The following article appeared in The Jewish Journal - Los Angeles and was written By Rachel Heller
Daylong synagogue attendance is rare among most Reform Jews. It's even rarer for their dogs.
For almost 12 years, Lucy traveled each day to University Synagogue in Brentwood with her owner, Rabbi Allen I. Freehling, then the synagogue's senior rabbi. The golden retriever mix soon became one of the most popular members of the Reform congregation.
"The kids coming in for Hebrew school used to arrive early, come to the rabbi's study, and hope that they would be the ones to take Lucy for a walk before going to class," Freehling recalled. "She was delighted to spend the whole day in my office. If there wasn't someone to pay attention to her, she would usually just sleep under my desk."
Freehling, now the executive director of the City's Human Relations Commission, found Lucy at a city-run animal shelter in the San Fernando Valley. Through a series of community workshops he is helping to facilitate for Los Angeles Animal Services, Freehling is urging other local residents to seek pets from city shelters, too.
L.A. Animal Services has been sponsoring its "Humane L.A." workshops -- a series of 11 free, public panel discussions -- every other week since August to educate Angelenos about what they can do to help make the city a "no-kill" haven. The workshops, which will continue through mid-December, focus on different facets of the agency's "no-kill equation," such as low-cost spay and neuter, rescue groups, foster care and adoption programs. Common-sense factors like these, the agency believes, can, in time, reduce the number of unwanted animals euthanized at city shelters.
"We do have a responsibility in terms of taking good care of the animals that are a part of our population," said Freehling, who is sharing the role of facilitator with three other members of the Human Relations Commission. "Spay and neuter has to become something that is accepted by everyone, because the only way to curtail the population of animals is if they are not reproducing on a regular basis. For people who wish to have animals, for them to consider adopting as opposed to purchasing would also be a step."
The senior rabbi at University Synagogue for 30 years, Freehling and his wife, Lori, adopted Lucy with social interaction in mind.
"Not wanting to leave Lucy home by herself, we purposely found an animal that would be good with adults and children," he said. "An animal is a marvelous provider of comfort. That was the role that she played at the synagogue. Being greeted by her was, more often than not, a comforting experience."
Lucy eventually died of cancer, and the Freehlings adopted Pearl, a black lab and pit bull mix, from an animal rescuer in Riverside. Pearl hasn't had the same opportunity to follow Freehling to work since he was appointed to the commission in 2002.
"Here at City Hall it's less likely that someone would bring an animal to the office on a regular basis," he said.
Asked if it's possible to make Los Angeles a no-kill city, the Chicago native does not hesitate before saying, "Yes." But profound changes must first occur in the local population's attitude toward its four-legged neighbors.
"I hope people will begin to understand what a no-kill city is all about and what our responsibilities are as part of that community, and not simply leave it up to a particular department within the city to solve the problem by euthanizing an extraordinary number of animals," Freehling said. "It's something we're all in together."
For dates and locations of the remaining "Humane L.A." workshops, visit www.laanimalservices.com/humanela.htm
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Friday, September 05, 2008
Landlords Should Consider the Benefits of Allowing Pets
The City of Los Angeles has a noble goal: To be the first major metropolitan city in the United States to end euthanasia as a tool to control pet overpopulation. Achieving this difficult goal requires robust community participation.
During this time of economic uncertainty, we especially need the help of an important constituency in our community, our landlords.
According to the 2000 Census LA has 1,275,412 households. Of these, 63% or 803,510 households are rentals. According to a report issued by The Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research and Education Promoting Animal Welfare in 2005, 50% of all rentals nationally prohibit pets.
Consider these other report findings: 35% of tenants without pets would own a pet if their landlord permitted; tenants in pet-friendly housing stay an average of 46 months compared to 18 months for tenants in rentals prohibiting pets; the vacancy rate for pet-friendly housing was lower (10%) than “no pets allowed” rentals (14%); and 25% of applicants inquiring about rentals in non-pet-friendly housing were seeking pet-friendly rentals.
The report observes: “With such a sizable potential tenant pool it would seem there would be enough pet-friendly housing to meet the current demand. In fact, according to economic theory, in perfectly functioning markets [where people make rational, profit-maximizing decisions, with full information and no significant transaction costs] pet-friendly housing should be available to renters willing to pay a premium to cover any extra costs to landlords.” Begging the question, “Do landlords overlook opportunities to increase profits by not adding to the pool of pet-friendly housing?”
With nearly half of American households having companion animals and over half of renters who do not have pets reporting they would have one or more pets if allowed, why are there so few pet-friendly rental units available?
Well, among landlords who do not allow pets, damage was the greatest concern (64.7%), followed by noise (52.9%), complaints/tenant conflicts (41.2%) and insurance issues (41.2%). Concerns about people leaving their pet or not cleaning common areas were rarely cited (5.9%).
Although 85% of landlords permitting pets reported pet-related damage at some time, the worst damage averaged only $430. This is less than the typical rent or pet deposit. In most cases, landlords could simply subtract the damage from a pet deposit and experience no real loss. In fact, the report finds landlords appear to experience no substantive loss, and further, there is little, if any, difference in damage between tenants with and without pets.
Other pet-related issues (e.g., noise, tenant conflicts concerning animals or common area upkeep) required slightly less than one hour per year of landlord time. This was less time than landlords spent for child-related problems and other issues. Whatever time landlords spent addressing pet-related problems was offset by spending less marketing time on pet-friendly units by a margin of 8 hours per unit.
While the study finds problems arising from allowing pets are minimal, the benefits frequently outweigh the problems. Landlords stand to profit from allowing pets because, on average, tenants with pets are willing and able to pay more for the ability to live with their pets, (especially in unregulated rent situations such as all market-rate apartment units built in Los Angeles since 1978, which are exempt from rent control).
In the City of Los Angeles nearly 17,000 pets were euthanized over the past twelve months. This is an increase over previous years, reversing many years of steady decline. The increase is attributed to the large number of pets surrendered to City shelters this year because of the housing foreclosure crisis. Imagine if just twenty percent of the 400,000 pet restricted households in LA permitted pets. That could create a demand far greater than the number of homeless pets dying in our shelters, allowing LA to finally achieve its goal.
Landlords have been hearing from their own colleagues and professional journals recently that permitting pets makes good business sense. Nonetheless, the lack of available pet-friendly rentals reveals there is a long way to go to meet current demand. The report reveals many landlords may be overlooking an opportunity to increase revenue and tenant pools/market size by allowing pets. While there are some costs to allowing pets, these costs are relatively low and the benefits appear to be even greater for landlords.
The benefits to the thousands of homeless pets who are dying for lack of a home each year cannot be overstated. Landlords can make a profitable, life saving choice by permitting pets. After all, a house is not a home without a pet.
During this time of economic uncertainty, we especially need the help of an important constituency in our community, our landlords.
According to the 2000 Census LA has 1,275,412 households. Of these, 63% or 803,510 households are rentals. According to a report issued by The Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research and Education Promoting Animal Welfare in 2005, 50% of all rentals nationally prohibit pets.
Consider these other report findings: 35% of tenants without pets would own a pet if their landlord permitted; tenants in pet-friendly housing stay an average of 46 months compared to 18 months for tenants in rentals prohibiting pets; the vacancy rate for pet-friendly housing was lower (10%) than “no pets allowed” rentals (14%); and 25% of applicants inquiring about rentals in non-pet-friendly housing were seeking pet-friendly rentals.
The report observes: “With such a sizable potential tenant pool it would seem there would be enough pet-friendly housing to meet the current demand. In fact, according to economic theory, in perfectly functioning markets [where people make rational, profit-maximizing decisions, with full information and no significant transaction costs] pet-friendly housing should be available to renters willing to pay a premium to cover any extra costs to landlords.” Begging the question, “Do landlords overlook opportunities to increase profits by not adding to the pool of pet-friendly housing?”
With nearly half of American households having companion animals and over half of renters who do not have pets reporting they would have one or more pets if allowed, why are there so few pet-friendly rental units available?
Well, among landlords who do not allow pets, damage was the greatest concern (64.7%), followed by noise (52.9%), complaints/tenant conflicts (41.2%) and insurance issues (41.2%). Concerns about people leaving their pet or not cleaning common areas were rarely cited (5.9%).
Although 85% of landlords permitting pets reported pet-related damage at some time, the worst damage averaged only $430. This is less than the typical rent or pet deposit. In most cases, landlords could simply subtract the damage from a pet deposit and experience no real loss. In fact, the report finds landlords appear to experience no substantive loss, and further, there is little, if any, difference in damage between tenants with and without pets.
Other pet-related issues (e.g., noise, tenant conflicts concerning animals or common area upkeep) required slightly less than one hour per year of landlord time. This was less time than landlords spent for child-related problems and other issues. Whatever time landlords spent addressing pet-related problems was offset by spending less marketing time on pet-friendly units by a margin of 8 hours per unit.
While the study finds problems arising from allowing pets are minimal, the benefits frequently outweigh the problems. Landlords stand to profit from allowing pets because, on average, tenants with pets are willing and able to pay more for the ability to live with their pets, (especially in unregulated rent situations such as all market-rate apartment units built in Los Angeles since 1978, which are exempt from rent control).
In the City of Los Angeles nearly 17,000 pets were euthanized over the past twelve months. This is an increase over previous years, reversing many years of steady decline. The increase is attributed to the large number of pets surrendered to City shelters this year because of the housing foreclosure crisis. Imagine if just twenty percent of the 400,000 pet restricted households in LA permitted pets. That could create a demand far greater than the number of homeless pets dying in our shelters, allowing LA to finally achieve its goal.
Landlords have been hearing from their own colleagues and professional journals recently that permitting pets makes good business sense. Nonetheless, the lack of available pet-friendly rentals reveals there is a long way to go to meet current demand. The report reveals many landlords may be overlooking an opportunity to increase revenue and tenant pools/market size by allowing pets. While there are some costs to allowing pets, these costs are relatively low and the benefits appear to be even greater for landlords.
The benefits to the thousands of homeless pets who are dying for lack of a home each year cannot be overstated. Landlords can make a profitable, life saving choice by permitting pets. After all, a house is not a home without a pet.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
LA Animal Services Announces New Pet Store Permit Requirements
LA Animal Services is issuing new Rules and Regulations for Pet Store Animal Care, launching a new era of more rigorous oversight of pet shops in the city. Compliance with these Rules is a prerequisite to obtaining a Pet Store Permit from the Department.
Under Section 53.50 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, all pet stores are required to obtain an operating permit from the Department. As it renews and updates these permits, LA Animal Services will enforce standards for the care of animals in pet stores established by Section 122350 et seq. and Section 122125 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, in order to ensure the humane treatment of animals and safeguard the public interest. These new standards were established by the passage of AB 1347 (Caballero) signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in October 2007, and become binding state law on January 1, 2009.
The combination of a strong state law and increased local enforcement should make a difference for these animals. I urge every pet shop to use the time between now and New Year’s Day to bring its facility into compliance.
The Department this week sent out a letter notifying all permitted pet store operators that these new requirements will become effective as of January 1st, 2009, and will work to inform those operating without current permits as soon as possible. The Department’s Pet Store Permit Inspectors are increasing efforts to inspect and assist pet store operators to come into compliance. It is the responsibility of pet store operators to ensure their store is in compliance by January 1st, 2009.
Visit LA Animal Services website to review the new Rules and Regulations. If you know of a pet store that is not in compliance with these Rules and Regulations you can let the Department know at 213.485.1135.
The Rules and Regulations can be accessed at http://www.laanimalservices.com/ under "Services/Permits.”
Under Section 53.50 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, all pet stores are required to obtain an operating permit from the Department. As it renews and updates these permits, LA Animal Services will enforce standards for the care of animals in pet stores established by Section 122350 et seq. and Section 122125 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, in order to ensure the humane treatment of animals and safeguard the public interest. These new standards were established by the passage of AB 1347 (Caballero) signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in October 2007, and become binding state law on January 1, 2009.
The combination of a strong state law and increased local enforcement should make a difference for these animals. I urge every pet shop to use the time between now and New Year’s Day to bring its facility into compliance.
The Department this week sent out a letter notifying all permitted pet store operators that these new requirements will become effective as of January 1st, 2009, and will work to inform those operating without current permits as soon as possible. The Department’s Pet Store Permit Inspectors are increasing efforts to inspect and assist pet store operators to come into compliance. It is the responsibility of pet store operators to ensure their store is in compliance by January 1st, 2009.
Visit LA Animal Services website to review the new Rules and Regulations. If you know of a pet store that is not in compliance with these Rules and Regulations you can let the Department know at 213.485.1135.
The Rules and Regulations can be accessed at http://www.laanimalservices.com/ under "Services/Permits.”
Monday, August 25, 2008
A House is not a Home without a Pet!
LA Animal Services is proud to announce an innovative program proposed by Keller Williams Realty to help our community’s homeless animals. The foreclosure crisis in Los Angeles has resulted in a 28% increase in the number of pets surrendered to LA Animal Service since the beginning of 2008. This has led to the first increase in pet euthanasia in over six years. Keller Williams has decided to do something about that and to challenge all Los Angeles Realtors to help.
The program encourages real estate agents to purchase a $100 Gift Certificate from LA Animal Services to present to their clients at the close of escrow of their new home. The Certificate becomes effective 30 days after the close of escrow and is effective for one year. The Certificate is good towards the adoption of a dog, cat or two bunnies.
Keller Williams Realty of Beverly Hills is spearheading the program pioneered by Keller Williams Realtor Adele Langdon. The Beverly Hills Office encourages other Keller Williams Offices and Real Estate companies to get on board.
“Keller Williams is delighted to partner with LA Animal Services on this life saving program,” said Rob Aigner, Team Leader of the Beverly Hills Office. “’A House is not a Home without a Pet’ provides our agents and clients a wonderful opportunity to play a meaningful role in helping homeless pets, the silent victims of the housing crisis. It is our hope that all the real estate offices in Los Angeles will join this noble effort.”
“Finding good homes for our shelter animals is a top priority,” added Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, “and ‘A House is not a Home without a Pet’ is a great example of a public-private partnership that benefits those animals and homebuyers alike.”
“Foreclosure pets are a societal problem,” said Tony Cardenas, City Council Member for District 6 and a former real estate agent himself. "We have a responsibility to help solve this problem and I applaud Keller Williams for taking a compassionate lead. It is my hope that real estate offices everywhere will follow this example.” Tony Cardenas is the originator of the City’s Animal Cruelty Task Force and the co-author of the City’s new spay/neuter ordinance that goes into effect on October 1st.
Keller Williams is announcing the program with a full page ad in this week’s MLS Caravan magazine received by all LA real estate agents.
The program encourages real estate agents to purchase a $100 Gift Certificate from LA Animal Services to present to their clients at the close of escrow of their new home. The Certificate becomes effective 30 days after the close of escrow and is effective for one year. The Certificate is good towards the adoption of a dog, cat or two bunnies.
Keller Williams Realty of Beverly Hills is spearheading the program pioneered by Keller Williams Realtor Adele Langdon. The Beverly Hills Office encourages other Keller Williams Offices and Real Estate companies to get on board.
“Keller Williams is delighted to partner with LA Animal Services on this life saving program,” said Rob Aigner, Team Leader of the Beverly Hills Office. “’A House is not a Home without a Pet’ provides our agents and clients a wonderful opportunity to play a meaningful role in helping homeless pets, the silent victims of the housing crisis. It is our hope that all the real estate offices in Los Angeles will join this noble effort.”
“Finding good homes for our shelter animals is a top priority,” added Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, “and ‘A House is not a Home without a Pet’ is a great example of a public-private partnership that benefits those animals and homebuyers alike.”
“Foreclosure pets are a societal problem,” said Tony Cardenas, City Council Member for District 6 and a former real estate agent himself. "We have a responsibility to help solve this problem and I applaud Keller Williams for taking a compassionate lead. It is my hope that real estate offices everywhere will follow this example.” Tony Cardenas is the originator of the City’s Animal Cruelty Task Force and the co-author of the City’s new spay/neuter ordinance that goes into effect on October 1st.
Keller Williams is announcing the program with a full page ad in this week’s MLS Caravan magazine received by all LA real estate agents.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Boks Provides Instructive Responses to Anonymous Attack
Another nasty e-mail is circulating the internet. The anonymous author seems intent on squashing any public dialogue in Los Angeles that would help lead our community to achieving its No-Kill goal and transform LA into the most Humane City in the USA. My responses to this anonymous person’s allegations are in bold. Anonymous is in italics. Please note that “anonymous” has no suggestions or recommendations to offer.
Anonymous: Tomorrow Wed August 20th, Ed Boks will be presenting one of his seminars on "RESCUE GROUPS".
There is NOTHING that Ed Boks can teach us about rescue that we do not already know.
ED: If you are a rescuer, I would largely agree. But these workshops are not for rescuers alone. They are for the entire community, most of whom don’t have a clue about the needs or our animals, our rescuers, and our department. These workshops are designed to help us think out side of the box (or the Boks, if you prefer) and come up with some new ideas, strategies and alliances to help save more lives.
Anonymous: If you know Boks and have worked with him, you know that the one value of attending any of his so called seminars is to support Ed Boks since he will use the attendance as evidence of his "success" in getting people to show up.
ED: Actually, my role in these workshops is that of a secretary, to document the ideas and suggestions of the community. A panel of rescuers and other experts will be present to engage on the topics being discussed.
Anonymous: The only possible value of attending would be to use it as a chance to get Boks/Barth to reverse the recent negative changes they made in the New Hope program.
ED: The purpose of tonight’s workshop is to discuss program enhancements, so we welcome discussion on this topic. To put the above allegation into context it is important to understand that there were only two significant changes in the New Hope program. One was reinstituting the $28 spay/neuter fee. This is a fee that rescue partners had routinely paid until the advent of the New Hope program in 2006. The department waived that fee for one year and there was no increase in the number of animals saved through New Hope. The fee was waived to help New Hope partners rescue more animals.
It was difficult to justify waiving the fee a second year when it had no measurable impact the first year. Nonetheless, the department secured a $160,000 grant from the Found Animal Foundation so we could waive the fee a second year. Unfortunately, there was still little increase in the number of animals saved and the grant money was spent. So the department had to reinstitute the fee this fiscal year to help off-set a 15% budget cut.
It would be great if the rescue groups would work together to obtain a grant to cover this fee, as the department did for the rescue groups in 2007.
The second change was asking New Hope partners to share adopter information with the Department so we can follow up on licensing. The Department is rightfully under a lot of pressure to increase licensing and we would appreciate our New Hope partners understanding this new requirement - and that it will lead to saving the lives of any licensed and tagged dog brought to any of our Centers.
Anonymous: However, remember that Ed Boke is famous for his lies and empty promises. He will charmingly agree to take your opinions under consideration but no change for the animals will take place unless it serves him personally.
ED: Serving as the general manager of LA Animal Services is a difficult job, particularly when personally criticized by anonymous mudslingers. However, every effort I make is dedicated to doing the best job I can for the City and the animals in my care.
Anonymous: Ed Boks has already agreed to form several "committees" in the past ostensibly working to improve the New Hope program, improve conditions at the shelters and implement public educational programs. Nothing these committees brought to the table was ever implemented. All of the committees dissolve because Ed Boks not only refused to take recommendations and input for positive change but actually falsely claimed that these committees approved changes when they did not.
ED: Actually, the New Hope program we are discussing tonight is the result of the work of two separate committees, one in 2006 and one in 2007. The department is also working with a committee on the formation of a marketing strategy for the spay/neuter ordinance, with remarkable results you will soon all see. The department has a track record of working productively with committees. Not perfect, as some committees have gone astray from staying focused on the business of saving lives and improving procedures and practices, but we are determined to continue working with the community and individuals committed to developing and implementing life saving strategies!
Anonymous: If you do choose to attend the seminar I ask you to challenge Ed Boks on the following:
Why is the Northeast Valley animal shelter not open to rescuers without the need for an advance appointment during very restricted hours?
ED: The Mission (Northeast Valley) Animal Care Center is not open to the public with the exception of our New Hope partners. The Center has very limited staffing, so we have no choice but to meet New Hope partners there by appointment.
Anonymous: If he blames a poor economy read further and ask him the following: Why did he, while our economy is failing, hire a second Assistant General Manager?
ED: Hiring an Assistant General Manager for operations has been a two year process that obviously began long before the current economic slowdown. This position is critical to the success of the department and I make no apologies for filling it with the most qualified person I could find. Improving the direct oversight over shelter and field staff is a critical function in a department with our history.
Anonymous: No General Manager in the history of LAAS ever had two AGM. The cost of these AGMs is approximately $200,000 in salary and benefits a year?
ED: For years before my coming to LA, the local animal welfare community insisted the City find a General Manager who would hold the department accountable for results. The three cardinal principles for success are Leadership, Focus, and Accountability. You cannot hold the Department accountable for results if you don’t allow for leadership. One person alone cannot effectively manage an organization with eight locations, seven of which are open 24/7, with officers in the field 24/7 covering over 490 square miles that is Los Angeles, and taking in 150 animals a day. All one has to do is look at the stream of General Managers who have graced the revolving door known as LA Animal Services over the past few years to know this is true.
For any organization to be successful the first rule is to get the right people on the bus and then to get the right people into the right seats on the bus. That is not an easy task in LA, and it took time, but the results are the only way to evaluate success. I believe you will see the type of leadership and results the LA community has been demanding.
Anonymous: Why does Ed Boks need 2 Directors of Fields Operations at the approximate cost of $230,000 in salary and benefits a year? Why does Ed Boks need 4 new District Supervisors of Operations at the cost of approximately $407,000 in salary and benefit per year?
ED: See the above answer. LA Animal Services is sometimes viewed very simplistically, as a company of dog catchers and kennel workers who operate on autopilot. However, Animal Services it is a very complex and dynamic organization. The District Supervisor positions are positions that were mistakenly eliminated several years ago as a budget saving measure. What that did was eliminate any opportunity for Center Managers to grow into executive-level positions. Through the reinstitution of these positions we will establish a well run, accountable department that will be able to select its future GMs and AGMs internally and not from out of state.
Anonymous: All at a time when LAAS' budget has been cut to the point that the department is slated to lay off 28 ACTs and the animal food budget has been reduced starting in Sept 2008 from $7,125 per shelter per month to $4,750 per shelter per month. That is a reduction of approx $100,000 a year in the food budget while the number of animals under his care continues to increase.
ED: The food budget was over budgeted in the past and we never spent the entire line budget allocated for food. The layoffs are the result of authorized hiring done specifically to prepare for the opening the new Mission (Northeast Valley) Center. If the City continues in its decision to not open that Center and to reduce operating hours, then, under current circumstances we have no choice but to lay off the extra Animal Care Technicians we hired to staff it. Efforts are being made by members of the City Council and others to remedy the situation, but the results are not yet known.
Anonymous: The following is documentation we have that illustrate how Boks/Barth report their killing, and it is very disturbing. It appears that this is one way he can deliver his false no-kill claims. The numbers below came for LAAS documents.
Ed Boks declared March 2008 as a "No-Kill Month". That month one LAAS district shelter euthanized approximately 271 animals. All but 21 were killed for behavioral, medical and unweaned. So that means that 250 in one shelter in one month were so ill and aggressive that they had to be killed.
In April of 2008 two of the highest kill LAAS district shelters euthanized approximately 898 animals. All but 38 were killed for behavioral, medical and unweaned. So that means that 860 animals in 2 shelters in one month were so ill or aggressive that they had to be killed.
In June 2008, 223 animal were euthanized in one of the district lowest kill shelters and NONE were reported as being killed for time and space. So here again, 223 animals were killed in one shelter in one month due to illness and aggression.
In July 2008; 165 animals euthanized in another low kill LAAS district shelter, again, NONE for time and space.
Since "no kill" accepts euthanasia for the medically and behaviorally unadoptable animals, these euthanasia rates lead one to believe that the killing was only 5% of the animals actually killed in LAAS.
ED: The recent increase in animal impounds has led to an increase in the number of animals euthanized. This is the first increase in pet euthanasia in the past six years. The Department successfully reduced pet euthanasia over 50% in the past six years, and 22% in 2007. YTD 2008 has seen a 37.38% increase in euthanasia (10,217) compared to 2007 YTD (7,437). However, when the numbers are normalized to account for the increase in impounds, the euthanasia rate is up only 3.49%.
So, what does that mean to achieving No-Kill?
Phase I of No-Kill is achieved when no healthy animal is killed due to a lack of space or resources.
Phase II is achieved when we end the killing of animals in need of medical treatment.
YTD 118 cats and 384 dogs were killed due to insufficient holding space and/or resources. These healthy pets represent the challenge to achieving Phase I of the City’s “No-Kill” Goal.
YTD, the Department is over 95% on its way to achieving Phase I of No-Kill.
The Department has always welcomed and invited the closest scrutiny to how these numbers are collected and reported. To date, no one has taken us up on our invitation. But the numbers are what they are…
Anonymous: However, in closely reviewing these numbers, it begs the question how could it be that 95% of animals killed in LAAS are killed because they are unadoptable. How does Ed Boks define "behavioral, medical or IRS"? Any of us that have adopted or rescued out of LAAS know that those are impossible odds. As a matter of fact, most of the animals labeled aggressive or sick are not. However, without using such tactics Boks/Barth team cannot show the mayor that they have created any positive change in LAAS.
ED: I know, the animal welfare community finds this type of success impossible to believe. That is why the department has always shied away from reporting on this and has only reported its numbers in terms of “beating hearts in” and “beating hearts out”.
Our staff doesn’t evaluate animal’s behaviors, by directive of our Commission. But we do evaluate them by observation. Animals that demonstrate dangerous behavior are not placed for adoption BUT THEY ARE MADE AVAILABLE to our New Hope Partners. So no animal is arbitrarily euthanized for behavior without having an opportunity to be considered and evaluated for seven days by our 140 New Hope partners.
Anyone who truly works with the Department knows that we have animals in our Centers for half a year or more, you know that we perform some of the most amazing life saving surgeries, we go to tremendous lengths to save lives, more so than any other municipal shelter system in the country. In the last year, our veterinary team expended over $300,000 in medical supplies and medicines. So yes, only around 5% of the animals euthanized are healthy, sound animals.
The Mayor’s office pays close attention to the work of the Department as well as to the concerns of the humane community regarding our operations and our results and is well aware of the progress we are making in a number of areas as well as of the challenges we continue to face.
Anonymous: The numbers above are not to illustrate the euthanasia rate. We are all aware the "no kill" will take time and planning to achieve. These numbers prove that Boks/Barth have failed to create a viable no kill solution but have succeeded in reated a way of misleading the city of Los Angeles and its mayor.
ED: If anonymous wants to work with the Department in identifying just how we are deceiving ANYONE, I welcome them to come forward. Notice that anonymous provides no solutions or recommendations, only personal attacks. If anonymous – or anyone else – thinks they have something constructive to recommend regarding achieving “no kill” apart from promoting certain personalities who are either unqualified for or show no interest in working here, I welcome those ideas. I believe we are employing viable no kill solutions to the best of our abilities in a difficult environment, and they form the basis of the workshop series. Also, once again, the Mayor’s office is completely familiar with everything that is going on.
Anonymous: Another method they use to provide false numbers is warehousing the animals.
In July of this year Ed was accused of warehousing the animals to improve his numbers. To achieve the appearance of less killing, Mr. Boks warehouses the animals until they develop behavioral and/or medical issues and then euthanizes
them for being medically or behaviorally unadoptable. In so doing the time and space numbers remain minimal.
ED: This is not an easy task; and it does point to the already-mentioned need for a more accountable management structure. The Department is committed to achieving “No-Kill”. Yes, we keep animals a long time in an effort to find them homes. Our Centers have a cadre of dedicated volunteer dog trainers who work with the animals to make them more adoptable while they are with us and to help them stay as sociable and healthy as possible. As mentioned above, we have an improved - and remarkable - veterinary program dedicated to fighting the constant threat of disease and treating animals as quickly as possible as needed.
Are we slow to euthanize animals? Yes. And I am in the process of implementing a program to make the process even slower. Each Center has what we call a “Heart-to-Heart” Team. They are charged with evaluating the animals before deciding if they should be euthanized. The team is made up of the Center Manager, the Animal Care Technician Supervisor, the Veterinarian, and the New Hope Coordinator or their designees. They review the length of time the animal has been with us, the health of the animal, the behavior of the animal, and our New Hope and adoption options. Only when this team feels we have exhausted every live saving option for a particular animal is that animal euthanized.
5% of the time this difficult process leads to the death of a healthy animal to help alleviate overcrowding.
Anonymous: THESE ARE NOT SOLUTIONS TO NO KILL, THIS ARE ILLUSION THAT KEEP BOKS AND BARTH EMPLOYED.
Some of you may not know that the LAAS shelter staff is extremely unhappy with Mr. Boks. performance and would like a change to be made. The staff is behind the humane community 100% and will support all rescue groups in every effort. For the first time in the history of LAAS the staff and rescuers are on exactly the same page.
ED: I am well aware of the concerns of some staff and I try to be available to discuss them. I am absolutely confident in saying I know these statements about total unity between the staff and humane community are inaccurate. Complaints from rescuers and others about incidents involving staff have not disappeared into thin air as anonymous apparently would have us believe.
I try to support both my staff and the rescue community and doing so sometimes raises the ire of one or the other when conflicts arise. Those conflicts arise because staff and the rescuers are NOT always on the same page. The Department’s management team spends too much time working on solutions to these issues for this “unity myth” to be credible. Finding solutions to these challenges is the purpose of tonight's workshop.
If someone has a better approach to managing these situations, I’m open to discussing. I want what is best for the Department.
Anonymous: Do you really want to take out time and attend this seminar or any other of Boks' seminars? The only result will be that Ed Boks can show that someone showed up to support him and will continue to ignore what we tell him we need to help save the lives of our city animals.
ED: I cannot imagine what the value of squashing dialogue is. What is this anonymous person afraid of?
Anonymous: Tomorrow Wed August 20th, Ed Boks will be presenting one of his seminars on "RESCUE GROUPS".
There is NOTHING that Ed Boks can teach us about rescue that we do not already know.
ED: If you are a rescuer, I would largely agree. But these workshops are not for rescuers alone. They are for the entire community, most of whom don’t have a clue about the needs or our animals, our rescuers, and our department. These workshops are designed to help us think out side of the box (or the Boks, if you prefer) and come up with some new ideas, strategies and alliances to help save more lives.
Anonymous: If you know Boks and have worked with him, you know that the one value of attending any of his so called seminars is to support Ed Boks since he will use the attendance as evidence of his "success" in getting people to show up.
ED: Actually, my role in these workshops is that of a secretary, to document the ideas and suggestions of the community. A panel of rescuers and other experts will be present to engage on the topics being discussed.
Anonymous: The only possible value of attending would be to use it as a chance to get Boks/Barth to reverse the recent negative changes they made in the New Hope program.
ED: The purpose of tonight’s workshop is to discuss program enhancements, so we welcome discussion on this topic. To put the above allegation into context it is important to understand that there were only two significant changes in the New Hope program. One was reinstituting the $28 spay/neuter fee. This is a fee that rescue partners had routinely paid until the advent of the New Hope program in 2006. The department waived that fee for one year and there was no increase in the number of animals saved through New Hope. The fee was waived to help New Hope partners rescue more animals.
It was difficult to justify waiving the fee a second year when it had no measurable impact the first year. Nonetheless, the department secured a $160,000 grant from the Found Animal Foundation so we could waive the fee a second year. Unfortunately, there was still little increase in the number of animals saved and the grant money was spent. So the department had to reinstitute the fee this fiscal year to help off-set a 15% budget cut.
It would be great if the rescue groups would work together to obtain a grant to cover this fee, as the department did for the rescue groups in 2007.
The second change was asking New Hope partners to share adopter information with the Department so we can follow up on licensing. The Department is rightfully under a lot of pressure to increase licensing and we would appreciate our New Hope partners understanding this new requirement - and that it will lead to saving the lives of any licensed and tagged dog brought to any of our Centers.
Anonymous: However, remember that Ed Boke is famous for his lies and empty promises. He will charmingly agree to take your opinions under consideration but no change for the animals will take place unless it serves him personally.
ED: Serving as the general manager of LA Animal Services is a difficult job, particularly when personally criticized by anonymous mudslingers. However, every effort I make is dedicated to doing the best job I can for the City and the animals in my care.
Anonymous: Ed Boks has already agreed to form several "committees" in the past ostensibly working to improve the New Hope program, improve conditions at the shelters and implement public educational programs. Nothing these committees brought to the table was ever implemented. All of the committees dissolve because Ed Boks not only refused to take recommendations and input for positive change but actually falsely claimed that these committees approved changes when they did not.
ED: Actually, the New Hope program we are discussing tonight is the result of the work of two separate committees, one in 2006 and one in 2007. The department is also working with a committee on the formation of a marketing strategy for the spay/neuter ordinance, with remarkable results you will soon all see. The department has a track record of working productively with committees. Not perfect, as some committees have gone astray from staying focused on the business of saving lives and improving procedures and practices, but we are determined to continue working with the community and individuals committed to developing and implementing life saving strategies!
Anonymous: If you do choose to attend the seminar I ask you to challenge Ed Boks on the following:
Why is the Northeast Valley animal shelter not open to rescuers without the need for an advance appointment during very restricted hours?
ED: The Mission (Northeast Valley) Animal Care Center is not open to the public with the exception of our New Hope partners. The Center has very limited staffing, so we have no choice but to meet New Hope partners there by appointment.
Anonymous: If he blames a poor economy read further and ask him the following: Why did he, while our economy is failing, hire a second Assistant General Manager?
ED: Hiring an Assistant General Manager for operations has been a two year process that obviously began long before the current economic slowdown. This position is critical to the success of the department and I make no apologies for filling it with the most qualified person I could find. Improving the direct oversight over shelter and field staff is a critical function in a department with our history.
Anonymous: No General Manager in the history of LAAS ever had two AGM. The cost of these AGMs is approximately $200,000 in salary and benefits a year?
ED: For years before my coming to LA, the local animal welfare community insisted the City find a General Manager who would hold the department accountable for results. The three cardinal principles for success are Leadership, Focus, and Accountability. You cannot hold the Department accountable for results if you don’t allow for leadership. One person alone cannot effectively manage an organization with eight locations, seven of which are open 24/7, with officers in the field 24/7 covering over 490 square miles that is Los Angeles, and taking in 150 animals a day. All one has to do is look at the stream of General Managers who have graced the revolving door known as LA Animal Services over the past few years to know this is true.
For any organization to be successful the first rule is to get the right people on the bus and then to get the right people into the right seats on the bus. That is not an easy task in LA, and it took time, but the results are the only way to evaluate success. I believe you will see the type of leadership and results the LA community has been demanding.
Anonymous: Why does Ed Boks need 2 Directors of Fields Operations at the approximate cost of $230,000 in salary and benefits a year? Why does Ed Boks need 4 new District Supervisors of Operations at the cost of approximately $407,000 in salary and benefit per year?
ED: See the above answer. LA Animal Services is sometimes viewed very simplistically, as a company of dog catchers and kennel workers who operate on autopilot. However, Animal Services it is a very complex and dynamic organization. The District Supervisor positions are positions that were mistakenly eliminated several years ago as a budget saving measure. What that did was eliminate any opportunity for Center Managers to grow into executive-level positions. Through the reinstitution of these positions we will establish a well run, accountable department that will be able to select its future GMs and AGMs internally and not from out of state.
Anonymous: All at a time when LAAS' budget has been cut to the point that the department is slated to lay off 28 ACTs and the animal food budget has been reduced starting in Sept 2008 from $7,125 per shelter per month to $4,750 per shelter per month. That is a reduction of approx $100,000 a year in the food budget while the number of animals under his care continues to increase.
ED: The food budget was over budgeted in the past and we never spent the entire line budget allocated for food. The layoffs are the result of authorized hiring done specifically to prepare for the opening the new Mission (Northeast Valley) Center. If the City continues in its decision to not open that Center and to reduce operating hours, then, under current circumstances we have no choice but to lay off the extra Animal Care Technicians we hired to staff it. Efforts are being made by members of the City Council and others to remedy the situation, but the results are not yet known.
Anonymous: The following is documentation we have that illustrate how Boks/Barth report their killing, and it is very disturbing. It appears that this is one way he can deliver his false no-kill claims. The numbers below came for LAAS documents.
Ed Boks declared March 2008 as a "No-Kill Month". That month one LAAS district shelter euthanized approximately 271 animals. All but 21 were killed for behavioral, medical and unweaned. So that means that 250 in one shelter in one month were so ill and aggressive that they had to be killed.
In April of 2008 two of the highest kill LAAS district shelters euthanized approximately 898 animals. All but 38 were killed for behavioral, medical and unweaned. So that means that 860 animals in 2 shelters in one month were so ill or aggressive that they had to be killed.
In June 2008, 223 animal were euthanized in one of the district lowest kill shelters and NONE were reported as being killed for time and space. So here again, 223 animals were killed in one shelter in one month due to illness and aggression.
In July 2008; 165 animals euthanized in another low kill LAAS district shelter, again, NONE for time and space.
Since "no kill" accepts euthanasia for the medically and behaviorally unadoptable animals, these euthanasia rates lead one to believe that the killing was only 5% of the animals actually killed in LAAS.
ED: The recent increase in animal impounds has led to an increase in the number of animals euthanized. This is the first increase in pet euthanasia in the past six years. The Department successfully reduced pet euthanasia over 50% in the past six years, and 22% in 2007. YTD 2008 has seen a 37.38% increase in euthanasia (10,217) compared to 2007 YTD (7,437). However, when the numbers are normalized to account for the increase in impounds, the euthanasia rate is up only 3.49%.
So, what does that mean to achieving No-Kill?
Phase I of No-Kill is achieved when no healthy animal is killed due to a lack of space or resources.
Phase II is achieved when we end the killing of animals in need of medical treatment.
YTD 118 cats and 384 dogs were killed due to insufficient holding space and/or resources. These healthy pets represent the challenge to achieving Phase I of the City’s “No-Kill” Goal.
YTD, the Department is over 95% on its way to achieving Phase I of No-Kill.
The Department has always welcomed and invited the closest scrutiny to how these numbers are collected and reported. To date, no one has taken us up on our invitation. But the numbers are what they are…
Anonymous: However, in closely reviewing these numbers, it begs the question how could it be that 95% of animals killed in LAAS are killed because they are unadoptable. How does Ed Boks define "behavioral, medical or IRS"? Any of us that have adopted or rescued out of LAAS know that those are impossible odds. As a matter of fact, most of the animals labeled aggressive or sick are not. However, without using such tactics Boks/Barth team cannot show the mayor that they have created any positive change in LAAS.
ED: I know, the animal welfare community finds this type of success impossible to believe. That is why the department has always shied away from reporting on this and has only reported its numbers in terms of “beating hearts in” and “beating hearts out”.
Our staff doesn’t evaluate animal’s behaviors, by directive of our Commission. But we do evaluate them by observation. Animals that demonstrate dangerous behavior are not placed for adoption BUT THEY ARE MADE AVAILABLE to our New Hope Partners. So no animal is arbitrarily euthanized for behavior without having an opportunity to be considered and evaluated for seven days by our 140 New Hope partners.
Anyone who truly works with the Department knows that we have animals in our Centers for half a year or more, you know that we perform some of the most amazing life saving surgeries, we go to tremendous lengths to save lives, more so than any other municipal shelter system in the country. In the last year, our veterinary team expended over $300,000 in medical supplies and medicines. So yes, only around 5% of the animals euthanized are healthy, sound animals.
The Mayor’s office pays close attention to the work of the Department as well as to the concerns of the humane community regarding our operations and our results and is well aware of the progress we are making in a number of areas as well as of the challenges we continue to face.
Anonymous: The numbers above are not to illustrate the euthanasia rate. We are all aware the "no kill" will take time and planning to achieve. These numbers prove that Boks/Barth have failed to create a viable no kill solution but have succeeded in reated a way of misleading the city of Los Angeles and its mayor.
ED: If anonymous wants to work with the Department in identifying just how we are deceiving ANYONE, I welcome them to come forward. Notice that anonymous provides no solutions or recommendations, only personal attacks. If anonymous – or anyone else – thinks they have something constructive to recommend regarding achieving “no kill” apart from promoting certain personalities who are either unqualified for or show no interest in working here, I welcome those ideas. I believe we are employing viable no kill solutions to the best of our abilities in a difficult environment, and they form the basis of the workshop series. Also, once again, the Mayor’s office is completely familiar with everything that is going on.
Anonymous: Another method they use to provide false numbers is warehousing the animals.
In July of this year Ed was accused of warehousing the animals to improve his numbers. To achieve the appearance of less killing, Mr. Boks warehouses the animals until they develop behavioral and/or medical issues and then euthanizes
them for being medically or behaviorally unadoptable. In so doing the time and space numbers remain minimal.
ED: This is not an easy task; and it does point to the already-mentioned need for a more accountable management structure. The Department is committed to achieving “No-Kill”. Yes, we keep animals a long time in an effort to find them homes. Our Centers have a cadre of dedicated volunteer dog trainers who work with the animals to make them more adoptable while they are with us and to help them stay as sociable and healthy as possible. As mentioned above, we have an improved - and remarkable - veterinary program dedicated to fighting the constant threat of disease and treating animals as quickly as possible as needed.
Are we slow to euthanize animals? Yes. And I am in the process of implementing a program to make the process even slower. Each Center has what we call a “Heart-to-Heart” Team. They are charged with evaluating the animals before deciding if they should be euthanized. The team is made up of the Center Manager, the Animal Care Technician Supervisor, the Veterinarian, and the New Hope Coordinator or their designees. They review the length of time the animal has been with us, the health of the animal, the behavior of the animal, and our New Hope and adoption options. Only when this team feels we have exhausted every live saving option for a particular animal is that animal euthanized.
5% of the time this difficult process leads to the death of a healthy animal to help alleviate overcrowding.
Anonymous: THESE ARE NOT SOLUTIONS TO NO KILL, THIS ARE ILLUSION THAT KEEP BOKS AND BARTH EMPLOYED.
Some of you may not know that the LAAS shelter staff is extremely unhappy with Mr. Boks. performance and would like a change to be made. The staff is behind the humane community 100% and will support all rescue groups in every effort. For the first time in the history of LAAS the staff and rescuers are on exactly the same page.
ED: I am well aware of the concerns of some staff and I try to be available to discuss them. I am absolutely confident in saying I know these statements about total unity between the staff and humane community are inaccurate. Complaints from rescuers and others about incidents involving staff have not disappeared into thin air as anonymous apparently would have us believe.
I try to support both my staff and the rescue community and doing so sometimes raises the ire of one or the other when conflicts arise. Those conflicts arise because staff and the rescuers are NOT always on the same page. The Department’s management team spends too much time working on solutions to these issues for this “unity myth” to be credible. Finding solutions to these challenges is the purpose of tonight's workshop.
If someone has a better approach to managing these situations, I’m open to discussing. I want what is best for the Department.
Anonymous: Do you really want to take out time and attend this seminar or any other of Boks' seminars? The only result will be that Ed Boks can show that someone showed up to support him and will continue to ignore what we tell him we need to help save the lives of our city animals.
ED: I cannot imagine what the value of squashing dialogue is. What is this anonymous person afraid of?
Monday, August 18, 2008
Ten Tips To Help Your Dog Beat The Heat
NY Daily News, 11 August 2008
Dogs need protection from the heat, too.
The dog days of summer are just as miserable for our four-legged friends.
"Anything that feels uncomfortable to you is definitely going to feel uncomfortable and unsafe to your pet," says Tod Schadler, veterinarian and associate dean at
Common sense can soothe cats and dogs begging to beat the heat. "What you would do to protect your child in the summertime is basically the same thing you would do for your pet," says Rashell Cooper of PetSmart.
Check out these expert tips for a safe summer with your pets.
1. Never Leave Pets Alone In Parked Cars. Even parking in the shade or cracking the windows isn't enough to keep your vehicle from becoming a 120-degree deathtrap in minutes.
2. Don't Overexert Your Pet. "If you're going to exercise your pet, don't do it when it's blazing hot in the middle of the day," says Schadler. Walk in the morning, late afternoon or evening, when temperatures are cooler.
3. Carry Water On The Go. "Just like a jogger takes some water along for themselves, take some water along for your pet, too," says Schadler. Signs of dehydration include dry tongues and noses.
4. Stick To Shade. Outdoor pets need shady spots in your yard. "It's always good in a grassy area," says Cooper. "It's cooler than being on concrete or dirt."
5. Have Backup Water Bowls. Scatter extra bowls around. "If they knock one over, there's always a fallback dish," says Schadler. Or fill a bowl with ice: "They can lick the ice cubes and the melting water stays nice and cool."
6. Keep Them Groomed. Brush and trim mangy or overgrown coats. "We recommend a professional groomer help you determine the length and what's going to keep them cool, but also protected from the sun," says PetSmart's Michelle Friedman.
7. Pets Need SPF. "If they're exposed to the sun a lot, they're susceptible to sunburns and skin cancer," says Cooper. There are pet sunscreens, but ask your vet about safe brands . "If dogs can get their tongue at it, they're gonna lick it off," Schadler says.
8. Protect Paws. Scalding sidewalks can cause serious burns. "You don't want to walk barefoot, and it's no different for your dogs," says Cooper. Try protective booties or walk on grass.
9. Watch Pets In Water. Some dogs aren't good swimmers. "Have them wear a life jacket for extra protection if they get tired," says Cooper. Don't let pets drink from chlorinated pools or from creeks and rivers crawling with microorganisms.
10. Know Heat-Stroke Signs. Look for excessive panting, disorientation, weakness, vomiting and very hot skin. "Call your veterinarian," says Schadler. "Describe what you're seeing. They'll let you know how much of an emergency it is.”
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Rottie pair abused by con man need help
In the last day or two, e-mails with the above subject line have been circulated on the world wide web. Here is an update on the situation:
On August 3, 2008, LA Animal Services West Valley Center contacted the LA Police Department regarding a serious incident involving one of our pets. Citizens visiting our Center alleged that they saw a man taunting and agitating a dog named Cesar, an adult Rottweiler, with an unidentified object. The witnesses also alleged that they saw him stomp on the dog’s paw in retaliation to a small bite he received during the taunting incident.
Cesar was found to have a cut along the top of his muzzle, which was immediately treated by our medical team. Fortunately, the cut was not serious and required no sutures. The individual was instructed by LAPD that he was not permitted inside any of our Centers and a report was filed and the matter has been referred to the Animal Cruelty Task Force (ACTF) for investigation.
We, at LA Animal Services, are deeply saddened by this serious incident and are thankful that Cesar is making a full physical recovery. We applaud the brave witnesses who came forward and recounted the facts to the Police. We are confident that the matter will be fully investigated and justice will be served on Cesar's behalf.
We appreciate your inquires regarding Cesar's well being. It is our fervent hope that Cesar and his best buddy, Cleo (also an adult Rottweiler), will soon have warm and loving homes available to them. Cesar and Cleo can be viewed on our website at http://www.laanimalservices.com/animalidsearch.htm. Just type in A0934326 for Cleo and A0934327 for Cesar. Our Best Buddy program allows you to adopt one animal for the full adoption fee and his/her buddy at one half the adoption fee.
Both Cesar and Cleo came into our Center on March 17th, five months ago, as lost pets without licenses or microchips. 100% of the lost animals that come into LA Animal Services with current identification go home. Unfortunately, 99% of the animals that come into LA Animals Services have no identification, and never go home again.
Cesar and Cleo are on our Green Alert which means any New Hope partner can rescue them and they are available to the public for adoption.
On August 3, 2008, LA Animal Services West Valley Center contacted the LA Police Department regarding a serious incident involving one of our pets. Citizens visiting our Center alleged that they saw a man taunting and agitating a dog named Cesar, an adult Rottweiler, with an unidentified object. The witnesses also alleged that they saw him stomp on the dog’s paw in retaliation to a small bite he received during the taunting incident.
Cesar was found to have a cut along the top of his muzzle, which was immediately treated by our medical team. Fortunately, the cut was not serious and required no sutures. The individual was instructed by LAPD that he was not permitted inside any of our Centers and a report was filed and the matter has been referred to the Animal Cruelty Task Force (ACTF) for investigation.
We, at LA Animal Services, are deeply saddened by this serious incident and are thankful that Cesar is making a full physical recovery. We applaud the brave witnesses who came forward and recounted the facts to the Police. We are confident that the matter will be fully investigated and justice will be served on Cesar's behalf.
We appreciate your inquires regarding Cesar's well being. It is our fervent hope that Cesar and his best buddy, Cleo (also an adult Rottweiler), will soon have warm and loving homes available to them. Cesar and Cleo can be viewed on our website at http://www.laanimalservices.com/animalidsearch.htm. Just type in A0934326 for Cleo and A0934327 for Cesar. Our Best Buddy program allows you to adopt one animal for the full adoption fee and his/her buddy at one half the adoption fee.
Both Cesar and Cleo came into our Center on March 17th, five months ago, as lost pets without licenses or microchips. 100% of the lost animals that come into LA Animal Services with current identification go home. Unfortunately, 99% of the animals that come into LA Animals Services have no identification, and never go home again.
Cesar and Cleo are on our Green Alert which means any New Hope partner can rescue them and they are available to the public for adoption.
Monday, August 04, 2008
Basic Ocean Etiquette
The following guidelines were developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). They are intended to help you enjoy watching marine wildlife without causing them harm or placing your personal safety at risk. Keep in mind that these are general guidelines, and it is best to follow location or species-specific guidelines if they are available.
Learn before you go. Many marine wildlife species have specific habitat needs and sensitive lifecycle requirements. Use the internet, guidebooks, and knowledgeable people to learn how to observe wildlife responsibly where you plan to visit them.
Keep your distance. Getting too close to animals can be harmful to them and to you. Take precaution and use binoculars that let you view animals from a distance where they won’t be disturbed.
Hands off. Touching wildlife, or attempting to do so, can injure the animal, put you at risk, and may be illegal for most protected species.
Do not feed or attract marine wildlife. Feeding or attempting to attract wildlife may harm animals by causing sickness, death, and habituation to people. Animals that are accustomed to humans become vulnerable to injuries and can be dangerous.
Never chase or harass wildlife. Do not surround, trap or separate animals, approach them head on, or approach them directly from behind. Make sure they know you are there before they see you.
Stay away from wildlife that appear abandoned or sick. Animals that appear sick may not be. They may be resting or are young awaiting the return of a parent. If animals are approached, their behavior may become aggressive. If you think an animal is sick or injured, contact local authorities.
Wildlife and pets don’t mix. Wild animals can injure and spread diseases to pets, and pets can harm and disturb wildlife. If you are traveling with pets, keep them leashed and away from wildlife. Please help us get the word out that it is against the law to let your dog on any LA City or LA County beach on or off leash at any time!
Lend a hand with trash removal. Human garbage and fishing debris are some of the greatest threats to marine wildlife. Carry a trash bag with you and pick up litter found along the shore.
Help others to become responsible wildlife watchers and tour operators. Lead by example. It’s up to you! Obtain and carry a few copies of these guidelines on your travels and share them with others. Patronize businesses that follow these guidelines. Protecting and conserving is everyone’s responsibility.
How you can help:
- Become Ocean Literate.
- Treat our coasts, oceans, and the animals that live there with care.
- Actively participate in local, state and federal efforts to protect and manage coastal and ocean resources.
Federal Laws Protecting Wildlife
Marine Mammal Protection Act: The MMPA prohibits the “take” of marine mammals. “Take” includes actions such as hunting, harassing, killing, capturing, injuring, and disturbing a marine mammal. For more information consult the text of the MMPA at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr.
Endangered Species Act: The ESA prohibits the “take” of a threatened or endangered species in U.S. territorial waters. “Take” under the ESA means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. For more information consult the text of the ESA at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr.
National Marine Sanctuaries Act: The NMSA provides authority for comprehensive and coordinated conservation and management of national marine sanctuaries, and activities affecting them, in a manner which complements existing regulatory authorities. NOAA develops regulations for each sanctuary that are responsive to their specific issues, needs and goals. For more information visit www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/protect/regulations/welcome.html.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act: The MBTA prohibits the pursuit, take, capture, kill, sale, purchase, or transport of migratory birds and their parts (including eggs, nests, and feathers) or attempt to engage in such conduct. For more information consult the text of the MBTA at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/intrnltr.html.
Contributors to these guidelines include NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program, NOAA Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources, National Park Service, US Fish and Wildlife, Watchable Wildlife, Inc., International Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, Wildlife Conservation Society, and a number of state and regional agencies, organizations, and institutions.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Landlords asked to help pets during foreclosure crisis
LA Animal Services is urging area landlords to be especially sensitive to the plight of displaced home owners with pets during the on-going foreclosure crisis. In the first six months of 2008, LA Animal Services experienced a 21% increase in pets turned into City shelters for reasons related to the housing crisis and a 28% increase in the number of pets euthanized.
This disturbing trend stalls six years of progress in dramatically reducing pet euthanasia in the City of Los Angeles. The department had reduced pet euthanasia over 50% during the past five years and 22% in 2007. Although the City of Los Angeles still has one of the lowest pet euthanasia rates in the nation, the department is determined to reverse the current negative trend and still achieve its No-Kill Goal. But we need help.
Many people who are losing their homes now are at the mercy of landlords and we are asking landlords to consider accommodating animals. If you are a landlord, please consider the emotional stress of displaced owners and the consequences to their pets.
One solution the department is asking landlords to consider is a modest increase in cleaning deposits that would make it possible for new renters to own pets.
I’m convinced that as landlords understand the anguish their tenants experience when they are forced to relinquish a loved member of the family, and see how easy it is to address their own concerns, they will want to do more to help keep pets and families together. We really need our community to pull together to help solve this crisis and, like never before, landlords are a significant key.
Please share this message with a landlord.
Thank you.
This disturbing trend stalls six years of progress in dramatically reducing pet euthanasia in the City of Los Angeles. The department had reduced pet euthanasia over 50% during the past five years and 22% in 2007. Although the City of Los Angeles still has one of the lowest pet euthanasia rates in the nation, the department is determined to reverse the current negative trend and still achieve its No-Kill Goal. But we need help.
Many people who are losing their homes now are at the mercy of landlords and we are asking landlords to consider accommodating animals. If you are a landlord, please consider the emotional stress of displaced owners and the consequences to their pets.
One solution the department is asking landlords to consider is a modest increase in cleaning deposits that would make it possible for new renters to own pets.
I’m convinced that as landlords understand the anguish their tenants experience when they are forced to relinquish a loved member of the family, and see how easy it is to address their own concerns, they will want to do more to help keep pets and families together. We really need our community to pull together to help solve this crisis and, like never before, landlords are a significant key.
Please share this message with a landlord.
Thank you.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
The Spay/Neuter Clock is Ticking
As of today, Angelenos have 61 days to get their dogs and cats spayed or neutered. LA Animal Services launched a “Countdown Clock” on its website to serve as a daily reminder to all Angelinos of how many days they have left to comply with the City’s new Spay/Neuter law before formal enforcement begins on October 1st, 2008.
On February 12, 2008, the City Council of Los Angeles approved a new law that requires all cats and dogs in the City to be spayed or neutered after the age of four months, with some specific exemptions allowed. Mayor Villaraigosa signed this ordinance into law on February 26, 2008, making Los Angeles the national leader in efforts to humanely decrease the number of pets abandoned and euthanized each year.
The law provided a seven month “grace” period to give Los Angeles residents an opportunity to voluntarily comply with the law. The Countdown Clock is to remind them that unless they have proof that their dog or cat is exempt by reason of one of the exemptions in the new law, if they have not spayed or neutered their dog or cat by October 1st, 2008, they will be in violation of the law and subject to civil and criminal penalties.
Failure to abide by the law after October 1, 2008 will result in an initial civil penalty of $100, which can increase to $500. Continued failure to abide by the law may result in the filing of a misdemeanor. At all times, the dog or cat is still required to be spayed or neutered.
The Countdown Calendar and more information on this law and spay/neuter services in the City of Los Angeles can be found at http://www.laanimalservices.com/.
On February 12, 2008, the City Council of Los Angeles approved a new law that requires all cats and dogs in the City to be spayed or neutered after the age of four months, with some specific exemptions allowed. Mayor Villaraigosa signed this ordinance into law on February 26, 2008, making Los Angeles the national leader in efforts to humanely decrease the number of pets abandoned and euthanized each year.
The law provided a seven month “grace” period to give Los Angeles residents an opportunity to voluntarily comply with the law. The Countdown Clock is to remind them that unless they have proof that their dog or cat is exempt by reason of one of the exemptions in the new law, if they have not spayed or neutered their dog or cat by October 1st, 2008, they will be in violation of the law and subject to civil and criminal penalties.
Failure to abide by the law after October 1, 2008 will result in an initial civil penalty of $100, which can increase to $500. Continued failure to abide by the law may result in the filing of a misdemeanor. At all times, the dog or cat is still required to be spayed or neutered.
The Countdown Calendar and more information on this law and spay/neuter services in the City of Los Angeles can be found at http://www.laanimalservices.com/.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
New Day in LA Animal Services Challenges a blast from the past...
Recent blog posts by Nathan Winograd of No Kill Solutions are accompanied by videos depicting the unacceptable actions of two former LA Animal Services employees. One employee depicted has not worked for the department since September 2004. Another left more than a year ago.
LA Animal Services has policies in place today to prevent the kind of behavior and activity depicted in Mr. Winograd's blog and the LA Animal Services team is committed to completely eliminating these kinds of errors and abuses.
Improper treatment of animals in our Animal Care Centers is neither condoned nor tolerated. It is our belief that the kind of incidents that are the subject of Mr. Winograd's allegations do not occur in today's LA Animal Services. If they ever do, and there is demonstrable proof of it, the perpetrators will be disciplined appropriately.
Today’s LA Animal Services values the integrity of each employee, volunteer and partner contributing to the professional delivery of excellent customer service and the humane treatment of animals, in an atmosphere of open, honest communication, predicated on our trust in and respect for each other.
Anyone with any evidence of inappropriate or abusive conduct towards our customers, partners, or the animals in our care is encouraged to forward that evidence to the Department so appropriate action can be taken immediately.
LA Animal Services has policies in place today to prevent the kind of behavior and activity depicted in Mr. Winograd's blog and the LA Animal Services team is committed to completely eliminating these kinds of errors and abuses.
Improper treatment of animals in our Animal Care Centers is neither condoned nor tolerated. It is our belief that the kind of incidents that are the subject of Mr. Winograd's allegations do not occur in today's LA Animal Services. If they ever do, and there is demonstrable proof of it, the perpetrators will be disciplined appropriately.
Today’s LA Animal Services values the integrity of each employee, volunteer and partner contributing to the professional delivery of excellent customer service and the humane treatment of animals, in an atmosphere of open, honest communication, predicated on our trust in and respect for each other.
Anyone with any evidence of inappropriate or abusive conduct towards our customers, partners, or the animals in our care is encouraged to forward that evidence to the Department so appropriate action can be taken immediately.
Monday, July 21, 2008
SUPPORT AB 1634 TO SAVE MONEY AND SAVE LIVES
AB1634 Overview
Problem: Massive pet overpopulation and animal bites in California.
Roaming animals create untold numbers of accidental pregnancies. According to the CA Department of Public Health, over 800,000 dogs and cats are abandoned annually in our state; this costs taxpayers over $250 million each year. Over half of these pets, 400,000 of them, are not adopted and thus are euthanized at taxpayer expense. Unaltered dogs are three times more likely to bite, and almost 40,000 people in California are attacked and bitten by dogs and cats each year. Children are the most common victims.
AB 1634 – A common sense law to help combat pet overpopulation and bites.
AB 1634 is a common sense tool that allows law enforcement to target roaming animals, prevent unplanned animal litters and reduce animal attacks. The law requires the owner of a nonspayed or unneutered dog or cat to be cited for being intact, if the animal is the subject of a valid complaint indicating that the owner has violated state or local animal control laws. At any occurrence, the penalty is waived if the animal is spayed or neutered.
AB 1634 – Building on existing law.
Current state law already provides additional fines for the owners of impounded nonspayed or unneutered animals. AB 1634 increases existing fines, and adds a spay or neuter requirement for the small number of animals subject to repeated animal control action.
The new law is similar to existing laws in other states, providing an additional tool for law enforcement to deal with animals and owners who repeatedly violate state and local laws.
AB 1634 – A fair process.
AB 1634 does not apply to animals that are caught up in “neighbor disputes” or are the subject of unwarranted complaints, and does not apply to violations related to excessive noise such as dog barking.
Animals cited under the provisions of AB 1634 are accorded the exact same due process and appeals rights granted to them for any violation of state or local animal control laws.
For more information please visit http://www.cahealthypets.com/.
Problem: Massive pet overpopulation and animal bites in California.
Roaming animals create untold numbers of accidental pregnancies. According to the CA Department of Public Health, over 800,000 dogs and cats are abandoned annually in our state; this costs taxpayers over $250 million each year. Over half of these pets, 400,000 of them, are not adopted and thus are euthanized at taxpayer expense. Unaltered dogs are three times more likely to bite, and almost 40,000 people in California are attacked and bitten by dogs and cats each year. Children are the most common victims.
AB 1634 – A common sense law to help combat pet overpopulation and bites.
AB 1634 is a common sense tool that allows law enforcement to target roaming animals, prevent unplanned animal litters and reduce animal attacks. The law requires the owner of a nonspayed or unneutered dog or cat to be cited for being intact, if the animal is the subject of a valid complaint indicating that the owner has violated state or local animal control laws. At any occurrence, the penalty is waived if the animal is spayed or neutered.
AB 1634 – Building on existing law.
Current state law already provides additional fines for the owners of impounded nonspayed or unneutered animals. AB 1634 increases existing fines, and adds a spay or neuter requirement for the small number of animals subject to repeated animal control action.
The new law is similar to existing laws in other states, providing an additional tool for law enforcement to deal with animals and owners who repeatedly violate state and local laws.
AB 1634 – A fair process.
AB 1634 does not apply to animals that are caught up in “neighbor disputes” or are the subject of unwarranted complaints, and does not apply to violations related to excessive noise such as dog barking.
Animals cited under the provisions of AB 1634 are accorded the exact same due process and appeals rights granted to them for any violation of state or local animal control laws.
For more information please visit http://www.cahealthypets.com/.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Creating a Humane LA: A Call to Action - Update
As explained in an earlier message, LA Animal Services is scheduling a series of public work shops to help better familiarize concerned Angelenos with LA Animal Services’ efforts to achieve “No-Kill”. The work shops will also serve to help gather input and feedback on how we can do better. We are designing these public workshops to focus on the ten tenets of the “No-Kill Equation”.
The series of work shops is called, "Creating a Humane LA". The meetings will be scheduled in the order outlined below, about two weeks apart. There has been a change in the date of the first work shop, so please take note.
District 8 Council Member Bernard Parks will host the first workshop:
The schedule below will be updated and posted on our website as the work shops are scheduled and confirmed. We will do our best to get the word out to the community and appreciate your assistance in helping us publicize these work shops to anyone who may be interested in attending.
1. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter I (CD 8 - Parks - August 6th CONFIRMED)
2. Rescue Groups (CD 13 - Garcetti - August 20th CONFIRMED)
3. Foster Care (CD 2 - Greuel - Week of September 1st)
4. Adoption Programs (CD 10 - Wesson - Week of September 15)
5. Pet Retention (CD 1 - Reyes - Week of September 29th)
6. Medical and Behavioral Rehabilitation (CD 6 - Cardenas - Week of October 6th)
7. Feral Cat TNR (CD 15 - Hahn - Week of October 20th)
8. Volunteers (CD 11 - Rosendahl - November 6th CONFIRMED)
9. Public Relations/Community Involvement (CD 4 - LaBonge – Week of November 17th)
10. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter II (CD 7 - Alarcon - Week of December 1st)
11. Creating a Humane LA (The Mayor - Week of December 8th)
The first work shop panel focusing on High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter programs will include Ed Boks and Brenda Van Den Bosch from LA Animal Services, Terri Austin from the Amanda Foundation, Sue Taylor from Actors and Others, Lori Wiess from Downtown Dog Rescue, and Judie Mancuso from California Healthy Pets. Other knowledgeable people will also be attending. The work shop will be facilitated by the Human Relations Commission.
Any organization who would like to set up an information table at any of these work shops to explain your role in legitimately and meaningfully helping LA achieve No-Kill is invited to contact LA Animal Services at 213.482.9530 to determine if we can accommodate you.
If you or your group would like to serve on a work shop panel discussion, please contact me at 213.482.9558 to discuss your involvement.
Be watching for additional updates!
If you would like to review what is currently happening in LA with respect to the ten components of of the No-Kill Equation, click here.
The series of work shops is called, "Creating a Humane LA". The meetings will be scheduled in the order outlined below, about two weeks apart. There has been a change in the date of the first work shop, so please take note.
District 8 Council Member Bernard Parks will host the first workshop:
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6 at 6:30 p.m.
High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Work Shop
The Constituent Service Center
8475 South Vermont (near Manchester)
Los Angeles, CA 90048
The schedule below will be updated and posted on our website as the work shops are scheduled and confirmed. We will do our best to get the word out to the community and appreciate your assistance in helping us publicize these work shops to anyone who may be interested in attending.
1. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter I (CD 8 - Parks - August 6th CONFIRMED)
2. Rescue Groups (CD 13 - Garcetti - August 20th CONFIRMED)
3. Foster Care (CD 2 - Greuel - Week of September 1st)
4. Adoption Programs (CD 10 - Wesson - Week of September 15)
5. Pet Retention (CD 1 - Reyes - Week of September 29th)
6. Medical and Behavioral Rehabilitation (CD 6 - Cardenas - Week of October 6th)
7. Feral Cat TNR (CD 15 - Hahn - Week of October 20th)
8. Volunteers (CD 11 - Rosendahl - November 6th CONFIRMED)
9. Public Relations/Community Involvement (CD 4 - LaBonge – Week of November 17th)
10. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter II (CD 7 - Alarcon - Week of December 1st)
11. Creating a Humane LA (The Mayor - Week of December 8th)
The first work shop panel focusing on High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter programs will include Ed Boks and Brenda Van Den Bosch from LA Animal Services, Terri Austin from the Amanda Foundation, Sue Taylor from Actors and Others, Lori Wiess from Downtown Dog Rescue, and Judie Mancuso from California Healthy Pets. Other knowledgeable people will also be attending. The work shop will be facilitated by the Human Relations Commission.
Any organization who would like to set up an information table at any of these work shops to explain your role in legitimately and meaningfully helping LA achieve No-Kill is invited to contact LA Animal Services at 213.482.9530 to determine if we can accommodate you.
If you or your group would like to serve on a work shop panel discussion, please contact me at 213.482.9558 to discuss your involvement.
Be watching for additional updates!
If you would like to review what is currently happening in LA with respect to the ten components of of the No-Kill Equation, click here.
Friday, July 11, 2008
AB 2427 - Time to be Heard
AB 2427 (Eng), a bill sponsored by the California Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA), will prevent local communities from deciding what veterinary procedures they will allow in their communities. This could affect future restrictions on declawing, tail docking, ear cropping and similar inhumane procedures on animals. It also would reverse the law adopted in West Hollywood several years ago prohibiting the declawing of cats.
This bill is about to be voted on the floor of the California State Senate, its last step before, if approved, going to the Governor for his signature or veto.
The City of Los Angeles has not taken an official position on this bill so I cannot discuss the substantive issues it raises in this forum. But if you would like to learn more about AB 2427 and/or contact your State Senator to express your support or opposition, here's how you can do so:
1) Obtain more information on the bill by going to: http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/pagequery?type=sen_bilinfo&site=sen&title=Bill+Information
2) Then go to: www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html .
3) Type in your zip code .
4) Press SEARCH .
5) Note the name of your Senator, the address of your Senator the Telephone number of your Senator and the Fax number of your Senator.
6) Make a phone call.
a) When you get the receptionist, ask if you may speak with the staff person who is in charge of advising the Senator on AB 2427. You may be transferred to voice mail or get a real person.
b) voice your opinion regarding how you feel the Senator should vote on AB 2427 (Eng) when it reaches the Senate Floor.
OR,
7) If you prefer, write a letter or send a fax to your Senator, but be prompt, because the bill may be heard in the next week or two.
This bill is about to be voted on the floor of the California State Senate, its last step before, if approved, going to the Governor for his signature or veto.
The City of Los Angeles has not taken an official position on this bill so I cannot discuss the substantive issues it raises in this forum. But if you would like to learn more about AB 2427 and/or contact your State Senator to express your support or opposition, here's how you can do so:
1) Obtain more information on the bill by going to: http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/pagequery?type=sen_bilinfo&site=sen&title=Bill+Information
2) Then go to: www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html .
3) Type in your zip code .
4) Press SEARCH .
5) Note the name of your Senator, the address of your Senator the Telephone number of your Senator and the Fax number of your Senator.
6) Make a phone call.
a) When you get the receptionist, ask if you may speak with the staff person who is in charge of advising the Senator on AB 2427. You may be transferred to voice mail or get a real person.
b) voice your opinion regarding how you feel the Senator should vote on AB 2427 (Eng) when it reaches the Senate Floor.
OR,
7) If you prefer, write a letter or send a fax to your Senator, but be prompt, because the bill may be heard in the next week or two.
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Creating a Humane LA: A Call to Action
LA Animal Services has long been committed to making Los Angeles a “No-Kill” community for animals. “No-Kill” is defined as getting LA Animal Services to the place where only dangerously aggressive and terminally ill and injured animals are euthanized. In other words, no animal will be euthanized, or killed, because the community lacks the space or the resources to properly care for and place an animal in a loving home.
Over the past several years LA Animal Services has implemented numerous programs and policies to achieve No-Kill with some remarkable success. To help hasten LA’s progress, some have asked LA Animal Services to consider a purportedly new approach called “The No Kill Equation”.
Proponents of “The No-Kill Equation” claim it provides a revolutionary formula to help local animal care and control agencies achieve “No-Kill”. In fact, the "No-Kill Equation" is actually comprised of ten commonsense, long-standing practices embraced and implemented to various degrees by LA Animal Services.
To help better familiarize concerned Angelenos with LA Animal Services’ efforts to achieve “No-Kill” and at the same time gather input and feedback on how we could do better, we are scheduling a series of public workshops to focus on the ten tenets of the “No-Kill Equation”.
The series of workshops will be called, "Creating a Humane LA". The meetings will be scheduled in the order outlined below, about two weeks apart.
Two Council Members asked to host High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Workshops so the series will begin with two sessions devoted to this topic.
District 8 Council Member Bernard Parks will host the first workshop. It is scheduled for
Tuesday, July 22 at 6 p.m.
High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Work Shop
The Constituent Service Center
8475 South Vermont (near Manchester)
Los Angeles, CA 90048
Over the past several years LA Animal Services has implemented numerous programs and policies to achieve No-Kill with some remarkable success. To help hasten LA’s progress, some have asked LA Animal Services to consider a purportedly new approach called “The No Kill Equation”.
Proponents of “The No-Kill Equation” claim it provides a revolutionary formula to help local animal care and control agencies achieve “No-Kill”. In fact, the "No-Kill Equation" is actually comprised of ten commonsense, long-standing practices embraced and implemented to various degrees by LA Animal Services.
To help better familiarize concerned Angelenos with LA Animal Services’ efforts to achieve “No-Kill” and at the same time gather input and feedback on how we could do better, we are scheduling a series of public workshops to focus on the ten tenets of the “No-Kill Equation”.
The series of workshops will be called, "Creating a Humane LA". The meetings will be scheduled in the order outlined below, about two weeks apart.
Two Council Members asked to host High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Workshops so the series will begin with two sessions devoted to this topic.
District 8 Council Member Bernard Parks will host the first workshop. It is scheduled for
Tuesday, July 22 at 6 p.m.
High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Work Shop
The Constituent Service Center
8475 South Vermont (near Manchester)
Los Angeles, CA 90048
District 7 Council Member Richard Alarcon will host the second High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter workshop at a location yet to be determined probably during the week of August 4th. The schedule below will be updated and posted on our website as the work- shops are scheduled and confirmed. We will do our best to get the word out to the community. We appreciate your assistance in helping us publicize these workshops to anyone who may be interested in attending.
1. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter I (CD 8 - Parks - July 22nd CONFIRMED)
2. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter II (CD 7 - Alarcon - Week of August 4th)
3. Rescue Groups (CD 13 - Garcetti - Week of August 18th)
4. Foster Care (CD 2 - Greuel - Week of September 1st)
5. Adoption Programs (CD 10 - Wesson - Week of September 15)
6. Pet Retention (CD 1 - Reyes - Week of September 29th)
7. Medical and Behavioral Rehabilitation (CD 6 - Cardenas - Week of October 6th)
8. Feral Cat TNR (CD 15 - Hahn - Week of October 20th)
9. Volunteers (CD 11 - Rosendahl - Week of November 3rd)
10. Public Relations/Community Involvement (CD 4 - LaBonge – Week of November 17th)
11. Creating a Humane LA (The Mayor - Week of December 1st)
Any organization who would like to set up an information table at any of these work- shops to explain your role in legitimately and meaningfully helping LA achieve No-Kill is invited to contact LA Animal Services at 213.482.9530 to determine if we can accommodate you.
If you or your group would like to be part of the Work Shop panel discussion, please contact me at 213.482.9558 to discuss your involvement.
Be watching for additional updates!
If you would like to review what is currently happening in LA with respect to the ten components of of the No-Kill Equation, click here.
Friday, June 27, 2008
REMINDER: KEEP YOUR PETS SAFE JULY 4TH
LA Animal Services is suggesting pet owners get their pets licensed and micro-chipped before the 4th of July. More animals are lost during the 4th of July celebrations than at any other time of the year. Loud noises from fireworks frighten animals due to their heightened senses of hearing, and they will do anything to escape the noise. This behavior is usually unpredictable and out of character, and it may include chewing through a leash, jumping through screens and glass windows, digging under a fence, jumping over a wall, bolting away from the owner, and running into traffic.
The good news is that there are many things you can do to help ensure your pet's protection. Just follow these six simple guidelines to make July 4th a great holiday for both of you!
· Don’t take your pet to fireworks displays. The explosions of the fireworks are loud to the human ear. Imagine how loud it sounds to your dog, who can hear sounds up to 60,000 cycles per second -- that's three times greater than the human ear can even register.
· Do not leave your pet in the car. With only hot air to breathe inside a car, your pet can suffer serious health effects, even death, in a few short minutes. Partially opened windows do not provide sufficient air, but do provide an opportunity for your pet to be stolen. This practice is also illegal in the state of California.
· Keep your pets indoors in a sheltered, quiet area. Some animals become destructive when frightened, so be sure you've removed any items your pet could destroy or may be harmful to your pet if chewed. Leave a television or radio playing at normal volume to keep him company while you're attending 4th of July picnics, parades, and other celebrations.
· If you know that your pet is seriously distressed by loud noises like thunder, consult with your veterinarian before July 4th for ways to help alleviate the fear and anxiety he or she will experience during fireworks displays.
· Never leave pets outside unattended, even in a fenced yard or on a chain. In their fear, pets who normally wouldn't leave the yard may escape and become lost, or become entangled in their chain, risking injury or death.
· Make sure your pets are wearing identification tags so that if they do become lost, they can be returned promptly. Animals found running at-large should be taken to the local animal care center, where they have the best chance of being reunited with their owners. Two forms of ID are always best when it comes to protecting your pet. If an individual finds your pet, the first thing he or she will look for is an ID tag. In LA, if your pet is taken to a shelter, he/she will be scanned for a microchip. LA Animal Services micro-chips pets for $25.
The good news is that there are many things you can do to help ensure your pet's protection. Just follow these six simple guidelines to make July 4th a great holiday for both of you!
· Don’t take your pet to fireworks displays. The explosions of the fireworks are loud to the human ear. Imagine how loud it sounds to your dog, who can hear sounds up to 60,000 cycles per second -- that's three times greater than the human ear can even register.
· Do not leave your pet in the car. With only hot air to breathe inside a car, your pet can suffer serious health effects, even death, in a few short minutes. Partially opened windows do not provide sufficient air, but do provide an opportunity for your pet to be stolen. This practice is also illegal in the state of California.
· Keep your pets indoors in a sheltered, quiet area. Some animals become destructive when frightened, so be sure you've removed any items your pet could destroy or may be harmful to your pet if chewed. Leave a television or radio playing at normal volume to keep him company while you're attending 4th of July picnics, parades, and other celebrations.
· If you know that your pet is seriously distressed by loud noises like thunder, consult with your veterinarian before July 4th for ways to help alleviate the fear and anxiety he or she will experience during fireworks displays.
· Never leave pets outside unattended, even in a fenced yard or on a chain. In their fear, pets who normally wouldn't leave the yard may escape and become lost, or become entangled in their chain, risking injury or death.
· Make sure your pets are wearing identification tags so that if they do become lost, they can be returned promptly. Animals found running at-large should be taken to the local animal care center, where they have the best chance of being reunited with their owners. Two forms of ID are always best when it comes to protecting your pet. If an individual finds your pet, the first thing he or she will look for is an ID tag. In LA, if your pet is taken to a shelter, he/she will be scanned for a microchip. LA Animal Services micro-chips pets for $25.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
AB 1634 Approved by California Senate Local Government Committee
An amended version of AB 1634 was passed through the Senate Local Government Committee yesterday with a 3-2 vote. The original bill required spaying and neutering of most pets in the state, with many common sense exceptions (similar to the ordinance we approved earlier this year here in Los Angeles). The bill now specifically targets dogs and cats who are the subject of complaints to animal control, fine-tuning enforcement, spay/neuter and penalty requirements.
Although the amended version of the bill does not go as far on spay/neuter as the previous version, supporters feel it certainly is a step forward for the state as a whole. Keep in mind that there are parts of California where the shelter kill rates approach 80% and the local political dynamics seem certain to prevent the passage of an ordinance even half as strong as what we now have in Los Angeles. Taking this big picture into account, and noting the enormous fiscal and emotional toll such kill rates take on both animals and people in California, even a small step in the right direction can be a big step.
Thanks are due to both Senator Gloria Negrete-McLeod and Assemblymember Lloyd Levine for working together to find common ground and allow this important bill to continue its journey towards law.
While having undergone significant changes as it moved through the legislative process, AB 1634 remains an important tool to help reduce the escalating cost of animal control in cities and counties throughout the State of California. This legislation will also alleviate some of the emotional distress caused by pet overpopulation.
AB 1634 now provides local animal control agencies useful discretion to resolve many of the vexing animal related problems we face and, for the first time, allows the local agency under certain circumstances to require the sterilization of animals being redeemed from public shelters by their owners.
The vast majority of the animal complaints we receive involve intact animals, including serious bites and attacks. AB 1634 has been transformed into a more finely tuned response that will help us target those animals that are clearly and indisputably a problem in our communities.
AB 1634 wisely allocates any funds collected under this law to be expended for the purpose of humane education and programs for low-cost spaying and neutering of dogs and cats.
The current version of the bill is a compromise, hand-crafted in the true political sense to provide some measure of relief from the pet population crisis in our communities without infringing on legitimate, responsible commerce, hobby breeding and pet ownership. Author Lloyd Levine believes it will prove to be the foundation for more statewide spay/neuter reforms in the future, and after a year-and-a-half of hard, often frustrating work, that’s progress.
Although the amended version of the bill does not go as far on spay/neuter as the previous version, supporters feel it certainly is a step forward for the state as a whole. Keep in mind that there are parts of California where the shelter kill rates approach 80% and the local political dynamics seem certain to prevent the passage of an ordinance even half as strong as what we now have in Los Angeles. Taking this big picture into account, and noting the enormous fiscal and emotional toll such kill rates take on both animals and people in California, even a small step in the right direction can be a big step.
Thanks are due to both Senator Gloria Negrete-McLeod and Assemblymember Lloyd Levine for working together to find common ground and allow this important bill to continue its journey towards law.
While having undergone significant changes as it moved through the legislative process, AB 1634 remains an important tool to help reduce the escalating cost of animal control in cities and counties throughout the State of California. This legislation will also alleviate some of the emotional distress caused by pet overpopulation.
AB 1634 now provides local animal control agencies useful discretion to resolve many of the vexing animal related problems we face and, for the first time, allows the local agency under certain circumstances to require the sterilization of animals being redeemed from public shelters by their owners.
The vast majority of the animal complaints we receive involve intact animals, including serious bites and attacks. AB 1634 has been transformed into a more finely tuned response that will help us target those animals that are clearly and indisputably a problem in our communities.
AB 1634 wisely allocates any funds collected under this law to be expended for the purpose of humane education and programs for low-cost spaying and neutering of dogs and cats.
The current version of the bill is a compromise, hand-crafted in the true political sense to provide some measure of relief from the pet population crisis in our communities without infringing on legitimate, responsible commerce, hobby breeding and pet ownership. Author Lloyd Levine believes it will prove to be the foundation for more statewide spay/neuter reforms in the future, and after a year-and-a-half of hard, often frustrating work, that’s progress.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
AB 1634: A Good Compromise by Dr. Allan Drusys, DVM
It has been many months, and this is not the draft anyone envisioned, but AB 1634 is back in business.
Wednesday, we will witness the bill's re-emergence after it was stalled in a Senate committee. Its rebirth may not please those who favor mandatory spay-and-neuter legislation, but who can find fault with the latest version?
It appears that Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Sherman Oaks, and the Senate co-sponsors, Gloria Negrete McLeod, D-Chino, and Alex Padilla, D-Los Angeles, have now fashioned the bill to reflect proven provisions originally set forth some nine years ago in SB 1785, known as the Hayden bill.
No longer will we waste time arguing over the appropriate age for pet sterilization and who can be a breeder. AB 1634 has been completely rewritten, and this version provides for an increasing series of fines resulting in possible pet sterilization upon the second cat impound or the third impound of a dog.
The fines ($50 and $100) are approximately twice what the existing Hayden bill calls for, yet the initial fines can be waived if the pet is sterilized within 14 days. On its third impound, the offending dog will not be released to the owner until it is spayed or neutered.
Another section of AB 1634 addresses complaints. Here the authors provide an identical fine structure for owners who do not abide by existing state and local animal regulations. Eventual sterilization of multiple violators (the pets, not the owners) is also called for.
Why is this a good deal?
Well, only those owners who do not take care of their animals will be subjected to the provisions of AB 1634. Most will have no one to blame but themselves if they do not have a kennel permit or if their animals are picked up while unlicensed.
Please, do not think the fines will revert to the state. Any funds collected under this law shall be expended for the purpose of humane education and programs for low-cost spaying and neutering of dogs and cats.
In contrast to mandatory spay and neuter, described as draconian by some groups, this approach places the burden solely where it belongs: on the pet owner.
AB 1634 is not ideal, but it is a workable compromise, hand-crafted in the true political sense, to provide some measure of relief from the pet population tsunami without infringing on commerce, hobby breeding or pet ownership.
Allan Drusys is chief veterinarian with Riverside County's Department of Animal Services.
Wednesday, we will witness the bill's re-emergence after it was stalled in a Senate committee. Its rebirth may not please those who favor mandatory spay-and-neuter legislation, but who can find fault with the latest version?
It appears that Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Sherman Oaks, and the Senate co-sponsors, Gloria Negrete McLeod, D-Chino, and Alex Padilla, D-Los Angeles, have now fashioned the bill to reflect proven provisions originally set forth some nine years ago in SB 1785, known as the Hayden bill.
No longer will we waste time arguing over the appropriate age for pet sterilization and who can be a breeder. AB 1634 has been completely rewritten, and this version provides for an increasing series of fines resulting in possible pet sterilization upon the second cat impound or the third impound of a dog.
The fines ($50 and $100) are approximately twice what the existing Hayden bill calls for, yet the initial fines can be waived if the pet is sterilized within 14 days. On its third impound, the offending dog will not be released to the owner until it is spayed or neutered.
Another section of AB 1634 addresses complaints. Here the authors provide an identical fine structure for owners who do not abide by existing state and local animal regulations. Eventual sterilization of multiple violators (the pets, not the owners) is also called for.
Why is this a good deal?
Well, only those owners who do not take care of their animals will be subjected to the provisions of AB 1634. Most will have no one to blame but themselves if they do not have a kennel permit or if their animals are picked up while unlicensed.
Please, do not think the fines will revert to the state. Any funds collected under this law shall be expended for the purpose of humane education and programs for low-cost spaying and neutering of dogs and cats.
In contrast to mandatory spay and neuter, described as draconian by some groups, this approach places the burden solely where it belongs: on the pet owner.
AB 1634 is not ideal, but it is a workable compromise, hand-crafted in the true political sense, to provide some measure of relief from the pet population tsunami without infringing on commerce, hobby breeding or pet ownership.
Allan Drusys is chief veterinarian with Riverside County's Department of Animal Services.
Monday, June 23, 2008
DON'T BUY A DOG OR PUPPY UNTIL YOU HAVE READ THIS!
A recent edition of “Oprah” focused national attention on the unfortunate phenomenon called the “puppy mill.” A puppy mill is a dog-breeding operation intended to provide a non-stop supply of often purebred puppies to a public that seems to have an insatiable appetite for them, an appetite that has created a situation ripe for abuse.Puppy mills force dogs to produce litter after litter just for profit. These dogs and their puppies are often plagued with suffering, resulting from disease, malnutrition, and loneliness. Oprah Winfrey’s intrepid investigative reporter found bitches who, when rescued from these unconscionable conditions, could barely walk after living a life of immobilized confinement. Most people don't know that when they buy a puppy from a pet shop, a newspaper ad or from the internet, they are often supporting a cruel and inhumane industry. We owe these dogs the favor of educating ourselves and others about the reality of puppy mills.
No matter what kind of dog we desire, we can’t let ourselves be duped. We must resist buying a puppy from a pet store, newspaper ad or website, where dogs from puppy mills are typically sold. Still, the temptations are difficult ones.
It’s easy to gaze into the sad eyes of the puppy in the pet store window and want to "rescue" the lonely pooch...
Or you read an ad in the newspaper, and the couple seems so trustworthy, with their decades of experience breeding dogs...
You find a website with photos of green hills and beautiful puppies that insist the "little darlings" and "bundles of joy" were born in paradise and will only be sold to "loving families"...
But watch out! A cruel, mass dog-breeding facility could hide behind each of these scenarios. Even if you missed Oprah’s exposé, most likely you've heard about these puppy factories. Puppy mills frequently house dogs in shockingly poor conditions, particularly for the "breeding stock" animals who are caged and continually bred for years, without human companionship, and then killed, abandoned or sold to another "miller" after their fertility wanes. These adult dogs are bred repeatedly to produce litter after litter, without the prospect of ever becoming part of a family themselves. In addition to an abused mother (and we’ve occasionally seen heartbreaking examples of abandoned overbred females come into the City shelters), the result is hundreds of thousands of puppies churned out each year for sale at pet stores, over the internet, and through newspaper ads. This practice will end only when people stop buying these puppy mill puppies.
Buyer Beware!
If you want a dog in your life, please don't buy a puppy mill puppy. Unfortunately, avoiding them requires discipline and awareness. Pet store clerks and other sellers will never willingly admit their dogs come from puppy mills, despite laws that require retailers to clearly and accurately identify the source of the animals they have for sale so that customers can take it into consideration. How do you separate fact from fiction? Here are the facts:
1. Pet stores cater to impulsive buyers and consumers seeking convenient transactions. Unlike responsible rescuers and breeders, these stores don't interview prospective buyers to ensure responsible, lifelong homes for the pets they sell, and the stores may be staffed by employees with limited knowledge about pets and pet care.
2. A "USDA-inspected" breeder does not mean a "good" breeder. Be wary of claims by pet store staff that they sell animals only from breeders who are "USDA-inspected." The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) enforces the federal law called the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), which regulates commercial breeding operations. But the act doesn't require all commercial breeders to be licensed, and the USDA establishes only minimum-care standards in enforcing this law and its inspection team is chronically understaffed. Breeders are required to provide food, water, and shelter, but not love, socialization, or freedom from confining cages. Sadly, many USDA-licensed and inspected puppy mills operate under squalid conditions with known violations of the AWA. But federal law constrains state and local authorities from blocking the shipping and sale of these animals across state lines, and current efforts to regulate their importation from overseas leave something to be desired, placing that much more of a burden on the customer to make the right choices.
3. Many disreputable breeders sell their dogs directly to the public over the Internet and through newspaper ads. They often sell several breeds of dogs, but may advertise each breed in a separate place and not in one large advertisement or website. These breeders are not required to be inspected by any federal agency and, in many states, are not inspected at all.
4. Reputable breeders care where their puppies go and interview prospective adopters. They don't sell through pet stores or to families they haven't thoroughly checked out.
5. Purebred "papers" do not guarantee the quality of the breeder or the dog. Even the American Kennel Club (AKC) readily admits that it "cannot guarantee the quality or health of dogs in its registry."
6. Puppy mill puppies often have medical problems. These problems can lead to veterinary bills in the thousands of dollars. But pet retailers count on the bond between families and their new puppies being so strong that the puppies won't be returned (though the law requires them to accept returns). And guarantees are often so difficult to comply with that they are virtually useless. In addition, poor breeding and socialization practices at many puppy mills can lead to behavioral problems throughout the puppies' lives. In the event a puppy purchased from a store does experience medical problems, the buyer should file a Pet Seller Complaint Form.
I can’t say this enough: If you’re looking for an animal to join your family, you should not buy from a pet store, and you should be very wary of websites and newspaper ads. Above all, don't ever buy a dog if you can't physically visit every area of the home or breeding facility where the seller keeps the dog.
Puppy mills will continue to operate until people stop buying their dogs. Putting them out of business should be a goal of every dog lover (and we should be so fortunate as to be faced with the dilemma of what to do with the mothers and puppies left to deal with if and when we succeed). We urge you to visit your local shelter or to do business with a respectable rescue individual or organization. You are likely to find a wide selection of healthy, well-socialized puppies and adult dogs—including purebreds—just waiting for that special home—yours.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Cats as Pets
Interview with Leslie Lyons Associate Professor, School of Veterinary Medicine UC Davis
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/
http://www.channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/explorer/3103/Overview
---------------------------
Mike Carruthers:
Cats have now equaled and in some places now surpassed dogs as the most popular house pet - and they are fascinating creatures.
Leslie Lyons:
Whether it's a tiger or whether it's a little house cat they still mark the house the same way, they'll use their claws the same way, they roll over in the sun, how they interact with one another is also very similar. So your house cat is like having a little wild individual in your own home.
Leslie Lyons, Associate Professor in the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of California at Davis, is featured on the National Geographic channel's explorer program called Science of Cats, which debuts Tuesday June 10th.
Well I think really to stand back and look at a cat, one realizes what a nearly perfect animal this is. They have a wonderful sense of hearing, actually at higher ranges than dogs do. Their sense of smell is also very keen but they also have a very keen sense of eyesight. So they have a very excellent balance of all their senses.
And here's something interesting to remember; the next time you see a brown cat...
That cat is not brown at all. If you actually pull out some of the cat's fur, the fur is banded black, yellow, black. And so all of the cats you look out there and see that are brown - they really don't have brown pigment at all, they're an optical illusion.
At somethingyoushouldknow.net I'm Mike Carruthers and that's Something You Should Know.
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/
http://www.channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/explorer/3103/Overview
---------------------------
Mike Carruthers:
Cats have now equaled and in some places now surpassed dogs as the most popular house pet - and they are fascinating creatures.
Leslie Lyons:
Whether it's a tiger or whether it's a little house cat they still mark the house the same way, they'll use their claws the same way, they roll over in the sun, how they interact with one another is also very similar. So your house cat is like having a little wild individual in your own home.
Leslie Lyons, Associate Professor in the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of California at Davis, is featured on the National Geographic channel's explorer program called Science of Cats, which debuts Tuesday June 10th.
Well I think really to stand back and look at a cat, one realizes what a nearly perfect animal this is. They have a wonderful sense of hearing, actually at higher ranges than dogs do. Their sense of smell is also very keen but they also have a very keen sense of eyesight. So they have a very excellent balance of all their senses.
And here's something interesting to remember; the next time you see a brown cat...
That cat is not brown at all. If you actually pull out some of the cat's fur, the fur is banded black, yellow, black. And so all of the cats you look out there and see that are brown - they really don't have brown pigment at all, they're an optical illusion.
At somethingyoushouldknow.net I'm Mike Carruthers and that's Something You Should Know.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Police dogs are civil servants, Norwegian supreme court rules
Thu Jun 5, 12:26 PM ET
Police dogs should be considered civil servants and any acts of violence against them therefore merits the same punishment as attacks on human police officers, Norway's Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
"The police officer and dog work ... as a single unit and ... an attack on the dog must be viewed in the same manner as an attack on the officer," the court said in its ruling.
The case dates back to May 19, 2007, when a man breaking into a house in the western town of Bergen was chased down by police dog Vera. Once he was on the ground and was being placed in handcuffs, he struck the German Shepherd.
The man was found guilty of attempted burglary, but was freed in two lower courts on charges that he had attacked a civil servant. Those verdicts were overturned by Thursday's ruling.
"Resorting to violence against a police dog being used to assist in an official operation in the line of duty, and who is under the immediate control of the officer, clearly falls under the article" 127 of the Norwegian penal code protecting civil servants, the court said.
The defendant, whose name was not given, thereby risks up to three years behind bars.
The Supreme Court did not hand down a sentence, but ordered the Appeals Court to re-examine the case.
Police dogs should be considered civil servants and any acts of violence against them therefore merits the same punishment as attacks on human police officers, Norway's Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
"The police officer and dog work ... as a single unit and ... an attack on the dog must be viewed in the same manner as an attack on the officer," the court said in its ruling.
The case dates back to May 19, 2007, when a man breaking into a house in the western town of Bergen was chased down by police dog Vera. Once he was on the ground and was being placed in handcuffs, he struck the German Shepherd.
The man was found guilty of attempted burglary, but was freed in two lower courts on charges that he had attacked a civil servant. Those verdicts were overturned by Thursday's ruling.
"Resorting to violence against a police dog being used to assist in an official operation in the line of duty, and who is under the immediate control of the officer, clearly falls under the article" 127 of the Norwegian penal code protecting civil servants, the court said.
The defendant, whose name was not given, thereby risks up to three years behind bars.
The Supreme Court did not hand down a sentence, but ordered the Appeals Court to re-examine the case.
Monday, June 09, 2008
Dutch government to lift 25-year ban on pit bulls
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP); The Dutch government says it will lift a long-standing ban on pit bulls because it did not lead to any decrease in bite incidents.
Agriculture Minister Gerda Verburg has informed parliament of the decision, which follows the advice of a commission of experts appointed to review the policy.
Instead, the country will focus on enforcing local leashing laws and owner education programs.
Spokesman Koen Geelink said Monday the ministry hopes to have a new policy in place by year-end, in which dogs that have displayed aggression will be tested by an expert.
The country banned the breeding and possession of pit bulls in 1993, after three children were killed by the dogs.
(http://asia.news.yahoo.com/080609/ap/d916m6uo2.html)
Agriculture Minister Gerda Verburg has informed parliament of the decision, which follows the advice of a commission of experts appointed to review the policy.
Instead, the country will focus on enforcing local leashing laws and owner education programs.
Spokesman Koen Geelink said Monday the ministry hopes to have a new policy in place by year-end, in which dogs that have displayed aggression will be tested by an expert.
The country banned the breeding and possession of pit bulls in 1993, after three children were killed by the dogs.
(http://asia.news.yahoo.com/080609/ap/d916m6uo2.html)
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Starving a dog as "art" brings pressure on Nicaragua to adopt a humane law
From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 2008:TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras--Costa Rican shock artist Guillermo "Habacuc" Vargas may become a real-life Central American counterpart of the Ancient Mariner, whose fictional excess and punishment helped an entire society to consider how to respond to cruelty toward animals.
More than two million people have signed Internet petitions denouncing Vargas. Thousands have pledged to ensure that he will not escape his past.
"As part of an exposition in Managua, Nicaragua, in August," summarized Rod Hughes of Costa Rica News on October 4, 2007, "Vargas allegedly found a dog tied up on a street corner in a poor Nicaragua barrio and brought the dog to the showing. He tied the dog, according to furious animal lovers, in a corner of the salon, where the dog died after a day. The exhibition included a legend spelled out in dog food reading 'You are what you read,' photos, and an incense burner that burned an ounce of marijauna and 175 'rocks' of crack cocaine. In the background, according to reports, the Sandista national anthem was played backward.
"According to the artist," Hughes continued, "his 'art' was a tribute to Natividad Canda, a Nicaraguan burglar killed in Costa Rica by two Rottweilers guarding property he had entered at night."
Hughes' account was largely translated from the newspaper La Nacion, of San Jose, Costa Rica, which added, "The dog died the day after the exhibition, as was confirmed to La Nación by Marta Leonor Gonzalez, editor of the cultural supplement of La Prensa in Nicaragua."
The severely emaciated condition of the dog has been documented in numerous published photographs of the exhibit, many of them close-ups of the dog, others showing the dog in the background while focusing on other parts of the gallery.
"We heard about this three days after it happened, and the poor dog had already died," McKee Project administrator Carla Ferraro told ANIMAL PEOPLE.
The McKee Project, the leading dog-and-cat sterilization program in Costa Rica, was only one of many Costa Rican pro-animal organizations to respond--but Vargas was beyond prosecution. The dog was tied and starved outside of Costa Rican jurisdiction, while Nicaragua has no humane law.
"Vargas, 32, said he wanted to test the public's reaction, and insisted that none of the exhibition visitors intervened to stop the animal's suffering," reported Gerard Couzens, Madrid correspondent for the London Observer, after the furor followed Vargas to an appearance in Spain. "He refused to say whether the animal had survived the show," Couzens added.
"Juanita Bermúdez, director of the Códice Gallery," where the Nicaraguan exhibition was held, "insisted Natividad escaped after just one day," Couzens continued.
Claimed Bermudez, "Natividad was untied all the time except for the three hours the exhibition lasted, and was fed regularly with dog food that Habacuc himself brought in."
"Our attempts to discuss the matter with Vargas' representative were met with silence," posted the World Society for the Protection of Animals. "When Vargas was invited to enter the VI Central American Visual Arts Biennale, to be held in Honduras this year, WSPA met with Empresarios por el Arte, one of the sponsors of the Honduras Biennale."
The outcome, WSPA announced, was that "the Biennial organizers have agreed not only to make the Honduras Association for the Protection of Animals and their Environment official observers but also to include new competition rules that prohibit abuse of animals."
In addition, WSPA said, it and a Nicaraguan member society "are supporting a campaign, led by the Commission for Natural Resources and Environment of the Nicaraguan Assembly, calling for legislation to protect animals in Nicaragua."
If Nicaragua adopts a humane law, the Vargas case will parallel the influence of The Rime of the Ancient Mariner in a way largely overlooked by literary critics.
Samuel Coleridge published the first edition of The Rime of the Ancient Mariner in 1798, 22 years before Britain had a humane law--but Coleridge was aware of the need for one, and moved in the same circles as some of Britain's most prominent early animal advocates. As The Rime of the Ancient Mariner gained popularity, parallel to the efforts of William Wilburforce and "Humanity Dick" Martin to push a humane law through Parliament, Coleridge produced updated and expanded editions in 1800 and 1817.
The central character of The Rime of the Ancient Mariner is a sailor on a ship that is led out of treacherous Antarctic waters to safety by an albatross. The Ancient Mariner shoots the albatross. Catastrophe follows. All of the crew die except the Ancient Mariner, but not before he is punished by being forced to wear the remains of the albatross around his neck, to remind himself and the world of his deed.
One of Samuel Coleridge's descendants, Stephen Coleridge (1854-1936) acknowledged The Rime of the Ancient Mariner as his inspiration throughout a long tenure as president of the British National Anti-Vivisection Society.
Stephen Coleridge's 9-point "Animals' Charter" is believed to be the earliest incarnation of the document now called the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare, promoted by WSPA in hopes of getting the United Nations to adopt it as an international convention.
Costa Rican president Oscar Arias Sanchez on March 5, 2008 became the one millioneth person to sign a petition seeking passage of the Universal Declaration. Costa Rican vice president Laura Chinchilla, environment minister Roberto Dobles, and education minister Leonardo Garnier signed the petition at the same ceremony, and then passed the petition among the audience to collect further signatures, said a WSPA press release.
[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, founded in 1992. Readership of 30,000-plus includes the decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. They have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; for free sample, send address to anmlpepl@whidbey.com. Website: http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/]
Monday, May 19, 2008
An Open Letter to Dog Breeders from The Humane Society of the United States
Many breeders of purebred dogs were shocked by a recent decision by the Board of the American Kennel Club to partner with Petland stores across the U.S. We were pleased to learn that AKC decided to reverse its decision.
The HSUS understands that quality dog breeders have put a great deal of expense and effort into testing their breeding dogs for genetic soundness and working to improve the overall health and welfare of their breeds. Responsible breeders are justifiably frustrated when poor quality, high-volume breeders (puppy mills) appear to get a stamp of approval when in reality these unscrupulous breeders have not worked to improve the soundness of their breeds or care for these animals humanely.
Because The HSUS has been at the forefront of the fight against puppy mills for over four decades, we understood and shared your concern over this partnership. The HSUS joined with breeders nationwide in contacting AKC and voicing our concern.
If the mission of AKC is to “…promote the sport of purebred dogs…”, the mission of the HSUS puppy mill campaign could easily be stated as “Promoting the Salvation of the Purebred Dog” since purebred dogs suffer at a far higher rate in puppy mills than do mixed breed dogs. As individuals who focus on specific breeds of dogs, this letter should serve as a personal invitation to each of you to join with The HSUS in our fight to stop puppy mills.
As any good breeder or animal welfare advocate knows, the bulk of pet store puppies come from puppy mills. Puppy mill breeding dogs suffer immeasurably as their needs are routinely ignored and compromised. A lifetime in a cage for an animal as highly social as a dog is psychological torture. Puppy mill breeding dogs are routinely forced into a life of poor quality housing (wire or concrete cages), poor quality food, poor quality water that is often dirty and algae-covered and poor quality (if any) veterinary care. Puppy mills breed indiscriminately, perpetuating congenital and hereditary disorders that are damaging to many future generations of dogs. This industry that accepts mistreatment and poor husbandry as routine is boosted every single time someone purchases one of the puppies at a pet store.
Additionally, the purchase of a puppy through a pet store removes any chance of a puppy buyer (and usually the pet store staff as well) knowing the conditions the puppies were born into, the level of care (or lack there of) the puppies received, the conditions the puppies’ parents continue to suffer under, and the genetic and other health problems the puppies are carrying due to the lack of appropriate health testing and veterinary care.
Some breed enthusiasts suffer from the misconception that The HSUS is working to stop all dog breeding. This is not the case. Our focus remains to stop the factory-style production of puppies, where breeding dogs are treated like little machines whose only purpose is to crank out puppies for profit. Our focus is on the hundreds of thousands of breeding dogs sitting in cages without hope of ever escaping to live a life as part of a family, and the millions of puppies those dogs are forced to produce to be sold at a high profit but who have a greater chance of suffering from their own host of health problems due to their poor start in life. We will absolutely work tirelessly to stop this entrenched and blatant mistreatment of dogs.
If you are opposed to cruel treatment of dogs, and if you feel that those who profess to be involved in the breeding of purebred dogs out of love for the breed should be actively fighting to protect those animals from abusive breeding practices, we again invite you to join with The HSUS in our fight to end puppy mills.
Please visit our website www.StopPuppyMills.org to learn more about our efforts and how you can join with us.
Stephanie Shain
Director of Outreach Companion Animals
The Humane Society of the United States
2100 L St., NW
Washington, DC 20037 301-258-3121
FAX 258-3081
www.hsus.org
www.StopPuppyMills.org
www.PetsForLife.org
The HSUS understands that quality dog breeders have put a great deal of expense and effort into testing their breeding dogs for genetic soundness and working to improve the overall health and welfare of their breeds. Responsible breeders are justifiably frustrated when poor quality, high-volume breeders (puppy mills) appear to get a stamp of approval when in reality these unscrupulous breeders have not worked to improve the soundness of their breeds or care for these animals humanely.
Because The HSUS has been at the forefront of the fight against puppy mills for over four decades, we understood and shared your concern over this partnership. The HSUS joined with breeders nationwide in contacting AKC and voicing our concern.
If the mission of AKC is to “…promote the sport of purebred dogs…”, the mission of the HSUS puppy mill campaign could easily be stated as “Promoting the Salvation of the Purebred Dog” since purebred dogs suffer at a far higher rate in puppy mills than do mixed breed dogs. As individuals who focus on specific breeds of dogs, this letter should serve as a personal invitation to each of you to join with The HSUS in our fight to stop puppy mills.
As any good breeder or animal welfare advocate knows, the bulk of pet store puppies come from puppy mills. Puppy mill breeding dogs suffer immeasurably as their needs are routinely ignored and compromised. A lifetime in a cage for an animal as highly social as a dog is psychological torture. Puppy mill breeding dogs are routinely forced into a life of poor quality housing (wire or concrete cages), poor quality food, poor quality water that is often dirty and algae-covered and poor quality (if any) veterinary care. Puppy mills breed indiscriminately, perpetuating congenital and hereditary disorders that are damaging to many future generations of dogs. This industry that accepts mistreatment and poor husbandry as routine is boosted every single time someone purchases one of the puppies at a pet store.
Additionally, the purchase of a puppy through a pet store removes any chance of a puppy buyer (and usually the pet store staff as well) knowing the conditions the puppies were born into, the level of care (or lack there of) the puppies received, the conditions the puppies’ parents continue to suffer under, and the genetic and other health problems the puppies are carrying due to the lack of appropriate health testing and veterinary care.
Some breed enthusiasts suffer from the misconception that The HSUS is working to stop all dog breeding. This is not the case. Our focus remains to stop the factory-style production of puppies, where breeding dogs are treated like little machines whose only purpose is to crank out puppies for profit. Our focus is on the hundreds of thousands of breeding dogs sitting in cages without hope of ever escaping to live a life as part of a family, and the millions of puppies those dogs are forced to produce to be sold at a high profit but who have a greater chance of suffering from their own host of health problems due to their poor start in life. We will absolutely work tirelessly to stop this entrenched and blatant mistreatment of dogs.
If you are opposed to cruel treatment of dogs, and if you feel that those who profess to be involved in the breeding of purebred dogs out of love for the breed should be actively fighting to protect those animals from abusive breeding practices, we again invite you to join with The HSUS in our fight to end puppy mills.
Please visit our website www.StopPuppyMills.org to learn more about our efforts and how you can join with us.
Stephanie Shain
Director of Outreach Companion Animals
The Humane Society of the United States
2100 L St., NW
Washington, DC 20037 301-258-3121
FAX 258-3081
www.hsus.org
www.StopPuppyMills.org
www.PetsForLife.org
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Bill aims to limit number of dogs held in abusive puppy mills
The House Agriculture Committee on Wednesday advanced legislation aimed at making it illegal for puppy mill owners to maintain more than 75 breeding dogs.
The bill aims to limit the number of dogs held in abusive puppy mills – mills that churn out thousands of dogs for sale in pet stores and over the internet.
The bill aims to limit the number of dogs held in abusive puppy mills – mills that churn out thousands of dogs for sale in pet stores and over the internet.
The Humane Society of the United States testified in support of the legislation. The organization says many puppy mill operators deceive consumers into believing the dogs came from reputable breeders.
"Limiting the number of animals at a puppy mill is an important first step to ensure that dogs used for breeding are treated humanely, and also addresses one source of pet overpopulation," said Julia Breaux , HSUS' Louisiana state director.
According to the HSUS, 76,000 dogs are handled by Louisiana's shelters each year and 50,000 of those dogs are eventually euthanized. Sheltering the unwanted dogs costs Louisiana citizens more than $10 million a year, the organization adds.
The HSUS is also working to try and ban internet sales that escape regulation through a loophole in current law, as well as banning the imports of young dogs from foreign puppy mills.
http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/wwl051408jbpuppymills.fda7d469.html
Friday, May 02, 2008
LA City Council votes to support the California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act
Today the City Council heard a motion made by Council Members Rosendahl and Alarcon to support the California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, which would prohibit the restrictive confinement of farm animals.
Council Member Rosendahl asked me to comment on the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. I prefaced my comments with this Cesar Chavez quote:
"'We need, in a special way, to work twice as hard to help people understand that animals are fellow creatures. We must protect them and love them as we love ourselves. We know we cannot be kind to animals until we stop exploiting them - exploiting animals in the name of science, exploiting animals in the name of sport, exploiting animals in the name of fashion, and yes, exploiting animals in the name of food.'
"Surely, if Cesar Chavez were here today, he would urge the City Council to support this initiative.
I want to thank council members Rosendahl and Alarcon for introducing this important motion to the City Council. I want to urge the Council to join the City of San Francisco and other California communities in supporting this modest ballot measure.
The hundreds of LA residents who volunteered their time to collect thousands of signatures, as well as the over 800,000 individuals who signed the Californians for Humane Farms petition agree with Council members Rosendahl and Alarcon that this initiative reinforces LA’s long standing commitment to protecting the health and welfare of all animals by preventing the inhumane treatment of animals.
This initiative is sponsored by The Humane Society of the United States, Farm Sanctuary and many other California and national animal welfare groups, CA family farmers, CA veterinarians, and public health and food safety professionals, and the LA Animal Services Commission recently voted to support a very similar motion.
The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act asks for only the most basic needs for farm animals: merely the ability to turn around and extend their limbs. It is hard to imagine a more moderate initiative.
The measure will prevent three methods of the most cruel and inhumane forms of extreme confinement in the world of animal agribusiness: veal crates, battery cages, and gestation crates. All three of these practices have already been outlawed in the European Union.
The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act will reduce the suffering of nearly 20 million animals confined in California factory farms each year. Florida, Arizona, and Oregon have already banned gestation crates, and Arizona has banned veal crates. Some major California food retailers are already voluntarily moving away from the cruel use of battery cages and veal and gestation crates.
As a City we would never permit animals in our shelters to endure confinement so restrictive that they couldn't extend their limbs for months on end, and as Californians we shouldn't support such cruelty to farm animals. All animals, including those raised for food, deserve humane treatment.
During these difficult fiscal times, it is important to know that California’s Legislative Analyst has determined that the fiscal impact of this initiative is limited to minor costs that will be offset by revenue from fines. This ballot measure also gives farmers until the year 2015 to phase in more humane production practices. Again, I ask the council for a yes vote."
Thanks to the hard work of many, and those who spoke in support of this motion today, the City Council unanimously voted to support this motion.
Earlier, the Council poetically voted to support an effort to create a national Cesar Chavez holiday.
Council Member Rosendahl asked me to comment on the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. I prefaced my comments with this Cesar Chavez quote:
"'We need, in a special way, to work twice as hard to help people understand that animals are fellow creatures. We must protect them and love them as we love ourselves. We know we cannot be kind to animals until we stop exploiting them - exploiting animals in the name of science, exploiting animals in the name of sport, exploiting animals in the name of fashion, and yes, exploiting animals in the name of food.'
"Surely, if Cesar Chavez were here today, he would urge the City Council to support this initiative.
I want to thank council members Rosendahl and Alarcon for introducing this important motion to the City Council. I want to urge the Council to join the City of San Francisco and other California communities in supporting this modest ballot measure.
The hundreds of LA residents who volunteered their time to collect thousands of signatures, as well as the over 800,000 individuals who signed the Californians for Humane Farms petition agree with Council members Rosendahl and Alarcon that this initiative reinforces LA’s long standing commitment to protecting the health and welfare of all animals by preventing the inhumane treatment of animals.
This initiative is sponsored by The Humane Society of the United States, Farm Sanctuary and many other California and national animal welfare groups, CA family farmers, CA veterinarians, and public health and food safety professionals, and the LA Animal Services Commission recently voted to support a very similar motion.
The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act asks for only the most basic needs for farm animals: merely the ability to turn around and extend their limbs. It is hard to imagine a more moderate initiative.
The measure will prevent three methods of the most cruel and inhumane forms of extreme confinement in the world of animal agribusiness: veal crates, battery cages, and gestation crates. All three of these practices have already been outlawed in the European Union.
The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act will reduce the suffering of nearly 20 million animals confined in California factory farms each year. Florida, Arizona, and Oregon have already banned gestation crates, and Arizona has banned veal crates. Some major California food retailers are already voluntarily moving away from the cruel use of battery cages and veal and gestation crates.
As a City we would never permit animals in our shelters to endure confinement so restrictive that they couldn't extend their limbs for months on end, and as Californians we shouldn't support such cruelty to farm animals. All animals, including those raised for food, deserve humane treatment.
During these difficult fiscal times, it is important to know that California’s Legislative Analyst has determined that the fiscal impact of this initiative is limited to minor costs that will be offset by revenue from fines. This ballot measure also gives farmers until the year 2015 to phase in more humane production practices. Again, I ask the council for a yes vote."
Thanks to the hard work of many, and those who spoke in support of this motion today, the City Council unanimously voted to support this motion.
Earlier, the Council poetically voted to support an effort to create a national Cesar Chavez holiday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
