Wonderful New LAAS Adoption Program--Ammended

A second hearing of a plan to increase adoption of pets will be heard this Friday before Council. Generally second hearings do not allow public comment, but you can call councilmembers to express your enthusiastic support.

The program involves for the adoption of a second animal with chipping and spay/neuter fees waived, after adopting the first with full fees.

Going before Council is the program as below:


The plan would be effective August 14.

Boks has had to include a revenue impact statement, but even if the entire $47,000 lost revenue were never recaptured, you must help make Council adopt it.

Recently, despite the bizarre numbers Ed has generated for April-June, adoptions actually "appear" to be up by several hundred, and fosters are up from a handful to over 100. That, combined with LAAS (Boks-denied) turning away animals from impound, is saving lives.

Several people have argued that selling animals so cheaply means they may not get good homes or will be used in research or to train attack dogs. All these are VERY REAL possibilities, but I think the benefits MAY outweigh the risks. No one really knows, they just speculate.

Their argument that paying hefty fees increases the likelihood they will be better cared for is a speculation in itself. Both sides of that issue speculate and believe their speculations to be truth, but no one can prove anything.

In any event, we will not see a stunning increase in the number of animals adopted, maybe 2-300, so it is only that number at risk. You have to weigh that against 50% kill rate we would see in summer, and it is a worthwhile risk.

As to Boks making it clear it is not a 2 for 1 sale, who is kidding whom? Anyone can claim animals came from the same litter or were best buddies in the shelter. Remember, it is staff talking to you; that in itself that should cause disbelief.

I wouldn't be surprised if every animal in the shelter won't have 10 or 20 best buddies as of August 14, but so what?

However, due to the overcrowding, more animals are dying from fighting, and more employees are getting mauled.

One rescuer told me, “Employees are being mauled; I've seen it. They had to pay two employees tons of money for being mauled by pits. They even had a class for volunteers on handling fighting and taking dogs in and out of the kennels.

The class was pretty lame. They bought all this expensive dog handling equipment but no one uses it. They still just hose down fighting dogs but it does nothing to the pits. Captain Dedeaux did the class. An employee who'd been bitten many times asked him to go into the kennels and show her how to use the equipment on the dogs, how to get them in and out of their kennels... He wouldn't do it. This woman really wanted to learn how to not get bitten. She'd been bitten 8 times already


Anonymous said...

You need to ask yourself, are those lives actually being saved? or just saved from being euthanized in the shelter that day? Do those animals end up in loving responsible homes? or will hoarders, people with little means adopt these animals but not be able to take care of them properly. Are the animals being refused at the shelters being dumped on the streets? in the shelter parking lot? or do they really go back home with the owner to find them a good home?

I personally feel that free or cheap animals don't necessarily mean they will go to a good home. These animals are cheap as it is, $36 to $80. If they can't afford that price, they can't afford veterinary care or food. They may be used as a bait animal, sold to a research lab, dumped on the street. A person who could afford to properly take care of an animal can afford to pay $36 to $80 for an animal. That is the least of the costs of pet guardianship. I'm all for saving the animals but not at their expense.

Boks did this program in Arizona. He also gave away New Hope animals for free. 2004 audit of Maricopa - pdf file Even though New Hope animals are now free in LA, they are still adopting out fewer animals than when rescuers had to pay for them. One result of this reduced fees in Maricopa was "AC&C’s extensive use of adoption fee discounts may have reduced FY 2003
revenues by an estimated $500,000."

If you look at the report, adoptions were down and euthanasia was up in 2003. Boks was the director in 2003. His free animals programs weren't helping adoptions or euthanasia but they did reduce revenue which could have been spent on spayneuter. Boks always says you can't adopt your way out of this problem. You must cut it off at the source. His programs don't reflect this mentality. Just my two cents. I'm all for the program if the animals go to good homes, but there's just no way to know.

Anonymous said...

And we've all learned that if the numbers came from Ed B., they're not true, so ???

Anonymous said...

Boks has made it clear that this is NOT a twoferone program. This is for BONDED animals. Those pets that lived together, were brought in together, and demonstrated that they would suffer if parted. Would you check this to see if it correct?

Anonymous said...

anonymous 3, you are wrong, look at the actual motion.

6-13-07 - Council Action - Verbal Motion - Zine Mover 2007 / Cardenas - ADOPTED - HEREBY MOVE that Council ADOPT the following recommendation of the Department of animal Services with respect to the "Best Buddies" animal adoption program in which free micro-chipping and free spay/neuter service is made available for bonded animals on today's Council agenda (Item No. 31, CF 07-1561):
REQUEST that the City Attorney, with the assistance of the Department of animal Services, prepare an ordinance to allow for the waiving of fees for micro-chipping and spay/neuter services for the second of two adopted animals that have bonded while in the care of a Department shelter.

It's a loophole. It's basically 2 for 1 or 4 for 2. It can even be female and male animals, even different species like a cat and a dog.

Boks sent this to CBS, 2 for 1. He said both programs are approved. They're not finally approved yet. Then Boks sends this out for further clarification.

" The program was only approved by
the City Council on July 13. The department must wait 30 days to implement. The Best
Buddies Program is scheduled to go into effect on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 and it will
apply to dogs, cats, and rabbits who are bonded together. "

Always making clarifications when he sends out untrue things which are not approved and he gets caught.
Council O.K.'s 2-For-1 'Best Buddies' Pet Program
(CBS) LOS ANGELES Los Angeles residents can buy one pet from a city animal shelter and get a second pet for free under an ordinance approved Friday by the City Council.

The "Best Buddies" program is aimed at encouraging animal lovers to adopt multiple pets from city shelters at a low cost while also reducing euthanasia rates of unwanted animals, according to a city report.

Those participating in the program would save $91 when adopting two dogs, $68 when adopting two cats and $50 when adopting two rabbits at the same time.

The two-for-one deal includes implantation of a microchip and required spaying or neutering of one of the pets for free.

In a related action, the council directed the city's Animal Services Department to implement the Seniors 4 Seniors Pet Adoption Program for one year.

Under the program, senior citizens and disabled people living in Los Angeles can receive free licenses for their dogs with proof of a rabies vaccination. Senior dog owners also receive a $60 gift certificate to cover the cost of spaying or neutering their pets at participating veterinary hospitals.

Animal Services Department officials will report back to the council in six months to discuss the program's progress.

Anonymous said...

I think its a great program. I hate the fact that bonded animals are so often separated in the shelter. Most people don't seem to realize how much 2 cats or 2 dogs will interact with each other. I've never understood, for instance, why anybody would adopt just a single kitten. They (and the kitten) miss so much. Getting that second littermate for free may be just the extra incentive someone needs to try something new. When they do, they will never want just one again. Lives saved now, lives saved in the future.

Anonymous said...

Animals that come in together aren't always separated. They will leave bonded cats together if they're spayed and neutered. They will leave dogs together if they're the same size and sex.

In the animal groups they are concerned that adopting two dogs at once might be more than an owner can handle. There are adjustment, medical and training issues. Two dogs may be too much then you get two returns. Sometimes animals are dumped because no one bothered to train them and they have issues. I've actually never adopted an animal from the shelter that didn't need medical and training.

In a perfect world, this program would be great. I hope they really only use it for bonded animals and not as a loop hole for 2 for 1.

Anonymous said...

Great, seniors who can least afford an animal now can get a senior animal that requires vet visits and money. That makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Fixed incomes don't allow a lot for the medical problems of the senior pet. I'm all for seniors having pets, but not for making problems for seniors with pets that require more attention medically because of age. How many pets have I picked up because the senior citizen is in the hospital or homes? How many pets have I picked up because the family doesn't want the pet after the senior passes? I deliver pet food every week to seniors who can't afford food for their pets. Why can't we think of what happens once the pet is out of the shelter?

Anonymous said...

I agree, post above me. Older pets will have more vet problems. I adopt older pets and don't I know it. They are always more expensive. Saving $30 on the adoption will not offset $1,000 in vet bills. Shelters do this program because it sounds great, not because it's good for the welfare of the animal. This is for low income seniors, not just seniors. They will have to dump their animal if it gets sick because they won't be able to afford it's care. That's one of the reasons they dump pets.

Another thing, so how many animals will this senior program save a year? 20? Okay, so you save 20 animals but at what cost. Heidi, the city attorney, dept, city council, public safety committee have spent thousands and thousands of man hours trying to get this damn program approved. $50,000 to save 20 animals a year? I'm sorry. Spend that money on spayneuter instead, same thing with the new shelters. If we'd spent that money on spayneuter, we wouldn't need the bigger shelters.

A last rant here. The new bigger shelters were expensive. Guess what, kennel space was not increased 400% as Boks likes to say. It wasn't increased at all.They forgot to figure into the equation all the cages that had been added here and there over the years. They just counted the main kennels and not all the add ons. At EV the new shelter have less room for animals than the old one. So they spent all that money for what? Just so it'd be nicer for humans? If it increases adoptions, fine but I don't know if it will yet. All done ranting.

Anonymous said...

According to a blog post by Ed Boks on Monday, July 09, 2007 describing the FY06/07 statistics... Pit bull and pit bull mixes represent the most popular dogs sought out for adoption. They also outnumber all other dog breeds euthanized. And now folks can get 2 for the price of one?