I call bullshit on this recently sprung up website PitBullsArea.com. It’s an incredibly poor, and dare I say dumb, website peppered with misinformation and vague implications that just sound basic and stupid. Yet it’s promoted as being Pit Bull supporting in nature. I can’t tell if whomever created it is just severely uninformed and simplistic, or if it’s a sham website created with the sole intention of having its information exploited by Pit Bull hating psychopaths. Whoever writes for the website constantly speaks in generalities, and they make some pretty outlandish claims that are just fantastically false in certain instances. It also has almost 30,000 “likes” on Facebook, but curiously the largest thread since its November 2013 inception has garnered a whopping 4 comments. Mysterious enough. It’s seems like a website not even run by an actual human being, maybe instead by a bot or a computer software generation system or something similar to that. Here’s some of their silly headlines…

“4 ways to prevent Pit Bull attacks”
“6 tips on how to prevent Pit Bull attacks”
“6 ways to properly raise a blue Pit Bull puppy”
“Understanding Pit Bull body language”
“5 facts you should consider before adopting blue nose Pit Bull puppies”
“Tips on how to care for your red nose Pit Bull puppies”
“8 best tips you can use for training your blue nose Pit Bull”
“7 causes of Pit Bull barking”

Um, what? Almost every single one of their posted story headlines (I just chose the dumbest) gives the impression from the start that “Pit Bulls” differ from other dogs. I don’t know if it was a trendy marketing decision or just foolishness that’s driving that angle, but it sure is incredibly unfair and misleading in numerous ways. Attempting to break down breed-specific body language and barking? WTF. Preposterous nonsense. Further, whenever they’re saying the whole blue and red nose stuff it’s usually written in a way to say that they will all be 1 way and based on their coloring. Preposterous nonsense, again. For example, one post says that all blue nose puppies will grow up to be “animal aggressive.” Just complete and utter rubbish. Last, the numerous failures of breed identification and the absolute fact of each dog of any breed being an individual sadly don’t seem to be topics that are given much mention on their website. And with that, it’s framework then drives home the opposite idea, even if it’s an unintended result, which is surely possible. I just know that this is bad advocacy.

I just wanted to quickly write something after reading Allison Benedikt’s Slate article about not getting a dog if you ever want to have kids. I personally found this article to be pretty deblorable. Sadly, I’m never amazed at the depths at which good people often sink. I don’t know Allison, but she’s very likely a decent person–and yet she can so callously type what she typed, seemingly without a care in the world. It’s wild to me.

With the internet and social media at the forefront of much of communication nowadays this “sinking” is often on full display. I was truly taken aback by these statements, which came in an article where she professed both a love for her dog and a love for her kids…

A friend of mine once told me that before he had a kid, he would have run into a burning building to save his cats. Now that he has a kid, he would happily drown the cats in the bathtub if it would help his son take a longer nap. Here is how I feel about that statement: Velvel, avoid the bathroom.

Recently I took Velvel for his annual checkup. He’s 13, does not get enough (any) exercise, and has gained a fair amount of weight in the past few years, as we’ve started doling out the dog treats quite liberally because it’s the only thing that shuts him up. The vet ran some blood tests and called with the results a few days later. Velvel’s liver levels are a little off, she told me, but why don’t we try medicine first before discussing other options. The vet delivered the news gently, as if I might start sobbing at any moment. All I could think was, “I can’t remember if she said liver or kidney.” And then the baby spit up and I had to go.

Both of these quoted sections come amongst other text that complains about how much the dog whines, how much the dog barks, that he poops, that he vomits, that he sheds, that she needs to walk him and that she regrets him. She goes on to say that it’s a “universal truth” that almost all parents regret their dog after having a child. She bases this around people that she knows. So, um, either she doesn’t know many people, or all of the people that she does know are basically jerk-offs. Because “parents regretting their dogs” is most definitely not a “universal truth.” Sorry Allison, you are wrong.

I first want to address the parent thing. We grew up with all kinds of animals. My mom had a Golden Retriever before me, while she was pregnant with me, and after I was born. He was one of my fondest memories. When he passed away and as my parents added another kid, and then another, we got another Golden Retriever. He grew up right alongside us. When we moved out to the country we took in even more animals. We had multiple dogs, cats, sheep, rabbits, a goat. It’s simply called living your life and prioritizing your loves and your time, and respecting each life as a member of your family. This may lessen over time for some people, or take another form, but as many other people have said… As the parent’s interest in the dog may decrease, the child’s interest in the dog will likely increase, thus creating the same interaction space and feeling of inclusion within the family unit.

All I can say after reading Allison’s article is that I’m glad that she wasn’t my mom. With that, I now want to thank my mom for not only being my favorite person on the planet, but for also instilling in me many of the necessary tools that go along with being a compassionate person. She loved each of our animals, and made time for them, and integrated them into our lives–whatever that looked like–always. Does that make her a super-mom? Well, she was. My mom was and is as awesome as they come. But I bet that all mom’s are super in their own way. This leads me to the thought that Allison’s bar is set too low. So I’m glad that I wasn’t her kid, that’s all that I can say, and here’s why…

Her article paints household pets as discardable objects. Straight up. That’s the takeaway. And coming from someone who deals with shelter pets, and why they are in these kill shelters in the first place, well, that’s fucking disgusting. Shame on you for that. Further, you are teaching that to your children.

I pray that people have more sense and trust in their own heart than to listen to some woman like Allison, who’s article is very likely to influence the dumping of more animals (to their death, at a “shelter”) as they anticipate children. That’s sad. That’s extremely sad. Have you given that any thought? I can only hope that you now do.

So a few months ago I did a phone interview with a journalist about all things related to my Pit Bull advocacy. Having known beforehand that she was also going to be asking me about the Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia (AIHA) that ultimately took Sway’s life, I set out to videotape my side of the interview so that I could then create an accessible testimony for the many other people currently going through what we went through. That video, which is almost 30 minutes in length, will be available within the next few days. Please stay tuned…

The videos below are some of the other questions that I was asked.

“What was the instance that acted as a catalyst in becoming an advocate for Pit Bulls?”

“What stereotypes did you experience while having Sway?”

“What are your thoughts on BSL (Breed-specific legislation)?”

“Where does the negative stigma and its perpetuation come from?”

Talking about the breed-targeting dynamic and the challenges of engaging all people… “Why does the Pit Bull stereotype still persist?”

“Can you talk about your relationship with the kill shelters that you photograph at?”

For over the last year I’ve been compiling video footage and evidence of police overreaction to situations and circumstances that involve dogs. Many of these incidents show a quick and unnecessary overuse of force towards the many animals unlucky enough to be caught up in a scene that has, for whatever reason, brought out a trigger-happy police officer. Beyond the force issue lingers others, like contradicting testimony from involved people, trespassing claims, civil rights violations, and further, what really seems like the following of generic scripts in the aftermaths of such tragedies playing out. Things like “protocol” and anything else that will serve to justify the questionable act after the fact is almost always rolled out as a way to put the blame on the dog and label them as “vicious” or “threatening,” and thus “deserving” of the amount of force that so many other people seem to have a problem with.

My goal is to put something together that will show a sampling of these situations, with the bigger goal of continuing the conversation about what is an appropriate response vs. what is the opposite. This is in no way meant to be an anti-police effort, as the police are made up of countless individual people, but rather a public acknowledgement of the wrongs being done in the names of the many good police officers around the country. I’m quite sure that many of them have just as much of a problem with the overreactions as you or I do. The populace simply wants accountability and transparency, and to live in a world where we can hope to not have our family pets killed at the hands of someone who should know better, and who has the ultimate ability to be better.

In closing, I’d like to draw attention to Baltimore cop Dan Waskiewicz and his brilliant way of responding to a “dangerous dog” call. He is an incredible example of doing the right thing, and then going the extra mile on top of that.

People have very strong feelings about Nathan Winograd and the “No Kill” shelters that his No Kill Advocacy Center work to create. I find that the majority of the people that criticize him and what he speaks about haven’t even read any of his books or his website. Instead they tend to parrot back a catchphrase or two, which ultimately amounts to getting the news of the world through a media sound byte, and just dismiss everything else as routine. They don’t want to read anything, they don’t want to hear anything, they don’t want to even attempt to understand it, they’d just rather call him a name and say what he talks about is “impossible.” They can’t tell you why it’s impossible because reality often shows that they have no idea what they themselves are even calling impossible. This attitude is a huge disservice to animals everywhere.

Shortly down the thread…

Again, don’t accept another person’s version of what is actually discussed in these books (many people’s versions are hearsay in and of themselves, so we have a multiplication of hearsay), instead read them for yourself and then do this crazy thing that’s called “coming to your own conclusion.” Whether it’s ultimately supporting or not supporting his claims is beside the point, because at least then you have the potential to actually know what you’re talking about when you move to either criticize or praise.

Watch who you piss off in this town. People will apparently cut you off in an instant for even moving to see another version of the presented reality. That’s what I’ve now learned. And without a word. Good for them. When you need help and ask me, I’ll still give it. Just putting that message out there. I hope that goes both ways. But my questions remain questions. So if I’m to be condemned for seeing someone’s side who is going up against a multifaceted juggernaut, then so be it.

Truth is, it seems that with each week that goes by, almost without fail, another example is provided of how this animal welfare/rescue community is one of the most fractured and vindictive slices of work you could ever get involved in. Sad, but basically true. I hope that me being candid doesn’t serve to make others want to not get involved. Actually, the point of what I’m about to write is meant to inspire exactly the opposite. I want others to get involved, become engaged, speak your truths and try to be as decent as possible. All this is relevant when it’s of popular opinion, and same goes for when it’s not. I don’t claim ownership over all of the facts, nor do I know even remotely close to everything, but I can recognize when something doesn’t make sense and I will state as much.

I actually have to go out of my way to state that “I don’t know all of the facts” and that “I don’t know everything,” because people will actually parrot this back to me as if I’ve ever acted as though either was true. They’re not. I admit that I’m dumb and blind on more than I’m smart and sighted. But I try to pick and choose things that I deem important, and things that I find interesting, and then become as knowledgeable and open to possibility as I can be. That choice makes sense to my own heart and that is really all that matters.

With all that being said, I’ve taken some extreme heat here lately from 2 rather large organizations and their supporters. Much of this comes in public communications from people disagreeing with me, which is totally great and necessary for healthy communication, and I embrace and respect this each and every time as I’m nobody any more important than the next person. But then many times I find myself asking if some of these people actually genuinely disagree with me or are they just defending for the sake of defense? And beyond that, much more is what people don’t see, but what is ultimately being said and done in private, the hidden influence and the gossip, because that’s how most people work.

So, many of you are probably like, “Well, what the heck is this about?” A few days ago I put out a Facebook post questioning the validity of some of the storylines coming from the recent raid in Palm Springs known as “Operation Desert Dogs.” This was done by the Animal Rescue Corps, otherwise known as ARC, on a man that was caring for between 13 and 15 dogs in his home. If you watch the media clips, many which are still available (some that are not), you will hear phrases like these: “Hoarder,” “hoarding situation,” “covered in scars from fighting,” “deplorable conditions,” “animals were not cared for and neglected,” “excessive feces” and “cockroaches coming off of the dogs.” Okay. Sounds really bad. The videos don’t look ^that bad, aligned with all of those statements, even on first view. Now before anyone jumps the gun, I’m not saying that what these videos show isn’t extremely unfortunate, sad, bad, all of it. But I’ve seen “really bad,” and this doesn’t even come close to quantifying as that. Unsafe? Yeah, potentially. Overwhelming? Yeah, for sure. You can clearly see that all of the dogs are of sound weight and are displaying pretty good temperaments during this frenzy. Odd, considering what was stated.

What’s far more odd is that I was actually contacted privately by someone that I know and trust, someone who is actually in direct contact with the man in question, and there seems to be a ton more to this raid/rescue than what meets the eye. First of all, the shelter apparently adopted out an unaltered male dog to this man, while at the same time telling him he was already fixed (they even provided a neuter certificate). He had an unaltered female at home and wala, nature ran its course and by the time he realized it the deeds had already been done. Also, this man actually reached out to (and was covered by) the news back in August of 2012 after he was cited for having an “illegal kennel.” The man who cited him? The same shelter employee who adopted out the unsterilized male! He openly asked for help then, was given no options by the shelter and even turned away when the new litter came. So the guy raised them himself. They gave him 2 months to find homes for the dogs, those 2 months came and passed, they did nothing. Also, he actively tried to surrender 11 of the dogs to the shelter (due to pressure from outside areas and not getting re-homing help from the rescue community) just a week before this raid happened and they turned him away again. Why? Why? Why? Why? And why?

Why was a dog adopted out from the shelter intact, while at the same time telling the adopter that the dog had already been neutered and providing him with a certificate of the neuter to boot? Why did his media appearance from 8/2012 and subsequent requests for help go ignored by the rescue community? Why did the shelter fail to act upon their threat regarding the “illegal kennel”? Why did the shelter turn away the newborn litter? And why did the shelter turn away 11 of his dogs just a week prior to the planned raid? No one can answer any of these questions.

But oh, I have more… Why was there no feces shown laying anywhere in any of the videos or pictures? The conditions were far from ideal, granted, but the words thrown around the media don’t match the numerous visuals. Why were all of his dogs of sound weight, 2 even residing at his private vet during the raid (and they were also seized), and yet the promoted talking points were that he “didn’t care for his dogs” and “neglected” them? Why was a huge 501c3 welfare organization allowed to act under the color of law, in apparent conjunction with the shelter, animal control and the police department? Has the 4th amendment been eroded so badly that 40+ people of no legal authority can rummage through someone’s home, taking pictures and recording video, all to be used to villainize him in the media later? Why would that ever be done in such a way, and to a man that has asked for help and been both ignored and turned away? Why is this man’s personal dog, Bowser, constantly trotted out in front of the cameras as the prime example of how all of the dogs were constantly fighting? This man will tell you that Bowser was found on the streets over 2 years ago and has had those scars the length of their time together, that they came from being beat up pretty badly by multiple Dobermans. He has the vet bills that show that care was provided. Why does this man refute their constant claims that he willingly gave up all of his dogs? And if they really wanted to rescue the dogs, why didn’t they privately work with this man (at any time) in order to do just that, instead of setting all of this up and absolutely dragging him through the mud?

So I called out character assassination and started defending this man on numerous points. I also said that based on many of the things that I’ve now stated here, that it was my opinion that the shelter refused his dogs because the raid was already in the works and had he been able to surrender 11 of his 15 dogs there would have been no justification for any kind of a raid. You take what you want from that. But it’s hard to dispute, especially with the many questions that have gotten no answers. I called it an unnecessary spectacle. Yup. I stand by that.

ARC supporters started calling me a “conspiracy theorist.” They started questioning what kind of animal advocate I was if I didn’t have any problems with the condition of the home. Putting words in my mouth. Then after trying to beat back some of the more extreme judgments about the condition of this person’s home, they then started saying that I was implying that all poor people lived like hoarders. Putting more words in my mouth. Tim Woodward, COO of Animal Rescue Corps, dismissively stated that I was “not even credible enough to take seriously” and then called the points that I raised “hazy conspiracy theories.” There’s that label again. Okay.

So there’s that. And that coupled with all of the backlash that I’ve taken over the last 2 months regarding what is going on with NKLA and their “No Kill December” stuff. Good God, I’m simply asking questions and pointing out some highly legitimate shit. But no, that apparently quantifies me as a “hater” of NKLA. Really? Let me state this again, and again, and again…

I LOVE BEST FRIENDS AND THEIR EFFORTS TO IMPROVE SHELTER ADOPTIONS AND RESCUES AND TO DECREASE KILLING.

I LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE CORPS AND THEIR EFFORTS TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF COUNTLESS ANIMALS.

I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY. BUT IF YOU WANT TO MAKE ME OUT TO BE YOUR ENEMY SIMPLY BECAUSE I ASK SOME DAMN GOOD QUESTIONS AND ATTEMPT TO BRING FORTH SOME GENUINE POINTS, WELL, THAT’S YOUR PREROGATIVE. THAT STILL DOESN’T MAKE ME YOUR ENEMY, THAT JUST MEANS THAT YOU ARE LYING TO YOURSELF.

SO ONCE AND FOR ALL, I LOVE YOU BOTH AND AM GENUINELY YOUR ALLY IN YOUR NUMEROUS POSITIVE EFFORTS. THANK YOU FOR EXISTING. BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT I’M A ROBOT THAT DOESN’T HAVE MY OWN THOUGHTS, NOR DOES IT MEAN THAT I’LL STUMP OFF OF A PREDETERMINED SCRIPT IN ORDER TO BLINDLY DEFEND ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO. IF THAT IS OFFENSIVE, OR A THREAT TO YOUR GOALS, WELL, THEN THAT’S JUST REALLY SAD. THAT IS ALL.

In my opinion this is one of the most important videos I’ve ever made. Yes, it is a rant. But yes, it is very important. If you are a volunteer, rescuer, shelter staff member or even a manager then please consider what is being said here.

City Council meetings for San Bernardino are the 1st and 3rd Monday of each month, the next being 1/21. Councilman John Valdivia oversees the ward where the shelter is located.
To email the San Bernardino City shelter supervisor, Ryan Long: long_ry@sbcity.org

City Council meetings for Rancho Cucamonga are the 1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month, the next being 1/16.
To email the Rancho Cucamonga City Council: council@cityofrc.us
To email the Rancho Cucamonga shelter director, Veronica Fincher: veronica.fincher@cityofrc.us

L.A. County, to the best of my knowledge, doesn’t do City Council meetings. You’d instead need to go directly to the L.A. County Board of Supervisors, also known as “the 5 little kings.” They appointed Marcia Mayeda, who oversees all of the county shelters, including Carson. She was responsible for firing Ric Browde, head volunteer at Baldwin Park, simply because he voiced his own opinion on his personal blog.
To email the director of the L.A. County DACC, Marcia Mayeda: mmayeda@animalcare.lacounty.gov

Original Facebook thread showing Lucia (embedded rope).
Video #1 of the SB City kennel mates, Lucia (embedded rope) & Britta.
Video #2 of the SB City kennel mates, Lucia (embedded rope) & Britta.
Video taken while shelter staff informs Maria that she now needs to do public records requests to obtain a report she was freely receiving prior to 1/5/13.

Shelter retaliation against volunteers is illegal, unconstitutional.
Retaliatory Rancho Cucamonga shelter spiraling downward.

What’s better… Increasing your monthly adoption and rescue rate by 20, 25, 35, even 50% and then being honest about it and celebrating that achievement? Or dishonestly implying that you killed no “adoptable” or “treatable” animals for an entire month, when proof shows that that absolutely didn’t happen? I don’t know about y’all, but I prefer the transparency in tandem with the striving to be better each month, even if it falls short of an ultimate goal. There’s always next time. There’s always trying again. That’s far better than celebrating a fake achievement that never happened, being advertised now on the backs of the animals that you killed and called “unadoptable” in order to pretend that they never existed. It’s an appeasement to a public that mostly doesn’t know any better, and a false representation of what you could actually be doing. It is possible, but not by shunning the proven route in order to actually do it. Embrace what you are then. Try to get there another way, if you must, but do it honestly. Is that too much to ask? The fact that they apparently can’t feel good about the first option, when that’s the true reality, shows a disturbing need to create a fantasy world instead. That shouldn’t make anyone feel too cozy about an intended outcome and the work that is or isn’t being put in to actually get there. Yes, this post is about NKLA.

And just for the record: I love Best Friends. I respect and appreciate many people that work for them. To those that will undoubtedly view this as me “bashing” them, you need to grow up. Don’t attempt to divide and conquer me here. This isn’t about me being an enemy to them, even if they (Best Friends) want to convince themselves that it’s true in order to not have an open and transparent go at things. It’s usually easier to just discard a dissenting opinion than to ponder on it and potentially change for the better. But it’s not wrong to question what’s going on, ever. I love Best Friends, but I love these scared and abandoned Pit Bulls far more. Don’t kill a number of them and then tell people that you didn’t. And if you keep doing it, people like myself will keep telling other people that you did.

The above picture illustrates simply 1 reason out of so many why our current kill-happy sheltering system needs totally overhauled. This is a puppy that was either surrendered or brought in by Animal Control and placed in the intake cage that sits at the entrance of the shelter. It was likely surrendered from a walk-in. I saw the puppy when I walked out of one of the buildings, on my way to continue photographing. This poor dog was 90% dead. His head was moving slightly and he was attempting to stretch his little legs. With all the things that I’ve seen at the Carson shelter, even I was taken aback by a puppy in this kind of shape just openly laying out in the middle of the elements (it was very cold and raining) on the floor of this cage. I tried to talk to the puppy and then quickly opened the gate to get a picture. I wanted to pet him so badly but opted against it because he was likely really sick, and I wasn’t even halfway through with photoing so was concerned that I’d potentially pass something onto another dog. As I was backing up one of the vets appeared out of nowhere. He didn’t say anything to me, simply reached into the cage and stuck a cotton swab up this puppy’s backside, pulled it out and then walked away. It was so robotic, like a living being wasn’t actually laying there. I was amazed. I waited around for a few more minutes to see if he’d come back, he didn’t. I moved along and 10 minutes later had passed Aileen, who was also there photoing the dogs, and I asked her if she’d seen the dog out in the intake cage. She said that she hadn’t. 10 more minutes pass, Aileen makes her way out of the building that I was in and grabs her own peek at the puppy laying out in the front. She told me later that she’d actually went into the front office and asked them if they were aware of the dog being out there. Their response? “Yeah, we know.”

I don’t know about y’all, but I find it extremely depressing and disturbing that this puppy sat out in that cage for well over 20 minutes. Not only that, but while staff (admittedly) and at least 1 “vet” were completely aware, and they did nothing. This puppy was likely very sick, and I’m certainly not a vet, but who’s to say that it couldn’t have been saved? I don’t know, I don’t know if he’s still alive or what ended up happening to him. What I do know is that even if this dog ultimately died, the treatment and lack of attention that he got leading up to his death is really distressing. He was not taken back into their hospital or medical room, he was not even taken into any room. Either of those things should have been done immediately. Instead, he was just placed out in the cold, on a metal floor. Even if he was extremely sick, couldn’t one of the staff members put some gloves on and held him until he passed? Done something, anything. They just remained seated knowing full well that he was laying out there. Hell, I’d of reached in and cradled him myself (even though no one outside of the staff is “allowed” to open up those intake gates or touch the animals inside of them), had I not had only 30 more minutes of decent light and an another entire building plus left to photograph.

Couldn’t this shelter have offered this puppy anything more than what they did? Just as a basic response and reaction, anything more? My answer is a resounding yes. Yet here I sit detailing what did and didn’t happen. This is a proper sliver of insight into how this shelter operates. They have some good folks that work there, mostly long-established volunteers and a few that are on the actual staff. But they are outnumbered and out influenced by the opposite of what they are. It is a problem. It is the biggest problem that exists.

This past Tuesday I attended a Commission meeting at the East Valley shelter where Brenda Barnette (L.A. City General Manager), the Los Angeles Board of Animal Services Commissioners and the ASPCA, as well as many members of the public, turned out to debate the issue of temperament testing. Click here to read the agenda and any of the accompanying documents.

For over a decade the L.A. City portion of the sheltering system has “officially” banned the using of so-called temperament tests. This was probably done to seem as if they were avoiding condemning adoptable pets to death, as well as to avoid focusing on specific breeds and so on. Well, as many of the public speakers pointed out, just because something is “officially” not in use doesn’t mean it isn’t already in use. To think that L.A. City wasn’t already temperament testing would be foolish. They were, and they are. Point taken. My thing about going to this meeting was to speak to how giving temperament tests in a shelter environment is already an unfair and unreliable idea, as well as to speak out against how these tests are then in many cases used to routinely put scary labels onto dogs that will then serve to justify their death just days (or hours) later. This is every kill shelters magic trick. For example, L.A. County disgracefully condemns hundreds, if not thousands of Pit Bulls to death every year with this very tactic. And sure, L.A. City does too. After all, they are all kill shelters no matter what kind of advertising campaigns they roll out to state otherwise.

So the question becomes, do you trust the as-is staff to implement these programs and then to use them the way that they are being promoted? Because, on its face, SAFER seems like something that would be helpful. At least the ASPCA wants people to believe so. Well, my answer to that question is no. I don’t trust the majority of staff at any current high-kill shelter to use (or be allowed to use) this program for any other reason than to kill dogs, or to justify the killing that they are already doing. It’s kind of simple for me: Actions count. Not words, not fudged numbers, not new theories being implemented by the same status quo.

Lastly, the most confusing thing about this entire meeting to me was this… SAFER is an ASPCA program. The ASPCA opposes genuine No Kill (ala Nathan Winograd, No Kill Advocacy Center). Yet, L.A. City has this campaign called NKLA which makes the public believe that they are eventually going to somehow get to No Kill (ala Nathan Winograd), albeit by using philosophically opposite actions in comparison to the many things which have already been proven to work elsewhere (ala Nathan Winograd). Following? Because it’s quite the enigma. And this isn’t about the rescues and organizations that make up the “coalition,” this is about Best Friends, as they ultimately have the power and have made the choices regarding what to do and what not to do. Another conundrum is that you can’t even begin to have any sort of a worthwhile discussion about No Kill with someone (this goes for anyone inside or outside of the coalition) who hasn’t even read “Redemption,” it’s that eye-opening of a book. Not simply read a “review,” not heard from a person who actually heard from another person. But actually read the book… I personally have no problem with NKLA’s goals, or striving to lower your kill numbers (duh), or making any genuine attempt to do anything to better the current system of death and destruction. I support you, I support those things, fully. But don’t be disingenuous, don’t mislead, don’t doublespeak. You can’t condemn Nathan Winograd privately and try to discredit what the No Kill Advocacy Center stands for, and without even genuinely having a desire to embrace any of their suggestions, while at the same time giving the public the impression that you are also striving to become No Kill. It’s basically nonsense. And people that are doing that are not to be trusted, in my opinion of course…

This last opinion is bound to get me in hot water with many local acquaintances but I simply need to go with my gut on this one. It’s a very important topic to discuss, and yet I’ve noticed that everyone seems to just want to ignore it for the “betterment of the cause.” Well does it really better the cause if this thing fails due to lack of effort, vision, courage, openness, transparency, honesty, ingenuity? Does it really better the cause if this then unfairly serves to further discredit the actual real No Kill communities that are out making it happen? I could be wrong, we’ll see, but there’s just something fundamentally foul about the complete shunning of actual results and the paths to those results.