Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Why not tell the truth, that the Council isn't as gullible as you hoped and you and your breeder buddies aren't as clever as you thought. They want to know what you've been doing about licensing since you've been here. Oh, oh, panic time! You thought you'd come to LA and pull the same BS you did in Seattle. According to stats, dog licenses are down about 15,000 since you've been GM. that's only seven months! So the City Council decided to take a look at what you are doing (not doing) and for the first time in LA, make you earn money to maintain the spay and neuter fund. Whoa, you thought because of your friends Rosendahl and Koretz that you'd have a free ride.
Well, looks like Rose is on to you finally. He signed a motion by Cardenas that will make you show what you've been doing for the past seven months, so you are in a hurry to play catch up at the expense of the abused, injured, neglected and abandoned animals in LA. You never even instructed officers to do licensing at all when they were on regular calls until now. So, LAAS has both a GM and a Field Operations Director who have never done a licensing program before and it shows. OK, employees, here's the real reason you are being told to busy your butts and bring in the bucks. It's not to save your jobs like you were told, it's to save Barnette and Salazar's jobs. Take a look.
"I THEREFORE MOVE, that the Animal Services Department, with the assistance of the CAO, be instructed to report within 30 days with recommendations relative to implementing an annual cap on the amount of dog licensing revenue deposited into the General Fund based on TY 09-10 amounts, with any increased revenue collected above that amount being deposited into the Animal Spay and Neuter Trust Fund.
I FURTHER MOVE that the Animal Services Department be instructed to report on the annual number of dog licenses issued for the current Fiscal Year 2010-11 and the previous five years."
Do you think this was an order by Council to do nothing but dog licensing until July and let the animals suffer? I don't think so. Is this the great licensing plan you told Council you are developed with Found Animals and Best Friends? Has either one of them ever done licensing? Doesn't sound like it. Where are all the notices to dog owners so they won't just relinquish dogs when a uniformed officer bangs on their door and tells them they need a license NOW? What about spaying or neutering first? That isn't in your plan. Isn't it true they will be told to just pay and get the license even if the dogs don't have rabies shots, aren't altered and they don't have a breeders permit--because all you want is numbers to show the Council in 30 days?
Then who's gonna follow up on this and straighten out this mess? Didn't you tell the press that more animals will be euthanized because there's not enough employees to even staff all shelters? If you were really interested in licensing revenue to save the shelters and spay/neuter, why did you take them both off the LAAS webpage? When you were told by a councilman to put them back, you put up five words. Doesn't look like a priority to me.
Let's take a look at where you were planning to take LAAS based on your history as a breeder with a daughter who is also a breeder. And let's not forget you were the AKC legislative rep for Seattle until seven months ago and you are still sending dogs to Seattle Humane Society. Has anyone check to see if LAAS is still paying for the spay or neuter of those transported dogs. According to reports SHS is getting a lions share of lap dogs and is also getting filled up with LA pit bulls so that BB's adoption rate will look good and she won't have to euthanize them here. Is that why they are holding her job open? A little inhouse politics? Better keep it open SHS.
C'mon BB, you can tell us. Wasn't your plan to just let the licensing slide down hill and blame it on the $100 unaltered license fee and the breeder permit requirement passed by the Council? Haven't you been working up to saying that other agencies charge less for unaltered dogs and get more revenue that way--the buzz word is you get more dogs "in the system." Isn't that why you want to change the ordinance so that license late fees are only a piddling 25% instead of 100%? That's $5 for late altered dog licenses. Is that gonna get them to pay on time? What you really want is for your breeder buddies to not have to pay $100 each for dogs that make them untaxed money at home. And you definitely don't want the city to know how many they have in crates and garages churning out puppies that make them rich. You opposed puppy mill legislation in Washington. You sure don't want to stop breeding in Los Angeles. http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-barnette.html
So, wasn't your real goal to destroy the Los Angeles spay/neuter ordinance, along with your friend Cathie Turner by telling the council that the $100 unaltered dog license is the reason people aren't licensing their dogs? Of course you weren't going to mention that impounds have decreased about one-half since that differential went into effect because it is an incentive for people to spay/neuter. You weren't gonna tell them that the reason there are less unaltered licenses is because people are fixing their pets. And the reason there aren't more altered licenses is because you don't have a licensing plan and because you are sending lots of the animals which are altered in LA shelters out of state.
So here's the bottom line. The March 30 BBD (Barnette Blueprint for Disaster) kickoff is postponed. So what are we going to do, a media blitz to cover that you overlooked notifying the public in your panic? Then next week LAAS officers whose job is to correct inhumane conditions and protect animals will become license canvassers with a goal-quota for each week to save your job. Maybe you can bully them a little harder to do more than 70 cause you gotta catch up fast. I hear bullying is something Mark Salazar does best. I also heard it cost Riverside a bundle to pay off the lawsuits for what he did to employees. But that didn't bother you, you hired him anyway and LA is used to paying off lawsuits for wrong conduct in LAAS so maybe it's no big deal. And BB says she doesn't believe in City rules and policy anyway. Looks like she makes it up as she goes along, since she ordered LAAS officers to turn their back on laws and conditions of animals and ONLY focus on LICENSING REVENUE. Suddenly it's down and dirty, just grab the money and run, ACO's. Sounds more like a madam at a brothel than a city manager trying to promote good animal care.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Listed as one of Missouri’s Dirty Dozen Mary Ann Smith - Smith’s Kennel, Salem, MO.
STATUS: Smith’s Kennel remains both USDA licensed and MDA licensed through 2011 despite ongoing repeat violations.
Smith’s Kennel has a history of repeat USDA violations stretching back more than a decade, including citations for unsanitary conditions; dogs exposed to below-freezing temperatures or excessive heat without adequate shelter from the weather; dogs without enough cage space to turn and move around freely; pest and rodent infestations; injured and bleeding dogs, dogs with loose, bloody stools who had not been treated by a vet, and much more.
Mary Ann Smith’s son, now Republican Majority Whip Representative Jason Smith, was once listed in state records as a co-owner of her kennel and has been an outspoken opponent of Proposition B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act and other animal welfare bills.
Also on making the list of one of Missouri's Dirty Dozen locally was a Reeds Spring facility. A June 2010 USDA inspection noted repeated veterinary issues with two Chows, one of whom had “mats hanging down” while another had patches of untreated hair loss.
That kennel is located in State District 62, represented by a co-sponsor of the House Bill to overturn the voters decision on Proposition B.
So, there you have it, a Fox News affiliate, a most-definitely Republican leaning media outlet, has noted that Republican Majority Whip Representative Jason Smith has a vested interest in seeing the vote of the people overturned.
http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-fox-files-prop-b-foe-may-have-conflict-of-interest-20110222,0,3145505.story has some interesting comments from this crooked politician.
When a very conservative REPUBLICAN news source takes on one of their own, then you know the politics are down and dirty. These are the guys that Toellner supports. Whose payroll are you on Toellner? It certainly ain't the payroll of truth, justice and the poor animals suffering in your state. You should be working for Prop B in Missouri, instead you take pride in undermining the voice of the people in Missouri. Nathan Winograd has you under his thumb, Rick Berman has you under his thumb, or maybe they have that thumb up your ass and you love it.
This week I read the ADL-LA "Asinine Alert" that centered around the employees at LAAS. The ADL-LA and "No Kill" condemns experience, calling it the "old regime". That term, by most standards, should be a positive thing but not with the ADL and "No Kill". They hate experience. Why? Because those with experience know that Nathan Winograd's program is a crock, a disaster for an open door shelter. Oh yes, I know of the Whino's bragging rights of Charlottesville and Nevada Humane. Now he's added a new one in Austin and already I can look at the numbers and see how Austin and the Whino are once again manipulating the numbers. One would think since the Whino has been out there that if his program worked, more shelters would be on board. He started his program in 2001 and in ten years, he only has those two to brag on. Austin doesn't count because it is too new to the scam. Philly fell, it was once his pride and joy. Charlottesville and Nevada Humane are both non profits, we can't get to their records to see the truth. If the program worked, every shelter in the country would be adopting it.
The one thing that any business owner is most concerned about with their employees is morale. If morale is low, your profits are low. If morale is high, you buy a Rolls Royce. So what about the morale of the LAAS employees? They have a woman, Barnette, now in charge who is known for screwing over employees. They have the ADL-LA with their antics. They had Ed Boks, need I say more. So how can these employees function under these conditions? I couldn't. I have seen these so called "rescues" come into the shelters with their holier than thou attitudes, talking down to employees. The public has been poisoned by these types of "rescues" and the ADL and often times the public assumes the same attitudes. Put yourself in the shoes of the LAAS employees and think of how you could handle it. They have to play nice to people who hate them. Even their own bosses, the City Council, puts them down. That's not how you run a business and expect to make anything from it. It's a sure fire way to bankruptcy court.
Now the ADL-LA is calling for the most experienced people to be fired. This reminds me of a woman who's husband has cheated on her and she goes after the other woman rather than her husband. Placing blame on employees is wrong, place the blame where it belongs, with the people who control the budgets and decisions. Destroying the morale of the employees of LAAS accomplishes nothing, it hurts everyone, the animals, the public, and the City.
I have asked the same question to shelter directors all over the county. That question is "What about your job do you hate the most?" I expected them to say the euthanization of animals but no, it was making the assignment to employees to do the euthanization. They know the toll it takes on an employee to take the life of a healthy animal, it's not something that you deal with very well. These employees have to do the dirty work the public has created for them. I have asked countless animal control employees why they chose to work in a shelter. The answer was always the same, they wanted to help animals. Only when they got into the business did they realize that their version of helping was not what they thought it would be. Those who stay were realistic about the type of help they could offer. Taking animals off the streets so these animals would not have to suffer from starvation, injuries, neighborhood punks, and slow deaths became their way of helping. They don't want to see animals suffer and neither do they want to see the animals die. They have the courage and strength to do what needs to be done, the courage and strength that I don't have. I thank the Lord for these people everyday. They have something within them that I don't have.
I have grown to hate the public for they are putting these people through. Nathan Winograd swears that it is a choice that the shelters make to "kill", I say he is full of shit. That choice is made everytime a oops litter is born. That choice is made when those such as the Whino and the ADL-LA tell the public they aren't at fault for the problem. Their philosophy gives breeders credibility so they can breed some more. Their philosophy is the one killing animals, not the animal control employees. What do they contribute to solve the problem? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! Do you see them protesting at the truly bad shelters - NO. Do you see the Whino doing anything to help the truly bad shelters - NO. They sit on their vegan asses and do nothing more than run their poisoned mouths.
I salute the employees of LAAS, they've had to endure much more than anyone should have to and they are hanging in there because of their wanting to help animals. They are the true heros here.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Coming soon, what the City needs to rid itself of this cursed Breeder Barnette. Boy has she screwed up now. WHEN ARE YOU LEAVING BB? BETTER TUCK YOUR TAIL BEFORE YOU BECOME TOO WELL KNOWN TO GET ANOTHER JOB WITH ANIMALS. Course you'll always be able to work for the AKC, which is where you belong.
If you submit your resignation on Monday, Barnette, I won't post the latest. Otherwise wait for the fallout.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
These horrid people have laid it out by saying we should not rescue dogs in those "killing" shelters.
"In evaluating this practice, it occurred to me that in doing so, we are part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Every time we rescue animals from a shelter, we are supporting their methods and reducing their KILL numbers. We are letting them know that even if we do not like what they are doing, we are willing to accept it."
So their solution is to not take animals from a "kill" shelter. I ask does that make sense? How can a shelter ever hope to reduce euthanasia if these types are not taking animals out? Thus comes the transportation scheme. The "rescues" still will have dogs to adopt out if they transport in more dogs. The homes they take for these transported dogs means a dog in their local shelter will die.
Nathan Winograd makes a comment but I don't believe him for one moment. It is because of him that this scheme has come to be. It is a scheme to force his program down the throats of the shelters. By taking away homes from local animals, leaving them to die, the euthanasia goes up and his cultist followers can yell and scream about the euthanasia rate, all the while pimping the Whino's failed program. Of course, he can't publically say he is in favor of this, but we all know where his heart is and it ain't for the animals. He didn't speak out against Barnette in Seattle when she was bringing in boatloads of dogs and pimping his program the whole while. He still isn't saying anything to her about the continuation of this transport to Seattle. Just the fact that he isn't speaking out against it shows that he is guilty.
Would this mean that these "rescues" would stop getting animals out of LA City Shelters? After all, the euthanasia rate is going up with Barnette at the helm so obviously she isn't working to be "No Kill". I have always said that if the rescues could bring about "No Kill", why haven't they done it already? I think they deliberately withhold their "services" again to pimp Winograd's program.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Spadaro was sentenced to probation, counseling, and payment. She has been ordered to turn in all but three of the animals she has tormented for so long. This won't stop her, I will bet that. She has a problem, a severe problem, and we all know that hoarders almost always turn back to their old ways.
A short but sweet article that I have been looking forward to for 6 years.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Talk about hard hearted and you talk about Brenda Barnette. Her flunky, Mark Salazar, just goes along for the ride, his mind is elsewhere according to his background. Where's Pammie with the ADL-LA, why isn't she screaming her head off like she DID with Boks? We can always expect Terri MassiveLardo to come out with a "press release" or an "ADL-LA Alert" that will explain away any involvement by their Saviour Barnette.
I've brought you the story of A1182494. Made for good ink for Barnette but showed no heart, no soul. She left that poor cat to waste away in the shelter, no efforts to make it adoptable. It was on death row. Did it, or will it, make it out alive?
SO NOW…It seems there are these dogs that a group has taken an interest in. The dogs belong to a homeless man and are not being properly taken care of. Awhile back a reader sent in this story about Princess and Dude, two dogs being tethered on very short leads and forced to endure storms because their owner is too lazy to take his shit out of their dog house. These two dogs have been brought to the attention of Brenda Barnette more than once. There are video clips showing the dogs in the storms, trying to get some cover. There are video clips showing the dogs without food or water. Imagine a homeless person trying to lug around bags of dog food or igloos. It's pretty obvious that the homeless don't need a dog when they can't even take care of themselves. And there are video clips of them in the scorching heat on hot pavement, hiding from the sun under a greasy 18-wheeler.
The STAND Foundation, http://www.standfoundation.org/ , has been video taping this situation and making their findings known to Brenda Barnette. Daniel Guss has offered to take these two dogs as soon as they can become available. This weekend, when we had a record cold storm in Los Angeles, these dogs were tied to a truck (no telling what would happen to them when it was moved). www.youtube.com/standfoundation . Six months ago, Barnette seized the dogs, but released them to Lori Weise from Downtown Dog Rescue. Oddly, Lori Weise, a formerly good rescuer, gave the dogs back to the homeless man, and into these horrendous conditions. Guess she worships Nathan Winograd too.
Guess who the two dogs are, yep, Princess and Dude again. No food. No water. Standing soaking wet and freezing because their tethers are too short to get to shelter. And apparently Downtown Dog Rescue was supposed to be taking care of them . Here’s what Ms. GM BB wrote in an e-mail last time, “Lori and friends have raised money to get some kind of a vehicle for Wolf and his dogs." But we all know that many times this raising of money doesn't quite get to the people it was intented for, don't we?
Late in December, Mark Salazar (aka the new Dave Diliberto), worked up a 30 day plan to remove the dogs if the conditions didn't improve substantially. As the 30 days past, he hemmed and hawed, and wanted two more weeks to improve the conditions. And then another two weeks. All with BrenDUH the BreeDER's blessing.
It's not three months later, and the dogs are still being treated like the trash strewn around them.
This morning an LAPD officer was to pick up the dogs and Wolf, move the dogs to temporary boarding and drive Wolf around looking for a new spot. The officer will make sure he is settled safely in a new neighborhood that this officer patrols, they will move the dogs back and hopefully this will resolve the situation.” Will this be a new policy adopted by LAPD to make them more "homeless friendly"?
But here they are. In their “new spot.” With all the old problems. Nothing is getting done to help these two dogs. How many laws have to be broken before Barnette takes action? How long before action is taken against Barnette for not doing her job?
Barnette is demonstrating the attitude of "No Kill", which is, any home, even NO home, is better than humane euthanasia in the shelter if they are unadoptable. IS IT? This cat, Princess, and Dude aren't the first ones to find out the hard way about the cold heart of Barnette.
While in Seattle, there was a rescue of Eskimo dogs. Great for collecting donations, taking in these poor puppy mill dogs, but then what happened. According to the employees, the dogs were left in their kennels to waste away. http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2009/10/seattle-humane-employees-painting-true.html "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."
So Princess and Dude remain in their situation, no shelter, no food, no water, no one who cares except for Daniel Guss. Will any of the rest of you care enough to demand that Barnette do her job and get off her $180,000 a year ass or else get her $180,000 ass out of this job and let somebody do it who cares about animals?
And what's up with that Pammie Ferdin? She is sure quiet when her gal pal BrenDUH the BreeDER is fumbling almost every day. What happened to Pammie? She used to claim to be about the animals, but I can't ever recall seeing her in the shelter, saving a life. She has lost the will to help animals, preferring instead to put support behind the likes of Nathan Winograd and Rick Berman. But then, losing your husband will do that to you, although in this case it might be for the better. Another story, another day.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
So, back to the latest ADL-LA BB Boast Blast. While they talk about how amazing it is that one volunteer is trimming bushes at the East Valley shelter, they don’t mention that shelter employees have come in on their own time to do this for years.
And the ADL-LA (or is that a Commissioner writing?) just had to remind us that employees are basically really bad. Here’s what they say, “pet guardian's are actually taking their time to e-mail the employee/volunteer who helped them! We haven't heard of this before. In the past it's been complaints about how badly the employees treated potential adopters and what a "turn off" it was dealing with trying to adopt an animal from LAAS.” Well that’s your first mistake. Maybe if you got your head out of your other body cavity you’d have heard a lot of things. Employees get animals adopted and help people because they decided to take hard jobs to help animals and they have always received praise from the public. Maybe you’ve just been too busy condemning them to try to make yourself look important, Pamster!
Speaking of volunteers, a very interesting e-mail was apparently written by an LAAS volunteer, saying that BB really appreciates them and is going to have them run the shelters because of her “if it doesn’t hurt an animal, it’s OK” policy. In other words, forget City policy and rules that protect the public and employees. If a volunteer thinks it’s a good idea, they can do it.
Here’s something scary! According to this volunteer, keys are being made for volunteers to come in to shelters day or night and have access to the animals and computers, and they will soon be telling shelter employees and managers what to do, because (the e-mail says) a call to Miss BB or her flunky Mark Salazar from a volunteer will “get you what you want regardless of what the shelter manager says.” Can this be true? (If not, Miss BB, you are invited to let us know exactly what is going on in the comment section below.)
Along with that, according to this enthusiastic volunteer, Miss BB is making arrangements so volunteers will have access to records in the LAAS chameleon system on ALL pet owners in the city, especially dogs. That includes the public AND public officials.
Yes, Mr. and Mrs. Council person, Commissioner, or Hollywood celebrity, or City employee, pretty soon all LAAS shelter volunteers may be able to get your address and phone number from your dog license or if you’ve ever called for help or someone has complained about your pet. Volunteers don’t go through the screening like a civil service employee. How safe does that make you feel after the threats and “protests” by the ADL-LA have made the Mayor and past City Attorney and dozens of city employees run and hide and caused one GM’s wife to have a heart attack?
To verify that they are not getting information they ”need”, the volunteer e-mail talks about a City Council person adopting a shelter dog and when the dog was recently found tied up over 50 miles away, the owner did not come to get it when called. Naughty, naughty council person, if that is true! However, the e-mail says that pretty soon volunteers will be able to call or write or do protests at homes of any public person to make “an example of them” if they don’t’ keep their pet. That information is supposed to be confidential. That is why LAAS officers and employees can be fired for disclosing public records.
It seems BB has become the “Chief Volunteer Coordinator” now and is building her own system and rules. Volunteers come and go and LAAS doesn’t really know who they are (we saw that happen when she was in Seattle)! If they have access to the part of the computer that has private information and if Queen BB allows this, she and the City can be sued royally if any of a public figures private information is exposed or any harm is done to them or their family.
One more thing, Pammie, and whoever is now writing the ADL-LA BB Boast Posts, the bonds for the LA shelters were $154 million dollars, not $52 million. The taxpayers, not the ADL-LA and not Breeder Barnette, own the shelters and decided they will be run according to City rules. If BB doesn’t know that, maybe a nice lawsuit and the courts can teach her, and YOU, that lesson ROYALLY!
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Tehachapi kicked that broad to the curb where she belongs. No CUP for this liar. The meeting brought out more of the Tia lies, does she even know what the truth is?
Guess all those T-shirts didn't do the trick, did they Tia? Look at the people you put in them, who in their right mind would want to live beside scum of the earth? All you managed to do right was pissed off the officials. The least you could have done is comb that nasty hair of yours, probably for the first time, and put on decent clothes. You looked like you just finished a bad drug trip. Then again you always look like that, maybe because you are a bad drug trip.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
MAYBE YOU FORGOT HIM??? YOU SENT THE SmART TEAM IN AND DID A BIG PRESS RELEASE ON JAN 19. HE'S STILL THERE WITH THE E-COLLAR ON HIS NECK!
A1182494 is the cat Brenda Barnette used in her press release of January 19, 2001, describing how LAAS "rescued" a cat from under some Beverly Hills pool furniture and then impounded the "rescued" cat on January 16, 2011. Brenda Barnette's press release said the cat would be available for adoption on January 20, 2011. The press release called the cat "sweet" and said nothing else about the cat to make someone want to save the cat.
Today, March 11, 2011, this cat is still impounded at LAAS, seven weeks later!!!!
Scroll down for the New Hope Alert list for cats, as of this morning, March 11, 2011. Search for the cat's impound number (A1182492) and you will see him listed, with the same awful photo Brenda Barnette never cared enough to improve. The cat Brenda Barnette "rescued" has now been on the New Hope Alert list for over two weeks, meaning he is at highest risk of euthanasia. Still, Brenda Barnette does nothing special to help this special cat she used for her own purposes. Seven weeks later.
Brenda Barnette was told that the cat's photo is awful (wearing a cone, looking terrified) and will hurt his chances of being adopted. She did nothing. The same awful photo is still on the website, seven weeks later.
Miss BB, why didn't you do any PR to help promote and save the cat you used in your press release for your own purposes to make herself look good, seven weeks? I heard from a volunteer that someone donated the adoption fees so the cat can be adopted for free. Don't you care, Brenda, or are you just not creative enough to save one cat?
Brenda Barnette can't even get this one cat saved. No wonder cat adoptions are down so much and cat (and dog) euthanasia is up. It's not even kitten season yet!!
Nice "rescue," Brenda. Nice skill getting the public to come adopt animals.
Will Brenda Barnette do one of those "transports" on this cat so he can be disposed of out of the public's eye? Or maybe one of her breeder friends can give her a training film on how to do adoptions. OR maybe you are too damn busy screwing up the LAAS website to care about this cat or any others.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
The City of Tehachapi is a battle ground right now, pitting the cults of Best Fiends and Tia Torres against the Old West Ranch neighborhood. The Old West Ranch neighborhood suffered a devastating fire last summer, many homes were lost, they are still trying to recover from that. Now they are fighting something even worse than that fire, pit bulls and parolees, roaring through their homes.
Merle Carnes, an ailing 71 year old woman who just lost her husband, is being threatened by the Torres' thugs, pit nutters without a conscience. This "hateful" woman, according to Torres, stayed during the fires to help neighbors evacuate, putting herself in danger. When Carnes finally did evacuate herself, her car would not start and another neighbor had to save her. She deserves to be treated as a hero, not the devil reincarnate. Carnes worked tirelessly with the Red Cross to help her neighbors. Carnes issued a letter to the other homeowners about her concerns with the move of Villalobos. A smart ass real estate agent, Veronica (RoniR) Raczkowski, forwarded the letter to Tia who immediately posted the letter along with Carnes phone number. Raczkowski is also the "California Team Leader for Best F(r)iends Network. Then began the death threats to this wonderful woman.
Raczkowski is also on the deed for the property along with Torres' 19 year old daughter. So Tia is willing to throw her own daughter under the train. She knows the liability involved with what she is doing and she is sticking her daughter's neck out putting this property under her name. What a lovely mom! Why didn't Tia put it in her name, could she? Tia has tried in the past to open a brothel, selling other women to support her addiction to pit bulls, but she deliberately exposes her daughters to these parolees. Other mothers do all they can to keep their daughters away from such, not Tia.
Instead of rehashing it all, please go to this blog which has more than you would ever want to know about this situation, well researched and accurate. This situation has more twists and turns than anything you'll see on television. The comments on this blog are well over 800 by now and climbing. All I want to say is that in my opinion, Tia Torres is a bitch, a liar, and the scum of the earth.
This Thursday is the meeting about granting the CUP to Torres. Let's pray that it is not granted.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
For example, in a news release on March 3rd, Barnette announced that it is exciting news that LA is backing the CA spay/neuter license program. Duh, as if that hasn't happened already?? Hey, somebody tell her that the press conference with the Mayor announcing the program was held at the WLA shelter last June. Since the whole thing has been a grand failure, is doing it over something to get excited about? Maybe BB is excited about the weird sort of psydelic/sort of religious drawing that nobody would want on their car unless they were high. I swear that the picture by Pierce Brosnan looks like a throwback to a bad acid trip from the 60's. Somebody tell me what in the world it has to do with spay/neuter?
And can you trust anything that is sponsored by the CVMA? Not me. They are going to decide how and which of their vets gets the money donated by taxpayers. And how is that going to be decided? It's like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. From what few details are available--(which is another reason it is failing, where’s the plan?)--this program can't be used to start new spay/neuter programs, which is what is desperately needed, it can only be used for those in existence already and most of them already have funding or they wouldn’t be in existence, would they?. . What about the apportionment? It is most likely that Los Angeles and San Francisco would have the most donors, but would they receive the lion’s share? Each of these cities already has a program and funding. Why wouldn't there be a plan to help small animal control agencies that don't have a vet (or even an RVT) establish s/n funding?
In fact, another reason this is failing is because it intends to redirect the donors that support local s/n organizations and have them send their money to another bureaucracy (the CVMA) that has no definite plan but can’t wait to get its hands on the money.. Instead of donating to the groups doing the work, this attempts to get people to donate at the state level. This means, people will say, “forget these local people. Throw away their fundraising letters. Who needs to attend their events? I donated and have a license plate saying "s/n" on my car--I don't have to do any more!" It’s the old “I gave at the office” approach.
So things are so bad the Found Animals Foundation is having to offer to pay shelters that can get people to buy a s/n plate and there is the carrot that one out of every 100 people will have a chance to have $300 donated to a shelter of their choice? What kind of s/n program are they expected to set up with $300?
Now there is even a proposed Senate Bill 610 to try to keep Mancuso’s claim-to-fame idea alive by lowering the number of license plates that have to be sold in order to get it in production. The DMV feels so sorry about this pathetic failure for the animals that it may lower the minimum requirement by 2/3—that’s 66%. Minimum for all other charitable plates is 7,500 orders (all over the state). They want to lower it to 2,500 out of pity for a poorly planned program. Guess others just can't see putting that psychedelic dog on their pretty cars either.
BTW, BB, do you have a CA s/n plate on your car, or how about the Mayor or Buddy Bickhart? Anybody in City Hall? Since the Animal Services Commission is voting on SB 610 on Tuesday, I’d suggest they all make a commitment to buy one of these ugly things before they try to cram it down the gas tanks of other CA residents. If they aren’t willing to do that, then their vote and Ms. BB’s big “exciting” press release is just another load of PR BS like the other stuff she’s been spreading around L.A.
Again, Miss BB has missed the boat. This is been done, over and done with, and was a flop. Next thing we know, Miss BB will be trying to re-name pit bulls LA Labs. Oops, been there, done that already with San Francisco’s St. Francis Terriers (was BB at SFSPCA then?) and Ed Boks and his New Yorkies. Can't you come up with something original, BB, something that can make a difference?
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Transporting keeps these lazy rescues in business and also causes the local shelter animals to die. All in the grand scheme of Winograd because when euthanasia goes up in the local shelter, then he can rear his ugly head. These transports have nothing to do with saving lives, they take lives.
HB 5368: Testimony of the Connecticut Veterinary Medical Association, February 2011
Mister/Madam Chairman, Members of the CGA Environment Committee,
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony regarding HB 5368. I represent the Connecticut Veterinary Medical Association, which includes over 95% of Connecticut-licensed veterinarians among its members.
We believe HB 5368 is a necessary and measured approach to addressing the growing problem of unregulated transport of animals into Connecticut. These animals are imported in a manner which ensures they remain hidden from oversight by Connecticut animal health authorities and further, they often have undeclared health problems which lead to disease exposure for Connecticut animals and unexpected veterinary medical costs for unsuspecting animal owners.
For several years, and especially since the 2005 Hurricane Katrina disaster, an informal, unregulated industry has developed which functions to move animals into the State of Connecticut from other states. This industry is known as "pet rescue." Primarily through web sites, Connecticut citizens interested in adopting an out-of-state pet may arrange for its delivery into Connecticut without oversight by Connecticut animal health authorities and without advance examination by a Connecticut licensed veterinarian. Often, intermediaries based in Connecticut or elsewhere, facilitate animal importation without having physical custody of the animals, and in most cases without them ever having custody. The transport process is accomplished by commercial delivery companies and private drivers that shuttle dogs a few hundred miles each, transferring animals to the next driver at pre-determined rendezvous points. There are also general aviation pilots and at least three general aviation organizations that have "pet rescue" as their primary function.
Dogs enter the transport network from out-of-state municipal pounds, private out-of-state brick-and-mortar shelters, private out-of-state individual "rescue" organizations or through individuals associated with such groups, individuals or groups involved with a particular breed "foster" care and from sales directly from commercial breeding operations. Indeed, some animals are bred specifically for transport and characterization of these animals as needing rescue is misleading.
A close look at pet transport reveals a plethora of unintended and negative consequences including inhumane animal welfare practices, circumvention of disease control regulations and questionable financial transactions that harm Connecticut animal owners and animals. These include:
1. Animals arrive with undisclosed diseases & deformities and new owners are subject to unexpected and unrecoverable costs of veterinary care, as well as exposing animals they already own to disease. Novel diseases may travel with these animals and these pose an emergent risk to animal and/or public health, risks local veterinarians and physicians may not immediately recognize. Animal owners often have no recourse and may also feel guilty about complaining about an animal's undisclosed medical conditions. Some of these animals are then surrendered to animal shelters here.
2. Connecticut-source animals located in Connecticut brick & mortar shelters and municipal pounds are passed over for adoption when large numbers of out-of-state animals are imported. Connecticut citizens thus indirectly subsidize mitigation of animal control issues in exporting states while our animal control costs are higher, because Connecticut source animals remain in shelter longer and are harder to find homes for. Some of these must wait long periods for adoption and/or are euthanized.
Thus continued unregulated animal importation exposes Connecticut animals to disease, is unfair to citizens surprised by undisclosed medical issues and the costs to treat these, is inhumane To Connecticut source animals by decreasing their chance of adoption and shifts the cost of animal control activities from other states to our state. HB 5368 will allow animal health officials to control animal importation, prevent disease transmission, help ensure humane transport standards, protect Connecticut animal owners and animals, reduce Connecticut animal control costs and minimize the surrender of newly imported animals. Thank you.
Arnold L. Goldman DVM, MS
Eva Ceranowicz DVM
Robert Belden DVM
Gayle Block DVM
Connecticut Veterinary Medical Association
I hope this starts a movement over this country to stop this scam called "Pet Transport".
• Residents are even being asked to feed, house and care for "stray, often dangerous" animals that they reported to the city.
• There are still animals on the street that residents have reported and yet aren't picked up quickly, or at all.
• Reports of roaming packs of dogs are on the increase, both from Humane Society investigators and city aldermen, including several serious dog attack and bite cases from the same parts of the city.
• The city is no longer accepting unwanted animals, leading to more left on streets.
• There is no central system to track pets picked up by animal control agencies. Residents can't easily find or reclaim them.
Stay tuned for more on this story.
There were 349 dogs found alive in dark, filthy barns belonging to a man who advertised a no-kill, nonprofit shelter. The bodies of 76 other dogs were found among the rescued on Feb.17.
"This is a no-kill shelter gone horribly wrong," said Kyle Held, commander of a special unit of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals that responds nationwide for large-scale animal rescues.
"We literally had to tear cages apart to remove animals," he said. "That just goes to show us as rescuers, these animals have had no socialization in months, maybe years."
One dog had to be euthanized, Held said. Many others have severe medical problems. Nearly 10 pounds of matted hair was removed from one dog. Several had nails so overgrown that they were embedded in the paws. Two of the rescued animals have given birth to puppies, adding 13 dogs, and several others are pregnant.
Yep, Nathan J. Winograd, you can thank yourself for this bullshit. This is just one of many. At least in the shelter they can die quickly and humanely whereas in your shelters they suffer needlessly and then die, if they are lucky. Just think, Brenda Barnette wants to make LA a "no kill", will it be like this one?