Remember Presley? Well over the last few weeks he has been making his way to his new life, and I’m happy to write that he is now safely in Ohio and up for adoption. Please watch the little video visual that I put together entitled “From kill shelter to airplane,” and then the small public service announcement that features Presley essentially embracing an endless amount of belly rubs while I talk about him and the many other great dogs that are out there waiting to be saved.

Here Presley is with Guilty ‘Til Proven Innocent director Jeff Theman, after making it to Ohio. We love and miss you Presley! Thanks to Jeff for coming to Carson with me, falling in love with Presley and keeping his word on getting him out. Thanks to Jean for helping rescue Presley, Anna for covering his flight, Irene for assisting me with his adoption fee and Dianne for doing countless things on his behalf behind the scenes (and co-starring with him in the many videos).

It’s my guess that the mass majority of people who have animals have no idea about what I’m about to type. I didn’t know either, until I started getting curious and looking into it myself. I never would have even thought to ponder this issue if it weren’t for being exposed to the many microchip-related mishaps that can happen at the kill shelters.

Look at your dog. Pull his or her microchip number up and I want you to do an exercise with me, as I’ve already done with my own dog’s microchips.

Here are the databases that I want you to actually search, using your own dog’s unique number. Each is considered to be a “universal” database that covers any number of different microchips…

Pet Microchip Lookup
Free Pet Chip Registry
Petlink
RFID-USA Microchip Registry or here
Petkey
EIDAP
InfoPET
PETMAXX

Now I don’t know about you, but the only database that my 2 dogs came up in was the first one (Pet Microchip Lookup)… And this was only because I took the extra step of manually entering them into the FoundAnimals free database awhile back. So even though both of my dogs have registered chips with Avid, they didn’t come up in this database through Avid, and they didn’t come up in any of the other ones at all. Regarding the 1 that did list them, they came up linked to the secondary FoundAnimals database instead. So had I not taken the initiative to do that, my registered dogs would have went 0 for 8 in these databases masquerading publicly as “universal” databases. Most people aren’t told to cross-register your pets like this, so they never even think to. The only reason that I did it was because it was free. After researching I found that the 2nd database is free as well. I’ve since signed up for that one too.

The other 6 actually charge you to list your animals… Petlink charges you a 1-time fee of $19.99 per pet. RFID-USA charges you a 1-time fee of $19.95 per pet. Petkey charges you a yearly fee of $14.99 per pet. EIDAP charges you a 1-time fee of $11.00 per pet. InfoPET charges you a 1-time fee of $25.00 and an additional $10.00 per added pet. PETMAXX links with Petlink, so if they aren’t listed in Petlink they have no chance of showing in PETMAXX.

Is all of this not totally ridiculous? Why isn’t there a truly universal database that umbrellas over every single one of these poser databases? If you pay once with a microchip manufacturer then the information should be shared with every other database, should it not? And why so many damn databases to begin with? The majority of which also operate exclusively from all the others. So it begs the question: Does this industry care about returning lost animals to their owners or only about charging numerous fees at the further expense of thoroughly confusing people?

Unfortunately these organizations are not required to speak to each other. That means that they are not sharing owner information. Making matters worse, the available online databases rarely catalog tangible results. Instead of working together for the intended advertised purpose, this whole idea really shows itself to be a diluted mess.

These are some of the most well known microchip manufacturers, many who then have their own databases…

24PetWatch, 1-866-597-2424, uses their own database.
AKC, 1-800-252-7894, uses their own database.
Avid, 1-800-336-2843, uses their own database.
Datamars, 1-877-738-5465, uses the Petlink database.
FoundAnimals, uses their own database.
HomeAgain, 1-888-466-3242, uses their own database.
resQ, 1-877-738-5465, uses the Petlink database.
*resQ was created by Bayer and I can’t tell if it’s now in some way affiliated with Datamars. This and this should be required reading for everyone.

Then you get into which scanners actually read which chips… The word “universal” is again readily thrown around, yet many scanners claiming to be universal only read certain microchips. Sometimes this is done on purpose. Avid chips read out at 9 digits. HomeAgain, AKC and other chips read out at 10 digits. FoundAnimals, Datamars and resQ are ISO chips and read out at 15 digits. Some HomeAgain and AKC chips are now ISO and 15 digits. ISO microchips are what most of the non-U.S. world are currently using. It has been said that many of the scanners being used in the United States seldom successfully scan for ISO microchips. Who knows, but pretty worrisome regardless. The 3 different types of chips run on 3 different frequencies: 125 kHz, 128 kHz, and 134.2 kHz. So unless your microchip scanner picks up all 3 frequencies it is NOT universal.

Some shelters and vets assume that if their scanner picks up three different brands of microchips, it is universal. However some brands are on the same chip frequency, and some make several different types of microchip. So unless the scanner picks up all three frequencies (the 125, 128, and 134.2), it is NOT universal. And unfortunately, many organizations are unknowingly still using non-universal scanners, which means they are missing chips and therefore unable to reunite lost pets with their families.

A couple different scenarios for you… Let’s assume that the scanner actually finds a chip on a stray dog. What if a staff member from a vet’s office or a shelter opted to pull up one of these database websites instead of calling a specific manufacturer directly? What if they tried to call, got put on a lengthy hold, and since they’re busy themselves opted to hang up and use one of these websites instead? Yikes. The mere existence of all of these different databases is troubling, because a single search bringing back no results basically implies that the pet has no owner. I’m not saying that this happens a lot, but if it happens at all then it’s a total shame. The absence of a result in any of these random databases could potentially cause an owned animal to die. That’s real. Best case, they wouldn’t be found but eventually saved and adopted out to someone else. No one knows how careful or thorough people are. Just as many vets and shelters likely have detailed protocol in order to deal with this, many probably don’t. That’s scary.

Please be aware of these missteps and take matters into your own hands to make sure that your pet’s microchip is best represented. If you’ve ever adopted a pet from the shelter it is imperative that you personally register your microchip with the microchip manufacturer. You may assume that the shelter does this for you. They do not. I’d also advise registering your pet’s microchip with the free secondary backup websites, FoundAnimals Microchip Registry and Free Pet Chip Registry. Going further, next time you are at your vet I’d have them scan for a microchip just to see if they get a worthwhile result. Lastly, I’d challenge animal shelters to setup test scenarios with dogs known to have specific chips, just to see if their owned scanners are truly up to snuff. Because I have no doubt that many aren’t, and that basically means more dead dogs.

The Carson shelter is located at 216 W. Victoria St., Gardena, CA 90248. You can reach them at 310-523-9566 or 310-527-5158.

I’ve re-read my article plenty of times. Maybe I missed something. I thought that, due to the backlash that I’m currently getting, maybe I was honestly unfair or harsh. I’ve gotta say, upon reading it back numerous times, I feel more strongly than ever that I wrote the appropriate article and that I did what made sense to me. It continues to make sense to me. When addressing Villalobos directly, which was only a small portion of the article, what I wrote was not harsh. If anything, I went out of my way to praise them, while laying out what the published dynamics of this legislation aims to do, and then asking them to reconsider their support for it. That’s basically it. The “harsh” sections were reserved for Councilman Glenn Green and the legislation itself. Those stating otherwise must not have read it, because it’s still online and you can see it for yourself.

Literally no one is disputing anything specific about what I wrote. I’ve been dealing with this for a solid 6-8 hours now, since waking up, and no one is attempting to point out irregularities or inaccuracies. The vast majority of those disagreeing with what I wrote are basically attacking me as a person, calling me names, cursing at me, comparing our “popularity,” and so on and so forth. Can I get some kind of a thoughtful discourse? The lack of that is usually proof enough that I made a valid point.

^Do you not see this? They keep saying that that doesn’t mean that they support everything that’s in the bill. Okay, fine. But it’s in the proposed bill. So if the bill passes, it happens. They support the bill. They are supporting what Councilman Green is proposing. Yet, I’m called the “liar” for simply pointing this out and then trying to break down what’s being proposed, and then asking Villalobos to reconsider their support for it. It’s being said by many that that apparently amounts to an “attack” on Villalobos. Not at all.

So I’m simply going to state a few things that I’ve also stated on my Facebook page…

This backlash that I’m getting for my statement on Villalobos’ position on the BSL in Westwego thing, as if I’m “jealous” or “uninformed” or “not reading,” or “not understanding,” or being a “hypocrite,” is totally off the charts insane. It’s really sad that some people can actually read something that was pretty darn clear, and still come to the vapid opinion that I’m somehow throwing rocks at the throne. It’s really sad that some people can read something that was fully sourced and essentially a response to information that is OUT IN THE OPEN, and then try to imply that I’m basically an “uninformed hater” that knows nothing about nothing. Where is the disconnect?

A hater? Of Tia and Villalobos? How?? I respect the hell out of both. I’m a hater for pointing out the obvious? I’m a hater for noticing that they are supporting some egregious compromise on BSL, and then trying to tell their hundreds of thousands of fans that this legislation actually is not BSL and that I’m somehow lying or misrepresenting their position? How? Why? For what? Wow. Humanity never ceases to let you down.

What’s most stunning is how so many people are just piling on me for reasons that don’t even make sense, as if they didn’t read a single word of what I wrote, and then calling me the hypocrite for “not reading.” A lot of this type of stuff seems to be coming from people who would rather follow someone because of “who” they are, instead of respond back to what I wrote with any kind of substance at all. What didn’t I read? How is what is being proposed in Westwego and supported by Villalobos not BSL? Can someone explain this to me? Can someone retort anything that I said, instead of just attacking the messenger? Someone even went so far as to actually compare me to Colleen Lynn!! You actually have to laugh at this stuff to keep from crying.

This world seems to be more and more awash in celebrity worship and so many people actually live their lives as if that kind of stuff somehow trumps any and everything. I love what Tia does, but she isn’t above criticism and neither am I. Criticize away at me, but please base it in something. I went out of my way to write the most thorough piece that I could, and to make it clear that I love what VRC does, but to also lay out my case for why I think that what they’ve chosen to do in Westwego is extremely damaging. I explained why, and thoroughly. I then simply asked them to reconsider their stance. That’s it. It wasn’t an “attack,” it wasn’t me “slamming” Tia, as so many people are now saying. My goodness. I’m in no way “jealous” of her fame, rather the opposite, and extremely happy that she has the platform that she has in order to show the true and wonderful nature of these dogs. I think that’s like the 50th time that I’ve said this now! Yet so many people are trying to boil the genuine stuff that I said down to “he’s just hating.” Really? I mean, really?

You can kill me all you want. Whomever wants to say whatever, go for it. I just wish that it was actually based in something, or in an effort to substantially retort something that I said. Instead, it seems to be the opposite. I’m just “bad” because I dared make a statement against a position that is clearly discriminatory and clearly meant to demonize Pit Bulls as a whole. I’m not saying that that’s what Tia wants, I’m saying that by her supporting the legislation that’s what she plays a role in basically allowing to have happen. It’s not my fault that Villalobos is supporting Councilman Green’s legislation, and backing a “compromise” that is totally wrongheaded and tyrannical on numerous levels. Yet, so many people have completely lost sight of that, simply based out of who this person is. It’s Tia, so we can’t dare question it. Um, why? Things shouldn’t work like that, where substance and principles go flying out the window, context out the window. Your dogs are going to be the ones affected! I’m all about compromise, and working together with people in all facets of my life. But I’m not up for “compromising” when it comes to people (like Green) who are hellbent on scapegoating Pit Bulls, demonizing them, perpetuating stereotypes, flaunting open discrimination and then passing unjust laws that usher all of that stuff in. I’m not for compromising with that.

In closing… What’s being lost here, and what’s most discouraging to me personally, is the clear disconnect between what is truly BSL and what many people actually do consider BSL vs. what they do not consider BSL. It’s beyond depressing that this definition is actually being fractured and that thousands of people don’t even seem to understand the basic nature of the legislation. For that, Tia should be ashamed. Because she is currently perpetuating that, and now doubling down on it by coming after me and attempting to turn my comments into something that they were not. Too many people will just listen to her, and take it as scripture, instead of even attempting to understand what is being discussed. That’s sad.

Thanks to those that actually know the difference.

Villalobos then came out with a statement, and then a 2nd statement, which was especially dramatic and pretty much out of bounds.

In the 1st one they tell me to “read before I write” and that I’m “spreading rumors,” while doubling down on this fearmongerish line of thought that had they not “compromised” then there would have been a total ban. That’s untrue, but okay. Telling me that I should read before I write is degrading and disingenuous. You bet I read before I wrote, why wouldn’t I have? This kind of a dismissive response is insulting everyone’s intelligence, their own supporters included, by taking petty shots at me while they ignore the actual statements and positions that their own organization made and took in regards to the legislation that is being discussed here.

The 2nd statement was far more over the top, where they imply that I’ve somehow ruined the day for their adorable Puma, who was just adopted. This ignores the fact that Villalobos’ own post was what linked these 2 events together, by posting a picture of Puma and then ranting about me for 5 paragraphs. That was their choice. They took the focus off of Puma, not me. They then accuse me of actually wanting them shut down, blame me for their donations drying up and then attempt to blame me for losing future adopters. If that wasn’t enough, they then claim that due to my blog post they “will no longer be commenting, discussing, talking, posting about BSL.” So it’s now become MY FAULT for their failure to use their massive platform to positively counter BSL around the country. Then comes the accusations of me wanting attention at their expense, and that I was getting my “15 seconds of fame.” Nice. They even source an article that they recently re-posted of mine from 2 years ago, calling it “one of the best reads ever” in regards to BSL and California. Less than a week later my rather consistent opposition to BSL is no longer legitimate for that praise…

Regarding this notion that I’m “wanting them shut down.” This is a totally absurdist statement. Just for the record: I HAVE NO DESIRE TO SEE VILLALOBOS SHUT DOWN, NOR DID I MAKE MY STATEMENTS IN AN EFFORT TO CAUSE THEM TO “LOSE SUPPORT.” My statements were made because I am against breed-discriminatory legislation. That’s it. Read what I wrote. It’s totally out there and available for people to read. Not only what I wrote, but what they wrote, and what Councilman Green is pushing for. For the 958th time: I SUPPORT VILLALOBOS and resent these accusations that I want them shut down, or that I’m trying to garner “fame” off of their reputation. Anyone that knows me knows that I don’t give a rat’s ass about fame. I don’t do what I do for “fame.” It’s total and utter bologna. If 5,000 people want to unlike my page in mass, that’s okay. People can be as nasty as they want to be with me, call me names, tell me all kinds of things that I can’t exactly repeat here… But it sucks that Villalobos are actually using reverse psychology and will probably succeed in turning massive amounts of people against me, people that don’t even know or care to even read what I actually wrote. Ultimately, people can make up their own minds on my reputation and my motivations. What I wrote is out there, I stand by it. I’m against BSL, not Tia, not Villalobos. I’m against “compromising” with people who are hellbent on scapegoating Pit Bulls for the individual incidents that irresponsible people repeatedly cause. This Council would never succeed in achieving a ban. We (Pit Bull people, Villalobos, myself, you) are in the right. BSL is totally backwards and wrong, and giving in at any ratio is extremely harmful. But again, saying that I want to see VRC shut down is an absolute falsehood. That’s the last thing that I’d ever want. They also can’t have it both ways, calling me a “nobody” that is “piggybacking on your fame,” while at the same time blaming me for “tons of donations lost” and the potential “closure” of your hugely massive and amazing rescue. If I’m a “nobody” then how in the world would I even remotely be able to accomplish that? Again, I have no desire in the world to see Villalobos close, or have their donations dry up. People can continue to put words in my mouth but I’ve been beyond clear and pretty darn consistent in the face of all of this.

Here’s my responses to basically the only criticisms that I’ve received, and they are constant and almost always the same:

That I should “go away” or “shut up,” coming from random people…

Folks, I’m here as a PIT BULL ADVOCATE that is stringently anti-BSL, in all forms. This is my page. I also run a website. I’m an American, which means the Constitution applies to me. You can’t tell me to “be gone” from my own page. I’m allowed to have my own opinion, I’m allowed to critically think, I’m allowed to discuss Pit Bull-related issues. Clearly I’ve made valid points, or this wouldn’t even be an issue. How do you think this has become an issue, on any level, if I didn’t make valid points? If you think rock-solid people from the Pit Bull community don’t stand behind what I wrote, which was much more anti-BSL and didn’t even address VRC until the end, then you’re sadly mistaken.

That I’m “seeking attention,” or “fame” by saying what I’m saying, coming from random people and also from Villalobos…
That Villalobos has done “way more than me,” and “more than I’ll ever be able to do,” coming from random people…

I’ve kind of already addressed this one numerous times above, but someone actually said to me that I’m saying all of this “to get a few readers.” Uh, not quite. My page has received around 100 likes since they shared my 2-year-old article this past week. I’ve actually earned my support, thanks. Same as them. Further, for every person that chooses to no longer support me, there’s likely 2 or 3 that have now chosen to support me. That goes for taking on any position of difficulty. Some people actually don’t like puff pieces. Also, like I said above, it doesn’t matter to me if I lose thousands of followers over my blog post regarding Villalobos. That isn’t what this is about. This is about BSL, not me, or Tia or Villalobos. I absolutely do not care, AT ALL, about having “followers.” The entire premise of that phrase is derogatory. I’d much rather have 1,000 critical thinking, compassionate and rational supporters than have 500,000 people that don’t even understand me or get where I’m coming from. This isn’t a popularity contest, or a dick-measuring contest, despite all of these people constantly throwing that vapid and empty stuff in my face. I do not care about your perception of fame. I care about opposing breed-discriminatory legislation in all of its forms. I support Villalobos, just not their position on this issue. Read what I wrote.

That I should stop “spreading lies,” because Tia is all of a sudden “wanting to make this breed-neutral,” coming from random people…

Councilman Green’s legislation is NOT breed-neutral. This is a total misrepresentation of the current truth. Villalobos stated quite clearly that “we are actually in support of what Councilman Green is proposing.” Those are her words, not mine. So whether it eventually becomes breed-neutral, and whether Villalobos eventually supports all of these discussed things for all dogs in Westwego, that doesn’t change the fact that they first supported his initial proposal that was and still is breed-specific. Stop rewriting history.

That these laws “won’t even be enforced anyways,” so it’s “not to worry about,” and that Tia is being “tactical,” coming from random people…

Did you get that? The implication that the eventually passed law will not be enforced, therefore it’s not a big deal and people are making a big deal out of nothing. So why the law in the first place then? That’s a pointless situation, a dog and pony show. If any of that is even remotely true then Villalobos’ stance should be that this law is pointless because it’s unenforceable and does nothing good besides villainize Pit Bulls and Pit Bull owners. Yet that’s not their stance.

That I need to “apologize,” and that I’m clearly in the wrong based around the “backlash” that I’ve gotten, coming from random people…

This isn’t about me, or them. I am not perfect, neither are they. Nobody is and nothing will ever be. But there will absolutely be no apology from me, as I did nothing wrong. I talked about the proposed legislation at length, and simply asked Villalobos to change their STATED position on it. Okay? And just because there’s a “backlash” doesn’t mean that that’s the majority of people. It just means that I’ve gotten backlash. Big deal. I don’t choose what to do based on how much backlash or how little backlash I’m going to get.

And that I’m “attacking” Villalobos/Tia, being “negative,” or “infighting,” coming from random people…

Since when has trying to have a genuine discourse become “attacking”? How is talking about the injustice of breed-discriminatory laws, and the hedging against those principles, a “negative” thing? And when did “infighting” all of a sudden become the go-to response for every single person that never wants to have a public opinion or give their own thoughts on anything?

For the absolute last time: I have no ill will towards Villalobos, or Tia Torres. I respect the hell out of what they do, and their rescue in general. I have no desire for them to be shut down (asinine). I have no desire to see their donations dry up. None. People should continue supporting Villalobos! But people should also be against BSL and BDL. If those things cross then people need to figure it out for themselves. I asked questions. I then asked Villalobos to reconsider their position on Green’s proposed legislation. That’s all. All of this misinformation is out of control. Everything I’ve written is publicly available. In closing, I’m most definitely not the type to cower to intimidation from a lynch mob. If that’s what comes then I’ll just get more and more outspoken about it. I support Villalobos and continue hoping that they will eventually oppose Councilman Green’s pathetic demonization efforts.

So all kinds of stuff has recently hit the fan in response to a horrendous attack on a Westwego woman that was sharing a tiny home with a “Pit Bull” breeding operation, live litter and all. Since this horrible incident, the Westwego City Council have moved to amend their city ordinance in an effort to make it far tougher on Pit Bull owners as a whole…

Under the proposed changes Pit Bull owners must be at least 21 years of age and carry $100,000 in liability insurance, follow specific confinement regulations (both in and out of the home), keep the dogs muzzled when leaving the home (perpetuating stereotypes), display warning signs on the premises (perpetuating stereotypes), mandatorily spay and/or neuter their dog as well as implant a mandatory microchip. Going further, this will also require that unlicensed Pit Bulls be killed, that the city’s code inspectors be able to visit people’s private homes to “determine compliance,” and that DNA-testing be done at the expense of the pet owner. Back quickly to the dogs being killed if they are “unlicensed”–what then happens to the strays that are impounded at the shelter? I’m assuming they’d all be unethically killed.

“Those responsible Pit Bull owners will not have a problem with this, I’m sure, recognizing we do not want to take their dog away,” Mayor Johnny Shaddinger said Wednesday, a day after City Attorney Joel Levy submitted a first draft of the proposed ordinance.

Ugh, actually we do. I’m responsible, and I have a big problem with it. Why? Because requiring that all “Pit Bull” owners get liability insurance in order to have or keep their family dog is BSL through and through. Folks, please remember that breed-specific legislation is not just simply a “ban” of a certain type of dog. It’s any legislation crafted that targets “specific” types of dogs. I put specific in quotations because there’s nothing ever specific about these policies, nor is there anything specific about how they are going to go about identifying whether your dog is or is not a Pit Bull. And notice how the Mayor says that “we do not want to take your dog away.” Um, okay. But you do want to create such a negative stigma around the dogs, as well as put hurdle after hurdle up in front of those already having the dogs, that they might voluntarily give their dogs up or be in violation of some law, thus being forced to give their dogs up. Not to mention the blowback that always follows a law that mandates liability insurance, allowing more landlords and insurance companies to move to over-protect themselves and avoid the dogs altogether. This is definitely an excuse for those folks to be more discriminatory in that regard. So no, all of this may not amount to Mr. Shaddinger actually coming to your home to personally “take your dog,” but it absolutely will amount to dogs being taken, given up, situational upheaval and the continuation of broad and sweepingly vile discrimination.

Green said the city needs the harsher guidelines because of Henry’s ordeal, and because he hears too many troubling stories about Pit Bull attacks. He doesn’t blame the animals, but he does blame pet owners who don’t properly care for them.

Ahem… Doublespeak alert!! Councilman Glenn Green “doesn’t blame the animals,” but yet what he’s doing is fundamentally making all of the animals guilty until proven innocent. He’s also admitting that “too many troubling stories” played a role, and goes on to admit that Mrs. Henry’s boyfriend didn’t “properly care for” his dogs. WOW. What a quote. So if he actually believes ^his last sentence then why aren’t his efforts based around responsible dog ownership and not the blatant targeting of an entire type of dog? Also, they already have a Pit Bull ordinance that went unenforced, and now they are “strengthening it,” even though the original ordinance did nothing to stop the attack that is prompting the doubling down on a new law. Again, how about targeting responsible pet ownership instead?

Now, onto Villalobos Rescue Center and Tia Torres, who I genuinely respect and think that they do great work with bringing public awareness to the true and very positive nature of these dogs. Up and to this point my only concern with them, in any area, has been that some of their merchandise is so abrasively Pit Bull-exclusive that it puts all other dogs down in the process (i.e. “If it ain’t pit, it ain’t shit”). Minor. Just me being observational and having an opinion. And I doubt they care. But anyways, to my surprise they are actually SUPPORTING this legislation! What the hell? See for yourself.

In this photo they then relay people to Einhorn Insurance, implying that they will be fine once they call them. I guess so, if local carriers are still available. I’m told that there are currently options, and Einhorn can assist in detailing those for folks when and if this becomes necessary. Most Louisiana homeowner’s insurance companies continue to flat out exclude Pit Bulls. That’s just another challenge that remains, and one that is not going to be getting any better in light of what has happened in Westwego. All of this is kind of besides the point though, as not everyone can afford liability insurance for their dog. Far more important than that, it’s wrong to have to be forced to get it when no one else does. That’s exclusionary. That’s punishing responsible people for committing no crime. That’s punishing the dogs.

Villalobos responds to the few critics of their position by implying that, hey, it was either this or “AN ALL OUT BAN.” Uh, not really. But way to fearmonger people into believing that there is only 2 options. Whatever happened to standing on your principles? I guess that somehow doesn’t apply with this, even though it does, and they are just choosing not to. They then tell people to “pick and choose your battles.” Alrighty.

Well, I’m here to say that what has been described here and elsewhere is pretty much an unofficial ban. Semantical games can be played but this is an egregious squeeze on law-abiding and responsible people, as well as an endless amount of good dogs. Requiring liability insurance in an area where almost all of the insurance companies choose to exclude that “type” of dog is essentially a ban on any dog that looks like that “type” of dog, whatever that means. And you won’t be able to decide, Glenn Green and his people will. Also, requiring that all dogs of a specific breed or type be forever spayed and neutered is an eventual ban, in theory, to boot.

Quite frankly I’m not only stunned by the stand that Villalobos has taken, but I’m also stunned by the amount of praise that they are receiving (and the amount of criticism that they are not receiving) in regards to the position that they’ve taken. My 2 cents is clear. You should be standing on the principle that this is totally wrong. That’s what everything boils down to. We are these dogs’ voice, and that’s a very important role to have and position to be in. And the platform that you have to be those things, I mean, my goodness gracious… Please, Villalobos: Reconsider your position. You don’t hedge on injustice, ever. You are either anti-BSL or you are not. That should be the end of it. Giving an inch to a politician hellbent on discriminating means that he is likely to take multiple miles. And what you’ve “given” here is far more than an inch. Is it worth discarding the soul of the argument, your principles and the truth, in order to appease a grandstanding Councilman who has it backwards? C’mon.

One of my legitimate rescue friends just posted on how she is often suffering backlash because she (their words) “too often” publicly asks for donations…

My message to those critical people: Anyone saying that is a hypocrite. Those critics are getting paid as we speak for doing something, whatever it is that they do, and that pay comes consistently. No one is putting the spotlight on them. People need to realize that a person advocating on behalf of these dogs and running an amazingly good rescue while she does it, well, that’s HER job! She needs to continue to be able to provide for the dogs, while also continuing to educate the public. That is a job, too. No less important than any of their own jobs. It’s funny that people want to consistently praise others for the work that they do for free, but as soon as that person asks for help with sustaining what they do half of that praise dries up. Then if you draw a comparison, like I’m doing, it causes an issue as well. Why and why? The criticizers EXPECT to be paid for the “services” that they provide in their own lives, and would start a riot if they weren’t. This rescuer is simply asking for people to respect what she does enough to consider donating. That’s her job, that’s part of what’s keeping her able to do what she’s doing.

No one is saying that you need to donate blindly, or without thought. Plenty of people likely misrepresent what they are about in order to siphon funds from unwitting people, but that doesn’t mean punish everyone! That’s simply BSL in yet another form! If you respect an individual or an organization, and know them to be credible, then support them with not only your enthusiasm and your assets, but with your dollars as well. If not, then don’t. But have the foresight enough as to not be so much of an asshat and claim that they can’t ask for donations while you cash weekly checks for doing God knows what. Again, anyone being that nasty is a huge hypocrite.

*One of my readers added this point, and I want to expand on it. She stated that rescuers aren’t asking for donations to “get paid” in order to buy a new purse, and that the donations in actuality go to the funding of the rescue. This then makes those that criticize them look all the more like jerks. I totally agree. But expanding on that point…

No one is itemizing how anyone else spends their money from their own 9-5’s. If the integrity of the rescuer is high then the majority, if not all of the money would likely go right to the dogs in some form or fashion anyways. But the whole notion that non-profits and people who devote a mass amount of their time to a specific cause shouldn’t be paid, simply to be paid, is also bunk and false in my opinion. They are people that need to survive as well. No one wants to donate to someone’s lame new purse; but what about to the food that nourishes them, or a new book that serves to inspire thought, or some new adventure that they may take on a weekend to recharge? I’d gladly donate to the people that I respect and admire (if I had the funds to), in order to support them as human beings. Where do you think the good work that they do ultimately comes from? It comes from them. Helping with their own situations and their own lives, their own well-beings, only serves to trickle down onto the dogs in some way. And that’s the way it should be, right? I don’t see anyone else passing up their own paychecks from bussing tables at the diner, or from the local Kinko’s, or from their management positions, or from their law firms. So people can, if they want to, get into this whole pissing match of “what” job helps “who” and at what rate of frequency, but I’d rather have people see that this comparison is 100% legitimate. Furthermore, I’d hope that more people would realize it instead of being so nasty to each other.

Relevant viewing.

This past Saturday beautiful Ginger got a single day out of the Norco shelter, in order to visit an offsite adoption event with Change of Heart Pit Bull Rescue, and ended up getting herself adopted!

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.

Remember sweet Amelia? Well she was finally able to leave the shelter today but unfortunately while waiting around to be “temperament tested” she contracted pneumonia… Now the rescuer had to hospitalize her immediately upon leaving the shelter. It would be super helpful for Sasha if people could donate what they can to cut down on her bill (attached at bottom). Thanks for considering, or even sharing this plea! Donations can be sent via PayPal to: loveleorescue@gmail.com or through the ChipIn she has set up. They can also be called directly into the hospital (Malibu Coast) at 310-317-4560, be sure to designate the donation for “Amelia.”

This morning my girlfriend got an email from a co-worker who yesterday found an extremely injured Pit Bull. Thankfully she went into action and did what any wonderful person would do. I’m not going to detail it anymore than that, as you can just read her amazing email (below) that she sent out on Zena’s behalf. If you’d like to donate, anything at all, towards Zena’s care: Please call it directly into the veterinarian’s office that is listed below. Big thanks to HyunJoo for being an amazing person, and thank you to anyone that will donate and/or spread this story. Zena needs all the help that she can get!

Dear Friends, I need your help.

On Friday at 6:30am, while walking Lucy and Buttons, I found a 7 month old Pit Bull-mix that had been hit by a car. I don’t know how long she was on the street, but her body was frozen cold, her nose and mouth bleeding, and car marks and blood all over her body. When I knelt and talked to her, she picked up her broken body and walked towards me.

With amazing guidance from the Eagle Rock emergency room (I think she was my guardian angel that morning! Thank you “Z”!), I got her to the emergency room. The staff on call did a diagnostic of her free of charge, and told me to get her started at Gateway (my vet) as they were going to be open very soon. By this time it was 7:30am. Zena was such a trooper. She was broken, in every way possible, but wagged her tail when the emergency room vet touched her, and laid down submissively in the waiting room, relieved to be in a warm, dry place.

Dr. Jimerson and the wonderful staff at Gateway quickly took her in. It turned out that she had a broken bone in her face, a broken wrist, one collapsed lung, nerve damage to her right front shoulder and leg, and possible brain injury. We believe she was hit, very hard, to her front right side (face and shoulder). I left her in Dr. Jimerson’s hands and thank God, as the hours passed, she was getting stronger and stronger. I went back to visit her Friday afternoon and was told that her front leg had a fracture on the wrist that should heal nicely with a cast, the bone in her face that had broken was also a clean fracture and will heal by itself, she had not fallen into a coma (which was what Dr. Jimerson was afraid of, given she was hit in the head), and she was alert and responding very well to the medication. The best news: She would most likely heal without any surgery and the nerve damage did not seem permanent hence we would not have to amputate her leg. What a miracle.

Zena is currently at Gateway for the weekend so they can continue to monitor her. If all goes as planned this weekend, she will get a cast on Monday which I will then bring her home with me. She will be with me for 6-8 weeks or until her leg is fully healed.

I feel so humbled and privileged to have come across Zena. Having 2 dogs of my own, I hope kind strangers would also extend their love if they are ever in such a awful situation. I have a gut feeling that Zena will make a full recover and have a thriving and full life. She has power in her eyes and I believe that this traumatic experience will only make her stronger.

I am emailing to you to ask for your help. As you can imagine, the financial cost will be high and steady. I have committed to paying for everything up to Monday’s treatment, but am asking for donations to ensure that Zena makes a 100% recovery over the next 2 months. Specifically, she needs weekly visits to the vet for her cast, another series of x-rays, and pain medication/vitamins/antibiotics. My goal is to hopefully raise $500. If you would like and can contribute to “Zena’s Holiday Fund,” please contact Gateway at 323-256-5840, tell them that you are calling to make a donation, and give them my name (HyunJoo Lee). They can take your card number over the phone. You can also drop off/mail them checks to: 431 West Los Feliz Rd., Glendale CA 91204. Please write “donation for HyunJoo Lee” at the memo line.

I also need your help find Zena a forever home. She is an amazing animal who is extremely affectionate. And obviously, she is a fighter. She is around 7-8 months old, 47 lbs (meaning she will be a big dog), and may be a Pit Bull/Labrador-mix. If you know of anyone who can commit to her and ensuring that she has a healthy, active, and fulfilling life, please contact me.

Attached are some pictures of her. She looks so much better now because the swelling in her face has gone down considerably. I will send updates and pictures to donors so please let me know if you make a donation.

Please spread the word to your friends and networks. Zena, Lucy, Buttons, and I thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Happy holidays!!