Saturday, July 16, 2011


I'll give you just a taste of what is to come. This is a complicated process and I think it has been set up deliberately so no one can figure it out in order to dispute the percentages that Abigail Smith is coming up with. If anyone can offer some insight that I could be wrong, I would welcome it. It can read another way and the report is not clear on which way it is to be read. This is my version until I am corrected. Of course, I always think the worst, after all it is "No Kill".

For the six month period, January 11 through June 11, let's look at the situation of foster homes for cats. During that period of time, there were 3,789 cats placed into foster care. Only 265 cats were adopted out by the foster. That leaves 3,524 cats still left in foster care. I can find no indication that these 3,524 cats have been returned to the shelter. I can find no indication that these 3,524 cats have been adopted period. Austin reports that they have 96 active foster homes for cats. So it appears that each foster home has 37 cats on an average. Can anyone say hoarding?

So the question is, are these 3,524 cats counted as live releases because they really aren't. They don't have their "forever" home yet and are subject to being brought back into the shelter to add to the numbers there. This would sure have an effect on the numbers, it's basically like hiding 3,524 cats and claiming them as a successful outcome.

This info has been compiled from this link.

Another way to view it is, let's take the month of June. The total number of cats entering the shelter is 777. The number reported in a foster home at the end of June is 176. Again these can't be counted as live releases. I find it strange that for the prior months foster homes only accounted for about an average of 5 adoptions a week. Yet the last week of June there were 97 adoptions in one week by foster homes!!

And now they are trying to stop taking owner surrendered animals as well.
Owner Relinquishment Policy 
Implement an owner surrender evaluation 
program.  This program would require pet 
owners considering relinquishment of a pet to 
schedule an appointment. On the spot drop off 
of owned pets would no longer be accepted.  
An evaluation of the pet would be conducted 
during the appointment.  This would provide 
the pet owner with definitive feedback 
regarding options available for their pet, if 

We all know what this means, Austin will no longer be a true open door shelter. What if an animal doesn't pass this "evaluation"? People don't make appointments and neither do they accept "options", they will just dump the animal instead. Austin has already done away with their night drop box.

Austin is not making it easy to figure all this out. But I will persist. More to come. And that taste I mentioned above, is turning out to be a sour one.


Anonymous said...

Doing away with a drop box means that fewer owners will come in because they don't want to be insulted with dirty looks and lectures. That means more animals on the streets, abandoned, starving.

If you care about animals you don't turn them away. Being euthanized in a shelter is much better than lying in a gutter after being hit by a car or starving to death.

NoKillSucks said...

Discouraging owners is the mainstay of No Kill. It shows clearly that they don't care about the animals, they don't care if the pets are abandoned. In this day and time of a poor economy, people losing their jobs and homes, it is more important than ever to take owner surrenders. Taking the pets in shows that you care.

All this will do is fill the streets in Austin with animals.

Anonymous said...

Where are you getting the 3,789 cats going into foster care from? I assumed that the 'Cats in foster care' row indicated the running total of cats in foster homes, not the number of cats entering foster homes.

I agree that the leap in adoptions at the end of June does look suspicious, but according to the Austin website, there was a big cat adoption event at the end of June, with $5 adoption fees. That could explain it.

HonestyHelps said...

Yes, Anon it is a running total AND I also said it can be read another way, as the total number of cats each week. There's no explanation to accompany this report as to which it is.

Oh yes, let's treat cats like a shoe sale, $5, get all you can get for a bargain basement price. Do you think that people who look for a "bargain" on cats, that those cats will ever see the inside of a vet's office? Why do you think we have such problems now with our pets, because they have been de-valued over the years.

Animals had value up until about a hundred years ago. We relied upon them to survive. They guarded our flocks, helped us hunt for food, and the list goes on. Now we don't see them in this light. We are now a disposable society and free/cheap means whatever it is is disposable. These "sales" make them disposable. So what, we can always get another one. They call "pocket" pets disposable pets, why? Because it is cheaper to let them die and get another than pay a vet. That's is what these $5 adoptions accomplish. Don't kid yourself into thinking happily ever after, that makes you part of the problem.

HonestyHelps said...

Why is Austin reminding me more and more of Philly/PACCA? Oh the glorious expounding upon all the adoptions, etc. when all the while cruelty abound in the shelter. Animals were given to known hoarders. BOGO sales galore (with a 30% returned rate too) and then suddenly the bubble popped. All Austin is doing is burning out fosters and rescues. It takes awhile but it's definitely on the way. Stay tuned.

Anonymous said...

One of the No Kill Nation geniuses, Billy LeFeuvre, made comments to the effect that it didn't matter whether the adoptions didn't stick, it was getting the animals out of the shelter that was important. Winograd also jumps on anyone who suggests free or low cost adoptions are dodgy in any way. Well, hey, I guess they have to make sure that the shelter keeps the animals coming in - where else is Winograd going to get those consulting fees from and fill all those seats at his seminars?

HonestyHelps said...

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what is happening today. Suddenly all those animals are gone off pet harbor.

Ed Boks screwed around with the Chameleon to make his numbers look better. Rancho Cucamonga sent in incorrect reports to the state for 2-3 years claiming they didn't understand how the Chameleon worked/clerical error.

There's dirt in TLAC and it was brought in with a Yankee from New York.