Thursday, October 28, 2010

California's Hayden Act: A Killer in Disguise and Winograd Supports It

Winograd loves the Hayden Act. He tried, in vain, to pass it off onto the people of New York as Oreo's Bill. Let me explain about the Hayden and how it kills more than it doesn't.

First of all, there was a mandate with the Hayden, recently suspended, thank God, that most people didn't understand. This mandate actually paid shelters to euthanize, yes you heard that right. It didn't pay to increase adoptions and save lives, it paid only when an animal was euthanized. By it being suspended, the reimbursable portions of this mandated are temporarily suspended, until the State of California elects to fund the mandate or actually repeals the mandate at a later date. Hayden did pay for animals held an extra day and who were subsequently euthanized, but it also paid for many other things including, veterinary care, proper record keeping including database management, feral cat testing as well as other requirements. But my focus is on what it does wrong which is to allow rescuers to control shelters.

Second, it is killing innocent animals this way. The Hayden Act allows anyone who just represents themselves as a "rescue" to take animals from the shelter. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A 501c3, ONLY SAY THAT YOU ARE A RESCUER. If the shelters refuse to give animals to these wannabe rescues, all hell breaks loose. So the shelters can't use their good sense to stop it without be called murderers.

How does this work? These so called wannabe rescues will put a hold on animals and then leave them in the shelters like the shelters were private kennels. I bring this up because I just learned that a couple of these wannabe rescues have tied up over 20% of the kennels at a shelter in California. They put a hold on dogs and have left them in there for over a month. This means that other dogs are being euthanized in order to hold on to these dogs on hold.

And this brings up Zephyr. Zephyr was a dog on hold by a rescuer in the Carson shelter in Los Angeles. A rescuer put a hold on Zephyr, a pit mix. This effectively stopped the shelter from euthanizing Zephyr. But Zephyr became sick while at the shelter and the shelter did treat Zephyr. She responded to the medication at first but soon succumbed to another bout and wasn't responding to the second round of treatments. She died in her kennel.

The story behind the story is this. This rescuer left Zephyr in her kennel all the while knowing that the reason Zephyr was becoming ill was from being left there, being re-contaminated with each incoming dog. The rescuer knew that Zephyr stood a better chance if she was taken from the shelter and treated. Yet this rescuer, who was at the shelter almost daily, was walking right by Zephyr and getting cute, fluffy dogs out. On the day of Zephyr's death, this rescuer saw Zephyr, obviously dying. The rescuer even took a picture and that picture says a thousand words but most of all says that this is a dying dog. Later, a news reporter asked the rescuer why she didn't take Zephyr since it was so obvious the dog was dying and after all, she had the time to take a picture. The rescuer responded that her vet was already closed for the day. I mean, c'mon, there is an emergency vet clinic on almost every corner in LA, that was not an excuse.

So now this rescuer files a lawsuit against the County of Los Angeles, and guess who a co-plaintiff was. Yes, you guessed it, Nathan J. Winograd. The case was settled out of court and I hear that the rescuer and Winograd were not very happy about it. Winograd has blogged about it and calls it a success but far from it.

So let's see now, what does all this mean? It meant that other dogs had to die to keep Zephyr alive. Zephyr was taking up a kennel, not a kennel that was shared either because policy is to not house another dog with a pit. So how many dogs died while that rescuer used the shelter as a private kennel. Zephyr was there over a month so that means about 25-30 dogs or more didn't have kennel space and were euthanized. Winograd didn't consider those dogs, they were losing their lives because of this rescuer that he supported, he, of course, blames the shelter for them dying. This is what Marcia Mayeda had to say about it.

Animals that are on "hold" status pose a dilemma for staff; they struggle between euthanizing an animal versus holding on in the hopes that a volunteer or rescue group will meet their commitment to take the animaL. Even when an animal on "hold" is euthanized for humane reasons, staff is often criticized even if it is in the animal's best interests. In this instance, staff erred on the side of trying to accommodate the volunteer's wishes.
On December 1, 2007, Zephyr passed away. Zephyr had been in the Carson Animal
Shelter for five weeks and on "hold" for the volunteer for a month.

One of the challenges faced by the Department in its efforts to work with volunteers or
Adoption Partners is ensuring that the animals these partners place on "hold" are removed
by them in a timely manner. This is critical because animal shelters cannot become a place
to keep animals for extended periods of time. Animals that are housed too long at a shelter
become stressed, are exposed to illnesses from other animals, infect animals with their own
illnesses, and take up valuable cage space needed for new arrivals. Moreover,
overcrowded shelters exceed staff's capacity to effectively and humanely care for the

As part of the Department's review of the holding practices used by Adoption Partners and
volunteers, it was discovered that the Carson Animal Shelter in particular had a large
number of animals being held for a very extended periods of time. In fact, over 50 dogs
were being held by volunteers or rescue groups, some for as long as five months.
The Department has corrected this abuse of the system by insisting the animals be removed in a timely manner.

Can you see how the Hayden Act is a killer? It allows the rescuers to be in charge, and therefore they are the ones killing animals in the shelter by screaming "Hayden" whenever they can't get their way. Winograd should have chastised the rescuer instead of joining her on the lawsuit. This rescuer killed Zephyr and a lot of other dogs with her actions. Instead Winograd joined her so this makes him guilty of killing all those dogs as well.

The Hayden Act is without a doubt the worse piece of legislation in the history of the humane effort and it is the darling of Winograd and his cult followers. It has killed more animals probably than it has helped. And Winograd wanted to do the same to New York. He is truly the most evil and misguided demon ever to walk the earth. He's not an animal lover, he is an animal hater.


Anonymous said...

ANOTHER No Kill shelter that's a killer, but the state wouldn't let the cruelty and abuses go on


Notice in the comments as the No Kill lunatics lie and cover, someone leaks the truth

"Balance wrote:
I have been there and am not suprised that concerns have been raised. They have too many animals. They seemed overwhelmed. Those dogs are crated for way too long. It's a hard fact, but you aren't going to find a home for every homeless dog and cat. They need to realize their limits."


It's the No Kill formula.

HonestyHelps said...

I like the one that says where there is smoke there is fire.

Know of any followups on this case? Sounds like the PACCA group hit town, doesn't it?