. Plus she just gave away a brand new shelter paid for by the taxpayers, and she wants more animals in the City, more strays, more owner surrenders, more cruelty, okay.

Now there is a mystery to be solved as well.

http://www.laweekly.com/2012-01-26/news/barking-dogs-LA-$250-fine/

But things might change with a new law, now in effect, to fine dog owners $250 to $1,000 — that is, if anyone enforces it.

 Then, in 2010, a bizarre series of events unfolded as City Hall tried to crack down. First, in May 2010, in a story that went national, the Los Angeles Times, Daily Breezeand CBS reported that the City Council voted 10-0 to create a $100 fine against obnoxious dog owners. Some media suggested the fines could generate up to $1.8 million annually.

Nobody at City Hall seems to know what happened to that vote. There's no record of it on the city website, and the Department of Animal Services never implemented a $100 fine — much less collected $1.8 million.

Instead, last year, one veteran animal services employee told L.A. Weekly that he had never heard of a $100 fine. And despite thousands of annual complaints, the department held only 83 formal administrative hearings to force owners to control their barking dogs.

And then Barnette trying to establish herself as a pro pit nutter, actually ruled against two just and fair rulings for an elderly couple. Barnette overruled in favor of backyard pit bulls.

Lopez says. "I walk around with earplugs in, and I sleep on the floor or in another room. It's made our lives a living hell and my husband has had two heart attacks."She says two administrative rulings by the L.A. Department of Animal Services were in their favor, and Lopez says hearing officer George Mossman was fair and just.But Barnette, a busy city department head dealing with frequent political headaches, found the time to intervene. Lopez says Barnette overruled Mossman.The case wended through the bureaucracy for months. Eventually, Animal Services ruled against the dog owners.

Yet nothing changed. Lopez says Animal Services officials today let the barking to continue in Highland Park. Lopez concludes that Barnette, who moved here from Seattle in 2010, suffers from an illogical fear of being perceived as "anti–pit bull."

Just another case of Barnette grandstanding without using her brain first. Increase the number of barking dogs, then an ordinance against them barking, and then no enforcement. 

THE CASE OF NATHAN WINOGRAD PROTECTING A BREEDER IN TOMPKINS COUNTY

So here we have Winograd, aware of horrid conditions at a breeding kennel, and yet he left those animals in those conditions while he worked at "gradually" reducing the numbers. What does that mean? How did he pick and chose which dogs would get a chance and which ones would continue to live in those conditions?

""In February 2003, the Groton kennel relinquished 59 dogs to Tompkins County SPCA. The SPCA maintained there were signs of neglect and long-term medical problems. Records showed that the kennel had never been cited for conditions in the nine years it had operated. The SPCA, the American Kennel Club and the State of New York had all inspected the kennel. After an initial license inspection, the New York Dept. of Agriculture and Markets contacted Mr. Winograd to inform him of the conditions in the Groton kennel. Winograd admitted he had known about the Groton kennel conditions since he began as director of Tompkins County SPCA. His goal was to “gradually” reduce the number of animals at the kennel. An Ithaca Journal op ed at the time argued that Winograd and the SPCA dropped the ball on the abusive kennel by failing to follow through with appropriate action.

Since the SPCA routinely facilitates the prosecution of animal abuse, it is puzzling that this organization recently went out of its way to claim serious incidents of neglect at a dog breeding facility without following through with charges. In other instances of alleged violations of state animal welfare laws, the SPCA quickly handed the cases over to law enforcement authorities for prosecution. Why not now?""

WITH THIS MENTALITY, NO WONDER HE IS THE DARLING OF THE BREEDING COMMMUNITY.

WHAT? ARE WE TAKING TACOS TO AN ALL YOU CAN EAT MEXICAN BUFFET?

When this article was published the 23rd, Petfinders had 649 Labradors listed for adoption in the San Diego area. Now why would they bring in more?

Could it be that San Antonio is trying to go "No Kill" and they are dumping on others? I'd vote for that one. Like LA City is dumping theirs on Canada, Washington, and Oregon.

http://www.ksat.com/news/Dog-transport-heads-from-SA-to-Southern-California/-/478452/8488178/-/mobwgr/-/

The group is Labradors and Friends and looking on their Petfinders, they have plenty of labs for adoption. Now could this be nothing more than grandstanding for donations? After all, now they can work San Antonio for donations too. And all the while, labs in the shelters in CA need rescuing.

CHRISTMAS RETURNS, BOGO RETURNS, WHAT IS "NO KILL" SELLING - SHOES?

One piece of information that you can't get from these "No Kill" shelters is their rate of return for their "reduced" adoption fees, BOGO sales, or Xmas/holiday specials.


From experience in Indianapolis during the reign of terror under Doug Rae, their $4 adoption special during 4th of July resulted in many letters being sent to the Councilmembers. These letters were from other shelters around the area where the $4 special pets were being returned, many of them because of biting. Rae refused to accept back these pets and the people were going to other local shelters for help. 


This article points out the problem with discounting pets to the public, pimping pets at times when they should not really be adopted. Xmas, with people in and out of a home, excitement, etc., is not a good time to take a strange pet into a household. A gift certificate is much more appropriate and do the adoption afterwards. We want to move them into homes, yes, but we need to do what is in the best interest of the pet.


http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/news/local/local-animal-shelter-sees-spike-christmas-gift-ret/nG6GT/


Hyde typically sees animals given back to the shelter that were once Christmas gifts, but she said usually doesn't see a big number of returns until April as the pets get bigger. Now, only January of 2012, Hyde counts 21 puppies calling the Canutillo shelter home. Some of the puppies were found in ditches, others running in the road, and some were dropped off directly at the shelter, like Noel.

Hyde says the age of the 21 puppies, none of which are more than a few months old, is what makes her wary that they're discarded Christmas gifts. Animal Rescue is a "no-kill" shelter, but as the pens fill up with more animals, there soon won't be a vacancy and unwanted animals will be turned away.

"We try to screen potential adopters and make sure they understand 'have you done your homework? Are you sure this is what you want? This is life time commitment' but we still get returns," Hyde said. "After a while you learn that they're only telling you want you want to hear."

We need to do better adoptions, not more adoptions. 

FOUR TO NINE DOGS PER KENNEL - "NO KILL" LABEL LIFTED FOR SHELTER. UPDATE ON BATON ROUGE

I just blogged about Baton Rouge. http://www.workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2012/01/no-kill-shelter-euthanizes-family-dog.html

If you remember, Baton Rouge was proclaimed as the newest open door shelter under "No Kill" and a mere 5 days later, it was being investigated.
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2011/09/baton-rouge-falls-now-quickest-failure.html

http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2011/09/one-failure-after-another-nathie-or-no.html

http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2011/08/add-another-failure-to-nathan-winograds.html

And after all of this, NOW Baton Rouge is backing off of "No Kill". Guess they found out you can't just walk in and say "Stop the killing", doesn't work, huh?

http://www.wafb.com/story/16530588/no-kill-label-lifted-for-shelter-in-east-baton-rouge

When the Companion Animal Alliance took over, there were sometimes eight to nine dogs in each kennel. There are still about four or five in some, but they're trying to get them down to where all animals have their own.

In the meantime, animals that are not adopted are put on a list to be euthanized.

OKAY, SO CAN ANYONE SAY "SLOW LEARNERS"?