PROVIDING INFORMATION AND ANALYSES OF ANIMAL ISSUES IN LOS ANGELES
http://losanglesveterinarian.blogspot.com/
Mr. Boks, Where Are the April Statistics?
. Ed, you gloated about LAAS great success during April of this year. You cited certain select statistics.
Where are the rest of the April statistics?
If LAAS did so well in April, why are you not posting ALL the statistics on the LAAS site? .
14 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Speaking of Temperment testing, you realize that every humane society, spca and municipal shelter in CA assesses behavior, don't you? Your beloved San Francisco SPCA temperment tests and euthanizes puppies that show agression to other puppies BEFORE they go on "the available books" therefore never officially "adoptable?"
And this is precisely what your saint, the late Mr. Knapp was planning for L.A. and Mr. Boks will have to allow behavioral assessment eventually.
Are you going to delude yourself forever?
Son of Naysayer
BTW, I spent a few hours looking at all the big, agressive, un-cute staff terriers being kept at a shelter today. They have kennel-itis from being kept in solitary for months (dogs are social animals you know, don't thrive alone in cages), spinning around barking and snapping at the public. They have absolutely ZERO chance of being adopted, but you have "STOPPED-THE-KILLING" so now you have a shelter full of crazy dangerous dogs. Are you and Pam happy now? No? Are you insane? Oh. That's right, now I remember...
"Temperament testing" (for those "authorities" on the subject that cannot spell it) is known to be a method for unscrupulous shelter staffers to attempt to justify the killing of frightened, traumatized, stressed or unsocialized animals. This inept "technique" would be laughable if not for the needless loss of animal life. If this were an acceptable means for killing animals there would be no need for animal behaviorist or skilled trainers.
Further, many of these animals are well adjusted once they leave the "shelter" environment. The environment with the scent of death lingering in the air. The dogs can smell the scent of death and understandably that can evoke some fear and defensiveness.
Identifying an animal's issues, if that is in fact the case, and taking corrective action is part of the life-saving no kill philosophy. I'm referring to rehabilitation, if necessary. Rehabilitation can take a matter of DAYS or WEEKS in most cases.
Weak, incompetent, unscrupulous "shelter" employees flaunt their insecurities by implementing the cruel, archaic practice of "temperament testing" to compensate for their own fears and inadequacies. As for safety concerns, no skilled, credible trainer or behaviorist would be willing to unleash a hazardous animal onto the public. Those that work in a positive manner with frightened, abused or displaced animals are not fooled by this farce called temperament testing. We all know it to be an unethical, falsely "convenient justification" for killing dogs and cats when the standard excuses are no longer believable or acceptable. Parasites will find any excuse to kill animals. Decent, competent people know better and PERFORM better.
NOW HERE THIS: If LAAS implements temperament testing all rescue organizations should join together in a BOYCOTT of LAAS. Animals can be rescued from "shelters" outside of the city. THAT will have an impact on Boks' precious numbers, which is all he cares about in addition to the money.
Thanks for correcting my spelling of temperament. You must be very busy correcting the spelling of everyone on the Internet.
I like staff terriers. I wasn't saying they are all aggressive and I was being sarcastic when I said "un-cute." The dogs I was describing were exhibiting aggressive behavior that will prevent their being adopted, and there are just so many of them; cage after cage of dogs apparently physically and spiritually neglected. I am sure the behavior can be modified, but not by civil service kennelworkers who have too much work already. Now that the killing has stopped (according to you demands) the shelters are filling up with these dogs. How many people are looking to adopt a dangerous appearing animal that will needs weeks of professional training or behavioral rehab? How many of these neglected and discarded dog are coming into shelters daily?
As the statistics clearly indicate, the LAAS "shelters" are NOT no-kill.
Son of Naysayer says: "You must be very busy correcting the spelling of everyone on the Internet."
Son of Naysayer also says: "BTW, I spent a few hours looking at all the big, agressive, un-cute staff terriers being kept at a shelter today."
It's obvious who is busy being productive and who is busy being non-productive. Also, I don't have the time or interest required to point out the multitude of misspellings by the illustrious "Son of Naysayer."
As evidenced by the "Son of Naysayer" postings and as the name clearly conveys, all the emphasis is placed on being consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative, all of which are adverse elements and conflict with the mission of saving animals, despite the educational opportunities available and the documented success in saving lives in shelter environments.
"Son of Naysayer" makes no sense, has no credibility, and it's boring to hear the same old flimsy excuses. The shelters in San Francisco, Philadelphia and Charlottesville have implemented the No Kill Equation to address the issues associated with a no kill conversion and they are successful. There's no need in redundantly dissecting every concern over and over, again and again, because some cannot comprehend the working aspects of the program and/or have a vested interest in being lazy. Educate yourself and evolve, or move on while dragging your feet and your club and carnage behind you.
http://www.nokillsolutions.com/whatsnew.htm
The programs and services, which we collectively call the No Kill Equation, include:
* shelter accountability; * affordable spay/neuter; * rescue group access to shelter animals; * comprehensive adoption programs including evening and weekend hours and offsite venues; * a feral cat TNR program; * medical and behavior rehabilitation; * public relations and marketing; * use of volunteers including foster families; * socialization programs; and above all else, * a compassionate, hard working shelter director who isn't content hiding behind the myth of "too many animals, not enough homes."
22 May, 2007 wrote: "It's obvious who is busy being productive and who is busy being non-productive. Also, I don't have the time or interest required to point out the multitude of misspellings by the illustrious "Son of Naysayer." As evidenced by the "Son of Naysayer" postings and as the name clearly conveys, all the emphasis is placed on being consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative, all of which are adverse elements and conflict with the mission of saving animals, despite the educational opportunities available and the documented success in saving lives in shelter environments."
Huh? "...consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative..."[?] But, I'm an artist!
That shrill, sanctimonious voice of the elite sounds familiar. Perhaps I've heard it at a commission meeting, or maybe on TV?
I am all for most of the items cut and pasted from the no kill solutions site, and I really, truly do volunteer my productive time doing some of the very programs and services listed. At the same time, I am not so delusional as to think South Central Los Angeles and the eastern San Fernando Valley are the same as Charlottesville. Animals are always going to be euthanized. Animals are euthanized everyday in the finest veterinary hospitals and (gasp) even in San Francisco! Oops, that was negative.
"[T]oo many animals, not enough homes..." is not a myth. That fact is why the shelters are filling up with unadoptable animals. It’s kind of ipso facto. Sorry if keeping it real is negative.
On the issue of temperament testing to the poster who claims it is a way for the "terrible" shelter staff to "kill" animals, you are offensive. Tell it to the kid with his face taken off because a dog was NOT temperament tested. Do you not feel any responsibility toward children and putting an untested dog in their household? I have temperament tested dogs for fifty years and you guys are off your rockers saying it shouldn't be done. To not test usually sets a dog and a family up for failure. Not in the best interest of the dog to be returned over and over again to the shelter. And a family and home is lost because they don't want to fail again. We have an obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible from our shelters, not just any and all animals.
You say: "We have an obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible from our shelters, not just any and all animals."
I say: Yes, you do have an "obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible." You have an obligation to make an attempt to ensure that the animal is the best that the animal can be for public safety reasons and as a good attempt to avoid the return of animals, as well as an obligation to make every attempt to NOT kill an animal if you're going to call your facility a "shelter." Dog training and REHABILITATION, if needed, is the key.
I repeat from my earlier posting:
"If this were an acceptable means for killing animals there would be no need for animal behaviorist or skilled trainers."
"Identifying an animal's issues, if that is in fact the case, and taking corrective action is part of the life-saving no kill philosophy. I'm referring to rehabilitation, if necessary."
"As for safety concerns, no skilled, credible trainer or behaviorist would be willing to unleash a hazardous animal onto the public."
"The programs and services, which we collectively call the No Kill Equation, include:" "* medical and behavior rehabilitation;" "* socialization programs;"
Temperament testing in a "shelter" whose policy is to routinely kill animals in volumes is a farce and is utilized by unscrupulous, incompetent shelter staff to attempt to justify the killing of more animals. Many of us have encountered the "inept temperament tester."
Anyone that has been temperament testing animals for 50 years has used archaic methods to attempt to justify the killing of animals. Unless, they were also actively involved in behavior modification to save animals. Today's behavioral assessments in shelters that are truly animal friendly and no kill (as much as possible) are utilized to identify any behavioral issues in order to make every attempt to CORRECT them rather than use another excuse to kill animals.
Sensationalism about animals attacking children is the old school, kill animals in the masses stand-by for being too uncaring, lazy and incompetent to provide dog training.
Taking an active role in producing the best animal possible for pet guardianship through either training, behavioral modification or rehabilitation for 50 years would be very commendable. At the other end of the spectrum, I would be ashamed to say that I temperament tested animals for 50 years and condemned them to death without the opportunity of a more natural assessment in an animal friendly no kill environment and without the opportunity of behavior modification. In essence, if you're not guilty there's no need to be offended.
In addition, I do not approve of "shelters" that do not perform trap, neuter and release of feral cats and condemn to death frightened domestic cats by labeling them as feral.
Yet again, more racist insults to "South Central Los Angeles and the eastern San Fernando Valley" by promoter of hate, Son of Naysayer. Perhaps after the L.A. Animal Watch postings targeting and promoting racism against pet owners in South Central L.A. and the eastern sector of the San Fernando Valley, Son of Naysayer in Son of Sam fashion can further advocate for hatred and needless killing on the hate group blogs.
Do we want to resort back to the fifties? Reading this no kill solutions reminds me of the 50's, have we not learned anything since? I felt like wearing a poodle skirt while reading no kill solutions. Temperament testing is a necessary evil in this day and time of people wanting to file lawsuits at the drop of a hat. The solution of rehab is a wonderful idea but totally unrealistic, out in left field, in outer space, for shelters supported by taxpayers. Find some solutions that are within the realm of man, not God.
Clearly, for some the desire to kill animals is very strong, while others simply do not value the life of an animal. That is not expected to change.
The catch and kill mentality IS circa 1950 and prior as history demonstrates. Some seem to have an aversion to progress. The immature references are not impressive considering the subject matter - life or death of companion animals. Of course, if their lives are of no consequence, then what's a little joke on them or what's a great deal of adamancy concerning saving their lives.
The progressive and humane methods of shelters in Reno, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Charlottesville have resulted in highly favorable results and statistics. Those that choose to ignore those statistics, which have held strong, can continue to support the killing of animals AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE, since they feel so strongly about the desire to kill. These shelters implemented a No Kill Plan, similar to a business plan, based on ANALYSES. Their success is not based on "a wing and a prayer," but a set of standardized and tailored directives, creative enhancements at the local level, hard work and the MOTIVATION to not kill animals. Of course, the testimonials and reports from the Shelter Directors can also be ignored, all the kill advocates can call all these Shelter Directors liars and continue to make the vacuous claim that a no kill shelter conversion is not possible (which is what they really want - for it to be impossible), if that is somehow self-satisfying. These Directors do not work for No Kill Solutions. They hired No Kill Solutions.
Generous organizations such as "Maddie's Fund" offer grants for no kill shelter conversions and there's no shortage of funds available in Los Angeles. So don't worry penny-pinchers, it won't cost YOU a precious penny more not to kill animals. As for lawsuits, it's a pet owner's responsibility to maintain control of their animals regardless of where the animal came from. So, do maintain control of your animals for what concerns you most - monetary concerns.
A word of caution: Those that support temperament testing of frightened, traumatized, displaced or stray animals in "shelters" that kill, had better make sure the gardener, the teenagers or the grandchildren don't leave their yard gate open allowing their faithful animal companions to wander and find their way to a kill shelter. YOUR ANIMALS WON'T PASS THE TEMPERAMENT TEST IN A SHELTER THAT KILLS.
I'm sure it's the case that there was a recruitment process for some of the positions at some of the shelters. But, if they were not producing results, people would be complaining just as we are.
Thursday, May 31, 2007 This, below, just in from the No Kill Advocacy Center (via listserve):
www.nokillsolutions.com/whatsnew.htm
"King County, Washington, Embraces Bold No Kill Initiative"
"The King County Council votes to embrace the No Kill philosophy and mandates that its animal control shelter save 85% of all dogs and cats within two years."
14 comments:
Speaking of Temperment testing, you realize that every humane society, spca and municipal shelter in CA assesses behavior, don't you?
Your beloved San Francisco SPCA temperment tests and euthanizes puppies that show agression to other puppies BEFORE they go on "the available books" therefore never officially "adoptable?"
And this is precisely what your saint, the late Mr. Knapp was planning for L.A. and Mr. Boks will have to allow behavioral assessment eventually.
Are you going to delude yourself forever?
Son of Naysayer
BTW, I spent a few hours looking at all the big, agressive, un-cute staff terriers being kept at a shelter today. They have kennel-itis from being kept in solitary for months (dogs are social animals you know, don't thrive alone in cages), spinning around barking and snapping at the public.
They have absolutely ZERO chance of being adopted, but you have "STOPPED-THE-KILLING" so now you have a shelter full of crazy dangerous dogs. Are you and Pam happy now?
No? Are you insane?
Oh.
That's right, now I remember...
You don't know anything about staff terriers if you call them aggressive, or non-cute. I doubt you spent a few hours with them at all.
"Temperament testing" (for those "authorities" on the subject that cannot spell it) is known to be a method for unscrupulous shelter staffers to attempt to justify the killing of frightened, traumatized, stressed or unsocialized animals. This inept "technique" would be laughable if not for the needless loss of animal life. If this were an acceptable means for killing animals there would be no need for animal behaviorist or skilled trainers.
Further, many of these animals are well adjusted once they leave the "shelter" environment. The environment with the scent of death lingering in the air. The dogs can smell the scent of death and understandably that can evoke some fear and defensiveness.
Identifying an animal's issues, if that is in fact the case, and taking corrective action is part of the life-saving no kill philosophy. I'm referring to rehabilitation, if necessary. Rehabilitation can take a matter of DAYS or WEEKS in most cases.
Weak, incompetent, unscrupulous "shelter" employees flaunt their insecurities by implementing the cruel, archaic practice of "temperament testing" to compensate for their own fears and inadequacies. As for safety concerns, no skilled, credible trainer or behaviorist would be willing to unleash a hazardous animal onto the public. Those that work in a positive manner with frightened, abused or displaced animals are not fooled by this farce called temperament testing. We all know it to be an unethical, falsely "convenient justification" for killing dogs and cats when the standard excuses are no longer believable or acceptable. Parasites will find any excuse to kill animals. Decent, competent people know better and PERFORM better.
NOW HERE THIS:
If LAAS implements temperament testing all rescue organizations should join together in a BOYCOTT of LAAS. Animals can be rescued from "shelters" outside of the city. THAT will have an impact on Boks' precious numbers, which is all he cares about in addition to the money.
Thanks for correcting my spelling of temperament. You must be very busy correcting the spelling of everyone on the Internet.
I like staff terriers. I wasn't saying they are all aggressive and I was being sarcastic when I said "un-cute." The dogs I was describing were exhibiting aggressive behavior that will prevent their being adopted, and there are just so many of them; cage after cage of dogs apparently physically and spiritually neglected. I am sure the behavior can be modified, but not by civil service kennelworkers who have too much work already. Now that the killing has stopped (according to you demands) the shelters are filling up with these dogs. How many people are looking to adopt a dangerous appearing animal that will needs weeks of professional training or behavioral rehab?
How many of these neglected and discarded dog are coming into shelters daily?
Son of Naysayer
As the statistics clearly indicate, the LAAS "shelters" are NOT no-kill.
Son of Naysayer says:
"You must be very busy correcting the spelling of everyone on the Internet."
Son of Naysayer also says:
"BTW, I spent a few hours looking at all the big, agressive, un-cute staff terriers being kept at a shelter today."
It's obvious who is busy being productive and who is busy being non-productive. Also, I don't have the time or interest required to point out the multitude of misspellings by the illustrious "Son of Naysayer."
As evidenced by the "Son of Naysayer" postings and as the name clearly conveys, all the emphasis is placed on being consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative, all of which are adverse elements and conflict with the mission of saving animals, despite the educational opportunities available and the documented success in saving lives in shelter environments.
"Son of Naysayer" makes no sense, has no credibility, and it's boring to hear the same old flimsy excuses. The shelters in San Francisco, Philadelphia and Charlottesville have implemented the No Kill Equation to address the issues associated with a no kill conversion and they are successful. There's no need in redundantly dissecting every concern over and over, again and again, because some cannot comprehend the working aspects of the program and/or have a vested interest in being lazy. Educate yourself and evolve, or move on while dragging your feet and your club and carnage behind you.
http://www.nokillsolutions.com/whatsnew.htm
The programs and services, which we collectively call the No Kill Equation, include:
* shelter accountability;
* affordable spay/neuter;
* rescue group access to shelter animals;
* comprehensive adoption programs including evening and weekend hours and offsite venues;
* a feral cat TNR program;
* medical and behavior rehabilitation;
* public relations and marketing;
* use of volunteers including foster families;
* socialization programs; and above all else,
* a compassionate, hard working shelter director who isn't content hiding behind the myth of "too many animals, not enough homes."
22 May, 2007 wrote: "It's obvious who is busy being productive and who is busy being non-productive. Also, I don't have the time or interest required to point out the multitude of misspellings by the illustrious "Son of Naysayer."
As evidenced by the "Son of Naysayer" postings and as the name clearly conveys, all the emphasis is placed on being consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative, all of which are adverse elements and conflict with the mission of saving animals, despite the educational opportunities available and the documented success in saving lives in shelter environments."
Huh? "...consistently and blatantly illiterate, ignorant and negative..."[?] But, I'm an artist!
That shrill, sanctimonious voice of the elite sounds familiar. Perhaps I've heard it at a commission meeting, or maybe on TV?
I am all for most of the items cut and pasted from the no kill solutions site, and I really, truly do volunteer my productive time doing some of the very programs and services listed.
At the same time, I am not so delusional as to think South Central Los Angeles and the eastern San Fernando Valley are the same as Charlottesville.
Animals are always going to be euthanized. Animals are euthanized everyday in the finest veterinary hospitals and (gasp) even in San Francisco! Oops, that was negative.
"[T]oo many animals, not enough homes..." is not a myth. That fact is why the shelters are filling up with unadoptable animals. It’s kind of ipso facto. Sorry if keeping it real is negative.
Son of Naysayer
On the issue of temperament testing to the poster who claims it is a way for the "terrible" shelter staff to "kill" animals, you are offensive. Tell it to the kid with his face taken off because a dog was NOT temperament tested. Do you not feel any responsibility toward children and putting an untested dog in their household? I have temperament tested dogs for fifty years and you guys are off your rockers saying it shouldn't be done. To not test usually sets a dog and a family up for failure. Not in the best interest of the dog to be returned over and over again to the shelter. And a family and home is lost because they don't want to fail again. We have an obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible from our shelters, not just any and all animals.
Re: Temperament Testing
You say:
"We have an obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible from our shelters, not just any and all animals."
I say:
Yes, you do have an "obligation to put out as good a quality animal as possible." You have an obligation to make an attempt to ensure that the animal is the best that the animal can be for public safety reasons and as a good attempt to avoid the return of animals, as well as an obligation to make every attempt to NOT kill an animal if you're going to call your facility a "shelter." Dog training and REHABILITATION, if needed, is the key.
I repeat from my earlier posting:
"If this were an acceptable means for killing animals there would be no need for animal behaviorist or skilled trainers."
"Identifying an animal's issues, if that is in fact the case, and taking corrective action is part of the life-saving no kill philosophy. I'm referring to rehabilitation, if necessary."
"As for safety concerns, no skilled, credible trainer or behaviorist would be willing to unleash a hazardous animal onto the public."
"The programs and services, which we collectively call the No Kill Equation, include:"
"* medical and behavior rehabilitation;"
"* socialization programs;"
Temperament testing in a "shelter" whose policy is to routinely kill animals in volumes is a farce and is utilized by unscrupulous, incompetent shelter staff to attempt to justify the killing of more animals. Many of us have encountered the "inept temperament tester."
Anyone that has been temperament testing animals for 50 years has used archaic methods to attempt to justify the killing of animals. Unless, they were also actively involved in behavior modification to save animals. Today's behavioral assessments in shelters that are truly animal friendly and no kill (as much as possible) are utilized to identify any behavioral issues in order to make every attempt to CORRECT them rather than use another excuse to kill animals.
Sensationalism about animals attacking children is the old school, kill animals in the masses stand-by for being too uncaring, lazy and incompetent to provide dog training.
Taking an active role in producing the best animal possible for pet guardianship through either training, behavioral modification or rehabilitation for 50 years would be very commendable. At the other end of the spectrum, I would be ashamed to say that I temperament tested animals for 50 years and condemned them to death without the opportunity of a more natural assessment in an animal friendly no kill environment and without the opportunity of behavior modification. In essence, if you're not guilty there's no need to be offended.
In addition, I do not approve of "shelters" that do not perform trap, neuter and release of feral cats and condemn to death frightened domestic cats by labeling them as feral.
Yet again, more racist insults to "South Central Los Angeles and the eastern San Fernando Valley" by promoter of hate, Son of Naysayer. Perhaps after the L.A. Animal Watch postings targeting and promoting racism against pet owners in South Central L.A. and the eastern sector of the San Fernando Valley, Son of Naysayer in Son of Sam fashion can further advocate for hatred and needless killing on the hate group blogs.
Do we want to resort back to the fifties? Reading this no kill solutions reminds me of the 50's, have we not learned anything since? I felt like wearing a poodle skirt while reading no kill solutions. Temperament testing is a necessary evil in this day and time of people wanting to file lawsuits at the drop of a hat. The solution of rehab is a wonderful idea but totally unrealistic, out in left field, in outer space, for shelters supported by taxpayers. Find some solutions that are within the realm of man, not God.
Clearly, for some the desire to kill animals is very strong, while others simply do not value the life of an animal. That is not expected to change.
The catch and kill mentality IS circa 1950 and prior as history demonstrates. Some seem to have an aversion to progress. The immature references are not impressive considering the subject matter - life or death of companion animals. Of course, if their lives are of no consequence, then what's a little joke on them or what's a great deal of adamancy concerning saving their lives.
The progressive and humane methods of shelters in Reno, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Charlottesville have resulted in highly favorable results and statistics. Those that choose to ignore those statistics, which have held strong, can continue to support the killing of animals AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE, since they feel so strongly about the desire to kill. These shelters implemented a No Kill Plan, similar to a business plan, based on ANALYSES. Their success is not based on "a wing and a prayer," but a set of standardized and tailored directives, creative enhancements at the local level, hard work and the MOTIVATION to not kill animals. Of course, the testimonials and reports from the Shelter Directors can also be ignored, all the kill advocates can call all these Shelter Directors liars and continue to make the vacuous claim that a no kill shelter conversion is not possible (which is what they really want - for it to be impossible), if that is somehow self-satisfying. These Directors do not work for No Kill Solutions. They hired No Kill Solutions.
Generous organizations such as "Maddie's Fund" offer grants for no kill shelter conversions and there's no shortage of funds available in Los Angeles. So don't worry penny-pinchers, it won't cost YOU a precious penny more not to kill animals. As for lawsuits, it's a pet owner's responsibility to maintain control of their animals regardless of where the animal came from. So, do maintain control of your animals for what concerns you most - monetary concerns.
A word of caution: Those that support temperament testing of frightened, traumatized, displaced or stray animals in "shelters" that kill, had better make sure the gardener, the teenagers or the grandchildren don't leave their yard gate open allowing their faithful animal companions to wander and find their way to a kill shelter. YOUR ANIMALS WON'T PASS THE TEMPERAMENT TEST IN A SHELTER THAT KILLS.
I'm sure it's the case that there was a recruitment process for some of the positions at some of the shelters. But, if they were not producing results, people would be complaining just as we are.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
This, below, just in from the No Kill Advocacy Center (via listserve):
www.nokillsolutions.com/whatsnew.htm
"King County, Washington, Embraces Bold No Kill Initiative"
"The King County Council votes to embrace the No Kill philosophy and mandates that its animal control shelter save 85% of all dogs and cats within two years."
Read the details at the website.
Post a Comment