.
LAAS is the first municipal shelter in the country to implement a closed door policy.
Like I said before. I agree in principle that not taking animals into the shelters saves lives, but it also makes others suffer more.
The problem is thrown back onto the community to solve for itself with few resources.
This is irresponsible and artificially brings LAAS to No-Kill. No animals; no kill.
There has to be some way for LAAS to help the rescue groups at this time, and not just provide the public with “resource” lists of full-up non-profits. Regarding neonatals, who he killed 5,600 last year, the situation is most desperate. he has to have some of his lazy-assed employees greet people at the shelter door telling people the truth about neonatals, returning the kittens to their moms, teaching how to bottle-feed, and working with groups to help them deal with the flood of kittens.
Why not assign some of his lazy-assed employees do nothing but bottle-feed and work with New Hope groups? Why not have some employees bottle feeding kittens in the shelter reception area when the public brings the kittens in? Anything.
What is happening with East Valley and the SALA's 150 day neonatal center?
One thing is unquestionable. Ed is not sharing the wealth or success with anyone else. He is not embracing offered help and expertise from the community or from across the country. He is not bringing the New Hope and welfare groups together for the common good. There is too much of Ed in everything. New Hope rescues have been down all during his tenure here.
Ed has to accept help from No-Kill experts and offered help from out the city.
I know of one shelter director who offered his shelter management expertise, free for the asking. Ed did not return his phone calls. For his own good and that of the animals he really needs to bring Nathan in, no matter how much humiliation this brings him. It will show the community he is working to help the animals not just his reputation.
Hell, he could ask for consulting help from Carl Friedman from the San Francisco municipal shelter instead of investing in programs that do not work.
Boks is going. There is no doubt about that at this point, maybe by March of next year.
There is a tiny chance if he were to embrace outside help and resources he could keep his job longer and a lot more lives would be saved.
This is a comment from an outside shelter director:
Like I said before. I agree in principle that not taking animals into the shelters saves lives, but it also makes others suffer more.
The problem is thrown back onto the community to solve for itself with few resources.
This is irresponsible and artificially brings LAAS to No-Kill. No animals; no kill.
There has to be some way for LAAS to help the rescue groups at this time, and not just provide the public with “resource” lists of full-up non-profits.
What is happening with East Valley and the SALAS 150 day neonatal center?
One thing is unquestionable. Ed is not sharing the wealth or success with anyone else. He is not embracing offered help and expertise from the community or from across the country. He is not bringing the New Hope and welfare groups together for the common good. There is too much of Ed in everything. New Hope rescues have been down all during his tenure here.
Ed has to accept help from No-Kill experts and offered help from out the city.
I know of one shelter director who offered his shelter management expertise, free for the asking. Ed did not return his phone calls. For his own good and that of the animals he really needs to bring Nathan in, no matter how much humiliation this brings him. It will show the community he is working to help the animals not just his reputation.
Hell, he could ask for consulting help from Carl Friedman from the San Francisco municipal shelter instead of investing in programs that do not work.
Boks is going. There is no doubt about that at this point, maybe by March of next year.
There is a tiny chance if he were to embrace outside help and resources he could keep his job longer and a lot more lives would be saved.
This is a comment on Ed's closed door admission policy by another shelter system director:
This policy is so bad! What he needs to do is say bring all unwanted pets to the shelter and offer free S/N's to people who bring in pets. They will likely keep one, the mom, and volunteers can foster the others and find homes for them. This should increase adoptions of cats and dogs significantly.
Transferring the problem to another day is stupid.
Thanks for the update and info. I think Mr. Boks is listening to the chickens while the coop burns down.
.
2 comments:
This policy makes absolutely no sense at all. He was supposed to do owner relinquishment counseling. Did this fail? or did he just not do it? If owner relinquishment counseling did not work, how will just refusing the animals work? It will piss people off. They will dump the animals in the street or lie and say they're strays. If they say they're strays, he must keep them for five days minimum. Then the shelters will fill up and he'll have to euth other animals.
In the online articles Boks stated he is doing this to improve their chance at adoption at weekend events. Bullshit! He is doing it to improve his horrible cat numbers. If he wanted the owned pets to make it to weekend events, he'd accept them any day of the week.
Speaking of numbers, he improved his cat numbers by refusing ferals and orphaned neonates. They are the most likely to be euthanized. The drop in euth is equal to the drop in intake. How is that improving the animals? It only improves the numbers at the animals' expense.
Boks is the worst director I have ever seen. Even Greenwalt was better.
Boks doesn't care if the animals end up on the street, hit by cars, diseased, impregnated, abused. He doesn't care that there will be even more animals next year...because he knows he won't be here. He generally lasts only two years somewhere then is found out and pushed out of town.
Post a Comment