.
Finally, maybe this action by Animal Commissioner Atake will force the Mayor to really take a close look at Boks and LAAS.
August 31, 2007
Honorable Antonio Villaraigosa
Mayor’s Office, City of Los Angeles
Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,
For two years, I have worked very hard to help improve the Department of Animal Services (LAAS) and protect the integrity of the Mayor’s office as your appointed Commissioner.
However, my seeking transparency, clarity and honesty is apparently what Mr. Blackman, your Deputy Chief of Staff, does not want me to do. His consistent refusal to hold Mr. Ed Boks, the General Manager, accountable — for his actions, including making false, misleading and inflammatory comments to your office, staff, City Council, the public, and the media
— has made my efforts ineffective at every level.
When I told Mr. Blackman that Mr. Boks would not shut down his city website blog, against the advice of the LAPD’s Threat Management unit, Mr. Blackman dismissed my concerns and called it merely “one of the many wrong things Boks has done” that he’s already aware of and would not take any action.
On the city website, Mr. Boks recently bashed the Director of LA County Animal Control and attacked one of the most reputable animal-welfare organizations which has provided invaluable assistance to the city’s department. Instead of allowing the Commission to keep Mr. Boks under control, it is my opinion that Mr. Blackman conceals critical facts and
protects Mr. Boks’ misbehavior from your view.
As a result, one such distortion made you appear uninformed at a recent press conference about the state of the city animal shelters. Consequently, several media outlets are presently investigating your claims of LAAS success.
Mr. Blackman looked the other way on another serious problem when Mr. Boks grossly misled City Council on August 3rd, during Item #41. As a result, City Council had to table an innovative program when it was discovered that Mr. Boks failed to consult with the Commission, Personnel and SEIU.
Recently, the Commission discovered its serious procedural problems with a past appeal. I was not involved with this particular appeal, however, I felt it was the Commission’s sworn duty to right its wrongs, and restore its integrity, when the process was violated, with unfairness and prejudice appearing high and harmful.
Unfortunately I have learned that certain members of your administration, this department and the Commission are incapable of acknowledging errors, therein misleading the public. Such actions (or inactions) are resulting in the needless suffering and death of many animals, mistreatment of the public, and wasting of financial and human capital.
You are welcome to contact me if you wish to be further informed about Mr. Boks’ crises, including, but not limited to, the veterinarian shortage; unopened spay/neuter clinics; zero foreign language outreach; shelter overcrowding; delayed shelter openings; end-runs on key stakeholders; and a tidal wave of public relations disasters.
As I recall, one of your campaign platforms was to uphold the ethical standards expected by the city residents. Most recently, you stressed the importance of accountability. While these values may not matter to some of your key staff, I hope they still matter to you.
In closing, I am resigning my position as a Commissioner because I can no longer, in good conscience, be a part of such demoralization. I wish that I were allowed to apply my business skills and expertise as a nonprofit organization leader, (the reason why you appointed me), to fully serve the people and animals of Los Angeles, which is supposed to be the City of
Angels.
Graciously,
Marie Atake
Apparently the Killing has begun big time
.
For the past few months there have been 1100 dogs, 1000+ cats and 1100 others in the shelters almost all the time. For the past few weeks, the number is down for cats and others. I think Boks is refusing a lot of cats and others. Officers never round those up. Dogs they do round up. I predict cat and other intake to be way down for August. Of course another reason the numbers may be down is that a lot of cats have been killed.
Dog (1082)
Cat (694)
Other (514)
Two weeks ago Boks said he would kill all bunnies that have been in the shelter longer than a month. Now about the annex cats. No one can see the annex cats. It's just a holding place before they die or are killed.
An email received this morning:
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:12 PM Save the Annex Cats!! - All are RED LISTED!!
The Annex has some very sweet kitties! Unfortunately they are not seen by the general public! They have almost no chance of getting adopted! I can't take them to the Main SLA Shelter because there is no room for them! All these kitties are just wonderful, sweet, friendly, playful luv-dolls!Every single cat listed here is R E D L I S T E D ! ! !
A896046 "Sandy", mom w/ 5 kittens (about 2 weeks old) Sandy is all black and lotsa loooooooooooooooong! She takes good care of her babies and doesn'tmind if I need to handle or move them. She loves attention and scratches behind the ear.
A874080 Queenie" F 3 yrs. is a gorgeous blue tabby who wants to be a silver tabby. I think she *may* be pregnant.
Another sweet girl who craves attention! "Nisa" F 4 months brown tabby, I don't know what else to say that I haven't already said. ALL my kitties are just so darn cute and friendly!
A888178 "Jade" 3 yrs. black Poor jade had 3 kittens but they got sick and died. She is doing well and enjoys my company.
These two kittens are sick and under medication:
A887474 "Harry" M 5 months, black Harry has a mild URI and is on medications. An adorable little boy who sometimes goes for shoulder rides. A888599 "BooBoo" M 4 months brown tabby BooBoo has a problem with his ear, possible ear infection? He is on medication but he doesn't let that stop him from playing hard and just enjoying life.
These extraordinary felines can be euthanized at any time. Does anyone have room for any of them? I do not have photo capability.
SLA Annex Shelter. Phone: 213-485-1120. New email address: Cat.Howell@lacity.org)
For the past few months there have been 1100 dogs, 1000+ cats and 1100 others in the shelters almost all the time. For the past few weeks, the number is down for cats and others. I think Boks is refusing a lot of cats and others. Officers never round those up. Dogs they do round up. I predict cat and other intake to be way down for August. Of course another reason the numbers may be down is that a lot of cats have been killed.
Dog (1082)
Cat (694)
Other (514)
Two weeks ago Boks said he would kill all bunnies that have been in the shelter longer than a month. Now about the annex cats. No one can see the annex cats. It's just a holding place before they die or are killed.
An email received this morning:
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:12 PM Save the Annex Cats!! - All are RED LISTED!!
The Annex has some very sweet kitties! Unfortunately they are not seen by the general public! They have almost no chance of getting adopted! I can't take them to the Main SLA Shelter because there is no room for them! All these kitties are just wonderful, sweet, friendly, playful luv-dolls!Every single cat listed here is R E D L I S T E D ! ! !
A896046 "Sandy", mom w/ 5 kittens (about 2 weeks old) Sandy is all black and lotsa loooooooooooooooong! She takes good care of her babies and doesn'tmind if I need to handle or move them. She loves attention and scratches behind the ear.
A874080 Queenie" F 3 yrs. is a gorgeous blue tabby who wants to be a silver tabby. I think she *may* be pregnant.
Another sweet girl who craves attention! "Nisa" F 4 months brown tabby, I don't know what else to say that I haven't already said. ALL my kitties are just so darn cute and friendly!
A888178 "Jade" 3 yrs. black Poor jade had 3 kittens but they got sick and died. She is doing well and enjoys my company.
These two kittens are sick and under medication:
A887474 "Harry" M 5 months, black Harry has a mild URI and is on medications. An adorable little boy who sometimes goes for shoulder rides. A888599 "BooBoo" M 4 months brown tabby BooBoo has a problem with his ear, possible ear infection? He is on medication but he doesn't let that stop him from playing hard and just enjoying life.
These extraordinary felines can be euthanized at any time. Does anyone have room for any of them? I do not have photo capability.
SLA Annex Shelter. Phone: 213-485-1120. New email address: Cat.Howell@lacity.org)
County Kill Numbers, stonewalling and Possible fraud
.
I had stated that LA County was less transparent than most shelter systems, including LAAS. Brad Jensen opined that County’s figures were more accurate because he was given raw figures that he could crunch, while Boks has been stalling on providing info he requested in January of this year. This may be true, but there is still a lack of transparency in the sense he had to make a request, pay for the material and crunch the numbers. No one else but Brad is likely to do that; therefore I contend County is less transparent than LAAS.
Then again, there is transparent, and "apparently transparent." With Ed's rapidly changing statistics and his wild exagerations lately, we do not know how phony his transparency is.
There was also a comment to a previous post saying County was forthcoming about supplying stats by Bob Ballinger over the phone. I questioned the validity of numbers relayed over the phone. They probably had the same validity as any of Boks' unchecked claims.
I have now received an anonymous email stating Ballinger was no friend of rescue groups and himself would stall on Requests for Records. So we hear two sides of the same coin.
The point I was trying to make is not the ease with which Brad or others receive numbers, nor even the total accuracy of the numbers, but the performance of both agencies, as both are claiming to be the best. Since Mayeda has the data Ed questions, I think it is to her to give him the raw numbers to crunch for himself. Actually, she should also send them to Brad and me, and we'll also crunch her numbers.
County's numbers may be more accurate or not, but my point is that County has a vastly higher kill rate and raw numbers than LAAS. I think if half of LAAS' staff quit and there were no replacements, and Ed were fired with no successor, LAAS would kill fewer animals even given his questionable stats.
Then I received another anonymous email claiming County was bad news and that a former employee was running a shelter that pretended to be a rescue group, which in fact was killing pets with a Schedule II controlled substance—Fatal Plus—without a vet being present.
Rumors such as these are usually inaccurate, and I acknowledge that. However, since I have contacted County supervisors alleging that Mayeda has perpetrated a fraud on the public and supervisors by falsely claiming that 90% of adoptable pets were indeed adopted from their shelter, when in fact they were killing the vast majority, I do expect to receive other allegations of fraud, if not within the County department itself, at least about rescues associated with County employees.
I alleged that her definition of “adoptable” was fraudulent in the sense that no one could believe the County adoption figures based on her definition of adoptable, as they were wildly out of sync with other large public shelter systems and depended Mayeda's use of behavior testing that allowed County to kill about 8,500 dogs for behavioral problems, which is a significant percentage of their impounds.
As I said, these allegations may be entirely made up or are hearsay and totally inaccurate. I don’t have the time to be an investigative reporter, and I await further information to be sent to me.
The emails:
Bob Ballinger used to be the person who would approve or deny a public records act request. You are correct, there's no way that an accurate assessment of records can be made over the phone, and frankly, I would not believe anyone who said X amount were killed. Just like now, suddenly overnight County has a 90% adoption rate!
Bob Ballinger retired around six months to a year ago, but he was no friend to rescue and would stonewall in order to not produce documents or “accidentally” send the wrong information (i.e., I requested impound numbers of owner surrendered animals for a few of the shelters for a two month period, and he sent me a letter with the numbers of animals surrendered, not the impound numbers which I clearly did not ask for. I had to resubmit my request, thus taking even more time.
LA County is bad, bad news.
There is a reason why LA County management is leaving! I just wish I knew someone who would do investigative journalism on why Judy Meraz was "relocated". There are some whopper rumors circulating now.
I do know that Judy Meraz and her husband Jaime, used to borrow Lavonne Rodstein's cabin in Lake Arrowhead. Lavonne Rodstein is or was the Director of Pet Harbor in Gardena, a place that should be investigated. It's a private "rescue" where most of the dogs and cats, if any get adopted, were euthanized on site which is illegal, unless it is done by a vet.
I wonder how they got hold of that "blue juice" aka, Fatal Plus, a DEA controlled substance Schedule 2 Drug? I believe, but I'm not certain that Pet Harbor would tell people that they would adopt out their pets, but were or still are euthanizing them. Sounds like fraud to me, especially if they are accepting donations for intake of someones pets (with the understanding that the pet would be adopted).
.
I had stated that LA County was less transparent than most shelter systems, including LAAS. Brad Jensen opined that County’s figures were more accurate because he was given raw figures that he could crunch, while Boks has been stalling on providing info he requested in January of this year. This may be true, but there is still a lack of transparency in the sense he had to make a request, pay for the material and crunch the numbers. No one else but Brad is likely to do that; therefore I contend County is less transparent than LAAS.
Then again, there is transparent, and "apparently transparent." With Ed's rapidly changing statistics and his wild exagerations lately, we do not know how phony his transparency is.
There was also a comment to a previous post saying County was forthcoming about supplying stats by Bob Ballinger over the phone. I questioned the validity of numbers relayed over the phone. They probably had the same validity as any of Boks' unchecked claims.
I have now received an anonymous email stating Ballinger was no friend of rescue groups and himself would stall on Requests for Records. So we hear two sides of the same coin.
The point I was trying to make is not the ease with which Brad or others receive numbers, nor even the total accuracy of the numbers, but the performance of both agencies, as both are claiming to be the best. Since Mayeda has the data Ed questions, I think it is to her to give him the raw numbers to crunch for himself. Actually, she should also send them to Brad and me, and we'll also crunch her numbers.
County's numbers may be more accurate or not, but my point is that County has a vastly higher kill rate and raw numbers than LAAS. I think if half of LAAS' staff quit and there were no replacements, and Ed were fired with no successor, LAAS would kill fewer animals even given his questionable stats.
Then I received another anonymous email claiming County was bad news and that a former employee was running a shelter that pretended to be a rescue group, which in fact was killing pets with a Schedule II controlled substance—Fatal Plus—without a vet being present.
Rumors such as these are usually inaccurate, and I acknowledge that. However, since I have contacted County supervisors alleging that Mayeda has perpetrated a fraud on the public and supervisors by falsely claiming that 90% of adoptable pets were indeed adopted from their shelter, when in fact they were killing the vast majority, I do expect to receive other allegations of fraud, if not within the County department itself, at least about rescues associated with County employees.
I alleged that her definition of “adoptable” was fraudulent in the sense that no one could believe the County adoption figures based on her definition of adoptable, as they were wildly out of sync with other large public shelter systems and depended Mayeda's use of behavior testing that allowed County to kill about 8,500 dogs for behavioral problems, which is a significant percentage of their impounds.
As I said, these allegations may be entirely made up or are hearsay and totally inaccurate. I don’t have the time to be an investigative reporter, and I await further information to be sent to me.
The emails:
Bob Ballinger used to be the person who would approve or deny a public records act request. You are correct, there's no way that an accurate assessment of records can be made over the phone, and frankly, I would not believe anyone who said X amount were killed. Just like now, suddenly overnight County has a 90% adoption rate!
Bob Ballinger retired around six months to a year ago, but he was no friend to rescue and would stonewall in order to not produce documents or “accidentally” send the wrong information (i.e., I requested impound numbers of owner surrendered animals for a few of the shelters for a two month period, and he sent me a letter with the numbers of animals surrendered, not the impound numbers which I clearly did not ask for. I had to resubmit my request, thus taking even more time.
LA County is bad, bad news.
There is a reason why LA County management is leaving! I just wish I knew someone who would do investigative journalism on why Judy Meraz was "relocated". There are some whopper rumors circulating now.
I do know that Judy Meraz and her husband Jaime, used to borrow Lavonne Rodstein's cabin in Lake Arrowhead. Lavonne Rodstein is or was the Director of Pet Harbor in Gardena, a place that should be investigated. It's a private "rescue" where most of the dogs and cats, if any get adopted, were euthanized on site which is illegal, unless it is done by a vet.
I wonder how they got hold of that "blue juice" aka, Fatal Plus, a DEA controlled substance Schedule 2 Drug? I believe, but I'm not certain that Pet Harbor would tell people that they would adopt out their pets, but were or still are euthanizing them. Sounds like fraud to me, especially if they are accepting donations for intake of someones pets (with the understanding that the pet would be adopted).
.
Interesting emails from Ed Boks to Animal Lover--Ammended
.
As you know, Boks is being sued by the author of my sister blog, LA Animal Lover. She filed a lawsuit against him and he may recently have been retaliating against her by spreading untruths. I don't know that for sure, as Ed never emails me anymore. So, in her own defense, she is posting emails from him to prove she worked on the blog as part of her volunteer services at his direction, including Ed's planned attacks against ADL and going legally after others.
http://laanimalfriends.eponym.com/
Actually, this is interesting stuff to me, as I was involved up to my eyeballs, but there is a LOT more happening now such as the Mayeda/Boks "snit" with Ed taking on Marcia in terms of who spins better numbers, and the massive improvement in the LAAS kill numbers with no commensurate increase in the live-save percentages.
Impounds are down 2,500 animals over the past 4 months, adoptions are up a few hundred, but New Hope is still down, while died in shelter has more than doubled. When all is said and done, there are fewer bodies coming out of the shelter but not because the euth rate has been cut in half. The number of animals impounded is what is being cut.
In the short term I agree with this policy. If Ed were able to do his job of actually rescuing, treating and adopting animals, I would not say this. But he is not saying this. He is not doing his job; he is doing numbers.
By the way, I talked to some people in Philadelphia who say Philly may do the job this year and the save rate may reach 60%. In 2003, the save rate was 11%.
Given that they have 1/6 the budget and 1/7 the employees of LAAS, that's quite good.
As you know, Boks is being sued by the author of my sister blog, LA Animal Lover. She filed a lawsuit against him and he may recently have been retaliating against her by spreading untruths. I don't know that for sure, as Ed never emails me anymore. So, in her own defense, she is posting emails from him to prove she worked on the blog as part of her volunteer services at his direction, including Ed's planned attacks against ADL and going legally after others.
http://laanimalfriends.eponym.com/
Actually, this is interesting stuff to me, as I was involved up to my eyeballs, but there is a LOT more happening now such as the Mayeda/Boks "snit" with Ed taking on Marcia in terms of who spins better numbers, and the massive improvement in the LAAS kill numbers with no commensurate increase in the live-save percentages.
Impounds are down 2,500 animals over the past 4 months, adoptions are up a few hundred, but New Hope is still down, while died in shelter has more than doubled. When all is said and done, there are fewer bodies coming out of the shelter but not because the euth rate has been cut in half. The number of animals impounded is what is being cut.
In the short term I agree with this policy. If Ed were able to do his job of actually rescuing, treating and adopting animals, I would not say this. But he is not saying this. He is not doing his job; he is doing numbers.
By the way, I talked to some people in Philadelphia who say Philly may do the job this year and the save rate may reach 60%. In 2003, the save rate was 11%.
Given that they have 1/6 the budget and 1/7 the employees of LAAS, that's quite good.
Yaroslavsky's email to Mayeda asking her to Explain Herself
.
Got this today from Yaroslavsky. Maybe when I get Mayeda's response and my rebuttal, I can send it to Ed Boks for his review and comment:
August 23, 2007
Marcia Mayeda, Director Department of Animal Care and Control 5898 Cherry Avenue Long Beach, California 90805
Dear Ms. Mayeda:
I am in receipt of correspondence from Edward Muzika, Ph.D. alleging fraud being perpetrated within your Department. I have enclosed a copy of his letter with attachments for your information.
I would appreciate your looking into this matter and responding to his concerns at your earliest opportunity. Please provide me with a copy of your response to him.
In advance, thank you for your attention to this request.
Sincerely,
ZEV YAROSLAVSKY Chairman of the Board Supervisor, Third District
ZY:rpm
Well, Zev got it a little wrong, I didn't say a fraud was being perpetrated within her department, I said she was a fraud and a liar. I'd have to prove fraud was being perpetrated to say it; I just called her a fraud and a liar, which is an opinion.
.
Got this today from Yaroslavsky. Maybe when I get Mayeda's response and my rebuttal, I can send it to Ed Boks for his review and comment:
August 23, 2007
Marcia Mayeda, Director Department of Animal Care and Control 5898 Cherry Avenue Long Beach, California 90805
Dear Ms. Mayeda:
I am in receipt of correspondence from Edward Muzika, Ph.D. alleging fraud being perpetrated within your Department. I have enclosed a copy of his letter with attachments for your information.
I would appreciate your looking into this matter and responding to his concerns at your earliest opportunity. Please provide me with a copy of your response to him.
In advance, thank you for your attention to this request.
Sincerely,
ZEV YAROSLAVSKY Chairman of the Board Supervisor, Third District
ZY:rpm
Well, Zev got it a little wrong, I didn't say a fraud was being perpetrated within her department, I said she was a fraud and a liar. I'd have to prove fraud was being perpetrated to say it; I just called her a fraud and a liar, which is an opinion.
.
Orlov is Number Impaired, But Boks May Be Doing Something Right.
.
Rick Orlov Daily News:
Even more telling, perhaps, is the number of workers who have left Boks' department.
The department has 69 vacancies among its budgeted staff of 300 - a significant gap usually not seen in government agencies.
http://www.dailynews.com/search/ci_6727686?IADID=Search-www.dailynews.com-www.dailynews.com
It all depends on whether he is getting rid of deadwood or good people.
Rick Orlov Daily News:
Even more telling, perhaps, is the number of workers who have left Boks' department.
The department has 69 vacancies among its budgeted staff of 300 - a significant gap usually not seen in government agencies.
http://www.dailynews.com/search/ci_6727686?IADID=Search-www.dailynews.com-www.dailynews.com
It all depends on whether he is getting rid of deadwood or good people.
LAAS Lowers Killing by Refusing Neonates--Ammended
Death in the shelter doubles under Boks.
Interesting statistics for those who are interested or who can understand them.
During the past three months, dog and cat killing decreased by 2,507.
But, neonate impounds dropped 1,536, meaning Boks was not killing them because he was turning them away. He is also refusing feral cats which also decreases impounds. Neonates and ferals have a very high euthasia rate, including 100% for ferals. Since feral cats do not have their own statistical category, we don't know how many were refused. I do know that when I tried to get a trap from them some months ago to trap a feral living under a friends house, I was told they no longer rent out traps.
But 60% of Boks improved kill numbers are not accomplished through any dramatic improvement of LAAS' ability to save animals, but because he simply is not doing his job.
In addition, because of increased crowding, disease and fighting, 271 cats and dogs did not leave breathing. Live in, dead out.
Also, take a look at this. The number of all animals dying in the shelter from disease, injury, etc., has more than doubled since Boks started. From 1,149 2005 to 2,371.
That is, for all animals, not just cats and dogs, the death rate has doubled under Boks.
June 2007 …2,371
May 2006 …1,433
April 2005 …1,149
March 2004 …931
Ed can get award after award, but he is just pushing them out onto the street or letting them die in the shelter from disease, or kill each other in the shelters.
He will whine that no matter what he does, he can’t catch a break. True, we are on to him. No matter what he does, it is not working.
There is an important comment below from a person who works at the Las Vegas shelter who had witnessed increased a huge "died on Premise" numbers at the Lied shelter. Shortly thereafter, HSUS had to kill 1,000 of the animals in one week due to disease outbreak. I posted about this happening in Maybe April on this blog.
Many of us have worried exactly about this, knowing that Ed is playing with fire. However, knowing Ed he will find an excuse for not taking responsibility for preventing an outbreak when it happens.
.
ABC Pulls Story About Boks National Honors
.
ABC pulled the story about Boks' national honors as relayed by the Mayor. Robin Kramer and Jim Blackman make the Mayor look like an idiot because they did not check Boks' facts.
If ABC admits its mistake, isn't it time for the Mayor to rebuke Boks?
What makes Ed say these things that are patently untrue? He knows I will find him out, yet he says these whoppers anyhow. Jees, Ed is self-destructive.
.
ABC pulled the story about Boks' national honors as relayed by the Mayor. Robin Kramer and Jim Blackman make the Mayor look like an idiot because they did not check Boks' facts.
If ABC admits its mistake, isn't it time for the Mayor to rebuke Boks?
What makes Ed say these things that are patently untrue? He knows I will find him out, yet he says these whoppers anyhow. Jees, Ed is self-destructive.
.
My Sources for Shelter Statistics
.
For those of you who want to check my numbers, the following are the official and unofficial sources by URL.
Notice that you can get nothing out of LA County's Marcia Mayeda without a request for public records. I wonder why.
Maricopa County
http://www.maricopa.gov/pets/pdf/MaddiesStats.pdf
New York City:
http://www.nycacc.org/stats.htm
Philadelphia
http://phillypaws.org/downloads.cfm
Los Angles Animal Services
http://laanimalservices.org/about_stats.htm
http://www.sheltertrak.com/downloads/
LA County
http://www.sheltertrak.com/stats_lacacc.php
http://sheltertrak.com/stat.php
http://www.sheltertrak.com/downloads/
San Francisco Animal Care (Municipal) and SFSPCA
http://laanimalwatch.blogspot.com/2007/03/san-francisco-animal-control-director.html
http://www.sfspca.org/numbers.shtml
For those of you who want to check my numbers, the following are the official and unofficial sources by URL.
Notice that you can get nothing out of LA County's Marcia Mayeda without a request for public records. I wonder why.
Maricopa County
http://www.maricopa.gov/pets/pdf/MaddiesStats.pdf
New York City:
http://www.nycacc.org/stats.htm
Philadelphia
http://phillypaws.org/downloads.cfm
Los Angles Animal Services
http://laanimalservices.org/about_stats.htm
http://www.sheltertrak.com/downloads/
LA County
http://www.sheltertrak.com/stats_lacacc.php
http://sheltertrak.com/stat.php
http://www.sheltertrak.com/downloads/
San Francisco Animal Care (Municipal) and SFSPCA
http://laanimalwatch.blogspot.com/2007/03/san-francisco-animal-control-director.html
http://www.sfspca.org/numbers.shtml
LA County's Dismal Failure at Saving Animals
.
Which hospital would you rather go to, one where 90% leave alive, or one where only 60% leave alive? Same with prison; which would you rather go to, one where 95% leave alive, or one where 70% leave alive?
This percentage of “leaving alive” is called the live release rate, or the live-save rate. Unfortunately for the animals, only one large municipal shelter provides even these dismal save rates for its animals.
The live-save rate is measured by the number adopted, the number rescued and the number returned to owner divided by the total number of animals impounded. Live save is not the obverse of euthanasia. Euthanasia is only one of the possible outcomes. Died in shelter is another outcome that subtracts from live saves, as well as the number of animals remaining in the shelter—i.e., warehoused. Some of the shelter systems below include the number of animals in the shelter at the beginning of the year, but most don't.
Below is the tale of the tape. These are the numbers for calendar 2006 and do not take into account the improvement or worsening of numbers for the last six months as these are not available for some of these systems. Also, the numbers for the first six months do not include the heavy kill months of summer, July, August and September, which would artificially raise the live save percentages contrasted to a full year’s numbers. For example, LAAS' live release rate has improved by 2% during 2007 as a result of warehousing and refusing to impound some animals with the highest kill rate, i.e., neonatals. Philly's first half rate improved to a remarkable 60.4%!!
Live save rates for cats and dogs at:
LA County..........................35.7%
Maricopa County................42%
Philadelphia.......................47%
LA Animal Services.............52.1%
New York City.....................54.3%
San Francisco/SFSPCA........87%
Once again Los Angeles County wins the national award. Not only does it place as number one in terms of adoptions, but it is also number one (worst) in terms of the number of cats and dogs killed, AND also is the worst shelter in terms of the percentage of animals leaving alive.
Mayeda is such a champ. I doubt she will hold a press conference about this.
.
Which hospital would you rather go to, one where 90% leave alive, or one where only 60% leave alive? Same with prison; which would you rather go to, one where 95% leave alive, or one where 70% leave alive?
This percentage of “leaving alive” is called the live release rate, or the live-save rate. Unfortunately for the animals, only one large municipal shelter provides even these dismal save rates for its animals.
The live-save rate is measured by the number adopted, the number rescued and the number returned to owner divided by the total number of animals impounded. Live save is not the obverse of euthanasia. Euthanasia is only one of the possible outcomes. Died in shelter is another outcome that subtracts from live saves, as well as the number of animals remaining in the shelter—i.e., warehoused. Some of the shelter systems below include the number of animals in the shelter at the beginning of the year, but most don't.
Below is the tale of the tape. These are the numbers for calendar 2006 and do not take into account the improvement or worsening of numbers for the last six months as these are not available for some of these systems. Also, the numbers for the first six months do not include the heavy kill months of summer, July, August and September, which would artificially raise the live save percentages contrasted to a full year’s numbers. For example, LAAS' live release rate has improved by 2% during 2007 as a result of warehousing and refusing to impound some animals with the highest kill rate, i.e., neonatals. Philly's first half rate improved to a remarkable 60.4%!!
Live save rates for cats and dogs at:
LA County..........................35.7%
Maricopa County................42%
Philadelphia.......................47%
LA Animal Services.............52.1%
New York City.....................54.3%
San Francisco/SFSPCA........87%
Once again Los Angeles County wins the national award. Not only does it place as number one in terms of adoptions, but it is also number one (worst) in terms of the number of cats and dogs killed, AND also is the worst shelter in terms of the percentage of animals leaving alive.
Mayeda is such a champ. I doubt she will hold a press conference about this.
.
Mayeda Goes Ballistic; Calls Boks Out
.
Mike Bell, little devil he is, passed on my email where I challenged Boks' claim that LAAS was the largest adoption agency in the country, to Marcia Mayeda, who heads the county's much larger shelter system. She just made this press announcement to set Boks and the Mayor straight.
Marcia is no slouch; she did the last three fiscal years and beat Boks heads down on all by all measures.
Marcia did not mention that the county slaughters 250% as many animals as LAAS. Nor, like Boks, explain all the elements of her claim.
PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASECONTACT: Marcia Mayeda, Director, 562-728-4610
Yesterday, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced that the City of LosAngeles’ Department of Animal Services is the largest animal adoption agency in the United States.This claim is inaccurate. The County of Los Angeles’ Department ofAnimal Care places more animals each year than the City of Los Angeles.
The City of Los Angeles placed 25,279 animals last year, compared to 28,309 animals placed by the County. In the 2005-06 fiscal year, theCity placed 24,515 animals compared to 27,670 for the County. In theyear prior to that, the City placed 24,190 animals and the County placed 28,203.
The County of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Care and Control is the largest animal control agency in the country, serving all unincorporated Los Angeles County as well as 51 contract cities.
“Our staff and volunteers work diligently to place abandoned animals into new, loving homes” stated County of Los Angeles Director MarciaMayeda. “They should be recognized and congratulated for their effortsthat lead the nation in the numbers of animals adopted”.
.
Mike Bell, little devil he is, passed on my email where I challenged Boks' claim that LAAS was the largest adoption agency in the country, to Marcia Mayeda, who heads the county's much larger shelter system. She just made this press announcement to set Boks and the Mayor straight.
Marcia is no slouch; she did the last three fiscal years and beat Boks heads down on all by all measures.
Marcia did not mention that the county slaughters 250% as many animals as LAAS. Nor, like Boks, explain all the elements of her claim.
PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASECONTACT: Marcia Mayeda, Director, 562-728-4610
Yesterday, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced that the City of LosAngeles’ Department of Animal Services is the largest animal adoption agency in the United States.This claim is inaccurate. The County of Los Angeles’ Department ofAnimal Care places more animals each year than the City of Los Angeles.
The City of Los Angeles placed 25,279 animals last year, compared to 28,309 animals placed by the County. In the 2005-06 fiscal year, theCity placed 24,515 animals compared to 27,670 for the County. In theyear prior to that, the City placed 24,190 animals and the County placed 28,203.
The County of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Care and Control is the largest animal control agency in the country, serving all unincorporated Los Angeles County as well as 51 contract cities.
“Our staff and volunteers work diligently to place abandoned animals into new, loving homes” stated County of Los Angeles Director MarciaMayeda. “They should be recognized and congratulated for their effortsthat lead the nation in the numbers of animals adopted”.
.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa fails Los Angeles' animals, then lies about it
.
August 21, 2007 Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced on the steps of City Hall that Los Angeles Animal Services was the number one and largest pet adoption agency in the nation. That's wonderful news except for the fact that it's completely untrue.
LA Animal Services isn't even the largest or best in the immediate area. LA County Animal Control takes in more animals and adopts out more animals. Other shelters save more animals and euthanasia fewer than the City.
Marcia Mayeda who runs the much larger LA County Animal Control got wind of his press release and sent this to the media.
"Yesterday, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced that the City of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Services is the largest animal adoption agency in the United States. This claim is inaccurate. The County of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Care places more animals each year than the City of Los Angeles. The City of Los Angeles placed 25,279 animals last year, compared to 28,309 animals placed by the County. In the 2005-06 fiscal year, the City placed 24,515 animals compared to 27,670 for the County. In the year prior to that, the City placed 24,190 animals and the County placed 28,203."
The Mayor made a few other "inaccurate" statements. He stated "for the first time in LA history, LA's animal shelters have saved and adopted out more animals than euthanized." This again is not true. LA City has saved more animals than it's euthanized since 2004, two years before the Mayor appointed the new General Manager Ed Boks and a year before Villaraigosa himself was elected Mayor. Does anyone in his office bother to check their facts?
The Mayor's press release went on to say “LA Animal Services has consistently reduced euthanasia over the past five years in the double digits." They have "cut the euthansia rate in half since 2002." Again, not true. The euthanasia rate did not go down at all during Boks' first year on the job in 2006. Very recently it's gone down a small percentage due to number manipulations. Boks is putting more animals in each cage so he doesn't have to euthanize them. Twice as many animals are dying from disease and fights caused by this overcrowding. He also is refusing to take in some animals. The current small reduction in euthanasia is equal to the increase in animals dying from overcrowding and the reduction in intake. There has been no double digit decrease ever. The records clearly show the euthanasia rate has not been cut in half since 2002.
Next the Mayor said that they reunited 16% of cats and dogs with their owners. Try 9%. The year before that it was also 9%, before that it was 10%. Fewer animals and a lower percentage are being reunited and the City is lying then bragging about it?
The Mayor's staff contacted ABC reporter John Gregory to cover this "historic" event, and that's when the story gets even wilder. Gregory reported that "L.A.'s Animal Services Department received a very special honor on Tuesday. The department's animal adoption agency won top national honors." The only thing is that the Department didn't win an award of any kind from anyone for anything. The Mayor merely framed a certificate of appreciation and showed it at the press conference. In effect he called a press conference to give a certificate of appreciation to himself. Many reporters have said that our Mayor has a big ego but this indeed does take the cake.
The Mayor's press release went on to say “LA Animal Services has consistently reduced euthanasia over the past five years in the double digits." They have "cut the euthansia rate in half since 2002." Again, not true. The euthanasia rate did not go down at all during Boks' first year on the job in 2006. Very recently it's gone down a small percentage due to number manipulations. Boks is putting more animals in each cage so he doesn't have to euthanize them. Twice as many animals are dying from disease and fights caused by this overcrowding. He also is refusing to take in some animals. The current small reduction in euthanasia is equal to the increase in animals dying from overcrowding and the reduction in intake. There has been no double digit decrease ever. The records clearly show the euthanasia rate has not been cut in half since 2002.
Next the Mayor said that they reunited 16% of cats and dogs with their owners. Try 9%. The year before that it was also 9%, before that it was 10%. Fewer animals and a lower percentage are being reunited and the City is lying then bragging about it?
The Mayor's staff contacted ABC reporter John Gregory to cover this "historic" event, and that's when the story gets even wilder. Gregory reported that "L.A.'s Animal Services Department received a very special honor on Tuesday. The department's animal adoption agency won top national honors." The only thing is that the Department didn't win an award of any kind from anyone for anything. The Mayor merely framed a certificate of appreciation and showed it at the press conference. In effect he called a press conference to give a certificate of appreciation to himself. Many reporters have said that our Mayor has a big ego but this indeed does take the cake.
Reporter Gregory had one last thing to add, "City shelters have a no kill policy, but that doesn't mean animals are not euthanized." The shelter does not have a nokill policy which is exactly why they are euthanizing them by the thousands per year. The City has since blamed the mistakes in ABC's reporting on the reporter.
99% of what the Mayor said in his press release and at the press conference was untrue. I only tried to verify this one press release. It makes you wonder how many other press releases for other Departments are completely untrue. It also makes you wonder why the Mayor is supporting and promoting a General Manager who most likely provided him with the untrue information. Ed Boks has made the Mayor look a fool.
Ann Angeleno
AnnAngeleno@yahoo.com
.
August 21, 2007 Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced on the steps of City Hall that Los Angeles Animal Services was the number one and largest pet adoption agency in the nation. That's wonderful news except for the fact that it's completely untrue.
LA Animal Services isn't even the largest or best in the immediate area. LA County Animal Control takes in more animals and adopts out more animals. Other shelters save more animals and euthanasia fewer than the City.
Marcia Mayeda who runs the much larger LA County Animal Control got wind of his press release and sent this to the media.
"Yesterday, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced that the City of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Services is the largest animal adoption agency in the United States. This claim is inaccurate. The County of Los Angeles’ Department of Animal Care places more animals each year than the City of Los Angeles. The City of Los Angeles placed 25,279 animals last year, compared to 28,309 animals placed by the County. In the 2005-06 fiscal year, the City placed 24,515 animals compared to 27,670 for the County. In the year prior to that, the City placed 24,190 animals and the County placed 28,203."
The Mayor made a few other "inaccurate" statements. He stated "for the first time in LA history, LA's animal shelters have saved and adopted out more animals than euthanized." This again is not true. LA City has saved more animals than it's euthanized since 2004, two years before the Mayor appointed the new General Manager Ed Boks and a year before Villaraigosa himself was elected Mayor. Does anyone in his office bother to check their facts?
The Mayor's press release went on to say “LA Animal Services has consistently reduced euthanasia over the past five years in the double digits." They have "cut the euthansia rate in half since 2002." Again, not true. The euthanasia rate did not go down at all during Boks' first year on the job in 2006. Very recently it's gone down a small percentage due to number manipulations. Boks is putting more animals in each cage so he doesn't have to euthanize them. Twice as many animals are dying from disease and fights caused by this overcrowding. He also is refusing to take in some animals. The current small reduction in euthanasia is equal to the increase in animals dying from overcrowding and the reduction in intake. There has been no double digit decrease ever. The records clearly show the euthanasia rate has not been cut in half since 2002.
Next the Mayor said that they reunited 16% of cats and dogs with their owners. Try 9%. The year before that it was also 9%, before that it was 10%. Fewer animals and a lower percentage are being reunited and the City is lying then bragging about it?
The Mayor's staff contacted ABC reporter John Gregory to cover this "historic" event, and that's when the story gets even wilder. Gregory reported that "L.A.'s Animal Services Department received a very special honor on Tuesday. The department's animal adoption agency won top national honors." The only thing is that the Department didn't win an award of any kind from anyone for anything. The Mayor merely framed a certificate of appreciation and showed it at the press conference. In effect he called a press conference to give a certificate of appreciation to himself. Many reporters have said that our Mayor has a big ego but this indeed does take the cake.
The Mayor's press release went on to say “LA Animal Services has consistently reduced euthanasia over the past five years in the double digits." They have "cut the euthansia rate in half since 2002." Again, not true. The euthanasia rate did not go down at all during Boks' first year on the job in 2006. Very recently it's gone down a small percentage due to number manipulations. Boks is putting more animals in each cage so he doesn't have to euthanize them. Twice as many animals are dying from disease and fights caused by this overcrowding. He also is refusing to take in some animals. The current small reduction in euthanasia is equal to the increase in animals dying from overcrowding and the reduction in intake. There has been no double digit decrease ever. The records clearly show the euthanasia rate has not been cut in half since 2002.
Next the Mayor said that they reunited 16% of cats and dogs with their owners. Try 9%. The year before that it was also 9%, before that it was 10%. Fewer animals and a lower percentage are being reunited and the City is lying then bragging about it?
The Mayor's staff contacted ABC reporter John Gregory to cover this "historic" event, and that's when the story gets even wilder. Gregory reported that "L.A.'s Animal Services Department received a very special honor on Tuesday. The department's animal adoption agency won top national honors." The only thing is that the Department didn't win an award of any kind from anyone for anything. The Mayor merely framed a certificate of appreciation and showed it at the press conference. In effect he called a press conference to give a certificate of appreciation to himself. Many reporters have said that our Mayor has a big ego but this indeed does take the cake.
Reporter Gregory had one last thing to add, "City shelters have a no kill policy, but that doesn't mean animals are not euthanized." The shelter does not have a nokill policy which is exactly why they are euthanizing them by the thousands per year. The City has since blamed the mistakes in ABC's reporting on the reporter.
99% of what the Mayor said in his press release and at the press conference was untrue. I only tried to verify this one press release. It makes you wonder how many other press releases for other Departments are completely untrue. It also makes you wonder why the Mayor is supporting and promoting a General Manager who most likely provided him with the untrue information. Ed Boks has made the Mayor look a fool.
Ann Angeleno
AnnAngeleno@yahoo.com
.
Boks' Claim of Being #1 Adoption Agency Exposed
.
O.k. here are the numbers for Boks claim to be the largest adoption agency in the US..
This is for LA Animal Services for FISCAL 2006-07,
and for Calendar 2006 for County Animal Care and Control.
Ed chose fiscal 2007 because those numbers are better for him. If we used 2006 for complete comparison, he’d do even worse.
.................................FY06-07 ....2006
Cats&Dogs ..............LAAS ..........LACACC
RTO .........................4,321 ..........6,182
Adoptions ..............15,113 ..........18,276
NewHope/Rescue ...5,840 ..........2,882
LAAS adopted 15,113
County adopted 18,276
Add rescue groups (Why? This is not something LAAS did, it was non-profit rescue groups, but Boks is taking credit for them.)
LAAS had 5,840 cats and dogs released to rescue groups
County had 2,882 released to rescue groups
LAAS Total 20,953 Adopted + Rescued
County Total 21,158 Adopted + Rescued
So Ed is dead wrong on two counts, adoptions for cats and dogs, and adoptions and rescued for cats and dogs. Beside, if you compare his calendar 2006 figures against County, he would fare even worse.
So what does Ed do? He throws in Rabbits and “Other Animals.” No other shelter really keeps those stats publicly available. We’d have to do a request for public documents to get the County’s rabbit and Other Animal figures. Mayeda certainly is not giving him those figures, and he knows no one else can produce data to prove him wrong. So he can freely say anything he wants in this area.
But on straight out adoptions of dogs and cats, he is a liar by 20%.
Even adoptions and rescues of dogs and cats he is off by 200, and if we compared his calendar 2006 against County 2006, he’d be worse off by almost 900.
The spreadsheet with data can be seen at:
http://spreadsheets0.google.com/ccc?key=pVc6YQelmdXWAkzEstmlaSA
O.k. here are the numbers for Boks claim to be the largest adoption agency in the US..
This is for LA Animal Services for FISCAL 2006-07,
and for Calendar 2006 for County Animal Care and Control.
Ed chose fiscal 2007 because those numbers are better for him. If we used 2006 for complete comparison, he’d do even worse.
.................................FY06-07 ....2006
Cats&Dogs ..............LAAS ..........LACACC
RTO .........................4,321 ..........6,182
Adoptions ..............15,113 ..........18,276
NewHope/Rescue ...5,840 ..........2,882
LAAS adopted 15,113
County adopted 18,276
Add rescue groups (Why? This is not something LAAS did, it was non-profit rescue groups, but Boks is taking credit for them.)
LAAS had 5,840 cats and dogs released to rescue groups
County had 2,882 released to rescue groups
LAAS Total 20,953 Adopted + Rescued
County Total 21,158 Adopted + Rescued
So Ed is dead wrong on two counts, adoptions for cats and dogs, and adoptions and rescued for cats and dogs. Beside, if you compare his calendar 2006 figures against County, he would fare even worse.
So what does Ed do? He throws in Rabbits and “Other Animals.” No other shelter really keeps those stats publicly available. We’d have to do a request for public documents to get the County’s rabbit and Other Animal figures. Mayeda certainly is not giving him those figures, and he knows no one else can produce data to prove him wrong. So he can freely say anything he wants in this area.
But on straight out adoptions of dogs and cats, he is a liar by 20%.
Even adoptions and rescues of dogs and cats he is off by 200, and if we compared his calendar 2006 against County 2006, he’d be worse off by almost 900.
The spreadsheet with data can be seen at:
http://spreadsheets0.google.com/ccc?key=pVc6YQelmdXWAkzEstmlaSA
Mayor Repeats Boks' Lie that LA Is Both No-Kill and also is the Biggest Adoption Agency in the US.
Boks lies to the Mayor, the Mayor lies to a reporter, and the reporter repeats the lie, representing it as fact. AND, KABC wants to copyright their lie!
From KABC-TV:
By John Gregory August 21, 2007 (KABC-TV) -
"L.A.'s Animal Services Department received a very special honor on Tuesday. The department's animal adoption agency won top national honors."
"Pet adoptions in Los Angeles are up and the city is now beating out other big towns like New York in finding homes for unwanted animals. "We're announcing that Los Angeles Animal Services is the number one public animal adoption agency in the United States of America," L.A.Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said."
(Comment: RECEIVED A VERY SPECIAL TOP NATIONAL HONOR FROM WHOM JOHN GREGORY? WHO FED YOU THIS LINE? HAVE YOU CHECKED ANY FACTS WHATSOEVER? WAS IT THAT THEY WON TOP HONORS FROM HIS HONOR ONLY?
In fact, the statement about being the number one adoption agency is false. LA County adopts more:
LAAS adopted 15,201 while LA County adopted 18,276 in fiscal 2006.
I am assuming Boks included New Hope rescues, and returned to owner categories, in order to get his number of "adoptions" to 25,000.
But LA County, when you add those same three categories, "adopted" 27,000.
The County may be murderers extraordinaire, but because they take in so many more animals, even with their terrible percentages, they adopt out more animals than Los Angeles Animal Services.)
Take a look at the chart supplied by Brad Jensen of Sheltertrak.com:
County adoptions, 18,276, LA City Adoptions, 15,201.
"The city's Animal Services Department celebrated the news with a pet adoption fair on the steps of City Hall."
"City shelters have a no kill policy, but that doesn't mean animals are not euthanized. It's still a last resort for pets they can't find homes for.There are still plenty of challenges facing L.A. Animal Services, and one of the big ones is pit bulls and what to do with them."
(Comment: Everyone who has hesitated to bring a pet to LAAS for adoption in the past, can now dump their animal with a peaceful mind.)
Copyright © 2007 KABC-TV. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
It just keeps getting deeper and deeper.
Boks' Math; Vets
.
Boks has set out Clifton Merritt’s statistical analysis of shelter killing in the US. Merritt is an anti-disciple of No-Kill who has argued that all definitions are worthless.
However, Merritt guesstimated animals killed in various shelter systems and gave estimates of feral cat populations and killing trends.
He also listed the specific outcomes of well over a hundred shelter systems, including LA.
However, Boks juggled the numbers Merritt provided and inserted fiscal year 2006-07 instead of 2006.
LAAS killed 19,216 cats/dogs in 2006, but Boks listed 17,314 which Boks said Merritt wrote. He put in Fiscal Year instead of the regular year.
Boks said LA averaged 4.3 animals killed per 1,000 residents according to Merritt, but in fact, Merritt reported 19,216/4,000,000, which is 4.8.
Not like these numbers mean anything.
Boks also offers his analysis:
(The basic question LA City critics keep asking is, "Why can't Los Angeles be like San Francisco?" The answer is that Los Angeles is exactly like San Francisco, if you compare like-to-like demographic units. For example, …if you compare San Francisco and San Mateo County to Los Angeles, the combined S.F./San Mateo number and the current Los Angeles County number per 1,000 humans would be just about identical.)
Well, using similar logic,why don’t we compare Los Angles City/County and San Bernadino and Kern County, with San Francisco, Mateo and Sonoma Counties? It is very interesting to note that the Boks supplied figures have exact numbers listed for LA City, LA County and San Francisco, the S.F. Bay area—whatever that is—has an estimate number of 50,000. I don’t know whether Ed through this number in or it was a Merritt estimate.
Merritt's numbers also show that for the Northeast U.S., whatever that means to him, the kill rates per 1,000 population was 1.7, or about 1/3 of LA City
AS IF THESE NUMBERS MEAN ANYTHING. THEY DON’T. IT IS ABSOLUTELY STUPID TO MEASURE PROGRESS TOWARDS NOKILL ON THE BASIS OF NUMBERS OF ANIMALS KILLED PER THOUSAND. If that were the measure, NYC would have been no-kill years ago.
On a more interesting note, LAAS now has four vets working and one close to hire. It is an international mix of nationalities and religions.
One American Jew, my former vet Steve Feldman; one Fillipino; one Chinese and one Indian. Maybe the Chinese is Taoist and the Indian Hindu or Buddhist.
Boks has set out Clifton Merritt’s statistical analysis of shelter killing in the US. Merritt is an anti-disciple of No-Kill who has argued that all definitions are worthless.
However, Merritt guesstimated animals killed in various shelter systems and gave estimates of feral cat populations and killing trends.
He also listed the specific outcomes of well over a hundred shelter systems, including LA.
However, Boks juggled the numbers Merritt provided and inserted fiscal year 2006-07 instead of 2006.
LAAS killed 19,216 cats/dogs in 2006, but Boks listed 17,314 which Boks said Merritt wrote. He put in Fiscal Year instead of the regular year.
Boks said LA averaged 4.3 animals killed per 1,000 residents according to Merritt, but in fact, Merritt reported 19,216/4,000,000, which is 4.8.
Not like these numbers mean anything.
Boks also offers his analysis:
(The basic question LA City critics keep asking is, "Why can't Los Angeles be like San Francisco?" The answer is that Los Angeles is exactly like San Francisco, if you compare like-to-like demographic units. For example, …if you compare San Francisco and San Mateo County to Los Angeles, the combined S.F./San Mateo number and the current Los Angeles County number per 1,000 humans would be just about identical.)
Well, using similar logic,why don’t we compare Los Angles City/County and San Bernadino and Kern County, with San Francisco, Mateo and Sonoma Counties? It is very interesting to note that the Boks supplied figures have exact numbers listed for LA City, LA County and San Francisco, the S.F. Bay area—whatever that is—has an estimate number of 50,000. I don’t know whether Ed through this number in or it was a Merritt estimate.
Merritt's numbers also show that for the Northeast U.S., whatever that means to him, the kill rates per 1,000 population was 1.7, or about 1/3 of LA City
AS IF THESE NUMBERS MEAN ANYTHING. THEY DON’T. IT IS ABSOLUTELY STUPID TO MEASURE PROGRESS TOWARDS NOKILL ON THE BASIS OF NUMBERS OF ANIMALS KILLED PER THOUSAND. If that were the measure, NYC would have been no-kill years ago.
On a more interesting note, LAAS now has four vets working and one close to hire. It is an international mix of nationalities and religions.
One American Jew, my former vet Steve Feldman; one Fillipino; one Chinese and one Indian. Maybe the Chinese is Taoist and the Indian Hindu or Buddhist.
Two Excellent Sites on Catfood and Nutrition and a Boks Spoof
.
Since everything in cat food seems to be a poison unless you make it yourself, I looked for a good site for guidance.
I found several, but the one I like best is by Dr. Pierson who appears to be located in the South Bay.
http://www.catinfo.org/
http://cats.about.com/cs/catfood/a/catfoodindex.htm?PM=ss12_cats
Also, for your viewing pleasure, and anti-Boks spoof on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiIzQuxlbaM
Since everything in cat food seems to be a poison unless you make it yourself, I looked for a good site for guidance.
I found several, but the one I like best is by Dr. Pierson who appears to be located in the South Bay.
http://www.catinfo.org/
http://cats.about.com/cs/catfood/a/catfoodindex.htm?PM=ss12_cats
Also, for your viewing pleasure, and anti-Boks spoof on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiIzQuxlbaM
Friskies Bites Dust
.
Remember good the old days when cat food had chicken, beef, and turkey, and there was no "With gravy?"
Remember too when kidney disease, hyperthyroidism and cancer were far less prevalent than now, and we were told that the average lifespan of indoor cats was 17 years?
Remember when an office call on a vet cost $20 and there was no charge for a recheck within two weeks?
Remember when we were told to stay away from fish canned food because it caused FUS?
Now, can you find anything made by Friskies or other supermarket cat foods that is not fish based, or has replaced meat with contaminated gravy?
An article from the LA Times today:
An epidemic of thyroid disease among pet cats could be caused by toxic flame retardants that are widely found in household dust and some pet food, government scientists reported Wednesday.The often-lethal disease was rare in cats until the 1980s, when it began appearing widely, particularly in California cats.
That was at the same time industry started using large volumes of brominated flame retardants in consumer products, including furniture cushions, electronics, mattresses and carpet padding.
Scientists from the Environmental Protection Agency noted a possible connection between hyperthyroidism and flame retardants. The chemicals -- known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs -- mimic thyroid hormones, so experts have theorized that high exposure in cats could cause overactive thyroids.Cats that remain indoors and eat fish-flavored canned food were found to be the most highly contaminated.
People in the United States have the highest PBDE levels in humans worldwide, but U.S. cats are even more exposed -- some with levels 100 times greater, according to the study.
We inhale or ingest dust, mostly from hand-to-mouth transfer," said Petreas, who did not participate in the study.The risk to cats that eat dry food and live in homes with average contamination is minimal, the study said, while "at the other extreme, maximal PBDE exposure" occurs in cats that eat fish-flavored canned food and live in houses with highly contaminated dust.
Cats that eat canned food containing whitefish, salmon and other seafood are exposed to PBDE levels up to 12 times higher than cats that eat dry food, and five times more than cats that eat poultry or beef canned foods, the study said. The chemicals build up in oceans and other water bodies and magnify in food chains.
However, much of the exposure -- for cats as well as people -- comes from dust, not food. Cats, while sleeping, often come in direct and prolonged contact with upholstery, carpeting and mattress materials that contain flame retardants. In addition, they often sit on electronic equipment. "Because of their meticulous grooming behavior, cats would effectively ingest any volatilized PBDEs or PBDE-laden dust that deposited on their fur during such activities,
In people and cats with the highest levels, Petreas said, "it's explained not by diet, but more contact with contaminated sofas, computers and other consumer products."Two pervasive PBDEs, used mostly in foam cushions, mattresses and carpet padding, have been banned in the United States since 2004.
Remember good the old days when cat food had chicken, beef, and turkey, and there was no "With gravy?"
Remember too when kidney disease, hyperthyroidism and cancer were far less prevalent than now, and we were told that the average lifespan of indoor cats was 17 years?
Remember when an office call on a vet cost $20 and there was no charge for a recheck within two weeks?
Remember when we were told to stay away from fish canned food because it caused FUS?
Now, can you find anything made by Friskies or other supermarket cat foods that is not fish based, or has replaced meat with contaminated gravy?
An article from the LA Times today:
An epidemic of thyroid disease among pet cats could be caused by toxic flame retardants that are widely found in household dust and some pet food, government scientists reported Wednesday.The often-lethal disease was rare in cats until the 1980s, when it began appearing widely, particularly in California cats.
That was at the same time industry started using large volumes of brominated flame retardants in consumer products, including furniture cushions, electronics, mattresses and carpet padding.
Scientists from the Environmental Protection Agency noted a possible connection between hyperthyroidism and flame retardants. The chemicals -- known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs -- mimic thyroid hormones, so experts have theorized that high exposure in cats could cause overactive thyroids.Cats that remain indoors and eat fish-flavored canned food were found to be the most highly contaminated.
People in the United States have the highest PBDE levels in humans worldwide, but U.S. cats are even more exposed -- some with levels 100 times greater, according to the study.
We inhale or ingest dust, mostly from hand-to-mouth transfer," said Petreas, who did not participate in the study.The risk to cats that eat dry food and live in homes with average contamination is minimal, the study said, while "at the other extreme, maximal PBDE exposure" occurs in cats that eat fish-flavored canned food and live in houses with highly contaminated dust.
Cats that eat canned food containing whitefish, salmon and other seafood are exposed to PBDE levels up to 12 times higher than cats that eat dry food, and five times more than cats that eat poultry or beef canned foods, the study said. The chemicals build up in oceans and other water bodies and magnify in food chains.
However, much of the exposure -- for cats as well as people -- comes from dust, not food. Cats, while sleeping, often come in direct and prolonged contact with upholstery, carpeting and mattress materials that contain flame retardants. In addition, they often sit on electronic equipment. "Because of their meticulous grooming behavior, cats would effectively ingest any volatilized PBDEs or PBDE-laden dust that deposited on their fur during such activities,
In people and cats with the highest levels, Petreas said, "it's explained not by diet, but more contact with contaminated sofas, computers and other consumer products."Two pervasive PBDEs, used mostly in foam cushions, mattresses and carpet padding, have been banned in the United States since 2004.
About Mary Cummins
.
I have known Mary Cummins for about 18 months now. We met a total of four or five times, once at Boks office planning how to best support Ed and the department, two or three times at Boks/community meetings, and once at Mary’s house for a planning meeting with Ed when he failed to show because he was afraid activists would blog about his hanging around his groupies. At that time, he didn't want anyone to know where he lived, so his place was out and I lived far away from either. Her “significant other” was there on that occasion.
We talked on the phone maybe ten times—tops. We have hundreds, maybe a thousand or more emails, mostly during the period when we were supporting Boks. We have hundreds of replies to or emailed from Boks re all kinds of things, from defending him and the department, to reviewing kill stats to commenting on his posts.
She was never his lover. She has been in a committed relationship ever since I met her. In the hundreds and thousands of emails,phone calls, or meetings was there even one indication of a romantic bond between them.
Nada. When attacks on Boks seemed to be going nowhere, the anti Boks people in the animal community attacked us to force us to stop defending Ed. She defended me and provided moral support.
She is one of the most intelligent woman I have ever met, and one of the most committed to the welfare of animals. She rescued and returned to the wild 1,400 wildlife in 2005. Her work and reputation were heavily damaged when she spent so much time and energy defending Boks. Then even Boks even went after her when he (allegedly) had two LAAS field people search her house.
She tried to prevent the killing of hundreds of ground squirrels poisoned by the City of Santa Monica. If you think she was obsessed, look at my postings about County Vector Control and Santa Monica officials killing squirrels. During her birth control project of the SM squirrels, there, she used to routinely rope and lower herself over the edge of the 200 ft cliffs in Palisades Park to treat the burrows with a cholesterol ingredient known to cause temporary sterility in small mammals.
Several of you have remarked to me as to how much she helped you when you had problems with wildlife or even with your animals. She can be relentless and selfless when it comes to helping animals or her friends.
Her only fault is her exuberance in the defense of friends. She pissed off a LOT of people when they attacked Boks and she responded in kind. She will counterattack to the same degree she and her friends are attacked. She was not afraid to go toe to toe with lots of people that attacked her friends of herself.
AND, she apologized to everyone that she had been overly enthusiastic when defending Boks.
I want to remind everyone that Mary is not your enemy. We all want to get rid of Boks. She has been providing statistics and information, including the transcript of Boks before Council when they reamed him for the way he went about the Pit Bull Academy.
Will you get off it and focus on the real problems at hand, saving animal lives at LAAS by whatever means needed, including exposing several general managers as the incompetents or liars that they are? Talk to her if you will to see if you can now get together for common goals.
.
I have known Mary Cummins for about 18 months now. We met a total of four or five times, once at Boks office planning how to best support Ed and the department, two or three times at Boks/community meetings, and once at Mary’s house for a planning meeting with Ed when he failed to show because he was afraid activists would blog about his hanging around his groupies. At that time, he didn't want anyone to know where he lived, so his place was out and I lived far away from either. Her “significant other” was there on that occasion.
We talked on the phone maybe ten times—tops. We have hundreds, maybe a thousand or more emails, mostly during the period when we were supporting Boks. We have hundreds of replies to or emailed from Boks re all kinds of things, from defending him and the department, to reviewing kill stats to commenting on his posts.
She was never his lover. She has been in a committed relationship ever since I met her. In the hundreds and thousands of emails,phone calls, or meetings was there even one indication of a romantic bond between them.
Nada. When attacks on Boks seemed to be going nowhere, the anti Boks people in the animal community attacked us to force us to stop defending Ed. She defended me and provided moral support.
She is one of the most intelligent woman I have ever met, and one of the most committed to the welfare of animals. She rescued and returned to the wild 1,400 wildlife in 2005. Her work and reputation were heavily damaged when she spent so much time and energy defending Boks. Then even Boks even went after her when he (allegedly) had two LAAS field people search her house.
She tried to prevent the killing of hundreds of ground squirrels poisoned by the City of Santa Monica. If you think she was obsessed, look at my postings about County Vector Control and Santa Monica officials killing squirrels. During her birth control project of the SM squirrels, there, she used to routinely rope and lower herself over the edge of the 200 ft cliffs in Palisades Park to treat the burrows with a cholesterol ingredient known to cause temporary sterility in small mammals.
Several of you have remarked to me as to how much she helped you when you had problems with wildlife or even with your animals. She can be relentless and selfless when it comes to helping animals or her friends.
Her only fault is her exuberance in the defense of friends. She pissed off a LOT of people when they attacked Boks and she responded in kind. She will counterattack to the same degree she and her friends are attacked. She was not afraid to go toe to toe with lots of people that attacked her friends of herself.
AND, she apologized to everyone that she had been overly enthusiastic when defending Boks.
I want to remind everyone that Mary is not your enemy. We all want to get rid of Boks. She has been providing statistics and information, including the transcript of Boks before Council when they reamed him for the way he went about the Pit Bull Academy.
Will you get off it and focus on the real problems at hand, saving animal lives at LAAS by whatever means needed, including exposing several general managers as the incompetents or liars that they are? Talk to her if you will to see if you can now get together for common goals.
.
Re Eric Jones Sweetheart Deal by Boks
.
This is a comment received from my last post, expressing my sentiments exactly:
Any veterinarian in the world will tell you Dr. Eric Jones is making unheard of money (thanks to the taxpayers!). If we let it be known to vets that the city was giving out ridiculous money for this position, there would have been a lot of takers, that's for sure. This money should be going to hiring more vets.
This is just stupid management. It feels like George W. Bush is running Animal Services with all the lying, cronyism and just poor judgment. How did we get here?
.
This is a comment received from my last post, expressing my sentiments exactly:
Any veterinarian in the world will tell you Dr. Eric Jones is making unheard of money (thanks to the taxpayers!). If we let it be known to vets that the city was giving out ridiculous money for this position, there would have been a lot of takers, that's for sure. This money should be going to hiring more vets.
This is just stupid management. It feels like George W. Bush is running Animal Services with all the lying, cronyism and just poor judgment. How did we get here?
-----------------------------
You know how we got here. Villaraigosa hired him and staff (Blackman and Bickhart) turned a blind eye to his shenanigans. Why isn't the Commission reigning him in?.
The Fine Art of Moral Corruption
.
Pia, Tia and Eric Jones. What do they have in common?
All had fat, cushy contracts brokered by Boks, two of them operational even before they were approved by anyone, and the third caught by Council before fully operational.
I guess Ed thinks he can buy loyalty. Spread out City money to friends, announce the contracts later and ask forgiveness because he didn’t ask anyone for approval in the first place: No Personnel, not the Commission, not Council.
Personally, the more I know about Ed, the less I like him. To me these contracts are borderline graft.
Pia purportedly is an ex girlfriend and may be able to get Ed a job in the future with all the bucks and people she has and knows.
Who knows what relationship Boks has with Jones. He has the best of the cushy contracts, $320,000 a year and another 3,600 spay neuter surgeries upon which he gives the City a whole 7% discount each. How much does he make? Six hundred thousand, seven, eight, more?
Boks' report said Pia has been working since February. Boks didn't sign her agreement until May 24, three months later, and didn't send it in until June 22. I'm sure he sent this in late so that she'd almost be done with the work before anyone saw the agreement.
Hopefully the commission is now trying to make it so they have to approve of these cushy consulting gigs. Boks is out of control.
So when Boks gets bounced from here, which may be soon, he has a lot of friends bought and paid for with City money, to start his game elsewhere.
I am so happy Ken White is making 150% of what Boks is making at his new job in San Francisco. San Francisco knows how to get good people; they pay them a quarter million dollars a year.
Good people in S.F., Carl Friedman running the municipal side and some good people on the SPCA side.
.
Pia, Tia and Eric Jones. What do they have in common?
All had fat, cushy contracts brokered by Boks, two of them operational even before they were approved by anyone, and the third caught by Council before fully operational.
I guess Ed thinks he can buy loyalty. Spread out City money to friends, announce the contracts later and ask forgiveness because he didn’t ask anyone for approval in the first place: No Personnel, not the Commission, not Council.
Personally, the more I know about Ed, the less I like him. To me these contracts are borderline graft.
Pia purportedly is an ex girlfriend and may be able to get Ed a job in the future with all the bucks and people she has and knows.
Who knows what relationship Boks has with Jones. He has the best of the cushy contracts, $320,000 a year and another 3,600 spay neuter surgeries upon which he gives the City a whole 7% discount each. How much does he make? Six hundred thousand, seven, eight, more?
Boks' report said Pia has been working since February. Boks didn't sign her agreement until May 24, three months later, and didn't send it in until June 22. I'm sure he sent this in late so that she'd almost be done with the work before anyone saw the agreement.
Hopefully the commission is now trying to make it so they have to approve of these cushy consulting gigs. Boks is out of control.
So when Boks gets bounced from here, which may be soon, he has a lot of friends bought and paid for with City money, to start his game elsewhere.
I am so happy Ken White is making 150% of what Boks is making at his new job in San Francisco. San Francisco knows how to get good people; they pay them a quarter million dollars a year.
Good people in S.F., Carl Friedman running the municipal side and some good people on the SPCA side.
.
July Stats--Preliminary Analysis
.
The July numbers for LAAS are in—Except for neonate kittens, where even the June numbers are not up yet.
An analysis for the July numbers:
For cats/dogs: Died in shelter way up (2.5 X), new hope down a little, adoptions up, intake is down, euthanasia is down.
Intake is down 500 cats/dogs, euthanasia down 700, adopted up300. Drop in euthanasia number is equal to the drop in intake, increase in died in shelter and increase in adoption.
Boks basically improved things just by refusing kittens/puppies
though adoptions are still up almost 300. Perhaps because he didn't have to euth cat/dogs to make room for puppies/kittens that just get killed anyway?
The live release rate is down to 51% from 54%. I don't include foster, only released to foster because the fosters are still in the system..Dead release, which is euth and died in shelter is 42%, which is up.
.
Of course it's July which is a bad month. I'll compare it to last year but I think it's an improvement. Last year was a massacre and Boks is taking in way fewer, and adopting out more.
What is highly unusual is that "adoptions" of neonates is triple last year's July rate. Adoptions of neonates is illegal unless the little is released with their mother. These are not fosters, these are adopted by the public. It could mean that people are bringing in litters and staff is advising them to adopt them instead of fostering, or else the figures are wrong again, and neonates are later reclassified as kittens.
.
The July numbers for LAAS are in—Except for neonate kittens, where even the June numbers are not up yet.
An analysis for the July numbers:
For cats/dogs: Died in shelter way up (2.5 X), new hope down a little, adoptions up, intake is down, euthanasia is down.
Intake is down 500 cats/dogs, euthanasia down 700, adopted up300. Drop in euthanasia number is equal to the drop in intake, increase in died in shelter and increase in adoption.
Boks basically improved things just by refusing kittens/puppies
though adoptions are still up almost 300. Perhaps because he didn't have to euth cat/dogs to make room for puppies/kittens that just get killed anyway?
The live release rate is down to 51% from 54%. I don't include foster, only released to foster because the fosters are still in the system..Dead release, which is euth and died in shelter is 42%, which is up.
.
Of course it's July which is a bad month. I'll compare it to last year but I think it's an improvement. Last year was a massacre and Boks is taking in way fewer, and adopting out more.
What is highly unusual is that "adoptions" of neonates is triple last year's July rate. Adoptions of neonates is illegal unless the little is released with their mother. These are not fosters, these are adopted by the public. It could mean that people are bringing in litters and staff is advising them to adopt them instead of fostering, or else the figures are wrong again, and neonates are later reclassified as kittens.
.
ERIK JONES ITEM AT COMMISSION MEETING
.
Monday Ed will present a progress report on the Eric Jones operation at SLA.
Supposedly he performed 600 spay/neuters in May-June. That's 300 a month or 3,600 a year. I though Ed was saying each spay/neuter center was going to perform 10,000 spay/neuters a year.
Questions to ask Ed and Eric:
How much did Jones charge the City for each of the 600 s/n performed for LAAS above and beyond the $320,000 contract fee?
Is the additional $320,000 being distributed monthly, quaterly, etc.?
Did Jones perform any other general vet services to the public and what was the income Jones received from the public?
What amount did the City get--it was supposed to get 10% of Jones general vet income.
How was the request for proposals (bids) advertised? The final contract Jones got looks very different from the one I remember seeing on the table three months ago.
.
Monday Ed will present a progress report on the Eric Jones operation at SLA.
Supposedly he performed 600 spay/neuters in May-June. That's 300 a month or 3,600 a year. I though Ed was saying each spay/neuter center was going to perform 10,000 spay/neuters a year.
Questions to ask Ed and Eric:
How much did Jones charge the City for each of the 600 s/n performed for LAAS above and beyond the $320,000 contract fee?
Is the additional $320,000 being distributed monthly, quaterly, etc.?
Did Jones perform any other general vet services to the public and what was the income Jones received from the public?
What amount did the City get--it was supposed to get 10% of Jones general vet income.
How was the request for proposals (bids) advertised? The final contract Jones got looks very different from the one I remember seeing on the table three months ago.
.
Boks at Maricopa County
.
An anonymous email was forwarded to me as follows. It was not very well written so I abstracted the essence. The full email is below my summary. I have no idea if any of this is true or a fabrication to destroy Boks.
Prior to Ed's sneaky "No Kill" sell, the contracts for the cities in the metropolitan areas were up for renewal. This allowed any other qualified organizations to bid with each individual city. At that time, the Arizona Humane Society, under the superb leadership of Ken White, and also located here in Phoenix, was a big contender for the contracts.
There was a bid out for someone to run maricopa animal control. Boks was the director at the time. He knew people and potential contractors would be interested in bidding if licensing revenue was as high as it was normally. So, he reduced licensing income by not taking renewals or issue new licenses. This made other people not want to bid on the contract. Boks knew he'd probably be fired if the shelter system were taken over by the Arizona Humane Society.
Then Maddies Fund comes in and offers spay and neuter funds if all shelters agree to mass spay and neuter efforts. Two groups didn't want to do it for valid reasons. Boks then used the media to trash those two groups. One was the Arizona Humane Society. Boks just trashed Ken White, the Director, every chance he could. White is actually a good guy and is now the Director in San Francisco Peninsula.
The email writer also said that Boks did not invent the New Hope program. It was there before he worked there but he takes credit for it. Boks wanted the Maddies Fund money but wasn't a 501 3c, so he started a shelter support group that was a 501 3c, like he did here.
He got apiece of land from the city and built the adoption center. He told everyone all over the world that it was the first no kill shelter anywhere. (Take a look at Ed's blog. In his bio section he says just this.)
Maddies Fund and Best Friends spread the news far and wide. They made Boks a star.
Of course it wasn't a "no-kill shelter," it was and is an adoption center only. If animals weren't adopted, they went back to the real shelters and were killed.
An anonymous email was forwarded to me as follows. It was not very well written so I abstracted the essence. The full email is below my summary. I have no idea if any of this is true or a fabrication to destroy Boks.
-------------------------
Prior to Ed's sneaky "No Kill" sell, the contracts for the cities in the metropolitan areas were up for renewal. This allowed any other qualified organizations to bid with each individual city. At that time, the Arizona Humane Society, under the superb leadership of Ken White, and also located here in Phoenix, was a big contender for the contracts.
There was a bid out for someone to run maricopa animal control. Boks was the director at the time. He knew people and potential contractors would be interested in bidding if licensing revenue was as high as it was normally. So, he reduced licensing income by not taking renewals or issue new licenses. This made other people not want to bid on the contract. Boks knew he'd probably be fired if the shelter system were taken over by the Arizona Humane Society.
Then Maddies Fund comes in and offers spay and neuter funds if all shelters agree to mass spay and neuter efforts. Two groups didn't want to do it for valid reasons. Boks then used the media to trash those two groups. One was the Arizona Humane Society. Boks just trashed Ken White, the Director, every chance he could. White is actually a good guy and is now the Director in San Francisco Peninsula.
The email writer also said that Boks did not invent the New Hope program. It was there before he worked there but he takes credit for it. Boks wanted the Maddies Fund money but wasn't a 501 3c, so he started a shelter support group that was a 501 3c, like he did here.
He got apiece of land from the city and built the adoption center. He told everyone all over the world that it was the first no kill shelter anywhere. (Take a look at Ed's blog. In his bio section he says just this.)
Maddies Fund and Best Friends spread the news far and wide. They made Boks a star.
Of course it wasn't a "no-kill shelter," it was and is an adoption center only. If animals weren't adopted, they went back to the real shelters and were killed.
The email in its entirety
I thought I might share our experiences in Phoenix, AZ. The birthplace of Monster Ed and his outrageous ideas and his even more outrageous presentations of it to our Metropolitan area. MaricopaCounty Board of Supervisors, and the County itself created this misdirected moron, allowed him to keep his own budget by agreeing to not ask for any monies from the county, but instead to be self sufficient.
Prior to Ed's sneaky "No Kill" sell, the contracts for the cities in the metropolitan areas were up for renewal. This allowed any other qualified organizations to bid with each individual city. At that time, the Arizona Humane Society, also located here in Phoenix, was a big contender for the contracts, and under the then superb leadership of Ken White, was researching the past six months revenue from Ed's kitty to see if it would be worth the commitment contractually for the long haul.
Interestingly enough? During this research, County residents,, rescue organizations, and other shelters were having an alarming issue with license renewal and updating Rabies vacc info. This was an ongoing issue over many months, and interestingly enough we all were advised that updating info was approximately six months behind schedule.
By stopping renewals, new issuances, and Rabies fees, the numbers dropped drastically and didn't show the true revenue. This in turn discouraged several of the organizations to take the leap. However, one very industrious individual saw through this numbers game and reached out to some of the most recognized local rescue orgs for support.
Now right on the heels of the six month stint, and the numbers game,came an organization we are all probably familiar with now..."Maddies Fund". Ed's free ride to the MoooooooooooN!
Maddies Fund stipulated in their grant that in order for 501c3's to receive access to what seems like an unlimited supply of cash flow, all the big rescue groups in theMetro area had to be on board and in agreement with Maddies Funds Mission Statement.
Two key organizations here in Phoenix were NOT on board with MaddiesFund and a lot of pressure was put on the bigger of the two not only by rescue, but by Ed Bok's (whom does not have a 501c3 non for profitorganization by which to access Maddies Fund) whom publicly attacked Ken White on many occasions in any and every newspaper or media source that would listen and print it.
Ed most certainly seemed to have many of these sources in his pocket. He basically would rail on Ken every chance he could, and poor Ken got one shot at responding to him publicly. And it was a most superb response.
You can find all these articles archived at azcentral.com I know that Ken's response was published in the Sunday Edition of Viewpoints. I believe the speal was My Turn or something like that. I cant recall how many years ago this was, but if you were to research to see when Ken went to the SPCA in SF Peninsula area, it would be prior by no more than six months.
Ed slammed Ken in many local papers, the New Times being one that allowed Ed to play dirty in the sandbox, and disallowed Ken to have a voice. Coalition All Breed Rescue of AZ was the other org opposing Maddies Fund and for many of the same principle reasons that Ken White was also opposing it.
Mainly it was a numbers game for Maddie, they only granted money for spay and neuter, and one of the brilliant ideas was to hold a S/N day at one of our major arenas (America West to be exact) and sterilize em all! Our concern focused on the actual individual dog and any underlying health issues, concerns or complications because there was no concern for the actual welfare of THAT dog. Only that it was part of the overall numbers.
A group called CABRA fought hard against the pressure to acquiesce, and most certainly against the attacks of Ed and his unsuccessful attemptto banish them forever from not only the New Hope Partnership Program (CABRA President Kathy Painter was one of the driving forces behind the conception, design and implementation of original the New Hope Partnership) and it was being utilized prior to Ed's reign.
So while Ed has everyone attacking Ken White, others and the AZHS from every angle, he is also forming a non for profit 501c3 org, a spin off of his revenue generating shelter (that will never qualify for grant money from Maddies) and in true Ed form, he dubbed it Friends of MCACC.This is how Ed got the grant monies out of Maddie's.
Now Maddies goal is of course No Kill by 2012 (?) ish, and once again in true Ed fashion, he finagles a pretty lil piece of property on some acreage that used to be an old DMV or something, lots of green green grass and large shady trees.
He dubs it the Adoption Center. An off site Disneyland variety that makes it easier for the public to visit as itskips the sad abused abandoned neglected stinking rotten noisy chaotic parts that keep the right types of adopters away.
Once again,( in true Ed fashion) he debuts his off site "Adoption"center NO KILL. Maddies Fund will certainly love that, and it makes the public feel all warm and fuzzy.
Just be sure not to mention those dogs at the Adoption center that take longer to be noticed, get sick, or develop behavioral issues get transported back to the shelter (about ten minutes away) to be killed.
Of course none of us in the rescue end of things buys this load of crap he is feeding the public, and the media just takes his every word as gospel and continues to report inaccurate info to the public.
The Adoption Site was just that, a showcase you might say, but it was never a shelter. There were no intakes there, no stray status, nada zip, all that was done prior to arriving at the "Adoption" site.
We all used to just laugh and laugh at NY for being so naive and stupid to eat Ed's bullshit, and many of us celebrated in true style and fashion after his departure here. So NY finally figured it out, it was certainly costly in many ways to them, and they fired his sorry ass.
But LA, like NY previously, didn't heed the warnings, or research carefully enough, for they fell into his bullshit trap too.
----------------.
As I said, this was emailed to me by someone else who removed all the personal information of the original writer. All of this could be a complete fabrication to hurt Ed for all I know. So take it with a grain of salt.
However, the person who email it to stated he/she had 4 independent verification sources.
.
.
Mary Cummins' Lawsuit Against Boks
.
As you are now aware, the other pro-Boks blogger is Mary Cummins. Both she and I defended Boks against all critics and were given insider information by Boks and others regarding any number of issues involving Ed and the department. I have over 700 emails from Ed et al regarding responding to attacks on Ed or the department.
Both Mary and I came under attack by a number of people, were threatened with lawsuits, slandered, vilified, etc., she more than I.
Mary underwent far more travail than did I. Because I was public, I had to temper what I said. Mary did not hold back nearly as much as I did. After a few months, most people in the animal community and the Mayor's Office knew she was the Friends blogger.
Because of that, she became too "controversial" and lost her website job with LAAS as well as her position with Michelson's Found Animal Friends, the latter because Ed never filled out the paperwork to renew her grant with Friends.
It is alleged that after Mary was fired, Boks approached her and said that they now could go out because they had no official relationship with each other. (I am always careful of how I say things. Alleged is one of my favorite words now, and, I actually was not there.)
Ed quickly distanced himself from both Mary and I after we became the focus of more anti-Boks persons' enmity than Boks himself. In other words, we were welcome when we defended him against any and all attacks,but if we were under attack, he suddenly did not know us. I felt this to be a form of cowardice.
Boks just disappeared. He had Mary's house inspected as some persons were peppering the Mayor's Office with claims that she was hoarding animals and Boks was protecting her--his alleged ex-lover. So, he threw her under a truck and--allegedly--got his own troops after her to make himself look above reproach. This certainly is abuse of his power. He said it was an "annual inspection," and that Mary was lucky she had not been "inspected" before. If you read her complaint, they did not even look at the cage area, but did an alleged warrantless search.
This is when I first felt contempt for him and became aware of how little Ed was concerned about anyone but himself. When I was threatened with lawsuits because of what I was writing supporting him and the department, he disappeared on me too. No support, no communication. Just "Bye, bye, don't need you anymore--actually, I am just scared to be associated with you if you get sued and it goes public." (Fake quotes supplied by me.)
It was during this same first quarter of 2007 that the year-end total statistics came out and we were shocked to find that Ed had been spinning No-Kill progress that had not happened. In fact,euthanasia had not decreased even 1% during his first year on the job. I think for a month or two, Mary and I were in such shock that we didn't know what to do.
I don't think it was until February or March that the shock of his failure to turn the euthanasia numbers around, and his personal lack of courage and loyalty in the face of adversity, led me to change my attitude towards him totally. I began to look closely at what he was spinning to see if the Wizard was nothing more than a hollow old man behind the curtain. That's what he was--except he is in his 50's.
All along I was appraised of the happenings outlined in Mary's complaint, real time, as we were in constant communication and therefore have a first hand knowledge of many of the events outlined in the precis below of the lawsuit. I was at ground zero while all of this was going down.
A precis of Mary Cummins' complaint:
Mary K. Cummins-Cobb vs City of Los Angeles, Edward Boks and Does 1-25Case No. BC3745961.
1. Breach of implied contract
2. Wrongful termination
3. Wrongful retaliation
4. Wrongful Harassment
5. Tortious interference with economic relations
6. Tortious interference with existing and prospective business relations
7. Intentional violation of the equal protection clause
11. While working for the Defendants, Plaintiff was subjected to unwarranted sexual harassment, among other things.
Beginning immediately after Plaintiff started working for Defendant Boks, he began engaging in inappropriate and unprofessional conduct, including by the way of explanation and not by way of limitation: (a)inappropriately touching, grabbing, feeling, hugging, holding and kissing Plaintiff(b) predicating Plaintiff's job as web master and computer trouble shooter on the condition that she work in his office so that she could be "right next to him all the time;" (c) making inappropriate and lewd comments about Plaintiff's looks and sexuality; (d) emailing and phoning Plaintiff, sometimes 20 times a day, asking her to go out on a date with him; (e) injecting a vulgar and prurient meaning into whatever topic was being discussed with Plaintiff regarding work: and (f) showing up at Plaintiff's home unannounced,uninvited, and drunk, after being told by Plaintiff not to come, in order to ask her out on dates, among other things.
12. Shortly after Plaintiff starting working with Defendant Boks, he began being attacked on the Internet by animal activists, who were not happy with the job he was dong at the Department of Animal Services. As a way of alleviating this problem, Defendant Boks asked Plaintiff to set up an anonymous blog site in order to rebut and refute the charges being made against him.
Plaintiff complied because she was afraid of losing her job and be in unable to help rescue her beloved animals.
13. Because Plaintiff is so well known in the animal rescue community, her anonymous blog was almost immediately recognized as being her work. Thereafter, on or about April 6, 2007 the animal activists began an attack on Plaintiff in addition to their attacks on Defendant Boks,sending emails, letters, and faxes to the mayor, city council members,commissioners, employees, and other animal rescuers wherein they libeled Plaintiff by accusing her of many untruths, including by way of explanation and not by way of limitation: (a) that she was a "911 terrorist," "a prostitute," and "a practitioner of squirrel pornography," (b) that she was "blowing the deputy mayor," (c) that there is a "bench warrant out for her arrest," (d) that she "keeps drugs and needles at her home to supply addicts," (e) that she is "biologically a male," (f) that she "posts pornography in children's chat rooms," (g) and that she is a "cyber stalker," among other things.
14. The animal activists also contacted all of Plaintiff's private clients, and everyone listed on her resume, as well as the Found Animal Foundation, and slandered Plaintiff by orally repeating all the false accusations listed herein above. These same activists threatened to kill Plaintiff and her clients, and smashed her car's windshield.They disrupted city council meetings demanding that Plaintiff be fired and threatened to sue Defendant if she were not fired.
15. As a result of these attacks, Plaintiff was forced to stay in her house, and was unable to go out because when she did the activists followed and stalked her where ever she went. On two occasions Plaintiff sent cease and desist letters to the animal activists, but the attacks continued unabated.
16. In or about June 2006, the Found Animals Foundation, which was one of Plaintiff's employers, as well as being responsible for the grant that enabled Animal Services to employ Plaintiff as a web master and computer trouble shooter, terminated Plalintiff from the position of Assistant to the director. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that her termination was precipitated by her failure to return the sexual advances of Defendant Boks, who then withdrew his support from the grant renewing process.
17. In or about June 2006 , Plaintiff went to the mayor's office seeking protection from the animal activists, but received none. She also complained about the sexual harassment, sex discrimination, the disparate treatment that caused an interference with her equal protection rights under the US and California Constitutions, and her employer, Defendant failure to properly protect her from said acts of harassment and discrimination, as more fully described hereinafter. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that as an employee of Defendant, was duty bound to protect her from the attacks of the animal activists, and to provide her equal protection under the laws.
Despite her complaints, nothing was ever done to stop the acts complained of, and plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that no one was even reprimanded for these wrongful acts.
18. On or about July 21, 2006, shortly after visiting the mayor's office, defendant Boks terminated plaintiff as both a volunteer rescue partner and a paid web designer/computer trouble shooter for the Department of Animal Services, stating that he was forced to do so by the mayor's office, because the Mayor did not want to be associated with such a huge controversy as that embroiling plaintiff. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that her termination was in retaliation for her complaints to the mayors office regarding the attacks from the activists, the sexual harassment, and the denial of equal protection of the laws, among other things.
19. Even after terminating plaintiff, defendant Boks continued to harass her for sexual favors, emailing and calling her, sometimes as much as 10 times an hour. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that when she still refused to go out with him or provide him with sexual favors, defendant Boks retaliated against her by delaying her wildlife permit, without which she was unable to work as a wildlife rehabilitator, and by interfering with her relationship with the Found Animals Foundation. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges that Defendant Boks continued his acts of harassment and retaliation against Plaintiff as last as February 27, 2007 by sending two animal control officers to her home, where she keeps a number of wild animals she has rescued, in order to conduct an "animal inspection."
For all her years working as a volunteer for the Department of Animal Services, Plaintiff had never heard of an "animal inspection." Moreover, the "inspectors" did not examine the cages where the animals were kept, but instead conducted a warrantless search of Plaintiff's entire house and garage.
.
Now that the case is public, I think we'll will hear from many other women with similar experiences with Ed.
Part of my posting all this is that no one seemed to have taken notice or cared about Ed's poor showing with regard to implementing No-Kill. His stats stank. Now things may be changing in the right direction, but it is a day late and a dollar short. Also, the euthanasia numbers appear to be down mostly because he is turning animals away and holding them longer. Adoptions and fosters are up modestly, but explain nothing.
But maybe this lawsuit will give Villaraigosa a reason to review Boks' performance. Ed has been characterized as a walking liability for the City. Then again, who is AV to judge?
.
As you are now aware, the other pro-Boks blogger is Mary Cummins. Both she and I defended Boks against all critics and were given insider information by Boks and others regarding any number of issues involving Ed and the department. I have over 700 emails from Ed et al regarding responding to attacks on Ed or the department.
Both Mary and I came under attack by a number of people, were threatened with lawsuits, slandered, vilified, etc., she more than I.
Mary underwent far more travail than did I. Because I was public, I had to temper what I said. Mary did not hold back nearly as much as I did. After a few months, most people in the animal community and the Mayor's Office knew she was the Friends blogger.
Because of that, she became too "controversial" and lost her website job with LAAS as well as her position with Michelson's Found Animal Friends, the latter because Ed never filled out the paperwork to renew her grant with Friends.
It is alleged that after Mary was fired, Boks approached her and said that they now could go out because they had no official relationship with each other. (I am always careful of how I say things. Alleged is one of my favorite words now, and, I actually was not there.)
Ed quickly distanced himself from both Mary and I after we became the focus of more anti-Boks persons' enmity than Boks himself. In other words, we were welcome when we defended him against any and all attacks,but if we were under attack, he suddenly did not know us. I felt this to be a form of cowardice.
Boks just disappeared. He had Mary's house inspected as some persons were peppering the Mayor's Office with claims that she was hoarding animals and Boks was protecting her--his alleged ex-lover. So, he threw her under a truck and--allegedly--got his own troops after her to make himself look above reproach. This certainly is abuse of his power. He said it was an "annual inspection," and that Mary was lucky she had not been "inspected" before. If you read her complaint, they did not even look at the cage area, but did an alleged warrantless search.
This is when I first felt contempt for him and became aware of how little Ed was concerned about anyone but himself. When I was threatened with lawsuits because of what I was writing supporting him and the department, he disappeared on me too. No support, no communication. Just "Bye, bye, don't need you anymore--actually, I am just scared to be associated with you if you get sued and it goes public." (Fake quotes supplied by me.)
It was during this same first quarter of 2007 that the year-end total statistics came out and we were shocked to find that Ed had been spinning No-Kill progress that had not happened. In fact,euthanasia had not decreased even 1% during his first year on the job. I think for a month or two, Mary and I were in such shock that we didn't know what to do.
I don't think it was until February or March that the shock of his failure to turn the euthanasia numbers around, and his personal lack of courage and loyalty in the face of adversity, led me to change my attitude towards him totally. I began to look closely at what he was spinning to see if the Wizard was nothing more than a hollow old man behind the curtain. That's what he was--except he is in his 50's.
All along I was appraised of the happenings outlined in Mary's complaint, real time, as we were in constant communication and therefore have a first hand knowledge of many of the events outlined in the precis below of the lawsuit. I was at ground zero while all of this was going down.
A precis of Mary Cummins' complaint:
Mary K. Cummins-Cobb vs City of Los Angeles, Edward Boks and Does 1-25Case No. BC3745961.
1. Breach of implied contract
2. Wrongful termination
3. Wrongful retaliation
4. Wrongful Harassment
5. Tortious interference with economic relations
6. Tortious interference with existing and prospective business relations
7. Intentional violation of the equal protection clause
11. While working for the Defendants, Plaintiff was subjected to unwarranted sexual harassment, among other things.
Beginning immediately after Plaintiff started working for Defendant Boks, he began engaging in inappropriate and unprofessional conduct, including by the way of explanation and not by way of limitation: (a)inappropriately touching, grabbing, feeling, hugging, holding and kissing Plaintiff(b) predicating Plaintiff's job as web master and computer trouble shooter on the condition that she work in his office so that she could be "right next to him all the time;" (c) making inappropriate and lewd comments about Plaintiff's looks and sexuality; (d) emailing and phoning Plaintiff, sometimes 20 times a day, asking her to go out on a date with him; (e) injecting a vulgar and prurient meaning into whatever topic was being discussed with Plaintiff regarding work: and (f) showing up at Plaintiff's home unannounced,uninvited, and drunk, after being told by Plaintiff not to come, in order to ask her out on dates, among other things.
12. Shortly after Plaintiff starting working with Defendant Boks, he began being attacked on the Internet by animal activists, who were not happy with the job he was dong at the Department of Animal Services. As a way of alleviating this problem, Defendant Boks asked Plaintiff to set up an anonymous blog site in order to rebut and refute the charges being made against him.
Plaintiff complied because she was afraid of losing her job and be in unable to help rescue her beloved animals.
13. Because Plaintiff is so well known in the animal rescue community, her anonymous blog was almost immediately recognized as being her work. Thereafter, on or about April 6, 2007 the animal activists began an attack on Plaintiff in addition to their attacks on Defendant Boks,sending emails, letters, and faxes to the mayor, city council members,commissioners, employees, and other animal rescuers wherein they libeled Plaintiff by accusing her of many untruths, including by way of explanation and not by way of limitation: (a) that she was a "911 terrorist," "a prostitute," and "a practitioner of squirrel pornography," (b) that she was "blowing the deputy mayor," (c) that there is a "bench warrant out for her arrest," (d) that she "keeps drugs and needles at her home to supply addicts," (e) that she is "biologically a male," (f) that she "posts pornography in children's chat rooms," (g) and that she is a "cyber stalker," among other things.
14. The animal activists also contacted all of Plaintiff's private clients, and everyone listed on her resume, as well as the Found Animal Foundation, and slandered Plaintiff by orally repeating all the false accusations listed herein above. These same activists threatened to kill Plaintiff and her clients, and smashed her car's windshield.They disrupted city council meetings demanding that Plaintiff be fired and threatened to sue Defendant if she were not fired.
15. As a result of these attacks, Plaintiff was forced to stay in her house, and was unable to go out because when she did the activists followed and stalked her where ever she went. On two occasions Plaintiff sent cease and desist letters to the animal activists, but the attacks continued unabated.
16. In or about June 2006, the Found Animals Foundation, which was one of Plaintiff's employers, as well as being responsible for the grant that enabled Animal Services to employ Plaintiff as a web master and computer trouble shooter, terminated Plalintiff from the position of Assistant to the director. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that her termination was precipitated by her failure to return the sexual advances of Defendant Boks, who then withdrew his support from the grant renewing process.
17. In or about June 2006 , Plaintiff went to the mayor's office seeking protection from the animal activists, but received none. She also complained about the sexual harassment, sex discrimination, the disparate treatment that caused an interference with her equal protection rights under the US and California Constitutions, and her employer, Defendant failure to properly protect her from said acts of harassment and discrimination, as more fully described hereinafter. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that as an employee of Defendant, was duty bound to protect her from the attacks of the animal activists, and to provide her equal protection under the laws.
Despite her complaints, nothing was ever done to stop the acts complained of, and plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that no one was even reprimanded for these wrongful acts.
18. On or about July 21, 2006, shortly after visiting the mayor's office, defendant Boks terminated plaintiff as both a volunteer rescue partner and a paid web designer/computer trouble shooter for the Department of Animal Services, stating that he was forced to do so by the mayor's office, because the Mayor did not want to be associated with such a huge controversy as that embroiling plaintiff. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that her termination was in retaliation for her complaints to the mayors office regarding the attacks from the activists, the sexual harassment, and the denial of equal protection of the laws, among other things.
19. Even after terminating plaintiff, defendant Boks continued to harass her for sexual favors, emailing and calling her, sometimes as much as 10 times an hour. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that when she still refused to go out with him or provide him with sexual favors, defendant Boks retaliated against her by delaying her wildlife permit, without which she was unable to work as a wildlife rehabilitator, and by interfering with her relationship with the Found Animals Foundation. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges that Defendant Boks continued his acts of harassment and retaliation against Plaintiff as last as February 27, 2007 by sending two animal control officers to her home, where she keeps a number of wild animals she has rescued, in order to conduct an "animal inspection."
For all her years working as a volunteer for the Department of Animal Services, Plaintiff had never heard of an "animal inspection." Moreover, the "inspectors" did not examine the cages where the animals were kept, but instead conducted a warrantless search of Plaintiff's entire house and garage.
.
------------------------------------
Now that the case is public, I think we'll will hear from many other women with similar experiences with Ed.
Part of my posting all this is that no one seemed to have taken notice or cared about Ed's poor showing with regard to implementing No-Kill. His stats stank. Now things may be changing in the right direction, but it is a day late and a dollar short. Also, the euthanasia numbers appear to be down mostly because he is turning animals away and holding them longer. Adoptions and fosters are up modestly, but explain nothing.
But maybe this lawsuit will give Villaraigosa a reason to review Boks' performance. Ed has been characterized as a walking liability for the City. Then again, who is AV to judge?
.
Parolees Fired
.
The 6 parolees have been fired. Personnel decided Boks didn't have the authority to hire them.
Too bad, too bad. I think it is a good idea, but also think it to be a $280,000 a year gift to a friend. I don't think it a good idea to bring in a non-profit's existing program and make it part of the City's operation. Every other non profit in the City will feel left out unless they are Ed's friends.
Worse, no one knows how effective the program would be in terms of saving pit bull lives. Would it save 30, 50, 200, 300? If it saved an additional 200 animals, that would be at a price of $1,400 each. The program's funded amount would have bought almost 5,000 $60 spay/neuter certificates a year. But it is sexier to have a pit bull academy versus telling the press that LAAS gave out 45,000 spay/neuter vouchers in 2007 versus 40,000 in 2006.
Even then, there is little in the way to ascertain the effectiveness of any of LAAS's programs. There is no evaluation and control process that anyone has told me about.
I wish Ed would put his greatest effort into building an effective and large volunteer program and implementing it at all costs.This is what has helped all other cities greatly lower their kill rates.
If LAAS is not doing it, why not? What is the blockage?
.
The 6 parolees have been fired. Personnel decided Boks didn't have the authority to hire them.
Too bad, too bad. I think it is a good idea, but also think it to be a $280,000 a year gift to a friend. I don't think it a good idea to bring in a non-profit's existing program and make it part of the City's operation. Every other non profit in the City will feel left out unless they are Ed's friends.
Worse, no one knows how effective the program would be in terms of saving pit bull lives. Would it save 30, 50, 200, 300? If it saved an additional 200 animals, that would be at a price of $1,400 each. The program's funded amount would have bought almost 5,000 $60 spay/neuter certificates a year. But it is sexier to have a pit bull academy versus telling the press that LAAS gave out 45,000 spay/neuter vouchers in 2007 versus 40,000 in 2006.
Even then, there is little in the way to ascertain the effectiveness of any of LAAS's programs. There is no evaluation and control process that anyone has told me about.
I wish Ed would put his greatest effort into building an effective and large volunteer program and implementing it at all costs.This is what has helped all other cities greatly lower their kill rates.
If LAAS is not doing it, why not? What is the blockage?
.
Santee Alley Illegal Animal Sales
.
Email fromMadeleine Fisher-Kern
Councilman Weiss:
As my councilman, I would like to put before you an issue that has been a problem for many years with little in the way of a solution. Perhaps you can be the activist that puts it before the other councilmembers as it effects all their districts regarding health and humane concerns.
There has been an active illegal trade in animals in Santee Alley in the downtown garment district. This trade is done out of trucks and along the alley with the acceptance of a the kiosk owners who sell their goods in that area. Baby turtles are kept in buckets and taken out and placed in plastic containers filled usually filled with too much water. They are stacked up ten or more and allowed to sit in the heat in front of these kiosks till sold.
Individuals are seen walking up and down the alley hawking and holding either a young puppy, or young bunny, or some exotic reptile or caged birds. They are sold to anyone willing to pay the price. These people are neither licensed to sell or caring in the treatment of these animals.
What happens to these animals if not sold is not something that I wish to think about.
Including the concerns for these young animals is also the health concerns that face the unknowing person who purchases these unfortunate creatures. It is known that turtles and other reptiles spread salmonella and e-coli if not handled properly. It is known that these young animals get no veterinary care to assure their health. So, not only is this a humane concern, it is a concern for the Health Department and for our city.
The Department of Animal Services is well-aware of the Santee Alley illegal animal trade. Wildlife Officer Greg Randall is aware of this ugly situation and is in need of some strong support to help eradicate it. Jim Bickhart is a bit busy these days. This is most annoying as the Mayor has made several promises to the animal rescue community and has met none of them also being busy with other things.
Councilman Weiss, we need an LA Municipal Law 53.42 regarding Public safety and selling animals off the street that is more than a slap on the wrist. These animal traders must see that the ongoing selling of these animals is not feasible economically or legally. These animal traders must see that this city is serious about putting a stop to the possible health risk to this city's citizens and the animal abuse they are thoughtlessly involved in for illegal financial gain.
If you would go to: http://metropettracker.com/extra.htm or go to www.metropettracker.com and click on the Extra! Extra! link. You will get a clearer picture from the two articles and more impressively, you will be able to read e-mails from those who live in the city and those who visit. Their reactions are not complimentary to our city's turning a blind eye to this crime.
Madeleine Fisher-Kern
Check her site out and please let me know more about this situation.
Email fromMadeleine Fisher-Kern
Councilman Weiss:
As my councilman, I would like to put before you an issue that has been a problem for many years with little in the way of a solution. Perhaps you can be the activist that puts it before the other councilmembers as it effects all their districts regarding health and humane concerns.
There has been an active illegal trade in animals in Santee Alley in the downtown garment district. This trade is done out of trucks and along the alley with the acceptance of a the kiosk owners who sell their goods in that area. Baby turtles are kept in buckets and taken out and placed in plastic containers filled usually filled with too much water. They are stacked up ten or more and allowed to sit in the heat in front of these kiosks till sold.
Individuals are seen walking up and down the alley hawking and holding either a young puppy, or young bunny, or some exotic reptile or caged birds. They are sold to anyone willing to pay the price. These people are neither licensed to sell or caring in the treatment of these animals.
What happens to these animals if not sold is not something that I wish to think about.
Including the concerns for these young animals is also the health concerns that face the unknowing person who purchases these unfortunate creatures. It is known that turtles and other reptiles spread salmonella and e-coli if not handled properly. It is known that these young animals get no veterinary care to assure their health. So, not only is this a humane concern, it is a concern for the Health Department and for our city.
The Department of Animal Services is well-aware of the Santee Alley illegal animal trade. Wildlife Officer Greg Randall is aware of this ugly situation and is in need of some strong support to help eradicate it. Jim Bickhart is a bit busy these days. This is most annoying as the Mayor has made several promises to the animal rescue community and has met none of them also being busy with other things.
Councilman Weiss, we need an LA Municipal Law 53.42 regarding Public safety and selling animals off the street that is more than a slap on the wrist. These animal traders must see that the ongoing selling of these animals is not feasible economically or legally. These animal traders must see that this city is serious about putting a stop to the possible health risk to this city's citizens and the animal abuse they are thoughtlessly involved in for illegal financial gain.
If you would go to: http://metropettracker.com/extra.htm or go to www.metropettracker.com and click on the Extra! Extra! link. You will get a clearer picture from the two articles and more impressively, you will be able to read e-mails from those who live in the city and those who visit. Their reactions are not complimentary to our city's turning a blind eye to this crime.
Madeleine Fisher-Kern
Check her site out and please let me know more about this situation.