Sunday, April 29, 2012


I have blogged about Porter County, Indiana previously.

Now it appears they have finally awoken to the truth about "No Kill".
VALPARAISO | A study released Friday, commissioned by Porter County officials to assess the county's animal shelter and operation, identified several areas of concern, including the need for a new shelter and reassessment of the shelter's no-kill policy.

The Porter County Board of Commissioners agreed in December to pay Shelter Planners of America $6,500 to conduct a needs assessment, feasibility and building program study. The study was conducted in the wake of missing funds, three different directors within a year, and numerous facility and animal health problems.

And the animals suffered. The legacy of "No Kill", suffering and more suffering. When will people learn that this morbid movement is not about the animals, they could care less. It is about serving a vile, little man's ego. 


Besides being immoral and unethical for sending dogs into areas still euthanizing for time and space and taking homes from the local shelter dogs so they have to die, these transports are rolling animal abusers.

This was sent to me. I do want to say that this participant used some common sense. I do hope she learned a valuable lesson at least.

And who wants to bet that Bett Sundermeyer in Houston probably is in agreement with these transports. Transports are a God send to "No Kill" because the motto is "outta sight, outta mind". Transports make it possible to be both for the "No Kill"ers.

 I am writing this on behalf of the transport volunteers who gave of their time this past Saturday and Sunday, April 21-22, to get a dog named Soldier from Houston, TX to Augusta, GA. I drove the last leg, from Buckhead to Augusta, GA. It is critical that all transport volunteers, coordinators, and rescues hear my story. I am angry, bewildered, and saddened by this entire situation, as are the two transport volunteers who have worked with me in the aftermath to find out how this happened and determine a way to mitigate the damage. Although it was traumatic for me, I will try to give the facts in an unadorned fashion

The dog was being transported from a foster, where he had been for approx. 2 weeks after being pulled from BARC in Houston. His time had run out. Soldier arrived at BARC injured and with an embedded collar. He was given some vet care, but has obviously had a very hard life for such a young dog (my vet says he is approx. 1 year old). He was being transported on a moderated run by a reputable coordinator. The transport went well, he seemed to have a good overnight, and on Sunday afternoon, he made it to the last leg, which I drove. My job was to get him the last 80 miles and hand him off to the woman who was listed as the “temporary foster” on the run sheet. We had touched base by email and settled on a meeting place in Augusta, though she lived across the river in South Carolina.

When I met her, I immediately had a very, very bad feeling. She just seemed “wrong.” I have been transporting for about 5 years, and there were many red flags. For example, when I remarked that I was surprised he wasn’t neutered (the run sheet said the foster would have it done) she said she was surprised, too (if she was supposed to have it done, why was she surprised?). Soldier looks a bit like a pit mix, although it’s very hard to tell, and she said that when dogs with pitbull blood aren’t neutered by the age of 20 months, it’s “too late.” She said he looked much older than she expected. I said what did she mean, “too late,” and she said they’re “ruined, too aggressive, there’s nothing you can do.” Then I found out her full name, which is SHIRLEY BARNES. The name rang a bell, and not in a good way, but I couldn’t place it. I don’t know how to explain my feelings of dread. I very much wanted to find a way to hold onto him, because I felt she wasn’t right. However, to remove a dog from transport constitutes theft. I tried to tell myself I was just being paranoid. She put Soldier in a too-small crate in her van, and as she drove away, I had my daughter take down her license plate number: That’s how worried I was. On the way home (just a 10 min. drive from the handoff) I called the coordinator, but could not reach her. I left a message (which has never been returned) asking about the foster’s background.

At home, I ran into the house and Googled her name. It only took about 20 seconds to discover that she had been found guilty on nine animal welfare violations and that 24 dogs were impounded from her Aiken County home. Please see and

I felt hysterical inside and was kicking myself for not following my own “gut,” rather than procedure. I tried to contact the rescue in Texas that was listed on the run sheet, but got only the man who had fostered Soldier for the last two weeks. He was utterly bewildered and knew nothing about the foster arrangements, or even what state the foster lived in. I called the foster’s county sheriff's department, but they told me to call AC on Monday, the next day. Finally, I tried calling her, and didn't expect to reach her (the cell number she gave was a wrong number and she had told me a whole story about how hard it was to reach her by phone or email in her rural area) but by some miracle, she answered the other number. I told her that I'd absolutely fallen in love with Soldier and had called the rescue, who said I could adopt the dog right off the transport (no way would a reputable rescue allow that without an application). I really laid it on thick. Turned out, she hadn't left Augusta yet and agreed to meet me and let me "adopt" Soldier. When I went back to our handoff spot, I got him in my car and sat there for a while talking to her, trying to draw her out. She opened up and told me that she had gone down to Miami at Thanksgiving and brought up 26 dogs from the AC there. She said that she goes up to Greenville periodically to get 10, and "always ends up bringing back 20 or 25." She seems to believe she is really helping these dogs.A rescue friend of mine was able to overnight Soldier, because I have four rescued dogs of my own, one of whom is fear-aggressive, and the next day I took Soldier to my vet to be boarded and neutered, which is scheduled for tomorrow. I went to take him for a walk today, and he has a great spirit.

Here is what we have found out since Sunday:

1) The rescue under whose license the dog was pulled in Houston had no idea the license was used and has no knowledge of this dog. The founder lets one woman who does "street rescue" use her license, but insists on being kept in the loop. She knows nothing about the pull from BARC or the fact that it is her rescue's name Soldier was pulled under. She is supposed to be checking with that person to see if she did it on her own, but I haven’t heard. Bottom line: That rescue seems to have no interest in Soldier (though they may be legally bound to).

2) The foster in Texas who physically pulled the dog and kept him for two weeks IS affiliated with a legitimate rescue, but was only doing a favor and that rescue is not backing this dog, either. We have not heard from this gentleman since Sunday when all hell broke loose and he didn't like the tone of some of the back-and-forth on email. He says he has nothing to do with this, although he might be willing to take Soldier back, though he's "over quota."

3) The young woman who arranged everything through Facebook lives in Albany, NY, has never done this before, and is not affiliated with any rescue, nor did she apparently have plans for getting him adopted or moved up north to her. She is very apologetic about the whole situation and has offered to pay for his boarding and neuter. She apparently "met" the foster/hoarder, Shirley Barnes, on a FB page for animals from BARC and decided that, with Shirley's help, she could save this dog from death. She claims to have three references for Shirley, and that they were so good she made no arrangements for a home visit or checked her out with local AC, but she has yet to furnish those references to me, despite repeated requests. I now doubt that they exist. I also don’t know how she connected with the rescue under whose license Soldier was pulled (possibly the street rescue person was on FB, as well).4) The transport coordinator, who does many, many of these every month, is "reputable," though I and others have come to question how thoroughly she checks out the receiving rescue, etc. In this case, she apparently checked out the rescue of the foster in Texas, and everything came back good. However, that rescue, as you will recall, has no stake in Soldier and so its reputation is immaterial. Some of the drivers involved in this transport have driven for her dozens of times. Yet, she has been silent since Sunday, when she said she checked out the rescue.....and then said nothing more. Not a single call to find out how the dog is doing or what our plans are for him, now that he’s become largely our responsibility.

5) I have spoken to law enforcement and AC in Aiken and Edgefield counties about Shirley Barnes. I initially thought—silly me!—that they would act on this information (primarily what she said about bringing in dozens of dogs) by getting a warrant and going on her property to see if there was a hoarding situation. She is under court order in Aiken County not to own or keep dogs at her house. However, I discovered that because she has moved from Aiken County, where she was convicted, to Edgefield County, a rural county which has no animal welfare laws, we can't go after her hoarding directly.  This is why we are trying to find out everything we can about her methods  (hence, all my phone calls to Texas, etc.) so we can try to cut off her access to animals. One of my fellow transporters has called the Greenville AC (where Shirley said she gets dogs) and has alerted them. This FB “Note” is the first step in getting the word out about Shirley Barnes, but also about what can go wrong when people don’t “do rescue right.”

Transport coordinators need to DEMAND answers to their questions and confirm that the people involved are in good standing with their local animal controls. A simply Google search is a start. Transport drivers need to be sure the coordinators and rescues involved have done their due diligence….imagine ending up with a dog you hadn’t planned on caring for because people dropped the ball! Or imagine being in the situation of handing over a dog to someone who makes you fear for the dog’s safety. One minute, you’re feeling good about helping, and the next minute, you’re faced with an ethical dilemma and possible heartbreak. People who want to help, but have no experience, should start with their local shelter or licensed rescue. People in the North (where I’m from) need not assume that only the animals of the Deep South require your assistance. Act locally! Animal rescue has a steep learning curve and you should start small. Finally, all rescues MUST check out their fosters THOROUGHLY! Shirley Barnes may come off as a sweet grandma to someone who doesn’t know what questions to ask. ASK QUESTIONS and CONFIRM THE INFORMATION. The sad truth is that animal rescue attracts some unbalanced people. While we may feel sympathy for them, THE ANIMALS COME FIRST. Please share this. Thanks.


Yes I know, I know. I haven't posted too much lately on Breeder Barnette. She's been involved in a lot lately. The investigations are finished and none have been in Barnette's favor.

I am waiting for some things to happen so I can combine all her recent failures along with the future failure to make one helluva post about this retched woman who suffers with penis envy.

Just hold on, it's coming. 

Friday, April 27, 2012


My mouth is still hanging open after reading what Natan Whino has to say about spay/neuter and the role it plays in reducing the pet overpopulation problem, which he says doesn't exist.

I've said all along that the Whino is a front for the breeders, he protected one in Tompkins County and I bet it is no coincidence that he left Tompkins shortly after being outted about this puppy mill that he refused to bust. He left animals to suffer.

So I think this says it all. 

"While spay neuter is important, our goal has never been no more births, even though birth rates might help. Our goal has been and is, and has always been no more killing. And when you focus on the no more killing part, spay/neuter actually takes a backseat to all those other programs like foster care, and adoptions, and helping people overcome the challenges they face that cause them to surrender their animals."

WTF!?! This man is a complete idiot! Can you not see that he is promoting more births with this stance on putting spay/neuter in the backseat? What of "You can't kill them if they ain't there" does this fool not understand?

Nathan Winograd, you have a warped, sick mind. But today brings hope for your downfall and it won't come soon enough. Later on that. I can assure you that "No Kill" has been sent a shock wave recently by a Maryland court. It's now a matter of time and Natan and his cult will be hitting the road, and I know it will be the road to hell where he has sent so many animals in his "No Kill" rescues and sanctuaries. 

Thursday, April 26, 2012


I find this especially interesting. Seems Travis County is turning in their pets at a remarkable rate. And the solution is not closing the drop box or counseling with an owner that wants to surrender their pet. To let an owner walk back out the front door with a pet they want to surrender only means that pet will be abandoned or neglected. I don't call that humane but hey, with "No Kill", outta sight, outta mind, and it doesn't care what happens as long as it doesn't have to deal with it.

I compared Travis County with the State of California. California has the Annual Report of Local Rabies Control Activities. According to their 08 report, 09 is incomplete still, there were a total of 133,682 cats and dogs surrendered by the owner. California has a population in 11 of 37,351,947 people. This means that one in 260 people surrendered their pet to a California shelter.

In Travis County, with a population in 11 of 1,049,873, there were 6419 pets surrendered by their owner. This is a rate of one in 156 people surrendering their pet. 

Does anyone see the problem here?


I am extending an invitation to my readers to go to this blog

It seems that many people are becoming disillusioned with Nathan Winograd and this is one of them. So welcome him with open arms. We can't win the war if our soldiers are hiding and more are coming out all the time.

Here's another one.  Sharon Adams of the Virginia Beach SPCA writes a good piece, an accurate piece, and now she will be in the sights of Nathan Winograd. Let's wish her good luck.

"No Kill", Bribes, And God Only Knows What Else

This should knock your socks off. It remained a mystery as to why the City of Los Angeles had hired Boks until this week. Now it has been released that Boks was hired with a $10,000,000 bribe. That's a good enough reason. And this is probably why the Mayor never stepped in to fired his ass.

Face it, folks, all of this comes down to money.
On May 26th, Breeder Brenda Barnette released a "Public Information" bragging about the beds donated to the shelters. Last weekend was a major adoption event sponsored by Best F(r)iends over two days. According to a statement here, IT WAS A REAL BUST!!

"Sure enough, close to 1,300 animals showed up from 18 shelters and approximately 50 rescue groups, each ready to find his or her own happy ever after.
"In the two-day event, there were 284 same-day adoptions and 102 animals pulled from shelters to be placed safely into rescue groups (including Best Friends).". (Note:  the 102 will just be local "relocations.")
And all the while, Best Fiends is collecting names and addresses so they can solicit donations, keep in mind Best Fiends is not really a local charity. They use us to garner donations. But look at those numbers? Do they justify the City giving away a new shelter to these people? I say it is a poor showing and all the shelter will become is a sanctuary, useless as such.
So today's "Public Information" should have been about this adoption event, one would think. Now one thinks, Barnette is so ashamed of the poor showing of her buddies that she is trying to take the focus off and not even talk about it. How many failures does it take, Mayor, are you going to jerk around like you did with Boks? Cut your losses while you can.


The Hayden Bill, the worse legislation ever, is on the verge of being repealed and Winograd is having a fit about it. He has written on his blog about how the numbers show that the Hayden is working.

This is Winograd's version of the numbers. "In 1997, the year before the Hayden Act was passed, 576,000 dogs and cats were killed in California shelters. In 1999, one year after passage, that number plummeted to 328,000. In just one year, almost 250,000 more animals were saved in California."

According to the Annual Report of Local Rabies Control Activities for 1997 in California, 504,468 dogs entered the system, and 347,967 cats entered. BUT THERE WERE 6 COUNTIES THAT DID NOT REPORT. Otherwise the other counties had complete reports. Total cats and dogs were 852,435. That doesn't count other animals.

Now the figures for 1999 do look better on paper. Only 299,934 dogs coming into the system and 208,781 cats for a total of  508,715. Looks like progress, right? Hold on. THERE WERE 10 COUNTIES THAT DID NOT REPORT AND 6 COUNTIES WERE INCOMPLETE. 

WHAT WINOGRAD FAILS TO MENTION IS WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW. According to the Annual Report, in 2010, 467,096 dogs entered the system and 400,433 cats entered. THIS IS A TOTAL OF 867,529 ANIMALS, MORE THAN IN 1997. 

1997 507,468 303,313            113,594 87,266
1998 503,559 308,921 110,715 90,257
1999 299,934 174,060  66,909 57,606
2000 430,236 240,975 111,586 73,654
2001 443,847 248,648 104,518 79,640
2002 381,967 189,985  98,811 71,870
2003 351,964 161,859 107,432 72,155
2004 299,149 125,352  83,304 67,020
2005 330,479 130,261  98,701 76,824
2006 375,170 146,386 112,089 86,771
2007 372,530 138,342  69,405 97,324
2008 414,756 159,231  80,008 86,094
2009 475,642 165,666  81,657 77,643
2010 467,096 178,993  82,914 89,263

Average 403,842 190,856  94,403 79,528

1997 347,967 272,784 85,152  5,659
1998 359,093 278,940  85,724  6,873
1999 200,781 153,931  94,647  4,765
2000 276,543 201,937 123,025  5,400
2001 315,794 226,770 142,266  10,718
2002 283,210 192,446 134,728  5,731
2003 305,807 215,244 140,189  5,563
2004 273,838 189,908 129,491  5,348
2005 322,966 224,205 169,814  6,008
2006 346,342 236,736  55,936  8,170
2007 352,516 229,492  49,375 11,525
2008 397,062 270,756  53,674  8,242
2009 363,443 247,195  49,061  7,638
2010 400,433 276,052  46,554  7,772

Tuesday, April 10, 2012


We've posted about this crazy bat lady in Texas before.
AND her crazy attorney.

Well, the saga continues. This came in as a comment but deserves a post. Seems this blog has become part of a court case.

has left a new comment on your post "You've Heard of the Crazy Cat Lady - Now Meet the ...": 

May 11, 2011 Blogger user A. Lollar made a post on this thread, see above. In the current lawsuit against Amanda Lollar which is here Lollar turned over discovery items to Plaintiff Mary Cummins. Lollar was asked in discovery if she had a Blogger account. She said no. She was asked if she was user A. Lollar. She said no. At her April 6, 2012 deposition Cummins again asked if she had a blogger account, was that account A. Lollar. Lollar again replied with no. Lollar said she had a Blogger account a long time ago just to make one post on a friends article. She had no current account.

One of the discovery items which Lollar did turn over was a print out of this page. She admitted to making that one post. Cummins showed her the document in her deposition and she finally admitted to posting it. Then she said "it's not a blogger account. I did not post on a blog." That most certain is a blogger account. This is a blog. Amanda Lollar of Bat World Sanctuary continued to perjure herself throughout her deposition. 

Can anyone say 2-5 years for perjury?  Read more about Mary Cummins and the crazy bat lady at

Tuesday, April 3, 2012


About time for some others to get on her case. Here's a new website dedicated to pointing out Breeder Barnette's lack of management skills and lack of humanity skills. I said all along that Barnette was brought in to privatize LA City shelters and now it appears others are agreeing with me on that. 

Enjoy the read.

If there's one thing I can assure these politicians of, it's that Angelinos are not in the mood to see 327 more good city jobs lost due to the Barnette plan to completely privatize L.A. Animal Services.  Nor do they approve of any more of their tax-payer dollars being spent to build new animal shelters, only to watch Barnette turn these valuable public assests over to her private rescue group buddies.