It's official, Reno has voted to NOT adopt the Whino's "No Kill" program. Pop that cork, dance, be jolly.
I would venture to say that something has spurred this decision. Probably, knowing "No Kill" the way I do, the Washoe County Commission had received enough complaints that they thought twice about making "No Kill" official.
Here's the link to the story.
http://www.rgj.com/article/20090624/NEWS/906240414/1321
And it made my day that Mitch Schneider turned against the Whino. Schneider was the traitor who accepted a speaking engagement with the "No Kill" conference. Makes you wonder what really has happened.
So, now the Whino is down to one, Charlottesville. That time is coming.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Wino is has added new, updated material to his book "Redemption" regarding the success story of Washoe County, NV.
It was due to the work of a couple people in Reno who worked tirelessly to educate the commission that caused them to vote this down. There was fiscal issues involved and the lack of assessments that buried it the no-kill community designation.
Just adding some info for better understanding.
Silence Dogood
There was other people who worked quietly and behind the scenes other than the ones you are referring to. And the presentation of the others involved revolved around the fiscal issues, not on how overcrowded NHS is or how many animals are suffering. Officials hear those things constantly from the humane community. Only when you can give them something that applies to all their constituents, animal lovers and haters, do they listen. There are always those who take credit even when they don't deserve it. It's still okay because the deed got done, let whoever take credit for it.
Thanks for the comment, whatever worked and has probably hit the Whino hard. You'll notice that the RGJ blogger put a piece up on the Whino's blog. I bet he is pissed, he's no longer the Whino's hero.
Did anyone notice the increase in service calls verses the intake? Compared to other shelters that adopted the Whino's program, this is a big point. It means they are leaving the animals in the field or with abusive owners. Pointing this out to the Commission had an effect. It has and does raise questions. Any successful program revolving around a shelter results in a decrease of service calls, or it should. It would make one suspect and I feel that the Commission felt this too.
I will have to check out Mr. Winograds blog. Honesty I don't see anybody taking credit for the decision of the council, where did you find that ? You lost me along the route. Did Winograd somehow take credit for his own lack of acceptance ? Clarify and please share this information on my blog. Who do you feel took crdit that doesn't deserve it. Just making sure you don't consider me a behind the scenes person, because I am not. I am a reader of blogs who volunteers in the belly of the beast.
Didn't mean it the way it turned out. I guess I should have said that there are others as well that contributed to this success. I'm not allowed to share information but I do know that the officials were contacted with some fiscal information. Now whether this helped, I would have to say yes. The focus needs to be on the fiscal, they understand that best, especially in these hard economic times. I have found that officials become deaf when they hear about killing animals in the shelters over and over again.
Post a Comment