UPDATE: This is really sad but this is what happens when the public hears "No Kill". http://www.examiner.com/animal-news-in-los-angeles/christmas-eve-drop-offs-at-east-valley-put-more-dogs-at-higher-risk
One would assume that if the rescue community were in support of Brenda Barnette that they would come running to take all those animals out of the shelters and make her look good. Let's take a closer look at the first five months of Brenda Barnette's tenur with the City of Los Angeles.
My previous post has some numbers that BB released right before Xmas although the total stats have not been posted on the website as of the writing of this post.
To first address the question of the support of the rescue community, looks like the answer is no. In July, New Hope Placements were 676, August 616, September 614, October 577, and November 397!! What happened? Doesn't Barnette's philosophy of "No Kill" stress it takes a community? Where's the community here? Instead of promoting a relationship with this community, Barnette is instead promoting her relationship with the breeding community with her push for upping the pet household limits. The rescue community sees this and is withdrawing their support in the only way that will be recognized, don't take the animals from the shelters.
In October the return to owner was 434 but the bottom fell out in November with only 292 pets reclaimed. Easy to abandon pets when you think in terms of "No Kill". The intakes are the highest since 05 with the "No Kill'ers" yelling it is the result of MSN. No it is the result of a lack of reality based leadership.
How LA could have hired Barnette with her baggage is beyond me. She is chasing her breeder friends around because she's not stupid. She knows they make political contributions and she is an appointee of the political system. She can ride the waves behind her boss if she brings in the moola. Why isn't she concentrating on things she can make happen like shoring up licensing? Or doing something to get more pets back to their owners like microchipping, etc. Why isn't she helping the rescue community to have exempts for their fosters rather than chasing the raising of pet limits? Because it has nothing to do with helping the shelter animals.
She's doing a lousy job, people, and she has nothing in her bag of tricks that will make anything good happen.
My previous post has some numbers that BB released right before Xmas although the total stats have not been posted on the website as of the writing of this post.
To first address the question of the support of the rescue community, looks like the answer is no. In July, New Hope Placements were 676, August 616, September 614, October 577, and November 397!! What happened? Doesn't Barnette's philosophy of "No Kill" stress it takes a community? Where's the community here? Instead of promoting a relationship with this community, Barnette is instead promoting her relationship with the breeding community with her push for upping the pet household limits. The rescue community sees this and is withdrawing their support in the only way that will be recognized, don't take the animals from the shelters.
In October the return to owner was 434 but the bottom fell out in November with only 292 pets reclaimed. Easy to abandon pets when you think in terms of "No Kill". The intakes are the highest since 05 with the "No Kill'ers" yelling it is the result of MSN. No it is the result of a lack of reality based leadership.
How LA could have hired Barnette with her baggage is beyond me. She is chasing her breeder friends around because she's not stupid. She knows they make political contributions and she is an appointee of the political system. She can ride the waves behind her boss if she brings in the moola. Why isn't she concentrating on things she can make happen like shoring up licensing? Or doing something to get more pets back to their owners like microchipping, etc. Why isn't she helping the rescue community to have exempts for their fosters rather than chasing the raising of pet limits? Because it has nothing to do with helping the shelter animals.
She's doing a lousy job, people, and she has nothing in her bag of tricks that will make anything good happen.
33 comments:
Grasp at straws much?
As far as the rescue community goes, why don't you compare the numbers to the same time a year ago (since AC is a seasonal business)?
In each case, the number of animals that went into rescue was an increase over the same month a year earlier by 50-100% increases in animals going to rescue groups over the previous year.
Instead of realizing that this is a success, you'd rather manipulate the numbers to try to undermine any chance of success. Pathetic.
It's pretty obvious you didn't bother to look at the stats, Anon:07.
AC is a seasonal business? Oh yes, during kitten season. I don't see the rescues pulling out of Petsmart during a "season".
Where are you getting your numbers? I show that the same month a year earlier had New Hope partners getting 443. And you can't argue the fact that this was the worse showing all year for New Hope. The figures have been declined since Barnette arrived, are you arguing that point too? If the rescues were behind Barnette, they would be beating the doors down to get the animals out and make her look good. It ain't happening. They may have tried right at first until they learned the truth about her and it has been downhill since.
Too, any small increase to the rescues is offset by the public adoptions falling. In Nov. 09 there were 1489 adoptions and in December 09 2052 adoptions compared to 1264 adoptions in Nov. 10, as best one can tell without Barnette posting the stats on a comparable basis. I guess she doesn't want people to see the number of euthanized.
Here's the link:
http://www.laanimalservices.com/PDF/reports/CatNDogIntakeNOutcomes.pdf
For all months since Barnett took over the placements at New Hope have been higher than the year prior (and yes, in 2009, the new hope placements went down during this same timeframe -- and pretty much in every shelter anywhere intake and adoptions go up during the summer months).
Now, if you want to bash her for being behind on adoptions, so be it, but your claim that the rescue community is not behind her appears to be terribly innaccurate. It appears you're the only one in a campaign against her.
Yeah, you'd like to think I was the only one. Ever heard of "trends"? Well, the rescue community is susceptible to trends as well. Is their trends sustainable? In this case, it isn't it appears. Also, might want to check the letters on file with the City Clerk to see how many letters of support for raising the pet limits are from rescues compared to those from breeders.
And the New Hope groups haven't done very much to increase their help since 2005 when they had 5408, and now are at 6068 for the same time frame. Whereas impounds have increased over 11,000 in the same time frame. Seems New Hope isn't increasing proportionately.
You need to be asking questions instead of trying to defend the rescue community. That's the point you seem to be missing.
Speaking of trends, did you notice that after several years of declining support from New Hope, the highest single year of support has been this past year?
Seems like the trend is upward.
We'll see if it will sustain itself. I think most rational people would hope that it would (because more lives would be saved) - but I'm guessing you'll be rooting the other way, even to the point of trying to undermine the growth here -- even if it costs animal lives.
And shall we ask why impounds are up so high? Could it be, at least in part, to legislation you supported?
What page are you on? Here's the figures and see if you see a trend that is sustainable.
2005-06 5408
2006-07 5372
2007-08 5503
2008-09 4497
2009-10 6068
2009-10 is a flash in the pan. Rescues were in Barnette's corner until they learned about her baggage. They are tapering off now. The sustainable trend is the one showing a decrease every month since Barnette came on board.
And I knew you would use the MSN excuse. No, the fucking reason is the damn "No Kill" movement, telling the public that the shelters are going "No Kill". That way the public doesn't give a damn about turning in their animals or turning them loose in the streets for animal control. After all the shelters won't kill them, they stand a chance, blah, blah, blah. The bullshit of "No Kill" is responsible for the increases in the shelters that use that term. No Kill is the killer in LA, not MSN.
Barnett has been there, what, 6 months? And in her first year there, placements with New Hope placements up 33% over the year prior with every month she's been there being higher than the same month year prior.
Ahh, so how we've gotten at the heart of the anger. You hate no kill. No kill is to blame. Never mind that that the true talk of No Kill there just began in the past 6 months while impounds began going up literally the month that MSN was passed.
Let the hatred of Winograd go. Do what's best for the animals...and don't root for them to die because you hate everything that is No Kill.
And you knew MSN would be brought up because it's becoming impossible to hide from the numbers, pesky little facts that they are.
Duh, Anon you are missing the point. Instead of increasing New Hope adoptions, they are decreasing now. Why?? Are the groups becoming more and more disillustioned the more they learn about Barnette's baggage and loyalties?
Even you have fallen for the propaganda of "No Kill" yet you are denying that the rest of public hasn't fallen under it's spell too. Go ahead, take the dog to the "pound" they won't kill it, they are NO KILL!! Let's not even mention how much the ecocomy has affected the shelters, all shelters even those without MSN are experiencing rises in impounds. Animal People News reported summer of 09 that a decade of focusing on adoptions (no kill) has resulted in more impounds and more euthanasia. What is so damn difficult to understand about this deception?
If you don't think MSN works, those pesky little numbers, try researching San Francisco and their MSN for pits. Have a few others you need to look at too.
LOL. Yes, if you look at a microtrend, they are decreasing right this second because animal sheltering is a seasonal business. Higher in summer, lower in winter. Everywhere.
But again, year over year, is MUCH improved. That is success.
Animal People's numbers are suspect (at best) based on a very small sample...and also pretends that the majority of the US has adopted no kill - when in fact, the majority hasn't (yet), and none of the cities in Clifton's sample group has adopted no kill.
Yes, San Francisco has been the exception to the rule. MSN has at least appeared to not be a disaster there like it has been in many places....likely because San Francisco had one of the most well-developed low cost spay and neuter programs in the nation at the time the law was passed...thanks in large part to the no killers you hate. Irony at its finest.
Anon, you are stumbling all over your feet, put them back in your mouth. You are so full of it. Using every excuse in the book when you know what the truth is, just admit it, won't hurt, I promise.
You "No Kill'er"s are the ones who have screwed up becoming pawns used by the breeders. LA is getting screwed on the pet limit increase, the breeders are the ones who will benefit from it. You "No Kill'er"s are the ones killing the shelter animals, driving away the public with your visions of barrels of dead animals. Disgusting little people that you are, puppets to those in power, you are the problem, definitely not the solution.
Brenda Barnette and our anon breeder friend say that RESCUES should be going broke cleaning up after the breeders and puppy mills!
Anon sounds like that breeder Gina Spadafori or Christie Keith. They make no sense. These plugs have nothing else to do but eat donuts and push for the AKC.
But rescues, you need to go broke for these people! These breeders need to have the $$ for their events! So, damn it, clean up after the puppy mills that pay for it, the backyard breeders that also provide the AKC registration money and sell unaltered dogs, and spend every cent you have so they have more to spend on their "hobbies" and screw the city on taxes and license fees too!
Barnette and her AKC breeder friends clearly think the rescue community is that supid.
The anon breeder friend is just a mouthpiece assigned to run interference for BB. BickyBaby gave a certain person the shaft it appears.
Honesty, this anon is NOT from the rescue community.
This is a dipshit breeder still trying to think they can trick the rescues into being their slaves.
Pretend to care about rescues while the breeders stick it to the rescues at every turn. And the breeders DON'T pay their fair share into the system and stick it to the shelter animals.
If just a fraction of the tax cheating and license fee evasion by breeders went into spay neuter clinics, there would be a new world for pets. But Barnette and the AKC want to see animals keep suffering so they can keep their hands on their ill-gotten dollars.
The breeders KNOW that mandatory spay neuter makes it harder for them to cheat the shelter animals, which is why they keep trying to convince rescue that it's bad. It's bad only for tax cheat breeders and puppy mills!
And Barnette is not enforcing it so these tax cheat breeders can keep stealing.
You're right, this person is NOT from the rescue community. My educated guess is from the legal profession, given a puppet assignment of blocking for BB. Can't you see the inexperience this person puts forth in the comments? Reads that "Redemption" book too often.
"And shall we ask why impounds are up so high? Could it be, at least in part, to legislation you supported?"
Barnette is REFUSING TO ENFORCE MANDATORY SPAY NEUTER so her breeder friends can keep ripping off the city and animals, and avoid paying license fees and taxes.
(One of her NAIA friends spilled the beans on that one, breeder!)
Breeders have been trying this trick for some years. Lie and say mandatory spay neuter doesn't work, in hopes that the foolish will repeal it and the breeders can cheat and steal freely again with no worries!
All about the money. They don't care how many shelter animals suffer and die, as long as they can keep their cash and operate with no regulations.
I think my entire point is that BB has bigger fish to fry like enforcing MSN and getting the licensing up to date. Then once she has done that, she can talk the talk of an increased pet limit.
You breeders were claiming that mandatory spay neuter didn't work before it ever even went into effect!
You screwed up with your propaganda campaign that you still keep trying at!
Christie or Gina, your breeder flop sweat is stinking bad.
AKC Breeders, Winograd did one good thing. He's opened the whole door into your deception and trickery, your lobbying and thieving, your tax evasion and fraud, your links to corrupt legislators and crooks.
The animal welfare community found out how you thieves and animal torture-supporters operate, your links to Rick Berman, your links to the puppy mills and the dog fighters, your support of animal cruelty, and all the rest of those nasty things you thought would be kept hidden.
No one but the desperate would hire Nathan Winograd to do anything. He's a loser and an egomaniac, and he encourages people to look more closely at you breeders and what you are up to. They don't like what they see, and they are digging deeper.
Patti Strand was failing, but Nathan Winograd was about the worst choice you could have made to replace her. Your crook world is getting opened up to daylight more every day, and if you think you can reverse that, you are as stupid as you act.
Yeah, Anon, they thought for sure they had it figured out when they brought in the Whino. They just didn't count on his stupidity of taking himself seriously.
Funny that the original post was about the rescues not supporting Barnette, which they clearly are in greater numbers than they have in any of the past 5 years, and then somehow you go off on a series of rants about how the breeders are screwing everything up and Winograd is to blame.
Yes, Winograd is to blame for the rescues supporting no kill..shame on him.
And what is even funnier is that someone like yourself, so inexperienced that you can't even read stats, would bother to come back here and continue to make a fool of yourself by repeating lies. NO, the rescues are not behind Barnette. The handwriting is on the wall and you are turning your back to it.
I can't read stats?
A 33% increase in animals going to rescus verses the year prior (and Barnette has only been there for half a year) and you are declaring that rescues are running from Barnette.
I can read stats.
And you are so blinded by hate that you can't even recognize improvements when you see them.
No, Anon, you can't make sense of stats. While Barnette is screaming at the public to take animals from the shelters, the New Hope adoptions are going down the tubes. Every month since she has been there, there are fewer New Hope adoptions. Duh, even you can see that.
The numbers have declined since Barnette has been there because adoptions are somewhat seasonal. The numbers between July and December dropped in 2009 also...was that Barnette's fault too?
People adopt more animals in the spring and summer. It's seasonal. That's why you have to compare year-over-year.
And in that regard, they're doing much better than in previous years. Duh, even you can see that.
Anon, you need glasses. Just look at the stats, you won't see that "seasonal" excuse you are using.
For 09 in July New Hope had 460 adoptions while in October there were 443, not much of a decline when you consider that Barnette has gone from 676 in July 10 to 397 in Nov. 10, quite a drop. That's the biggest one month drop of all.
In fact the stats show that the biggest months for adoptions are December, January, June, July, and from August thru Oct. You want to try to make something seasonal from those? Just another lousy, lame excuse from your Messiah to put along with all the rest of the lame excuses.
Every month since Barnette has been there is higher than the same month year prior.
But, if you would rather them fail, so be it.
Not the brightest bulb on the block are you Anon:15, just can't seem to figure all this out, can you.
Sure, the groups try to make the new director look good at first before they learn the truth. But since they are learning the truth about BB, they are slacking off now. Why didn't the groups take more animals out then before? Wouldn't be that they were holding out in order to force the city to hire a "No Kill'er"? A new tactic in the arsenal of "No Kill", don't take the animals out of the local shelters so that eutanization goes up and it makes the shelters look bad. No, instead they chose to "import" dogs, not pit bulls or large dogs, they make sure they cherry pick the small dogs. Then they use this to claim they are saving lives when it actually means the local shelter animals are dying because of what these groups do.
The rise in those numbers are political, not real. Geez, you don't get out much do you? You have no understanding of how this works. The bottom line is that Barnette is a failure and the groups who had some hope, now don't feel that way. They are going to use those tactics to get rid of Barnette and it has already started. Wise up or get dumped with Barnette, your choice.
Sure sounds like there are those (read "you") who would try to undermine anyone that wasn't themselves -- even if it means killing animals in the process.
And when animals die, you declare victory. You must be proud.
I'm sure you're right, and this is all an elaborate scheme by the rescue community to try to make Barnette look good, but now they hate her. It can't just be that the numbers are up.
When she eventually isn't moving more dogs to rescue than they were doing before she started, then by all means, I will be back and say "you were right". Until then, you've got nothing to base your opinion on.
"No Kill" has killed more animals than you can imagine. Yet, you continue to defend this philosophy and those who carry out the murder orders. You're the one who celebrates every time a shelter animal loses their life because of the tactics of "No Kill". I'm the one who grieves for them.
Foolish person that you are, do you enjoy being a puppet, having your chain yanked by Barnette? You won't be back to say anything other than the words that are dictated to you. Barnette will go and it won't take long, she was chickenshit in Seattle, jumping the sinking ship like a rat. She'll do the same in LA.
Didn't Rancho Cucamunga (another one that Winograd lies about) have to actually go to the media and say we're not No Kill, don't drop off your animals here! (while Winograd was lying and claiming it was a no kill success) Because people were coming from other counties to abandon their animals, and the overload was breaking the shelter.
Why did outside people bring their animals?
BECAUSE NO KILL CLAIMS IT IS WORKING AND THAT THEY ARE SUCCESSFULLY DEALING WITH ALL THESE ANIMALS. Winograd was bragging (and lying) in the media! Winograd said it was working great, so why wouldn't people dump their animals there since Winograd was telling these lies to the public and saying No Kill worked great?
I am sure this is happening in LA.
People from outside the city are dumping their animals in the city in higher numbers because they hear that No Kill solves all the problems!
Lies, endless lies. Barnette and Winograd beg for people outside the city to dump animals at will in the city. They say they have the magic answer!
This is what No Kill is bringing to LA, a lot of pain and a lot of death. And a lot of rescues going broke, thanks to Barnette and Winograd.
Yes indeed Anon:49 that did happen in Rancho but the reason you gave is far from the truth.
The term is deceiving the public and that's why they show. The public had no idea whether the concept works or not, it's the term placing in their minds that the shelter no longer "kills". Of course most people don't want their pet euthanized but that is not an indication that the public accepts "No Kill" as a success.
And what about Rancho letting animals die in their cages? According to the original Annual Report of Local Rabies Control Activities of 08, Rancho had more animals to die in their cages than at the county shelter which handles twice as many animals. When questioned about this, Rancho immediately issued another report. It is still under investigation with the DA's office.
And Rancho was turning away owner surrenders, letting nature kill those pets in horrible ways. Yeah, "No Kill" works alright but only in the minds of those gullible enough to believe it.
"Foolish person that you are, do you enjoy being a puppet, having your chain yanked by Barnette?'
This breeder doesn't care about the shelter animals. They just care that their fellow AKC breeder Barnette is there to oppose laws so they can make more money, cheat on taxes and license fees, and breed more dogs and help the mills abuse and breed more dogs (and get the rescues to work harder and spend more cleaning up after them), and they'll lie for Barnette as long as they can.
Of course they will, she is handing them a 30% increase in business with pimping this increased pet limits ordinance.
If she wanted to help the shelter animals, it would be in the form of making exceptions for the rescues so they could house more animals. Along with that would be subject to surprise inspections to make sure that the animals aren't going to hoarders or just exchanging one kennel for another. There's so much more to fostering than just food, water and sheltering. Barnette would install a heavy duty training program for the fosters so they can accomplish what the foster home is for, making ready an animal for a home. That includes evaluation and training. Barnette just wants to move them out of the shelter so she looks like she is doing a good job. What a bitch!!
Post a Comment