Another "No Kill" decides to stop investigating abuse cases. Can't very well accuse others of abuse when you are doing the same.
http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/localnews/11-10-2010-humane-society-vote
"Former Washington Area Humane Society board members and employees say that while they worked at the shelter in Eighty Four, abuse investigations have always been done - until recently.
The present humane society board voted in October to suspend the investigations because of overcrowding at the shelter. The no-kill shelter also is not taking in any animals unless they were previously adopted from the shelter or are strays found with a microchip from the shelter.
The board is expected to vote tonight on whether to continue the suspension of investigations as well as on the moratorium on accepting animals.
Paul Volz, a veterinarian and current board member, said a recent Observer-Reporter article about the overcrowding and suspension led to more adoptions. The deteriorating economy led to more animals being taken to the shelter, he said. In October when the vote was taken, the shelter's capacity of 350 animals was 75 percent over what the board has approved."
You can't overcrowd your shelter and then stop taking in the very animals that need your help, but "No Kill" does. This is not the only one recently that has had to stop their cruelty investigations because of overcrowding. So now the very animals that they should help can't get help. Another legacy of Nathan Winograd and his cruel "No Kill Equation" program.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
CoverUp in Chicago? Is Oprah Behind It?
Back in September a reporter for a TV station in Chicago went undercover at Chicago Animal Care and Control. I didn't post anything at that time, thinking I would shortly. So today I started to research and guess what? Everything has been taken offline but I did manage to find this cached version. I wonder if Oprah had anything to do with it since she jumped in and had the director, Cherie Travis, on her show trying to deny everything. I don't care for Oprah anyway but I did write and give her a piece of my mind.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5JrLaEBIhY4J:www.wgntv.com/community/newsletter/wgntv-chicago-animal-control-conditions-aug30,0,1606541.story+%22cherie+travis%22%2Bwgn%2Bundercover&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us CHICAGO - One of the missions of Chicago's Animal Care and Control, the largest pound in the city, is to assure the humane treatment of animals. There is a strong push from many groups to make that shelter and others in Chicago no-kill. No one's saying that's not a noble idea but is it at the expense of the animals' basic needs?
WGNTV went undercover to find out.
First we received pictures from inside Chicago Animal Care and Control taken over the past few weeks. The complaints were from longtime employees and a rescue worker, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of losing their jobs. There was also a veterinary intern who became overwhelmed by what she saw. They were concerned about the way the animals were being treated.
Earlier this month WGNTV went undercover inside Animal Care and Control.
Dogs were doubled up in cages because of overcrowding. Cats were living in small carriers because there wasn't a cage for them. Shelter workers tell us some stayed on a loading dock for up to 72 hours in sweltering conditions.
Cats were sick with upper respiratory infections. Their eyes were crusted over and they were sneezing.
Animals had open wounds; a dog with a sore on its back, a cat with an eye infection, a dog with the deadly and highly contagious parvo disease. They were all in cages next to healthy cats and dogs.
"Peter," a longtime employee, says he has never seen conditions at the shelter so bad. He says they don't have the staff to care for all the animals.
The director, Cherie Travis, agrees there is a staffing problem.
Travis is an animal rights attorney and an adjunct professor of Animal Law at DePaul and Northwestern Universities. She is the co-founder of CASA, an organization that wants to eliminate the needless euthanasia of Chicago's animals also known as no-kill. On her facebook page, she says her goal is to make Animal Care and Control no kill in 3-5 years. ] Although Travis doesn't really want to talk about it.
WGNTV gave her an opportunity to respond to the story and she chose not to. She called the news director and asked that the story not run.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jg0kOOVizycJ:www.cltv.com/news/wgntv-animal-care-control-followup-sept2,0,7834928.story+%22cherie+travis%22%2Bwgn%2Bundercover&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
"Earlier this week, WGNTV went undercover at Chicago's Animal Care and Control with video showing questionable conditions.
Dogs living in their own feces and urine, cats dead in their own cages were just some of the overcrowded conditions at the city's largest animal shelter. When there aren't enough cages cats are kept in carriers. Insiders say sometimes they're there for up to 72 hours with barely room to move.
Cherie Travis, the commissioner of Animal Care and Control, refused to discuss the conditions at the time.
Thursday, Travis still refused to answer questions but issued this statement through the city's press office.
"While the WGN story presented a case of overcrowding at the facility... This is simply not the case. In fact, during the tour the reporter admittedly stated that examples of overcrowding or poor treatment were not found."
But documents show that there is overcrowding.
The statement also said Animal Care and Control takes the condition of the animals housed at its facility very seriously and that the organization is conducting an investigation regarding the animals in the photos presented during the piece.
Paula Fasseas is the founder of PAWS, the largest no kill facility in the city. PAWS takes 200-3000 animals a year from Animal Care and Control. Employees and volunteers are there daily. She says she supports Cherie Travis and her vision to reduce euthanasia through spay and neuter programs and getting rescue groups to come take animals out for adoption."
This Examiner also confirms that there was a story. Strange how everything has been taken offline regarding this expose by Marcella Raymond.
http://www.examiner.com/animal-advocacy-in-chicago/chicago-s-animal-care-and-control-risks-unacceptable-conditions-quest-to-go-no-kill
"One theory behind the overcrowding at the shelter is that the shelter's director, Cherie Travis, wants to eventually make the shelter "no-kill", specifically within 3-5 years. Although this is a compassionate idea, it may not be practical for the volume of animals that are housed within the shelter." Honey, that ain't no theory, that is "No Kill"!!!
This blog says that the story was pulled - WHY? http://www.dancingdogblog.com/2010/11/chicagos-animal-care-and-control-wgn-pulls-story/
"Marcella Raymond was supposed to have a news on Animal Care and Control that was to air last night, but it was pulled from the line-up. There may be an explanation, it may air at another time and I hope that is so. But the travesty here is there is only one reporter willing to speak up on the problems at Animal Care and Control.
If cats were dying with regularity at any other shelter, wouldn’t you think the TV stations would be all over the story? If animals were being kept in temporary carriers for days on end, with no room to move around, no room for water or food or elimination…that would be deemed aggravated cruelty anywhere else. Yet nothing is done and nothing is reported."
Oprah is a heavy hitter in Chicago. She wields a lot of money and a lot of influence. Could it be that she has used this influence to put these animals at risk? Judge for yourself.
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/dog-saving-network/2010/09/oprah-could-do-more-harm-than-good-for-chicago-animal-care-and-control.html
"Oprah has apparently caught wind of the story and will be doing a show in the near future with the Director of CACC, Cherie Travis, as a guest. This can't happen. There is a real chance that Travis could gain some credibility from the appearance and that could potentially make matters worse for the animals at CACC."
I do know that Oprah is misguided about animals and supports "No Kill". If she did indeed do this, then she has the blood of these animals on her hands.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5JrLaEBIhY4J:www.wgntv.com/community/newsletter/wgntv-chicago-animal-control-conditions-aug30,0,1606541.story+%22cherie+travis%22%2Bwgn%2Bundercover&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us CHICAGO - One of the missions of Chicago's Animal Care and Control, the largest pound in the city, is to assure the humane treatment of animals. There is a strong push from many groups to make that shelter and others in Chicago no-kill. No one's saying that's not a noble idea but is it at the expense of the animals' basic needs?
WGNTV went undercover to find out.
First we received pictures from inside Chicago Animal Care and Control taken over the past few weeks. The complaints were from longtime employees and a rescue worker, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of losing their jobs. There was also a veterinary intern who became overwhelmed by what she saw. They were concerned about the way the animals were being treated.
Earlier this month WGNTV went undercover inside Animal Care and Control.
Dogs were doubled up in cages because of overcrowding. Cats were living in small carriers because there wasn't a cage for them. Shelter workers tell us some stayed on a loading dock for up to 72 hours in sweltering conditions.
Cats were sick with upper respiratory infections. Their eyes were crusted over and they were sneezing.
Animals had open wounds; a dog with a sore on its back, a cat with an eye infection, a dog with the deadly and highly contagious parvo disease. They were all in cages next to healthy cats and dogs.
"Peter," a longtime employee, says he has never seen conditions at the shelter so bad. He says they don't have the staff to care for all the animals.
The director, Cherie Travis, agrees there is a staffing problem.
Travis is an animal rights attorney and an adjunct professor of Animal Law at DePaul and Northwestern Universities. She is the co-founder of CASA, an organization that wants to eliminate the needless euthanasia of Chicago's animals also known as no-kill. On her facebook page, she says her goal is to make Animal Care and Control no kill in 3-5 years. ] Although Travis doesn't really want to talk about it.
WGNTV gave her an opportunity to respond to the story and she chose not to. She called the news director and asked that the story not run.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jg0kOOVizycJ:www.cltv.com/news/wgntv-animal-care-control-followup-sept2,0,7834928.story+%22cherie+travis%22%2Bwgn%2Bundercover&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
"Earlier this week, WGNTV went undercover at Chicago's Animal Care and Control with video showing questionable conditions.
Dogs living in their own feces and urine, cats dead in their own cages were just some of the overcrowded conditions at the city's largest animal shelter. When there aren't enough cages cats are kept in carriers. Insiders say sometimes they're there for up to 72 hours with barely room to move.
Cherie Travis, the commissioner of Animal Care and Control, refused to discuss the conditions at the time.
Thursday, Travis still refused to answer questions but issued this statement through the city's press office.
"While the WGN story presented a case of overcrowding at the facility... This is simply not the case. In fact, during the tour the reporter admittedly stated that examples of overcrowding or poor treatment were not found."
But documents show that there is overcrowding.
The statement also said Animal Care and Control takes the condition of the animals housed at its facility very seriously and that the organization is conducting an investigation regarding the animals in the photos presented during the piece.
Paula Fasseas is the founder of PAWS, the largest no kill facility in the city. PAWS takes 200-3000 animals a year from Animal Care and Control. Employees and volunteers are there daily. She says she supports Cherie Travis and her vision to reduce euthanasia through spay and neuter programs and getting rescue groups to come take animals out for adoption."
This Examiner also confirms that there was a story. Strange how everything has been taken offline regarding this expose by Marcella Raymond.
http://www.examiner.com/animal-advocacy-in-chicago/chicago-s-animal-care-and-control-risks-unacceptable-conditions-quest-to-go-no-kill
"One theory behind the overcrowding at the shelter is that the shelter's director, Cherie Travis, wants to eventually make the shelter "no-kill", specifically within 3-5 years. Although this is a compassionate idea, it may not be practical for the volume of animals that are housed within the shelter." Honey, that ain't no theory, that is "No Kill"!!!
This blog says that the story was pulled - WHY? http://www.dancingdogblog.com/2010/11/chicagos-animal-care-and-control-wgn-pulls-story/
"Marcella Raymond was supposed to have a news on Animal Care and Control that was to air last night, but it was pulled from the line-up. There may be an explanation, it may air at another time and I hope that is so. But the travesty here is there is only one reporter willing to speak up on the problems at Animal Care and Control.
If cats were dying with regularity at any other shelter, wouldn’t you think the TV stations would be all over the story? If animals were being kept in temporary carriers for days on end, with no room to move around, no room for water or food or elimination…that would be deemed aggravated cruelty anywhere else. Yet nothing is done and nothing is reported."
Oprah is a heavy hitter in Chicago. She wields a lot of money and a lot of influence. Could it be that she has used this influence to put these animals at risk? Judge for yourself.
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/dog-saving-network/2010/09/oprah-could-do-more-harm-than-good-for-chicago-animal-care-and-control.html
"Oprah has apparently caught wind of the story and will be doing a show in the near future with the Director of CACC, Cherie Travis, as a guest. This can't happen. There is a real chance that Travis could gain some credibility from the appearance and that could potentially make matters worse for the animals at CACC."
I do know that Oprah is misguided about animals and supports "No Kill". If she did indeed do this, then she has the blood of these animals on her hands.
Build It and They Will Come - NOT
In looking at the latest stats from LA City under Brenda Barnette, it is interesting to note that she ain't doing that good. Oh, people like Ed Muzika and Nathan Winograd bragged over the turnout for her "Meet and Greet" but what they failed to recognize that most of those people there weren't from the humane community, but rather the breeding community, welcoming one of their own.
And please, don't give me that line about how this is early and give her a chance. If she was being supported by the humane community, they would go out of their way to make her look good but they didn't come.
The adoptions for September were the lowest they have been since 2006. Rescues were slightly higher but when you consider the amount of animals served, these numbers are extremely low. Just 614 animals taken by rescues for the month of September with the total impounds being 5,116, pitiful. Here's the kicker, the euthanization is the second highest recorded since 2005 for the month of September.
Euthanization was the highest recorded for dogs since 2005. I can hear them now saying that it is because impounds are up since 2005 which is true. The impounds are the second highest since 2005. And adoptions for dogs were the second lowest for the entire year.
The numbers for dogs doesn't include pit bulls. Strange how they break out the pit numbers from the dog numbers. There were more pits to hit the shelter that since before 2005. The adoptions of pits was the second lowest for the entire year. Rescues only took 31 pits from the shelter whereas the impound number of pits was 582. Again showing that you just can't depend on the rescues to be of much help. Euthanization of pits were the highest they have been since 2005 for the month of September.
Cats didn't fair well either. Rescues only took 186 cats from a total impound number of 2324. Again, since announcing Barnette's arrival, euthanization of cats increased dramatically, the second highest since 2005. These stats don't separate owner surrenders but I bet that number increased because they were touting Barnette's affiliation with "No Kill".
Another interesting observation is that since her appointment was announced, the impounds increasing fairly dramatically. This always happens when you say "No Kill". People just assumed that it is now safe to surrender their pets to a shelter.
Why are the rescues not getting animals out? Their phones never stop ringing from people wanting to surrender pets. They pick the best of the lot and the rest end up in the shelter, their rejects. Why would they go take animals out of the shelter when they had already rejected those same animals plus there's no donation from the shelter. Try to give a rescue a pet and they will always ask for a donation. You just can't compete with that as an open door shelter.
She is pushing for an increase in household limits, a whopping 66% increase. Do you think the rescues are supporting her in this? NO! In fact if you check on the support letters on file at http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=10-0982 you will see that the majority of those are from the breeders. Not one letter is written on letterhead of any rescue.
So what this shows me is that Barnette does not have the support of the rescues or they would be coming to the shelter to make her look good. And we all know that breeders don't take animals from the shelters. So now let the excuses begin.
And please, don't give me that line about how this is early and give her a chance. If she was being supported by the humane community, they would go out of their way to make her look good but they didn't come.
The adoptions for September were the lowest they have been since 2006. Rescues were slightly higher but when you consider the amount of animals served, these numbers are extremely low. Just 614 animals taken by rescues for the month of September with the total impounds being 5,116, pitiful. Here's the kicker, the euthanization is the second highest recorded since 2005 for the month of September.
Euthanization was the highest recorded for dogs since 2005. I can hear them now saying that it is because impounds are up since 2005 which is true. The impounds are the second highest since 2005. And adoptions for dogs were the second lowest for the entire year.
The numbers for dogs doesn't include pit bulls. Strange how they break out the pit numbers from the dog numbers. There were more pits to hit the shelter that since before 2005. The adoptions of pits was the second lowest for the entire year. Rescues only took 31 pits from the shelter whereas the impound number of pits was 582. Again showing that you just can't depend on the rescues to be of much help. Euthanization of pits were the highest they have been since 2005 for the month of September.
Cats didn't fair well either. Rescues only took 186 cats from a total impound number of 2324. Again, since announcing Barnette's arrival, euthanization of cats increased dramatically, the second highest since 2005. These stats don't separate owner surrenders but I bet that number increased because they were touting Barnette's affiliation with "No Kill".
Another interesting observation is that since her appointment was announced, the impounds increasing fairly dramatically. This always happens when you say "No Kill". People just assumed that it is now safe to surrender their pets to a shelter.
Why are the rescues not getting animals out? Their phones never stop ringing from people wanting to surrender pets. They pick the best of the lot and the rest end up in the shelter, their rejects. Why would they go take animals out of the shelter when they had already rejected those same animals plus there's no donation from the shelter. Try to give a rescue a pet and they will always ask for a donation. You just can't compete with that as an open door shelter.
She is pushing for an increase in household limits, a whopping 66% increase. Do you think the rescues are supporting her in this? NO! In fact if you check on the support letters on file at http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=10-0982 you will see that the majority of those are from the breeders. Not one letter is written on letterhead of any rescue.
So what this shows me is that Barnette does not have the support of the rescues or they would be coming to the shelter to make her look good. And we all know that breeders don't take animals from the shelters. So now let the excuses begin.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Abigail Smith Fleeing Tompkins County SPCA
And I don't blame her, look at the deficit that she is leaving. I don't blame her as much as I blame the program, "NKE", for the deficit.
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/5-finalists-named-for-austins-animal-services-chief-1015743.html
Out of all those finalists, I would still say Austin is screwed. They will learn their lesson the hard way like Philly and Indy did.
UPDATE: Be sure and read the comment regarding the Park family who are generous donors to Tompkins County SPCA. Looks like they aren't in the picture anymore. I would venture to say that Abigail is deserting a sinking ship.
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/5-finalists-named-for-austins-animal-services-chief-1015743.html
Out of all those finalists, I would still say Austin is screwed. They will learn their lesson the hard way like Philly and Indy did.
UPDATE: Be sure and read the comment regarding the Park family who are generous donors to Tompkins County SPCA. Looks like they aren't in the picture anymore. I would venture to say that Abigail is deserting a sinking ship.
Proposition B Passes, Take that Winograd and Toellner
Well, well, well, Brent Toellner, what happened? And the very area that you live in voted yes. Are you a popular guy or what? Just have to rub it in.
http://www.komu.com/KOMU/d7e2017e-80ce-18b5-00fa-0004d8d229cb/10438886-80ce-18b5-00c2-48119accdc27.html
JEFFERSON CITY - The final results are 51% yes and 49% no. Many national groups are among those in support of Proposition B, or the "Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act". They say now is the time for better animal protection enforcement.
Members from the ASPCA and the Humane Society of the United States were in St. Louis watching and celebrating the results. The campaign in support of Proposition B was led on the state level by the Missourians for the Protection of Dogs.
Senior Director of the ASPCA's Field Investigations and Response Team, Tim Rickey, said Missouri puppy mills are a national issue because dogs bred in Missouri are sold throughout the United States. Rickey told KOMU that dogs bred in cruel conditions in puppy mills end up having medical and behavioral problems. He said puppy mills are the worst form of animal cruelty.
Many local groups were among those against Proposition B. These groups included many farmers and cattle breeders. The Missouri Farm Bureau and the Alliance for Truth campaign were among those against the proposition. The groups told KOMU how it feared future regulations against cattle owners will follow. A member of the Missouri Dairy Association said he thought animal protection rules were already strict enough.
Only 12 counties plus the city of St. Louis voted yes for Proposition B among Missouri's 114 counties. Those counties in support of the proposition were mostly in the Kansas City and St. Louis areas.
http://www.komu.com/KOMU/d7e2017e-80ce-18b5-00fa-0004d8d229cb/10438886-80ce-18b5-00c2-48119accdc27.html
JEFFERSON CITY - The final results are 51% yes and 49% no. Many national groups are among those in support of Proposition B, or the "Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act". They say now is the time for better animal protection enforcement.
Members from the ASPCA and the Humane Society of the United States were in St. Louis watching and celebrating the results. The campaign in support of Proposition B was led on the state level by the Missourians for the Protection of Dogs.
Senior Director of the ASPCA's Field Investigations and Response Team, Tim Rickey, said Missouri puppy mills are a national issue because dogs bred in Missouri are sold throughout the United States. Rickey told KOMU that dogs bred in cruel conditions in puppy mills end up having medical and behavioral problems. He said puppy mills are the worst form of animal cruelty.
Many local groups were among those against Proposition B. These groups included many farmers and cattle breeders. The Missouri Farm Bureau and the Alliance for Truth campaign were among those against the proposition. The groups told KOMU how it feared future regulations against cattle owners will follow. A member of the Missouri Dairy Association said he thought animal protection rules were already strict enough.
Only 12 counties plus the city of St. Louis voted yes for Proposition B among Missouri's 114 counties. Those counties in support of the proposition were mostly in the Kansas City and St. Louis areas.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Brenda Barnette, Bathrooms, and Breeding.
I've been following this particular situation in LA for awhile. As we all cried about, Brenda Barnette was hired in the City of LA.
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/barnette-has-so-much-dirt.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/stop-uhaul-barnette-you-wont-be-here.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-barnette.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/barnette-and-her-shs-vet-he-prescribed.html
and the list goes on, just do a search for Barnette on this very blog and you'll see. I have many postings about her from Seattle/King County as well. Also look under ACO Guild, those postings tell a tale about this woman.
Now I ask you, does this make sense? Barnette is asking for an increase in the household pet limits, a 66% increase if you do the math. Please. You've got over 10 million people in LA. High cost of living and a low income level. It is estimated that only 10% of the dogs are licensed. And Barnette wants to increase limits??? She is being supported by two city council members, Koretz and Rosendahl. Both admit they want to have more animals. Rosendahl has admitted to breeding. And we all know Barnette's background as a breeder, and legislative rep for the AKC. Now what does this sound like to you?
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/bad-move-l-a-s-brenda-barnette-looks-to-raise-dog-cat-limits
Worse yet, looking at Barnette's report that is posted on line and looking at the motion that was passed by the LAAS Commission, there's something very "fishy" going on. Why is there a small (but very mighty) addition to the motion that isn't in the report and it isn't listed on the agenda item description? HERE IT IS: is. They approved changing the definition of dog and cat kennels to not start until there are six dogs or six cats (has always been four dogs or four cats), but it looks like Barnette added: EXCLUDING ANIMALS IN TEMPORARY FOSTER CARE.
So what the hell does she mean--you can have UNLIMITED temporary foster care animals (no definition of any of those words, of course)? Or does it mean that if you have temporary foster animals, you can only have three and can't increase to five? Based on her big announcement about fostering in bathrooms, basements and garages, doesn't this seem like she believes she's entitled to UNLIMITED ANIMALS if they are just called "temporary fosters"??? Does that apply to all the breeders who don't sell their pups right away? If they are under four months they are puppies, but if they are over four months they are FOSTERS? I read the numerous letters written to the Council from breeders. http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=10-0982 Of course they want it. What about the rest of us, that don't feel safe walking our dogs down the street as it is?
So okay, here's the punch line. Now she is complaining of the overcrowding of the shelters and begging for 12,000 foster homes. Is this not a hoot? Is there anyone out there that can explain this sort of mentality? It is the "No Kill" mentality and it makes no sense.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/l-a-shelter-animals-fostered-in-basements-bathrooms
Read this shit. If you have an extra bathroom??? No mention of training. Nothing. What is going through this person's head? I'll tell you what, their Messiah, their false prophet, "No Kill". Then if she gets these 12,000 homes, she will make herself look good on paper by counting them in her "live release numbers". This is getting ridiculous.
And of note on this article, a comment was made of her hiring someone who headed a humane society with an 80% euthanization rate. I bet she overlooked experience people right here in LA to do that. Sounds like this new hire was a dumbass and he will bow down to her for saving him. Her vet with the Seattle Humane Society was caught prescribing medication to himself in the name of his dead dog. She is connected with Kim Sgro, that's another one involved in dirt. Barnette surrounds herself with the scum of the humane community. She either does that on purpose or she has very poor judgement. Barnette is a control freak without a doubt. You can read all about her being one on this very blog.
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/barnette-has-so-much-dirt.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/stop-uhaul-barnette-you-wont-be-here.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-barnette.html
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/barnette-and-her-shs-vet-he-prescribed.html
and the list goes on, just do a search for Barnette on this very blog and you'll see. I have many postings about her from Seattle/King County as well. Also look under ACO Guild, those postings tell a tale about this woman.
Now I ask you, does this make sense? Barnette is asking for an increase in the household pet limits, a 66% increase if you do the math. Please. You've got over 10 million people in LA. High cost of living and a low income level. It is estimated that only 10% of the dogs are licensed. And Barnette wants to increase limits??? She is being supported by two city council members, Koretz and Rosendahl. Both admit they want to have more animals. Rosendahl has admitted to breeding. And we all know Barnette's background as a breeder, and legislative rep for the AKC. Now what does this sound like to you?
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/bad-move-l-a-s-brenda-barnette-looks-to-raise-dog-cat-limits
Worse yet, looking at Barnette's report that is posted on line and looking at the motion that was passed by the LAAS Commission, there's something very "fishy" going on. Why is there a small (but very mighty) addition to the motion that isn't in the report and it isn't listed on the agenda item description? HERE IT IS: is. They approved changing the definition of dog and cat kennels to not start until there are six dogs or six cats (has always been four dogs or four cats), but it looks like Barnette added: EXCLUDING ANIMALS IN TEMPORARY FOSTER CARE.
So what the hell does she mean--you can have UNLIMITED temporary foster care animals (no definition of any of those words, of course)? Or does it mean that if you have temporary foster animals, you can only have three and can't increase to five? Based on her big announcement about fostering in bathrooms, basements and garages, doesn't this seem like she believes she's entitled to UNLIMITED ANIMALS if they are just called "temporary fosters"??? Does that apply to all the breeders who don't sell their pups right away? If they are under four months they are puppies, but if they are over four months they are FOSTERS? I read the numerous letters written to the Council from breeders. http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=10-0982 Of course they want it. What about the rest of us, that don't feel safe walking our dogs down the street as it is?
So okay, here's the punch line. Now she is complaining of the overcrowding of the shelters and begging for 12,000 foster homes. Is this not a hoot? Is there anyone out there that can explain this sort of mentality? It is the "No Kill" mentality and it makes no sense.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/l-a-shelter-animals-fostered-in-basements-bathrooms
Read this shit. If you have an extra bathroom??? No mention of training. Nothing. What is going through this person's head? I'll tell you what, their Messiah, their false prophet, "No Kill". Then if she gets these 12,000 homes, she will make herself look good on paper by counting them in her "live release numbers". This is getting ridiculous.
And of note on this article, a comment was made of her hiring someone who headed a humane society with an 80% euthanization rate. I bet she overlooked experience people right here in LA to do that. Sounds like this new hire was a dumbass and he will bow down to her for saving him. Her vet with the Seattle Humane Society was caught prescribing medication to himself in the name of his dead dog. She is connected with Kim Sgro, that's another one involved in dirt. Barnette surrounds herself with the scum of the humane community. She either does that on purpose or she has very poor judgement. Barnette is a control freak without a doubt. You can read all about her being one on this very blog.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Bragging Rights of Nathan Winograd - Yeah, right!
What is this??? Nathan Winograd, are you kidding me? You brag about a shelter that only handles 4500 animal a year? C'mon.
http://www.virginia.gov/vdacs_ar/cgi-bin/Vdacs_search.cgi?link_select=facility&form=fac_select&fac_num=170&year=2009
Cats 2540 Reclaimed 60 Adopted 1611 Transferred 189 Died In Kennel 69 Surrendered by Owner 367 Transferred In 12 Others (I have no idea what that is) 28 Euthanized 225 Miscellaneous (I have no idea what that is either) 18
Dogs 1935 Reclaimed 532 Adopted 1122 Transferred 30 Died In Kennel 11 Surrendered by Owner 390 Transferred In 50 Others 0 Euthanized 159 Miscellaneous 1
Now this link http://www.caspca.org/statistics.htm .
Something that stood out to me was the lack of "Transferred within the Community/Coalition". Doesn't the Whino stress that it takes a community? So I do wonder what this means because it appears to me anyway, that nothing is going on within the community or local rescues. Any other suggestions to explain this?
Demographics for Albemarle/Charlottesville show less than 100,000 people with Albemarle being largely a White community where only 17% of the population is non-White. . Albemarle's median houshold income is above the state level at $59,575 and a median family level of $85,223. These figures were the latest ones and that is 06/07. As of August 09, the unemployment rate of Albemarle was only 4.4 compared to the national average of 8.1.
Now the Whino say that demographics don't matter, I say they do.
Demographics for the City of Los Angeles show a 2009 population of 10,409,035 according to the CA Dept. of Finance. With a per capita personal income level of $42,325 and an unemployment rate of 12.5% as of Sept. 10. And white people are in the minority at 46.9%. And according to Winograd, none of this matters. Of course, these demos matter to businesses wanting to relocate, or whoever, but when it comes to the animals, he tosses them. It's pretty obvious to any rational thinking person that demographics make a lot of difference.
Looking at the propaganda on the website for CASPCA, the stated budget is as stated:
In 2008, our operating budget was approximately $2.9 million dollars. Animal care and adoption expenses include costs related to the daily cleaning, feeding and other care provided for 5,000 animals. This includes stray animals waiting to be reclaimed by their owners, animals brought in by animal control officers, animals whose owners could no longer care for them and animals waiting for new adoptive homes. Adoption expenses include evaluation of animals for proper placement and various adoption promotions, outings and events. Other animal care and adoption expenses include certain building costs related to animal care and expenses of our Purrin’ at Pantops offsite adoption center. Clinic spay/neuter expenses include the cost of medications and surgical supplies relating to spaying and neutering approximately 6,000 animals; medications, testing and vaccinations for the 5,000 animals in our care and other clinic expenses such as radiographs, daily treatments and general medical care. Fundraising and Outreach expenses consist of costs related to our mailings, events and other related activities. Rummage expenses include the cost of rent, staffing and other miscellaneous items for our store. Building expenses include interest payments on a $2.8 million dollar building loan and building insurance cost.
LA City has a budget of $20,314,323 and serves 54,191 animals according to the 08 numbers. So it looks like in order to keep up with the Jones that LA City would need about $11-12,000,000 more. Keeping in mind, of course, that administrative costs in LA City would be considerably more higher than the tiny CASPCA, leaving even less for programs and the animals. Then again it costs more to serve a population of 10 million compared to a population of less than a 100 thousand.
Still, the numbers from a small shelter like this one can't compare with the numbers like in LA or Philly, or New York, or most major cities. I know rescue groups that handle that many adoptions a year. Geez, Whino, is this the best you can do? This ain't nothing to brag about really. Small potatoes.
This is Pat Dunaway still waiting for your "evidence".
http://www.virginia.gov/vdacs_ar/cgi-bin/Vdacs_search.cgi?link_select=facility&form=fac_select&fac_num=170&year=2009
Cats 2540 Reclaimed 60 Adopted 1611 Transferred 189 Died In Kennel 69 Surrendered by Owner 367 Transferred In 12 Others (I have no idea what that is) 28 Euthanized 225 Miscellaneous (I have no idea what that is either) 18
Dogs 1935 Reclaimed 532 Adopted 1122 Transferred 30 Died In Kennel 11 Surrendered by Owner 390 Transferred In 50 Others 0 Euthanized 159 Miscellaneous 1
Now this link http://www.caspca.org/statistics.htm .
Something that stood out to me was the lack of "Transferred within the Community/Coalition". Doesn't the Whino stress that it takes a community? So I do wonder what this means because it appears to me anyway, that nothing is going on within the community or local rescues. Any other suggestions to explain this?
Demographics for Albemarle/Charlottesville show less than 100,000 people with Albemarle being largely a White community where only 17% of the population is non-White. . Albemarle's median houshold income is above the state level at $59,575 and a median family level of $85,223. These figures were the latest ones and that is 06/07. As of August 09, the unemployment rate of Albemarle was only 4.4 compared to the national average of 8.1.
Now the Whino say that demographics don't matter, I say they do.
Demographics for the City of Los Angeles show a 2009 population of 10,409,035 according to the CA Dept. of Finance. With a per capita personal income level of $42,325 and an unemployment rate of 12.5% as of Sept. 10. And white people are in the minority at 46.9%. And according to Winograd, none of this matters. Of course, these demos matter to businesses wanting to relocate, or whoever, but when it comes to the animals, he tosses them. It's pretty obvious to any rational thinking person that demographics make a lot of difference.
Looking at the propaganda on the website for CASPCA, the stated budget is as stated:
In 2008, our operating budget was approximately $2.9 million dollars. Animal care and adoption expenses include costs related to the daily cleaning, feeding and other care provided for 5,000 animals. This includes stray animals waiting to be reclaimed by their owners, animals brought in by animal control officers, animals whose owners could no longer care for them and animals waiting for new adoptive homes. Adoption expenses include evaluation of animals for proper placement and various adoption promotions, outings and events. Other animal care and adoption expenses include certain building costs related to animal care and expenses of our Purrin’ at Pantops offsite adoption center. Clinic spay/neuter expenses include the cost of medications and surgical supplies relating to spaying and neutering approximately 6,000 animals; medications, testing and vaccinations for the 5,000 animals in our care and other clinic expenses such as radiographs, daily treatments and general medical care. Fundraising and Outreach expenses consist of costs related to our mailings, events and other related activities. Rummage expenses include the cost of rent, staffing and other miscellaneous items for our store. Building expenses include interest payments on a $2.8 million dollar building loan and building insurance cost.
LA City has a budget of $20,314,323 and serves 54,191 animals according to the 08 numbers. So it looks like in order to keep up with the Jones that LA City would need about $11-12,000,000 more. Keeping in mind, of course, that administrative costs in LA City would be considerably more higher than the tiny CASPCA, leaving even less for programs and the animals. Then again it costs more to serve a population of 10 million compared to a population of less than a 100 thousand.
Still, the numbers from a small shelter like this one can't compare with the numbers like in LA or Philly, or New York, or most major cities. I know rescue groups that handle that many adoptions a year. Geez, Whino, is this the best you can do? This ain't nothing to brag about really. Small potatoes.
This is Pat Dunaway still waiting for your "evidence".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)