Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Seattle Humane Employees Painting the True Picture

Seems to me that the Seattle Humane Society needs the Whino to do an audit on their shelter. But since he is buddies with Brenda Barnette, it is doubtful he would speak the truth. And Barnette, lying bitch that she is, uses disease as an excuse to not help the local shelter animals when her shelter is the one that needs to quarantined.

(Kent, WA) Seattle Humane Society (SHS) employees, speaking on the condition of anonymity due to fear of retribution from SHS management, report in the last 18 months SHS has transferred in over 120 Skagit/Everett dogs and 90 American Eskimos from Kennewick, in addition to, over 100 transfers from Kern County, CA. The last 12 Eskimos remain at the shelter 5 months later without enrichment and no interest from rescue due to the fact they are so stressed they try to bite repeatedly rendering them unsafe to handle. Staff report severe overcrowding of the shelter with transferred dogs, lead to injury from fights, illness and high risk of disease spreading to the existing animal population.

Earlier today, Sgt. David Morris, Guild Executive Board member and Lead Cruelty Investigator for KCACC said, “I have serious concerns about our dogs and cats well being if King County turns over control of sheltering to the Humane Society. It is painfully evident they are not properly staffed or equipped to take on a project of this magnitude.”

SHS employees report overcrowding in isolation areas is a real problem due to disease prevention not being a concern of management. Staff has issue with improper housing and ventilation where sick animals are housed especially when the shelter is over capacity. SHS just recently recovered from a bad strain of Calici Virus affecting at least 22 cats. Improper quarantine and willful disregard for Veterinary protocol combined with adverse recommendations from management is of grave concern to SHS staff.

The fact SHS management continuously transfers animals from outside King County, as well as, from hoarder’s, plagues the shelter with disease and should be known to the public. SHS management is continually subjecting the shelter population to preventable disease. In addition, staff is concerned the public does not receive full disclosure of theses conditions during the adoption process or prior to placing animals in foster.

The SHS with around 70 staff has had over 60 employees turnover in the last 18 months, this is over 75%! Staff fears this high rate of attrition is not just the nature of the job, but from a complete lack of attention to training, employee retention and morale by management leading to a lack of continuity in care for the animals.


Felony said...

"The last 12 Eskimos remain at the shelter 5 months later without enrichment and no interest from rescue due to the fact they are so stressed they try to bite repeatedly rendering them unsafe to handle."

I don't think there is much interest in these dogs because they are not not pit bulls. If they were pit bulls, the nutters would be all over them. This part of the world has pit bull fever.

HonestyHelps said...

You're probably right Felony. Barnette did a piece on her blog in the paper just recently about adopting pits as pets. Haven't seen her blog about adopting these Eskimo dogs. Anyone reading this blog needs to go to the ACO Guild blog listed on my favorites.

Anonymous said...

I thought this blog was to help the animals. If so, then stop the personal attacks and name calling! It only confirms the fact that you are more worrried about the personal issues rather than the care of the animals. As far as the 12 Eskimos go, SHS took in 90 of them (How many did KCACC bring in?). That means that over 87% found homes. The rest may have issues and you would too if you were treated they way those dogs had been treated at the mill. But those remaining dogs are not shoved into a corner and forgotten. Unless you actually worked with the dogs when they arrived, or fostered some of them, I would suggest you shut up (it is easy to criticize from your armchair). I did both..and no, I don't work for SHS or PAWS but I do donate time and money to their cause. Since this is my first visit to this site I may be under the wrong assumption that it is actually concerned with the truth and helping animals... Am I wrong? -CharlieB (posting as anonymous).

HonestyHelps said...

Barnette leads the Seattle Humane and therefore subject to criticism. Has nothing to do with name calling, have you heard me calling her a bitch or a whore, that is name calling. She is/was a breeder, doesn't that tell you something about her "dedication" to animals? And the truth hurts that Barnette is importing animals rather than trying to help the local animals there. And you can't see the wrong in that?

Of course she took the Eskimos, they were purebreds, bring much more money than the shelter mutts.

And no, you are not wrong, Charlie, this blog is to help animals. Your problem is you don't know what helps animals and what doesn't if you are defending the Seattle Humane. Think about the dogs that died because of the importation, do you consider that helping animals? Seattle Humane sucks as far as I am concerned.

But time will tell and it will tell that "No Kill" in Seattle is the same as it was in Philly, abusive to animals. Do some research for yourself, educate yourself. This is nothing but a personal agenda for Barnette and it will result in horrid suffering for the animals. Come back in a year and see if you sing the same song.

Anonymous said...

Was Barnette bailing out one of her breeder/puppy mill friends by taking those Eskimos? Was the breeder prosecuted or reported for abuse? as clearly these dogs were abused

This sounds like breeders dumping their unwanted or SICK animals with their breeder friend who is using shelter funds to help them out

WHERE DID THESE ESKIMOS COME FROM? Is Barnette hiding an abusive puppy mill or breeder?

Anonymous said...

CharlieH, Brenda Barnette is a for-profit AKC breeder and BREEDER LOBBYIST who belongs to organizations that support animal abuse and puppy mills.

She is actively involved with groups who donate to this pro-cruelty, pro-puppy mill AKC lobbying group http://

She is not an appropriate choice for a shelter leader, and she opposes anti-cruelty laws.

She is abusing that shelter and using it and the animals for her fellow breeders interests, not the interests of the animals.

You are getting duped.

The shelter needs a humane CEO, not a breeder lobbyist.

Anonymous said...

Here is an unhappy memory for the Seattle Humane Society and Barnette's misuse of the organization for her for-profit breeding interests.

Remember the national exposure in the news about a year ago of the puppy mills that are supplying pet stores?

Most of these puppy mill puppies are AKC registered, and puppy mill registrations bring in the bulk of the money for AKC, and pay for breeder shows, breeder lobbying and activities like Barnette is involved in.

Barnette wrote a letter to the newspaper in the name of SHS putting down this expose, and claiming that "responsible" breeders (like her I guess? She means AKC breeders) were ok and that people should BUY DOGS FROM BREEDERS.

She did not reveal that those abused puppy mill puppies are the ones that AKC profits from, and that her "responsible" breeder friends get supported by.

She did not mention that her AKC and its "responsible" breeders support puppy mills and oppose puppy mill regulation.

She used SHS to promote her business of breeding and selling dogs, and to support puppy mills and hide her AKC's involvement in puppy mill activity.

She didn't even mention that SHE WAS A BREEDER!

This is UNETHICAL and it hurts shelter animals and ALL pets.

Anonymous said...

Here's another issue.

Barnette's AKC and her fellow breeders all claim there is no problem with purebred dogs in shelters because they do "breed rescue" and take the purebreds.

Well, where were Brenda's breeder friends and breed rescues for these dogs?

They make money breeding and selling Eskimos. Why didn't they spend some of their profit helping these dogs?

If Brenda's breeder friends are so "responsible" why didn't they take these dogs?

No, they let the shelter pay the bills and deal with their purebred castoffs.

And take up space so other dogs die.

The breeders just want to make their $$ and let the humane community spend to clean up breeder messes.

HonestyHelps said...

I just assumed when they referred to a puppy mill that probably charges were made or were about to be made. The puppy mill could have cut a deal to get out of the charges. I'll see if the ACO Guild might have some answers.

Breed rescues often are nothing more than "breeders" in disguise. The Vincent Act in CA requires all shelter dogs and rescues to alter prior to adoption over the age of 8 weeks. One of the main reasons was that "breeders" were getting their breeding stock from the shelters. Most purebreds look like any others in their breed, what would the AKC know if there was a switch. And because this was becoming an issue is when the AKC came up with the DNA testing before the public became aware of their switcheros.

And since SHS is not subject to public records requests we can't see whether those purebreds were altered prior to adoption. Could have been a jealousy bust, vengence, who knows why if there is nothing about it as far as publicity, charges, etc.

The estimates of purebreds in Southern CA shelters runs from 25-40% according to area. I'd say that is a problem.

Anonymous said...

I am a previous employee at the Seattle Humane Society and I would like to clarify a few things.

The American Eskimos that are still at the shelter are their due to behavioral issues. The are not adoption candidates due to aggresive behavior towards people. The shelter has contacted numerous rescue groups who specialize in aggresive dogs and American Eskimos and the resues dont want to take them.

Ms. Barnett is a poodle breeder. She is not an appropriate CEO for an animal shelter whos main motto is "spay and neuter all pets!"

The puppy mill that housed the American Eskimos was from Kennewick, Wa. The woman who ran the puppy mill was selling the dogs online to pet stores and to private buyers. She is being prosecuted for animal cruilty, neglect and for having too many animals in one location. Unfortunatly, animal cruilty laws are very lax and due the animals almost no justice. In Washington state if you are convicted of animal cruilty or neglect, you can move out of the county you were convicted in and open a kennel.

In closing I would like to state that Brenda Barnett is not good for the shelter, not good for its employees, and most importantly not good for the animals of king county.