Sunday, June 28, 2009

Not A Bad Week After All

On a couple of fronts here. The vote of the Washoe County council to not adopt "No Kill" was quite nice. Seems there's a lot of movement over using the term "no kill" anyway. It has always been a deceptive term and that is the main complaint.

When Rancho Cucamonga City opened their doors after the adoption of the NKE by Winograd, within three months they had dogs and cats in crates and carriers in the hallways so bad you couldn't get through. They had a ringworm outbreak. Now ringworm is fairly easy to spot and I checked with five other shelters in the area and none had ever had an outbreak of ringworm. Course anything is possible. The first year there were two newspaper articles where the Director proclaimed they were NOT "no kill" with the reason being to stem the tide or rather, flood, of surrendered animals. This one city took in more "public" surrenders than the entire county of San Bernardino. San Bernardino just happens to be the largest county in the country at almost 22,000 square miles. Public surrenders are those good people who stop, take a stray off the streets, and bring it to the shelter. So these public surrenders had to be actually owner surrenders. Rancho was turning owners away, they denied it but the other shelters in the area got those turned away. So the term "no kill" gave people an out, a way to "get rid of" their pet without the guilt. That coupled with the hateful statement by the Whino that there is no pet overpopulation and the public is not responsible for the "killing", dooms shelters. Yet his pit buller buddies claim that pits attack because of irresponsible owners, how does that figure together. I think the Whino has given some lame excuse to answer that one, like I never said there weren't irresponsible owners. Well, yes you do when you say the public is not responsible for the killing. What the fuck are the shelters supposed to do, give all them out to hoarders? Oh no, we "adopt" ourselves out of it, with which highly paid advertising agency does the shelter pay to overcome the constant criticism you continue to blast? Telling a man he will bring his family to see barrels of dead animals and cruelty at the shelter will not help adoptions, will it? This man will end up at Petsmart instead and another shelter animal will die as a direct cause of this man's criticism. Can't he grasp what he is doing to the shelter animals? Or because it sells books?
Also, according to a letter in the Daily Bulletin from one of the activists who brought Winograd to Rancho, the died in kennel rate had soared to 600%.Seems the BAD RAP of pit bulls is a good rap for this program, throw some dogs in with the pits and you don't have to euthanize, let the pits do it for you. Now you understand why the Whino pushes pit bulls, they keep his euthanasia numbers lower.

And speaking of pits, more cities adopted bans or regulations against these dogs this week. Not soon enough for a 10 year old and 3 year old who were killed by pits within the last week. We won't mention the plain old attacks that happened this week from the pits and bullies. Several other cities are considering either a ban or regulation. These dogs just keep it up, digging their own graves. I just wish they would take their crazed owners with them. I don't know who is worse, the dogs or the sub-humans that own then.


HonestyHelps said...

By the way and I apologize, need to say thanks to those in Reno who stood their ground on this issue. It's people like yourselves all over the country that will stop this program. Good job.

Anonymous said...

I think you meant "will end up at Petland"

Petland is the one that sells the AKC registered puppy mill puppies that they ship in from puppy mill breeders actually convicted of animal abuse and torture

Patti Strand, NAIA leader and AKC board member, gets the puppy mill business going with the AKC.

Nathan Winograd is involved with NAIA, and getting promoted by NAIA.

They see him as their ticket to help the puppy mills so the AKC can keep raking in the mill reg dollars.

HonestyHelps said...

Here in California we don't have Petland that I know of. I only see Petsmart and the rescues that work out of there. I understand about Petland and just read an update at HSUS.We have problems with smuggled puppies from Mexico. I was just involved in a bust a few weeks ago in a park here where they were selling them. California has a severe problem with backyard breeders. I get puppies almost everyday from backyard breeders.

Think about this. Criticize the shelters, have your Whinonettes do the same locally. Who benefits? Certainly not the shelter animals. They lose. People don't want to see dead animals or filty pens, etc. so they go instead to the "rescues" at Petsmart. What does the term "rescue" mean to most people? They are thinking that it's life was saved from the euthanasia table. Wrong. It's another marketing term. Very few "rescues" actually save anything. Watching them for a number of years I see owners turning in their pets along with a donation.

So who is benefitting from Winograd's condemnation of shelters? Either breeders or "rescues". No wonder he has followers, he makes money for them.

Anonymous said...

I saw your response over at and I just wanted to thank you for realizing that my reply raised some questions. I was lucky enough to have my first reply posted, but none of the others made it past moderation. Unfortunately is highly moderated and often times important details ARE left out. Real rescues are often put down, when in reality we fight for exactly THE SAME thing - a safe world for people and animals alike. If only would realize that there really are people who understand the genetic whisper in a pit bull to fight other dogs and chase prey - and yet can manage their dogs, responsibly and safely... they just don't think it exists, but it does.
The situation with Harrison's dog is disgusting. The dog had pressure sores on his elbows from laying on the concrete slab so often and was not a family pet as much as a resident dog (just because a pet lives on your property doesn't make him a family pet). The woman who 'saved' him has no business in rescue, no training or behavior schooling, and has spent nights harrassing real rescues (name calling and all) that refused to help this dog. ANY reputable rescue would NOT place a dog with a bite history. MK Kain is a crazy woman who only got involved because her police officer husband knew Harrison's contacts. She actually doesn't even have ties to Best Friend's network - but just met a casual volunteer with them through some local event. The morning I read the article in the paper about her I was outraged.
I wanted to share this all with you because Honesty does Help - and dogsbite was not allowing me to write what I know about the story. It's a NO WIN situation for anyone!
I feel bad that I tracked you down via your own blog to respond regarding that site - but I was otherwise denied a voice.

HonestyHelps said...

I'm not sure that the questions are the ones you want to hear. Much of what you said is standard fare for excuses offered for these dogs. There is always an effort to classify them as abused by being outside, in pens, tethered, etc. I studied these pictures carefully and I don't see the pressure sores anywhere on the dog. He looks well cared for.

A dog should never find crying as a reason to attack. And what role did you play to try to stop this other person from getting the dog? Did you contact the newspaper and give an expert opinion?

My feelings are that the cost of success in saving pits is not worth the failures. All the pits in this country are not worth one child's life. And a dog, abused or not, is not excused from attacking a crying child.

As for DogsBite moderating, do you realize how many nut cases she has to deal with every day? I don't blame her in the least. I can deal with them because I can make the time. She is involved in a higher calling, addressing officials with reliable information. She doesn't sit on her blog all day, she is formulating plans and reports.

I think it comes down to whether you are being honest or just making excuses like the rest of them for the pits. If you take a pit of unknown origin and adopt it out, do you think that is the right thing to do? I don't. The question in my mind is no longer how to save the pits, but rather how to save ourselves from the pits. I always said I wanted to own a pit before I die but no longer. The more I see the more I am convince that they need to be extinct. They do too many attacks for me to support keeping them around. Human life is always more important than a dogs lives.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your response.
I'm glad I stopped back to read – But I have to break my comment into 2 parts!
I do not think that Harrison's dog was mistreated or abused - but I DO think that the dog was not socialized and he definitely was not altered. The vet that neutered him mentioned the pressure sores. I actually can give you his info if you like.
Harrison himself isn't the greatest citizen, being arrested last year for domestic violence. It doesn't surprise me that a man such as himself would have this kind of animal - AND not have him fixed.
Any such story you read regarding the mauling states that mother, who does NOT reside at the address, went outside to let the dog out of its pen. I can provide you with links if you like. Some folks question why she even let the dog out, since it's not usually out - with the idea that it must have been just for routine feeding or watering.
I do feel for the woman who keeps - I bet she does receive a lot of grief, but there is grief on the other side to. It isn't right when someone loses a family pet for 10 years that had never hurt anyone (Denver, Colorado BSL) and the dog was put to sleep before they could even fight it. It's not fair for innocent dogs to pay for the sins of others. However, I am well aware that there is a huge problem out there - for anti pit people, and for true pit rescues. I think we really share a common ground in wanting safe communities.
I am close with a rescue that gave a statement regarding the situation, which was simply "no reputable rescue will take in a dog with a bite history". They gave a similar such statement when they were asked to 'save' a dog that mauled a little girl a few months back. The dog had a HISTORY of aggression towards people and the woman in question was breeding that dog. Inexcusable. I can link you to those stories as well.
It's fighting a losing battle dealing with people like MK Kain. She got very hostile and unprofessional when she was addressed that what she was doing was wrong - that didn't stop her.

Anonymous said...

Pt II-
I am with you 100% that there is ABSOLUTELY *NO* excuse for ANY dog to attack a child (or anyone) - but that goes for ANY dog. Someone I know has a Doberman mix that bit a child in the face a few months back - causing stitches. It didn't make the news. 10 days in quarantine and the dog was back in the home - WITH children. Personally, I think one strike, and you are out.
Rest assured the rescue I am close with have put dogs down for much less than a snarl. They do not make excuses or save dogs not worth saving. One such dog was a handsome pit bull mix that simply got too excited. He couldn't readily calm himself down after play, and after he nipped 2 adults (not even breaking skin or causing so much as a bruise) they decided that he was too much of a risk and the board voted to have him euthanized. I admit, I cried when he passed on, but I knew in my heart it was the right thing to do.
I was personally asked to help with a pup several years ago that was passed through 4 sets of hands before reaching me. This dog was 6 months old and was exhibiting behavior I didn't understand - but never towards me - only towards strangers. After 8 weeks of therapy for the dog, and rehab - I had her evaluated - and she didn't pass. At that point I took her to the vet- under much scrutiny and ridicule because she was just a pup - and I had her euthanized. Knowing I put down an otherwise healthy PUPPY hurt me, but again, I did the right thing. It didn't make it easy - but it was right. And that pup never even bit anyone. I really wish Harrison would have done the right thing for his dog and his family, but in my own opinion his huge sense of ego couldn't allow his 'tough dog' to be put to sleep. Sometimes euthanasia is the most humane thing.
There are rescues out there that do the right thing; the goal is to educate the community, provide training classes for people and their dogs, provide free spay/neuter programs and help to home dogs that deserve it... and they are - much like good pit bull owners - few and far between.
I understand your frustration, on so many levels. We both fight a losing battle, with our enemy being the same. I get sick to my stomach with every news story... and I can only pray that in my lifetime there will be a change.
Sorry for my long response – unlike so many others I really think it’s important to find a common ground.

HonestyHelps said...

I can appreciate your feelings on doing the right thing, but your priorities are wrong. There are many other breeds being euthanized everyday in our shelters, dogs that are not bred for viciousness. But people want to save this particular breed, why? It was bred for a bloodsport that is illegal and common sense says let the breed die out. You are focusing on saving these dogs while I focus on saving people from these dogs. That's what I mean by priority.

And although you say you can provide links to prove the typical excuses for these dogs, I can see for myself. I studied the pictures carefully and didn't see the pressure marks. I have no sympathy for this dog, none. Obviously the wife was comfortable with letting the dog out, she had done it before probably. So I fail to see that this is an excuse. This dog attacked three people, attacked because of a child crying. I agree with you that it should be put down. I disagree with making excuses for it. Like I said if you are adopting pits without a history, then you are adding to the problem. The excuses used about pits should be a warning to not adopt out pits with unknown histories. I know of two fatalities from pits who passed their temperament tests with flying colors, only to end up being killers. The cost of success in saving pits is not worth the failures of them killing people.

HonestyHelps said...

"If only would realize that there really are people who understand the genetic whisper in a pit bull to fight other dogs and chase prey - and yet can manage their dogs, responsibly and safely... they just don't think it exists, but it does."

I thought that at one time but thanks to DBO I see that pits are escape artists, plus there are attacks from pits who are leashed to an owner, and a couple of those owners were considered expert pit behaviorists. Unless you live in Northern Canada, reachable only by air, would these dogs be considered safe from the public. Then the only one to be attacked would be the owner. They are unpredictable and don't have the normal shut off that other breeds do. I have been doing dogs for fifty years and I know about dog bites/attacks. Pits are different without a doubt. You need to rethink your attitude about them before something happens to you or someone else.

Anonymous said...

I do feel there are far to many pits being adopted that should not be put into the public sector, and I don't agree that an above ground pet cemetary is the answer. Being put in a sanctuary until you die a lonely death, is not kindness for any dog. It will be interesting to see what plays out up north, I am to pleased to be in a sensible shelter to let down my guard. Every shelter is a potential victim.

HonestyHelps said...

Gret, just last month the courts upheld Loudoun, VA's ban about no adopting pits from their shelter. Of course they give them out to rescues and that's probably worse. But then the rescues can have the liability, one attack, they're out of business. Slowly but surely that will get people out of the pit bull rescue. They just aren't safe dogs any more. The breed has been destroyed by backyard breeders. And as much as it hurts me to say it, and it does hurt, I can no longer support adopting pits out from shelters that have no history - strays. Even owner turn ins, as if the owner tells the truth about surrendering the dog. I don't want it that way but I value life, all life, and consider pits to be a danger to all life. We made them that way and it is our responsibility to change it, with bans and slowly trying to make the breed extinct.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous who rescues pit bulls.

Sorry, I don't accept this. You understand the "genetic whisper" but still think you can handle the dogs "responsibly?"

Unfortunately, it only takes one little mistake like an unlocked gate, a broken latch, a delivery man who open a door, an unexpected visitor, whatever, and then DEATH OCCURS.

There is no way possible to responsibly handle dogs with explosive aggression bred into them. Even if they are kept chained or caged (which is terribly cruel) it only takes a little mistake and then DEATH happens to the innocent.

And as far as finding "responsible" people to adopt dogs that have aggression bred into them, it isn't happening. 99 percent of humanity cannot handle these dogs, period.

It is pit bull rescues that are in denial about this whole issue, and are doing their share to contribute to the maulings.

No matter how enamored you are of these dogs, there is no rationalization for owning dogs that have such issues.

And NO excuse for placing them in homes where this aggression is getting directed onto the innocent neighbors and community.

HonestyHelps said...

I know of two deaths due to pits from rescues that had passed their temperament tests and this is recent. I could probably come up with more if I looked. Reporters should ask the question as to where the attacking dog came from. And just last week a pit that was adopted from a rescue attacked within 24 hours, again it passed a temperament test. I agree with Anon that you can't trust these dogs and rescues have blood on their hands.

HonestyHelps said...

Plus these dogs from rescues were probably altered, offsetting the poor research of one Karen Delise.

Anonymous said...

Also anonymous who is in pit rescue

You do realize that the AKC and the dog fighters are laughing all the way to the bank from the support you give them to breed and abuse more pit bulls for profit.

I am not being snarky here.

These people had a real game plan to get the rescue folks involved in their pit bull excuse, promotion, and protection plan. They don't care about these dogs. They care about the MONEY they make from abusing and torturing these dogs. They don't want regulations tripping up the profit machine, even though regulations would HELP pit bulls and cut down on the overbreeding and abuse, and put some rules in places to deal with the abusers of these dogs.

The breeders have got you guys right where they want you, even repeating their propaganda.

But you guys go broke, and they cash checks.

And pit bulls still keep getting overbred and tortured.