Winograd is again condemning HSUS for their role in the Wilkes dog fighting case. I applaud them for taking a stand for the victims of pits. These aren't the typical street dogs used by street punks who know nothing about breeding the fight into dogs, these are true fighting dogs, bred for that purpose, bred for bad temperaments.
I challenge Winograd to take these dogs home with him, raise them "right" and let them take the face of his children off. It's about time you showed us that you are willing to do what you tell others to do. You adopt these dogs, not anyone else, you, Winograd.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Here's Some Honesty For You Winograd
Why do you continue to make a total fool of yourself?
First you try to blame any negative comments on one person, like one person has the time to comment all over the country about you. What does this Pat Dunaway have on you that you are so scared of? I'd like to know.
You continue to bash Wayne Pacelle and it makes you look like you are jealous of him. And of course, you are. You don't have 10 million people following you, just a handful scattered about. You're nothing more than a Wayne Pacelle wannabe.
Continuing to say that your way is the ONLY way gives you a Messiah complex. People are seeing you as delusional now.
And you want to refer to others as pro-killing when you are the guilty one, Winograd. Yes, you are responsible for animals dying, not with mercy, but in horribly cruel ways. PACCA was caught and now people know what your NKE program really does. It is only a matter of time before the Reno and Charlottesville NKE programs show the same as PACCA. You like those non profits because there is no transparency, takes them longer to get "caught". Go to Reno and walk in that shelter, make sure you take oxygen with you because the stench is overwhelming.
Stop with the licks about the fighting dogs in NC. Damn, how many people have to die before you realize that pits are killing people? How many children have to go through life with no face and scars because you want to save them all? You are a sick man, Winograd, to place the life of a dog above that of a child.
Stuff it, Winograd, find that hole you crawled out of and go back in. Your gig is up, people are beginning to see what you are.
First you try to blame any negative comments on one person, like one person has the time to comment all over the country about you. What does this Pat Dunaway have on you that you are so scared of? I'd like to know.
You continue to bash Wayne Pacelle and it makes you look like you are jealous of him. And of course, you are. You don't have 10 million people following you, just a handful scattered about. You're nothing more than a Wayne Pacelle wannabe.
Continuing to say that your way is the ONLY way gives you a Messiah complex. People are seeing you as delusional now.
And you want to refer to others as pro-killing when you are the guilty one, Winograd. Yes, you are responsible for animals dying, not with mercy, but in horribly cruel ways. PACCA was caught and now people know what your NKE program really does. It is only a matter of time before the Reno and Charlottesville NKE programs show the same as PACCA. You like those non profits because there is no transparency, takes them longer to get "caught". Go to Reno and walk in that shelter, make sure you take oxygen with you because the stench is overwhelming.
Stop with the licks about the fighting dogs in NC. Damn, how many people have to die before you realize that pits are killing people? How many children have to go through life with no face and scars because you want to save them all? You are a sick man, Winograd, to place the life of a dog above that of a child.
Stuff it, Winograd, find that hole you crawled out of and go back in. Your gig is up, people are beginning to see what you are.
Hello Indy? Anyone Home There?
Douglas Rae has been hired to take over animal control in Indy. DID ANYONE CHECK HIM OUT BEFORE HIRING????? Obviously not or they would have seen the piss poor job he did in Philly.
The description of the PACCA shelter is beyond words, the filth, the overcrowding, the disease (PACCA flu) and who is responsible for all this - Douglas Rae, of course, was he not the Chief Operating Officer? And what was he operating? A freaking hell hole for animals, that's what he operated.
The Philly audit was there for the City of Indy to check out, did they? Anyone reading this audit would know that Rae is incapable of running a shelter. It appears that there may be an unethical association between some of the animal commission and Winograd that resulted in Rae being hired without checking him out. I say without checking him because if they had he would not have the job.
And with all the dirty little secrets about PACCA coming out, what does Winograd say about Rae? "I actually think Doug Rae is one of the best directors of operations that I have ever seen," said Nathan Winograd, director of the Oakland, Calif.-based National No-Kill Advocacy Center. "Most of the success in Philadelphia was due to Doug's hard work." It should read "Most of the FAILURE in Philadelphia was due to Doug's incompetence would be a little more Honest(y).
And how can Winograd supported Rae? The same way he supports any idiot that yells I want no kill. Winograd condemned Howard Nelson until Nelson played the Whino by saying he would go no kill. And the Whino fell for it. Winograd condemns Philly yet supports the very person who made it that way along with Tara Darby. But I say the CEO is less responsible than the person who was supposed to be doing the day to day operations and that is Rae.
So it looks like Indy will become another Philly. Hello, anyone home there?
The description of the PACCA shelter is beyond words, the filth, the overcrowding, the disease (PACCA flu) and who is responsible for all this - Douglas Rae, of course, was he not the Chief Operating Officer? And what was he operating? A freaking hell hole for animals, that's what he operated.
The Philly audit was there for the City of Indy to check out, did they? Anyone reading this audit would know that Rae is incapable of running a shelter. It appears that there may be an unethical association between some of the animal commission and Winograd that resulted in Rae being hired without checking him out. I say without checking him because if they had he would not have the job.
And with all the dirty little secrets about PACCA coming out, what does Winograd say about Rae? "I actually think Doug Rae is one of the best directors of operations that I have ever seen," said Nathan Winograd, director of the Oakland, Calif.-based National No-Kill Advocacy Center. "Most of the success in Philadelphia was due to Doug's hard work." It should read "Most of the FAILURE in Philadelphia was due to Doug's incompetence would be a little more Honest(y).
And how can Winograd supported Rae? The same way he supports any idiot that yells I want no kill. Winograd condemned Howard Nelson until Nelson played the Whino by saying he would go no kill. And the Whino fell for it. Winograd condemns Philly yet supports the very person who made it that way along with Tara Darby. But I say the CEO is less responsible than the person who was supposed to be doing the day to day operations and that is Rae.
So it looks like Indy will become another Philly. Hello, anyone home there?
Friday, February 13, 2009
The Question Should Not Be How To Stop Killing The Pits But How To Stop The Pits From Killing The Children.
Short and to the point. That's all, folks.
This is a Hoot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This article is by one of my least favorite columnist but this time I didn't mind reading his story. Howard Nelson, as you may know, was kissing up to the Whino, so I am not at all sorry to see him leave. From the sound of things, he walks out when it doesn't go his way. Sounds like a real winner. Read this article and then tell me who it reminds you of.
Posted on Thu, Feb. 12, 2009
PSPCA chief takes leave
By Stu BykofskyPhiladelphia Daily News
Just two months after wresting the city's animal control contract from PACCA, Pennsylvania SPCA CEO Howard Nelson quit late yesterday afternoon. His resignation letter cited health issues and "an environment no longer conducive to my success or the success of the organization."
Neither Nelson nor PSPCA Board President Harrise Yaron responded to several messages left for them on their cell phone and e-mail accounts.
However, Kevin Feeley, of the high-profile Bellevue Communications Group, did. Feeley was hired last night to handle questions flowing from the resignation.
Such as, was the resignation accepted?
Feeley says the resignation "took the board by surprise" and after a flurry of phone calls, it was agreed that Nelson would be placed on a leave of absence. His interim replacement is board member Beth Ann White, who will work without pay and handle day-to-day operations. The board is planning to meet, perhaps as early as tonight, to discuss what they will do next.
Nelson took the reins of PSPCA in March 2007 and immediately raised the profile of the animal organization, but at some cost. A couple of longtime board members were forced out, with one, former PSPCA President Richard Elliott, going public with his complaints that Nelson was a tyrant demanding "my way or the highway."
Those claims were echoed by former PSPCA employees who alleged that Nelson was tyrannical and ordered humane agents to operate outside their jurisdictions. Throughout the barrage of accusations, the board stood squarely behind Nelson, noting the good works he had done in tackling puppy mills and other forms of animal cruelty.
"Everybody need a little bit of time to figure out what happened, why it happened and how we go forward," said Feeley, who has done some PR work for PSPCA in the past.
The PSPCA board became aware only last night that Nelson had "resigned" a couple of times from his last job as the head of the Washington (D.C.) Humane Society only to be cajoled back to his job by the board.
Posted on Thu, Feb. 12, 2009
PSPCA chief takes leave
By Stu BykofskyPhiladelphia Daily News
Just two months after wresting the city's animal control contract from PACCA, Pennsylvania SPCA CEO Howard Nelson quit late yesterday afternoon. His resignation letter cited health issues and "an environment no longer conducive to my success or the success of the organization."
Neither Nelson nor PSPCA Board President Harrise Yaron responded to several messages left for them on their cell phone and e-mail accounts.
However, Kevin Feeley, of the high-profile Bellevue Communications Group, did. Feeley was hired last night to handle questions flowing from the resignation.
Such as, was the resignation accepted?
Feeley says the resignation "took the board by surprise" and after a flurry of phone calls, it was agreed that Nelson would be placed on a leave of absence. His interim replacement is board member Beth Ann White, who will work without pay and handle day-to-day operations. The board is planning to meet, perhaps as early as tonight, to discuss what they will do next.
Nelson took the reins of PSPCA in March 2007 and immediately raised the profile of the animal organization, but at some cost. A couple of longtime board members were forced out, with one, former PSPCA President Richard Elliott, going public with his complaints that Nelson was a tyrant demanding "my way or the highway."
Those claims were echoed by former PSPCA employees who alleged that Nelson was tyrannical and ordered humane agents to operate outside their jurisdictions. Throughout the barrage of accusations, the board stood squarely behind Nelson, noting the good works he had done in tackling puppy mills and other forms of animal cruelty.
"Everybody need a little bit of time to figure out what happened, why it happened and how we go forward," said Feeley, who has done some PR work for PSPCA in the past.
The PSPCA board became aware only last night that Nelson had "resigned" a couple of times from his last job as the head of the Washington (D.C.) Humane Society only to be cajoled back to his job by the board.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Another Typical No Kill Way to Handle Pitbulls
Don't go on service calls. This is incredible. Indy has hired Doug Rae, the second in command of PACCA. Doesn't anyone check before hiring? In a commission meeting yesterday, Rae said he intends to save the pits and adopt them out after "rehab"? Dogsbite.com reports that Indy is over the top with pit attacks, one woman lost her arm just this week from an attack last week.
The point of this is that the NKE shelters do drag their feet on service calls about pits, they don't want to pick them up. No body does. In Tompkins County, it was discovered that they weren't answering their phones until after 10 in the mornings, why, so they didn't have to answer service calls. I do have town hall meeting minutes backing this up.
This reporter has done a lot of stories on this issue so if you want look those up too.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090209/LOCAL/902090365
The point of this is that the NKE shelters do drag their feet on service calls about pits, they don't want to pick them up. No body does. In Tompkins County, it was discovered that they weren't answering their phones until after 10 in the mornings, why, so they didn't have to answer service calls. I do have town hall meeting minutes backing this up.
This reporter has done a lot of stories on this issue so if you want look those up too.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090209/LOCAL/902090365
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Let's Talk
Today I had some email conversation with a reporter that I have a great deal of respect for, a straight shooter of a guy. He pointed out something to me and I have decided to put it up so we can all contribute.
Should Winograd be blamed for each and every failure of a no kill shelter? Of course not, don't be silly. But indirectly he can be blamed. Winograd flys under the radar, just low enough so he can say it was not his fault. Just because a shelter doesn't pay for a consultation with him doesn't mean they can't follow his lead and program. Prior to Winograd, private shelters would declare no kill, it has been around for a long time, but not open door shelters owned by the public. Private shelters can do what they want, they don't answer to the public. But Winograd took the term "no kill" much too literally (his inexperience probably). If he were bringing something new to the table, it might be different. All he has managed to do is combine all the ideas that other people had been doing for a long time and write a book. He doesn't offer anything about how to get these things done. Just saying to fundraise doesn't tell how to go about doing it, organizing, publicity, etc. So basically, shelters are left to their own devices after his consultations. And that is why they fail.
I want to put in an excerpt from an article written in 1998. Please note in this article that there are contradictions to the story Winograd gives in this day and time. Despite a contract to the contrary, the Director of SFACC states that they euthanize the animals TURNED DOWN by the SF SPCA.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/11/22/SC57SC1.DTL&type=printable
But Roger A. Caras, president of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, wrote in a newsletter last year that no-kill ``is more hoax than fact.''
Caras' primary target in the article is Avanzino and the San Francisco SPCA. He wrote that Avanzino's figures of euthanizing only 200 of the 5,000 animals the San Francisco SPCA handled is deceptive.
``The no-kill shelter propagandists would like the publicized figures to stop right there,'' Caras wrote. ``However, the city facility (San Francisco Animal Care and Control) . . . handled around 18,000 animals in the same 12-month period and euthanized more than 6,700 of those.''
No-kill critics maintain that private, nonprofit shelters keep their euthanasia statistics low because they refuse to accept injured, ill or behaviorally disturbed animals, which city-run control shelters must take.
Carl Friedman, director of San Francisco's Department of Animal Care and Control, has an adoption pact with Avanzino's SPCA. Many of the dogs and cats Friedman euthanizes are ones turned away by Avanzino's organization.
``I don't think anyone really knows what `no kill' means,'' Friedman says. ``Our SPCA claims to be a no-kill facility, but yet they do euthanize animals -- of course, nonadoptable ones.
``The unfortunate thing about this no-kill philosophy is that it sets up a good guy/bad guy relationship. How many times have I heard, `I don't want to go down to your facility. You kill animals there.' I say, `Come on down, and help me not kill them.' It's no good saying we're a no-kill facility; then down the block, 6,000 animals are being killed. Everyone can see through that.
``I can't talk for whoever at the Duffield Foundation is going to hand out the money, but it probably will be Rich, and he knows what it's like. And he knows the only way to have fewer animals killed is for private and municipal (agencies) to work together. That's what he and I do now.''
So that leads to the next topic, just how many animals have died in the name of "No Kill"? This movement has pitted the humane community against itself. We need someone who can bring us together, not tear us apart such as Winograd has done. It has painted a picture of shelters that is turning the public away, thus reducing adoptions and killing animals. No one will bring their family to a shelter when they think they will see cruelty and dead animals. This painting of the shelters as death camps only serves to drive away the public but it adds to his agenda. Sometimes I wonder if this is deliberate to make his shelters look better or to force more shelters to accept his religion.
Another story out of San Francisco also contradicts statements that Winograd makes concerning mandatory spay/neuter and breed specific legislation. This is the city he brags about.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/28/MNK5RMK79.DTL&type=printable
S.F. sterilization law successful in reducing pit bull population
Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Not long ago, pit bulls occupied about three-quarters of the dog kennels at San Francisco's Animal Care and Control shelter. Now, only about a quarter of the unwanted canines at the shelter are pit bulls.
The numbers of pit bull terriers and pit bull mixes abandoned and euthanized in San Francisco have fallen drastically since the city implemented a law 18 months ago requiring that pit bulls be sterilized, animal officials say.
Animal Care and Control Director Carl Friedman said the city has impounded 21 percent fewer pit bulls since the law passed than during the previous year and a half. The number of pit bulls euthanized has dropped 24 percent.
The law grew out of the uproar over the fatal mauling of 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish, who was attacked in his Inner Sunset District home by two pit bulls that had not been sterilized. The boy's mother had left him alone in the family's basement and cautioned him not to go near the dogs, one of which had bitten the boy earlier in the day.
Friedman says fewer pit bulls are being abandoned to the pound because fewer are being born, thanks to the spay and neuter requirement.
"Something is working," he said. "I wouldn't bet the house it's all because of the ordinance, but nothing else has really changed."
Animal control officers have confiscated 38 pit bulls from owners who refused to comply with the law, Friedman said. About 500 pit bulls have been spayed or neutered in San Francisco in that time, he said. Animal Care and Control does the operations, as well as the SPCA and a free mobile clinic from the Peninsula Humane Society that visits the city twice a month.
Because it was targeted only at pit bulls, the spay and neuter ordinance required a change in state law to allow cities and counties to impose "breed specific" requirements. San Francisco's SPCA, which does not believe in targeting particular breeds, acknowledged that it has seen an increase in the number of pit bulls brought in to be spayed and neutered.
"This law has been a success in reducing the euthanization of animals, and we do support that," said SPCA president Jan McHugh-Smith.
But many animal groups would prefer that the process be voluntary - a tactic they say is working in the East Bay, where pit bull advocates and animal control officials have focused on educating the public of the need for sterilization instead of making surgeries mandatory.
"We have seen it become much more difficult to own a pit bull in San Francisco, especially if you're a renter. The law has brought an added stigma to the breed," said Donna Reynolds, executive director of the pit bull advocacy group Bad Rap.
"In the East Bay we're ... supporting dog owners and offering resources to help people make good decisions, and we're seeing huge numbers pour into the doors to get their pit bulls fixed," she said.
People on both sides agree that spaying and neutering is good for pit bulls because it minimizes the number of unwanted pups and blunts aggression in males.
San Francisco's law allows animal control officers to issue a fix-it ticket to noncompliant dog owners, requiring that the pit bull be sterilized within two weeks. Animal Control officers also hand out information on low-cost and free surgeries.
Officers follow up with visits to the homes of owners who have not complied. A first violation can bring a citation and $500 fine; more than one citation can land an owner in jail and result in the city seizing the dog.
Usually, however, Animal Care and Control officers don't let it get to that point. If they return and have to write a citation, officers will take the dog from the owner - sometimes forcefully - spay or neuter the animal and return it, unless the pit bull is aggressive or officials believe it is being used in dog fights.
In the past 18 months, the agency has issued about 250 fix-it tickets, of which only 30 or so are outstanding. It has handed out 204 citations.
"We don't want to criminalize this - there are a lot of people that can't afford to spay or neuter their dogs," Friedman said. "The whole idea is not to take the animal away unless they pose a danger."
One day last week, the Animal Care and Control shelter on 15th Street in the Mission District had only three pit bulls out of about three dozen dogs total. Pit bulls still can be difficult to place with owners: Sandra, a friendly, energetic, 8-month-old brindle pit bull, has been waiting for a new home since June.
Friedman stresses that the law did not reflect an official desire to condemn pit bulls. The breed is more a problem because of the sheer number of the dogs than because of their disposition, he said.
"I've seen pit bulls make wonderful companion animals - they are good for families and children," Friedman said. "I understand where (opponents) were coming from, but I didn't want to see us going the same routes as other communities that are banning certain breeds altogether. In my mind, this is a very good compromise and it's been a success."
When I speak of his personal agenda, I am reminded of him walking away from "alleged" cruelty and suffering for the sake of writing a report. When he has been in these "death camps" and saw a dog suffering, what has he done to relieve the suffering? Did he ask staff in the shelter to do something, maybe they were unaware of the suffering. Did he call the police to report a felony cruelty? Did he do anything at that moment to relieve the suffering? No, he walked away and no one was aware until his report was submitted. He didn't give shelter staff an opportunity to explain.
Philly is such a good example of his mentality. Philly was a shining star, his hand picked director was wonderful and look how they increase the live release rate. Meanwhile back at the ranch. Animals were suffering horribly during the time he was praising Philly and his director. It wasn't until the truth was coming out that he turned like a snake and condemned Philly and his hand picked director. He is quick to condemn, not so quick to help. Did he offer to step in, just from the kindness of his heart, not to mention to make up for picking a lousy director? No, he just condemned and blamed everyone else. He said it was poor management, well, duh, remember, you picked her, praise her, and then threw her to the lions. Sounds like some of my relationships.
And Winograd loves to say that he will grant interviews to anyone including the breeders, doesn't mean he supports them. This is the ultimate slap in the face. How stupid does he think we are? If you are a supporter of civil rights, you don't do interviews with the KKK. There is an implied impression when you are interviewed by an organization that you are accepting of that organization and what it stands for. Considering that the breeding industry is now using Winograd to fight new legislation that can only help animals, I would say that he has thrown his hat in with them. I think it goes to show one thing, that he is in this for his own personal gain and that is all. Giving credibility to breeding by granting interviews, falling in with them to fight legislation, saying there is not a problem with too many pets (what a whacked out way to determine this), is undermining decades of hard work by dedicated people.
Winograd is a man of contradictions. It's not his fault, it is never his fault. And he fails to learn how to improve his program so that it just might work with his denial of failure. I see him as a wannabe. He wants to be Avanzino, he wants to be Sayers, he wants to be Wayne. He wants a Dave Duffield to put $239 million in his hands. It will never happen, Winograd.
Should Winograd be blamed for each and every failure of a no kill shelter? Of course not, don't be silly. But indirectly he can be blamed. Winograd flys under the radar, just low enough so he can say it was not his fault. Just because a shelter doesn't pay for a consultation with him doesn't mean they can't follow his lead and program. Prior to Winograd, private shelters would declare no kill, it has been around for a long time, but not open door shelters owned by the public. Private shelters can do what they want, they don't answer to the public. But Winograd took the term "no kill" much too literally (his inexperience probably). If he were bringing something new to the table, it might be different. All he has managed to do is combine all the ideas that other people had been doing for a long time and write a book. He doesn't offer anything about how to get these things done. Just saying to fundraise doesn't tell how to go about doing it, organizing, publicity, etc. So basically, shelters are left to their own devices after his consultations. And that is why they fail.
I want to put in an excerpt from an article written in 1998. Please note in this article that there are contradictions to the story Winograd gives in this day and time. Despite a contract to the contrary, the Director of SFACC states that they euthanize the animals TURNED DOWN by the SF SPCA.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/11/22/SC57SC1.DTL&type=printable
But Roger A. Caras, president of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, wrote in a newsletter last year that no-kill ``is more hoax than fact.''
Caras' primary target in the article is Avanzino and the San Francisco SPCA. He wrote that Avanzino's figures of euthanizing only 200 of the 5,000 animals the San Francisco SPCA handled is deceptive.
``The no-kill shelter propagandists would like the publicized figures to stop right there,'' Caras wrote. ``However, the city facility (San Francisco Animal Care and Control) . . . handled around 18,000 animals in the same 12-month period and euthanized more than 6,700 of those.''
No-kill critics maintain that private, nonprofit shelters keep their euthanasia statistics low because they refuse to accept injured, ill or behaviorally disturbed animals, which city-run control shelters must take.
Carl Friedman, director of San Francisco's Department of Animal Care and Control, has an adoption pact with Avanzino's SPCA. Many of the dogs and cats Friedman euthanizes are ones turned away by Avanzino's organization.
``I don't think anyone really knows what `no kill' means,'' Friedman says. ``Our SPCA claims to be a no-kill facility, but yet they do euthanize animals -- of course, nonadoptable ones.
``The unfortunate thing about this no-kill philosophy is that it sets up a good guy/bad guy relationship. How many times have I heard, `I don't want to go down to your facility. You kill animals there.' I say, `Come on down, and help me not kill them.' It's no good saying we're a no-kill facility; then down the block, 6,000 animals are being killed. Everyone can see through that.
``I can't talk for whoever at the Duffield Foundation is going to hand out the money, but it probably will be Rich, and he knows what it's like. And he knows the only way to have fewer animals killed is for private and municipal (agencies) to work together. That's what he and I do now.''
So that leads to the next topic, just how many animals have died in the name of "No Kill"? This movement has pitted the humane community against itself. We need someone who can bring us together, not tear us apart such as Winograd has done. It has painted a picture of shelters that is turning the public away, thus reducing adoptions and killing animals. No one will bring their family to a shelter when they think they will see cruelty and dead animals. This painting of the shelters as death camps only serves to drive away the public but it adds to his agenda. Sometimes I wonder if this is deliberate to make his shelters look better or to force more shelters to accept his religion.
Another story out of San Francisco also contradicts statements that Winograd makes concerning mandatory spay/neuter and breed specific legislation. This is the city he brags about.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/28/MNK5RMK79.DTL&type=printable
S.F. sterilization law successful in reducing pit bull population
Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Not long ago, pit bulls occupied about three-quarters of the dog kennels at San Francisco's Animal Care and Control shelter. Now, only about a quarter of the unwanted canines at the shelter are pit bulls.
The numbers of pit bull terriers and pit bull mixes abandoned and euthanized in San Francisco have fallen drastically since the city implemented a law 18 months ago requiring that pit bulls be sterilized, animal officials say.
Animal Care and Control Director Carl Friedman said the city has impounded 21 percent fewer pit bulls since the law passed than during the previous year and a half. The number of pit bulls euthanized has dropped 24 percent.
The law grew out of the uproar over the fatal mauling of 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish, who was attacked in his Inner Sunset District home by two pit bulls that had not been sterilized. The boy's mother had left him alone in the family's basement and cautioned him not to go near the dogs, one of which had bitten the boy earlier in the day.
Friedman says fewer pit bulls are being abandoned to the pound because fewer are being born, thanks to the spay and neuter requirement.
"Something is working," he said. "I wouldn't bet the house it's all because of the ordinance, but nothing else has really changed."
Animal control officers have confiscated 38 pit bulls from owners who refused to comply with the law, Friedman said. About 500 pit bulls have been spayed or neutered in San Francisco in that time, he said. Animal Care and Control does the operations, as well as the SPCA and a free mobile clinic from the Peninsula Humane Society that visits the city twice a month.
Because it was targeted only at pit bulls, the spay and neuter ordinance required a change in state law to allow cities and counties to impose "breed specific" requirements. San Francisco's SPCA, which does not believe in targeting particular breeds, acknowledged that it has seen an increase in the number of pit bulls brought in to be spayed and neutered.
"This law has been a success in reducing the euthanization of animals, and we do support that," said SPCA president Jan McHugh-Smith.
But many animal groups would prefer that the process be voluntary - a tactic they say is working in the East Bay, where pit bull advocates and animal control officials have focused on educating the public of the need for sterilization instead of making surgeries mandatory.
"We have seen it become much more difficult to own a pit bull in San Francisco, especially if you're a renter. The law has brought an added stigma to the breed," said Donna Reynolds, executive director of the pit bull advocacy group Bad Rap.
"In the East Bay we're ... supporting dog owners and offering resources to help people make good decisions, and we're seeing huge numbers pour into the doors to get their pit bulls fixed," she said.
People on both sides agree that spaying and neutering is good for pit bulls because it minimizes the number of unwanted pups and blunts aggression in males.
San Francisco's law allows animal control officers to issue a fix-it ticket to noncompliant dog owners, requiring that the pit bull be sterilized within two weeks. Animal Control officers also hand out information on low-cost and free surgeries.
Officers follow up with visits to the homes of owners who have not complied. A first violation can bring a citation and $500 fine; more than one citation can land an owner in jail and result in the city seizing the dog.
Usually, however, Animal Care and Control officers don't let it get to that point. If they return and have to write a citation, officers will take the dog from the owner - sometimes forcefully - spay or neuter the animal and return it, unless the pit bull is aggressive or officials believe it is being used in dog fights.
In the past 18 months, the agency has issued about 250 fix-it tickets, of which only 30 or so are outstanding. It has handed out 204 citations.
"We don't want to criminalize this - there are a lot of people that can't afford to spay or neuter their dogs," Friedman said. "The whole idea is not to take the animal away unless they pose a danger."
One day last week, the Animal Care and Control shelter on 15th Street in the Mission District had only three pit bulls out of about three dozen dogs total. Pit bulls still can be difficult to place with owners: Sandra, a friendly, energetic, 8-month-old brindle pit bull, has been waiting for a new home since June.
Friedman stresses that the law did not reflect an official desire to condemn pit bulls. The breed is more a problem because of the sheer number of the dogs than because of their disposition, he said.
"I've seen pit bulls make wonderful companion animals - they are good for families and children," Friedman said. "I understand where (opponents) were coming from, but I didn't want to see us going the same routes as other communities that are banning certain breeds altogether. In my mind, this is a very good compromise and it's been a success."
When I speak of his personal agenda, I am reminded of him walking away from "alleged" cruelty and suffering for the sake of writing a report. When he has been in these "death camps" and saw a dog suffering, what has he done to relieve the suffering? Did he ask staff in the shelter to do something, maybe they were unaware of the suffering. Did he call the police to report a felony cruelty? Did he do anything at that moment to relieve the suffering? No, he walked away and no one was aware until his report was submitted. He didn't give shelter staff an opportunity to explain.
Philly is such a good example of his mentality. Philly was a shining star, his hand picked director was wonderful and look how they increase the live release rate. Meanwhile back at the ranch. Animals were suffering horribly during the time he was praising Philly and his director. It wasn't until the truth was coming out that he turned like a snake and condemned Philly and his hand picked director. He is quick to condemn, not so quick to help. Did he offer to step in, just from the kindness of his heart, not to mention to make up for picking a lousy director? No, he just condemned and blamed everyone else. He said it was poor management, well, duh, remember, you picked her, praise her, and then threw her to the lions. Sounds like some of my relationships.
And Winograd loves to say that he will grant interviews to anyone including the breeders, doesn't mean he supports them. This is the ultimate slap in the face. How stupid does he think we are? If you are a supporter of civil rights, you don't do interviews with the KKK. There is an implied impression when you are interviewed by an organization that you are accepting of that organization and what it stands for. Considering that the breeding industry is now using Winograd to fight new legislation that can only help animals, I would say that he has thrown his hat in with them. I think it goes to show one thing, that he is in this for his own personal gain and that is all. Giving credibility to breeding by granting interviews, falling in with them to fight legislation, saying there is not a problem with too many pets (what a whacked out way to determine this), is undermining decades of hard work by dedicated people.
Winograd is a man of contradictions. It's not his fault, it is never his fault. And he fails to learn how to improve his program so that it just might work with his denial of failure. I see him as a wannabe. He wants to be Avanzino, he wants to be Sayers, he wants to be Wayne. He wants a Dave Duffield to put $239 million in his hands. It will never happen, Winograd.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Pitbulls: Bad Rap? Unfortunately Not
We bred the dog with hunting instincts, herding instincts, guarding instincts and we don't deny these instincts that we bred into dogs. Why are we in denial about the instincts that we bred into the bully breeds, particularly the pitbull? We bred them for viciousness, that's all, and they are living up to that breeding.
For weeks now, I have been glued to a great website. I must be a glutton for punishment because this website is a hard read.
http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-study-deaths-maimings.htm
I know all the arguments about pitbulls and the bully breeds. I hear "No Kill" telling everyone that pitbulls make fine family pets. Read the articles and links on this website and you'll feel differently.
And does "No Kill" help the situation? Not quite. While we need to be educating people about the pitbull and bully breeds with the truth, they are not for everyone, "No Kill' is saying pitbulls make family pets, they are getting a bad rap. I say Bullshit to that. They have earned the bad rap and more. "No Kill' is adopting out pitbulls into families without regard for the truth of them, they were bred for viciousness. One always looks for a vicious breed to take home to the kids, right?
"No Kill" is in denial of the truth of these breeds. I, personally, love these breeds but would hesitate to have one. And as much as it hurts to say it, I would never adopt one from the shelters. Too many have been bred for bad temperaments and no history behind a shelter dog makes me nervous anyway, much less one of these breeds. I have seen how "friendly" these breeds can be, up until they attack. You can't judge these breeds by how much they wag their tails or the big smiles.
With "No Kill' telling everyone how great these dogs are and they don't deserve a "bad rap" only serves to increase the demand, something we don't want to do. The demand needs to decrease, thereby stopping the breeding. No demand, no money, no supply. When will "No Kill" realize that you don't put a dog's life above a child's life? HEY, WINOGRAD, READ THE WEBSITE ABOVE AND THEN TELL ME TO SAVE A PITBULL'S LIFE.
For weeks now, I have been glued to a great website. I must be a glutton for punishment because this website is a hard read.
http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-study-deaths-maimings.htm
I know all the arguments about pitbulls and the bully breeds. I hear "No Kill" telling everyone that pitbulls make fine family pets. Read the articles and links on this website and you'll feel differently.
And does "No Kill" help the situation? Not quite. While we need to be educating people about the pitbull and bully breeds with the truth, they are not for everyone, "No Kill' is saying pitbulls make family pets, they are getting a bad rap. I say Bullshit to that. They have earned the bad rap and more. "No Kill' is adopting out pitbulls into families without regard for the truth of them, they were bred for viciousness. One always looks for a vicious breed to take home to the kids, right?
"No Kill" is in denial of the truth of these breeds. I, personally, love these breeds but would hesitate to have one. And as much as it hurts to say it, I would never adopt one from the shelters. Too many have been bred for bad temperaments and no history behind a shelter dog makes me nervous anyway, much less one of these breeds. I have seen how "friendly" these breeds can be, up until they attack. You can't judge these breeds by how much they wag their tails or the big smiles.
With "No Kill' telling everyone how great these dogs are and they don't deserve a "bad rap" only serves to increase the demand, something we don't want to do. The demand needs to decrease, thereby stopping the breeding. No demand, no money, no supply. When will "No Kill" realize that you don't put a dog's life above a child's life? HEY, WINOGRAD, READ THE WEBSITE ABOVE AND THEN TELL ME TO SAVE A PITBULL'S LIFE.
Breeders = Cruelty
It is amazing how some people can actually defend people who chose to breed in this day and time. And how can these same people make mention of "reputable" breeding in light of the recent BBC announcement of why it will no longer air the Crufts Dog Show. I have said for many years now that I don't want a purebred because I have seen them having more and more problems. Read this article and weep for the poor purebreds. Breeders are dirt, and yes, I mean all of them. There are no reputable breeders. How can you be reputable when you bring animals into the world knowing that homes will be taken and other animals will die? You can't be. Doesn't work that way. Then to make a mess of those dogs that are bred, well, what can I say?
http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/1843/rspca-pedigree-dog-report/
http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/1843/rspca-pedigree-dog-report/
Sunday, February 8, 2009
This Says It All - Report on Franklin County "No Kill"
This article points out all the horrid aspects of "No Kill". It is written by vets who worked at the Franklin County "No Kill" shelter. Unbelievable!!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9282165/Franklin-County-Ohio-Dog-Shelter-Report
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9282165/Franklin-County-Ohio-Dog-Shelter-Report
Dog Proves Not All Shelters Are Bad
This is a wonderful story about Chip who managed to find his way back to the shelter where he had been adopted from. Ten miles and several attempts to capture him did not deter him from his mission of seeing all his friends at the shelter.
http://www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=124672
http://www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=124672
Saturday, February 7, 2009
A Letter from a Shelter Manager
I think our society needs a huge "Wake-up" call. As a shelter manager, I am going to share a little insight with you all...a view from the inside if you will.
First off, all of you breeders/sellers should be made to work in the "back" of an animal shelter for just one day. Maybe if you saw the life drain from a few sad, lost, confused eyes, you would change your mind about breeding and selling to people you don't even know. That puppy you just sold will most likely end up in my shelter when it's not a cute little puppy anymore. So how would you feel if you knew that there's about a 90% chance that dog will never walk out of the shelter it is going to be dumped at? Purebred or not! About 50% of all of the dogs that are "owner surrenders" or "strays", that come into my shelter are purebred dogs. The most common excuses I hear are; "We are moving and we can't take our dog (or cat)." Really? Where are you moving too that doesn't allow pets? Or they say "The dog got bigger than we thought it would". How big did you think a German Shepherd would get? "We don't have time for her". Really? I work a 10-12 hour day and still have time for my 6 dogs! "She's tearing up our yard". How about making her a part of your family? They always tell me "We just don't want to have to stress about finding a place for her we know she'll get adopted, she's a good dog".
Odds are your pet won't get adopted & how stressful do you think being in a shelter is? Well, let me tell you, your pet has 72 hours to find a new family from the moment you drop it off. Sometimes a little longer if the shelter isn't full and your dog manages to stay completely healthy. If it sniffles, it dies. Your pet will be confined to a small run/kennel in a room with about 25 other barking or crying animals. It will have to relieve itself where it eats and sleeps. It will be depressed and it will cry constantly for the family that abandoned it. If your pet is lucky, I will have enough volunteers in that day to take him/her for a walk. If I don't, your pet won't get any attention besides having a bowl of food slid under the kennel door and the waste sprayed out of its pen with a high-powered hose. If your dog is big, black or any of the "Bully" breeds (pit bull, rottie, mastiff, etc) it was pretty much dead when you walked it through the front door. Those dogs just don't get adopted. It doesn't matter how 'sweet' or 'well behaved' they are. If your dog doesn't get adopted within its 72 hours and the shelter is full, it will be destroyed. If the shelter isn't full and your dog is good enough, and of a desirable enough breed it may get a stay of execution, but not for long . Most dogs get very kennel protective after about a week and are destroyed for showing aggression. Even the sweetest dogs will turn in this environment. If your pet makes it over all of those hurdles chances are it will get kennel cough or an upper respiratory infection and will be destroyed because shelters just don't have the funds to pay for even a $100 treatment.
Here's a little euthanasia 101 for those of you that have never witnessed a perfectly healthy, scared animal being "put-down". First, your pet will be taken from its kennel on a leash. They always look like they think they are going for a walk happy, wagging their tails. Until they get to "The Room", every one of them freaks out and puts on the brakes when we get to the door. It must smell like death or they can feel the sad souls that are left in there, it's strange, but it happens with every one of them. Your dog or cat will be restrained, held down by 1 or 2 vet techs depending on the size and how freaked out they are. Then a euthanasia tech or a vet will start the process. They will find a vein in the front leg and inject a lethal dose of the "pink stuff". Hopefully your pet doesn't panic from being restrained and jerk. I've seen the needles tear out of a leg and been covered with the resulting blood and been deafened by the yelps and screams. They all don't just "go to sleep", sometimes they spasm for a while, gasp for air and defecate on themselves. When it all ends, your pets corpse will be stacked like firewood in a large freezer in the back with all of the other animals that were killed waiting to be picked up like garbage. What happens next? Cremated? Taken to the dump? Rendered into pet food? You'll never know and it probably won't even cross your mind. It was just an animal and you can always buy another one, right?
I hope that those of you that have read this are bawling your eyes out and can't get the pictures out of your head I deal with everyday on the way home from work. I hate my job, I hate that it exists & I hate that it will always be there unless you people make some changes and realize that the lives you are affecting go much farther than the pets you dump at a shelter. Between 9 and 11 MILLION animals die every year in shelters and only you can stop it. I do my best to save every life I can but rescues are always full, and there are more animals coming in everyday than there are homes.
My point to all of this DON'T BREED OR BUY WHILE SHELTER PETS DIE! Hate me if you want to. The truth hurts and reality is what it is. I just hope I maybe changed one persons mind about breeding their dog, taking their loving pet to a shelter, or buying a dog. I hope that someone will walk into my shelter and say "I saw this and it made me want to adopt". THAT WOULD MAKE IT WORTH IT
First off, all of you breeders/sellers should be made to work in the "back" of an animal shelter for just one day. Maybe if you saw the life drain from a few sad, lost, confused eyes, you would change your mind about breeding and selling to people you don't even know. That puppy you just sold will most likely end up in my shelter when it's not a cute little puppy anymore. So how would you feel if you knew that there's about a 90% chance that dog will never walk out of the shelter it is going to be dumped at? Purebred or not! About 50% of all of the dogs that are "owner surrenders" or "strays", that come into my shelter are purebred dogs. The most common excuses I hear are; "We are moving and we can't take our dog (or cat)." Really? Where are you moving too that doesn't allow pets? Or they say "The dog got bigger than we thought it would". How big did you think a German Shepherd would get? "We don't have time for her". Really? I work a 10-12 hour day and still have time for my 6 dogs! "She's tearing up our yard". How about making her a part of your family? They always tell me "We just don't want to have to stress about finding a place for her we know she'll get adopted, she's a good dog".
Odds are your pet won't get adopted & how stressful do you think being in a shelter is? Well, let me tell you, your pet has 72 hours to find a new family from the moment you drop it off. Sometimes a little longer if the shelter isn't full and your dog manages to stay completely healthy. If it sniffles, it dies. Your pet will be confined to a small run/kennel in a room with about 25 other barking or crying animals. It will have to relieve itself where it eats and sleeps. It will be depressed and it will cry constantly for the family that abandoned it. If your pet is lucky, I will have enough volunteers in that day to take him/her for a walk. If I don't, your pet won't get any attention besides having a bowl of food slid under the kennel door and the waste sprayed out of its pen with a high-powered hose. If your dog is big, black or any of the "Bully" breeds (pit bull, rottie, mastiff, etc) it was pretty much dead when you walked it through the front door. Those dogs just don't get adopted. It doesn't matter how 'sweet' or 'well behaved' they are. If your dog doesn't get adopted within its 72 hours and the shelter is full, it will be destroyed. If the shelter isn't full and your dog is good enough, and of a desirable enough breed it may get a stay of execution, but not for long . Most dogs get very kennel protective after about a week and are destroyed for showing aggression. Even the sweetest dogs will turn in this environment. If your pet makes it over all of those hurdles chances are it will get kennel cough or an upper respiratory infection and will be destroyed because shelters just don't have the funds to pay for even a $100 treatment.
Here's a little euthanasia 101 for those of you that have never witnessed a perfectly healthy, scared animal being "put-down". First, your pet will be taken from its kennel on a leash. They always look like they think they are going for a walk happy, wagging their tails. Until they get to "The Room", every one of them freaks out and puts on the brakes when we get to the door. It must smell like death or they can feel the sad souls that are left in there, it's strange, but it happens with every one of them. Your dog or cat will be restrained, held down by 1 or 2 vet techs depending on the size and how freaked out they are. Then a euthanasia tech or a vet will start the process. They will find a vein in the front leg and inject a lethal dose of the "pink stuff". Hopefully your pet doesn't panic from being restrained and jerk. I've seen the needles tear out of a leg and been covered with the resulting blood and been deafened by the yelps and screams. They all don't just "go to sleep", sometimes they spasm for a while, gasp for air and defecate on themselves. When it all ends, your pets corpse will be stacked like firewood in a large freezer in the back with all of the other animals that were killed waiting to be picked up like garbage. What happens next? Cremated? Taken to the dump? Rendered into pet food? You'll never know and it probably won't even cross your mind. It was just an animal and you can always buy another one, right?
I hope that those of you that have read this are bawling your eyes out and can't get the pictures out of your head I deal with everyday on the way home from work. I hate my job, I hate that it exists & I hate that it will always be there unless you people make some changes and realize that the lives you are affecting go much farther than the pets you dump at a shelter. Between 9 and 11 MILLION animals die every year in shelters and only you can stop it. I do my best to save every life I can but rescues are always full, and there are more animals coming in everyday than there are homes.
My point to all of this DON'T BREED OR BUY WHILE SHELTER PETS DIE! Hate me if you want to. The truth hurts and reality is what it is. I just hope I maybe changed one persons mind about breeding their dog, taking their loving pet to a shelter, or buying a dog. I hope that someone will walk into my shelter and say "I saw this and it made me want to adopt". THAT WOULD MAKE IT WORTH IT
Friday, February 6, 2009
First Look Inside PACCA - OMG
From the description in this article, I can only imagine the horrors and suffering of the animals under the PACCA program. Thank goodness that someone finally stepped in. When will people learn the lesson about the "No Kill Equation" program?
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20090206_Improvements_at_city_animal_shelter.html?viewAll=y
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20090206_Improvements_at_city_animal_shelter.html?viewAll=y
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Animal Control Contracts - Winograd's "No Kill" or the Road
Please make up your mind would you? First you believe in privatizing like in King County, now you say the SPCA's and Humane Society's need to back off of animal control.
Guess what? I agree with you on that one. The non profits are not transparent enough with their sheltering, look at Philly. Had it been subject to public records, maybe so many animals would not have suffered under the hand picked "No Kill Equation" director. Reno had to resort to filing a restraining order against a valued volunteer and commission member for speaking the truth of what she saw going on inside. Porter County had a long time volunteer arrested for speaking the truth of the suffering he saw inside their "No Kill" shelter.
So we agree on something, never thought I'd see the day. By the way, shove it with the history lesson, we don't live the past like you do.
Guess what? I agree with you on that one. The non profits are not transparent enough with their sheltering, look at Philly. Had it been subject to public records, maybe so many animals would not have suffered under the hand picked "No Kill Equation" director. Reno had to resort to filing a restraining order against a valued volunteer and commission member for speaking the truth of what she saw going on inside. Porter County had a long time volunteer arrested for speaking the truth of the suffering he saw inside their "No Kill" shelter.
So we agree on something, never thought I'd see the day. By the way, shove it with the history lesson, we don't live the past like you do.
WTF! Trap, Neuter and Release????
Give me a break, please. First we are told that the "feral" cats must be returned to their old stomping grounds after altering. Now the Whino and "No Kill" say to just take them any old place and turn them loose. Does this man have any concept of what cats are all about, does he care about them at all?
We all know, at least those of us with any sense, that cats taken to a new place and released will run, and run, and run. First, they have gone through the trauma of being trapped, then an operation, and now you want to turn them out into a world they don't know anything about. They don't know where to hide, or where they can be safe enough to sleep, or anything else. It's bad enough that these poor cats are doomed by "caregivers" to a miserable life outside, but to do this to them is unspeakable.
I refuse to use the word "outside" to describe a cat. The "feral" cat movement, in my humble opinion, is the ultimate cruelty for cats. First of all, there are very few truly feral cats around. Try to imagine tiny kittens, born outside, trying to survive. It would be almost impossible for them to do so with cars, punks, hawks, dogs, and the like. The "feral" cats of the old TN&Return are actually tame cats, abandoned outside. These cats can be reintroduced back into a home, but they are too numerous in the eyes of TN&Return/Release. So instead they chose to do what they do, throw some food out in the middle of the night and go to bed feeling that they are not guilty of adding to the problem. It was designed to relieve the guilt people feel for the problem, not to help the cats.
So the supporters of the old regime of TN&Return/Release continue to tell us that these are feral cats, they can be outside. Excuse me, but don't all animals learn to hunt for survival from their parents? But these cats weren't taught, they don't have the skills necessary for survival on their own. That is why TN&Return/Release feeds them. It seems a conflict in terms to say that cats can't survive on their own yet they need to remain outside without those skills. Just doesn't make sense to me.
And think also about the wildlife, not in the sense of the cats killing native species but rather the feed stations attracting wildlife. The wild animals come in to get the food and you know the story. People get pissed, run the risk of rabies, the animals get killed on the highways, etc. But these people that set up the feed stations don't care, as long as they can sleep at night.
I say we do start a movement of TN&Retain. I bet we could get the cities to go along with it. Look at all it offers, gets the cats off the street, keeps them from the shelters, hey, it is a win-win movement. Any votes out there?
We all know, at least those of us with any sense, that cats taken to a new place and released will run, and run, and run. First, they have gone through the trauma of being trapped, then an operation, and now you want to turn them out into a world they don't know anything about. They don't know where to hide, or where they can be safe enough to sleep, or anything else. It's bad enough that these poor cats are doomed by "caregivers" to a miserable life outside, but to do this to them is unspeakable.
I refuse to use the word "outside" to describe a cat. The "feral" cat movement, in my humble opinion, is the ultimate cruelty for cats. First of all, there are very few truly feral cats around. Try to imagine tiny kittens, born outside, trying to survive. It would be almost impossible for them to do so with cars, punks, hawks, dogs, and the like. The "feral" cats of the old TN&Return are actually tame cats, abandoned outside. These cats can be reintroduced back into a home, but they are too numerous in the eyes of TN&Return/Release. So instead they chose to do what they do, throw some food out in the middle of the night and go to bed feeling that they are not guilty of adding to the problem. It was designed to relieve the guilt people feel for the problem, not to help the cats.
So the supporters of the old regime of TN&Return/Release continue to tell us that these are feral cats, they can be outside. Excuse me, but don't all animals learn to hunt for survival from their parents? But these cats weren't taught, they don't have the skills necessary for survival on their own. That is why TN&Return/Release feeds them. It seems a conflict in terms to say that cats can't survive on their own yet they need to remain outside without those skills. Just doesn't make sense to me.
And think also about the wildlife, not in the sense of the cats killing native species but rather the feed stations attracting wildlife. The wild animals come in to get the food and you know the story. People get pissed, run the risk of rabies, the animals get killed on the highways, etc. But these people that set up the feed stations don't care, as long as they can sleep at night.
I say we do start a movement of TN&Retain. I bet we could get the cities to go along with it. Look at all it offers, gets the cats off the street, keeps them from the shelters, hey, it is a win-win movement. Any votes out there?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
More "No Kill" Bull
Brag, brag, brag. Well, it might help to check before bragging. Seems the Porter County Indiana "No Kill" shelter ain't doing that well. In fact, because they have been turning away owner turn ins, it has resulted in a documented case of cruelty and death for kittens.
nwi.com/articles/2008/06/14/news/top_news/doc26393badf9640e0586257468000ba717.txt
He needs to check these things out before he starts bragging. He blogged about how great this shelter is doing.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/06/14/news/top_news/doc26393badf9640e0586257468000ba717.txt
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/08/20/news/porter_county/doca3a5977c440f99ad862574ab0016571a.txt
Shelter volunteer there arrested for speaking out on the conditions of the "No Kill" shelter.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/07/22/news/porter_county/doce5fdbfe72ba9c4f38625748e0002fa4e.txt
Overcrowding now and they want to build another shelter.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/09/02/news/porter_county/doc5f63f5cb78ed21a4862574b7007a3963.txt
And it's not cheap.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/09/05/news/porter_county/doc0dd22c0731858728862574ba007f1382.txt
BUT after all of this and there are more articles on line, dig this masterful marketing trick. Seems as always, Winograd and his Whinonettes put a spin on everything. Forget that they are overcrowded, forget that valued volunteers are arrested for speaking out, forget it all and tell how the "live release" rate has gone up. Don't mention that the shelter is turning away people, taxpayers who pay for the service and then don't find it available when they need it. And they probably haven't reached their saturation point with their fosters and rescues, usually Whinonettes trying to impress their master. If there is one thing the Whino is good at, it is marketing.
http://www.post-trib.com/news/1384152,pcshelter.article#Comments_Container
nwi.com/articles/2008/06/14/news/top_news/doc26393badf9640e0586257468000ba717.txt
He needs to check these things out before he starts bragging. He blogged about how great this shelter is doing.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/06/14/news/top_news/doc26393badf9640e0586257468000ba717.txt
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/08/20/news/porter_county/doca3a5977c440f99ad862574ab0016571a.txt
Shelter volunteer there arrested for speaking out on the conditions of the "No Kill" shelter.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/07/22/news/porter_county/doce5fdbfe72ba9c4f38625748e0002fa4e.txt
Overcrowding now and they want to build another shelter.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/09/02/news/porter_county/doc5f63f5cb78ed21a4862574b7007a3963.txt
And it's not cheap.
http://nwi.com/articles/2008/09/05/news/porter_county/doc0dd22c0731858728862574ba007f1382.txt
BUT after all of this and there are more articles on line, dig this masterful marketing trick. Seems as always, Winograd and his Whinonettes put a spin on everything. Forget that they are overcrowded, forget that valued volunteers are arrested for speaking out, forget it all and tell how the "live release" rate has gone up. Don't mention that the shelter is turning away people, taxpayers who pay for the service and then don't find it available when they need it. And they probably haven't reached their saturation point with their fosters and rescues, usually Whinonettes trying to impress their master. If there is one thing the Whino is good at, it is marketing.
http://www.post-trib.com/news/1384152,pcshelter.article#Comments_Container
Winograd Gets It Wrong Again: Study Shows Suffering at Tompkins County
Does this man hate cats or what? First he supports TNR, the old one, Trap, Neuter, and Return, except now he wants to change it to Release. In other words, don't follow what has always been accepted about "TN&Return" which is you must return them to the same place. Makes sense to do that. But it doesn't make sense to release a poor cat who has just been through the trauma of being trapped and altered, in a new place where the cat is confused and frightened even more. Why does he want to hurt cats that way?
NOW, a recent study shows that the "garden" room that is so popular with the Whino and his Whinonettes is actually contributing to the stress the cat feels in the shelter. We all know that cats don't necessarily get along or want the companionship of other cats. We all know that humans coming in and out of these rooms would scare cats. Typically a cat would seek to hide.
THIS STUDY WAS DONE AT TOMPKINS COUNTY SPCA.
So again the Whino gets it wrong and it is contributing to additional suffering. So what else is new?
http://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/11075/1/Caroline%20Monk%20Research%20Honors%20Thesis.pdf
NOW, a recent study shows that the "garden" room that is so popular with the Whino and his Whinonettes is actually contributing to the stress the cat feels in the shelter. We all know that cats don't necessarily get along or want the companionship of other cats. We all know that humans coming in and out of these rooms would scare cats. Typically a cat would seek to hide.
THIS STUDY WAS DONE AT TOMPKINS COUNTY SPCA.
So again the Whino gets it wrong and it is contributing to additional suffering. So what else is new?
http://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/11075/1/Caroline%20Monk%20Research%20Honors%20Thesis.pdf
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Not Your Usual TNR
Forget the old regime, the old way of thinking, now you have an alternative.
TRAP, NEUTER, AND RETAIN
All cats deserve to live but Trap, Neuter and Retain insures that not only do they live, they live a good life. They deserve to be free of hunger, pain, coyotes, neighborhood punks, cars, poison, and a variety of other things that make their lives outside miserable.
No longer will the wildlife have to suffer from "outside" cats. Cats won't be taking prey meant to sustain other animals. And with the elimination of feed stations under the old regime thinking, wildlife won't risk their lives coming into residential areas to the cat feed stations. Life can get back to normal with the removal of a non native species, the domestic cat.
No longer will the "caregivers" of "feral" cat colonies have to go out in the middle of the night to feed cats in dangerous neighborhoods. No longer does the caregiver have to worry about how the cats are or if they are dry and warm. Now with Trap, Neuter, and Retain, the caregiver always knows where and how they are.
Cat enclosures are plentiful on the market. It may take a little extra time and money to Trap, Neuter, and Retain, but hey, you caregivers love cats, right? Nothing to too much or too good to have cats have a good life. So get out there and buy those enclosures. Bring those cats to your home and do the right thing by them. Truly save their lives, not just throw food and water to them on nightly drive bys. Join Trap, Neuter, and Retain today, don't let them suffer one more night.
TRAP, NEUTER, AND RETAIN
All cats deserve to live but Trap, Neuter and Retain insures that not only do they live, they live a good life. They deserve to be free of hunger, pain, coyotes, neighborhood punks, cars, poison, and a variety of other things that make their lives outside miserable.
No longer will the wildlife have to suffer from "outside" cats. Cats won't be taking prey meant to sustain other animals. And with the elimination of feed stations under the old regime thinking, wildlife won't risk their lives coming into residential areas to the cat feed stations. Life can get back to normal with the removal of a non native species, the domestic cat.
No longer will the "caregivers" of "feral" cat colonies have to go out in the middle of the night to feed cats in dangerous neighborhoods. No longer does the caregiver have to worry about how the cats are or if they are dry and warm. Now with Trap, Neuter, and Retain, the caregiver always knows where and how they are.
Cat enclosures are plentiful on the market. It may take a little extra time and money to Trap, Neuter, and Retain, but hey, you caregivers love cats, right? Nothing to too much or too good to have cats have a good life. So get out there and buy those enclosures. Bring those cats to your home and do the right thing by them. Truly save their lives, not just throw food and water to them on nightly drive bys. Join Trap, Neuter, and Retain today, don't let them suffer one more night.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)