I was online today and somehow came across a link to your post about the “Animal Care Community Outreach Commission” meeting that was apparently held on Tuesday, and how no one showed up. This led me to check out your actual blog, and then to an acknowledgement of the frequent tone coming from the many blog posts. I soon became aware that you actually sideways referenced me in a post entitled “So what is in a kennel card?” from back in December of last year. This post aimed to belittle my points that I had made days earlier, and talk about how kennel cards were apparently useless things that provided no legitimate value to anyone. You further detail how you’ve “never found it to be an inconvenience” that Devore doesn’t display kennel cards, and that kennel cards “do more harm than good.”
Well, my video actually details why it is an inconvenience to many folks, like myself, photographers and/or networkers and the like, as well as the general public who may be experiencing the shelter system for the first time. I doubt that you even watched my video, due to your asking of the question of why I made it… The video clearly explains why I made it. Listen to it sometime. And to your point about kennel cards doing “more harm than good.” Right. Knowing a dog’s actual ID# and having that information openly accessible to the public is an awful thing. Just horrendous.
Going down your article you then imply that I’m a “No Kill activist,” as to box me up underneath that label. You then say that this is a “tactic” used by these shadowy activists in order to knit pick over “petty” things. Petty? Wanting to know the animal ID#s of the countless impounded dogs is petty? Right. Back to the labels: My name is Josh Liddy and you can email me at swayloveorg at gmail dot com whenever you’d like to speak to me. I have no problem with telling you who I am and how to contact me. I’d of contacted you, but since your website is run anonymously and you “moderate” the comments in order to memory hole “accusations,” well, I don’t have that option. But just so you know: I’m an individual person and not taking marching orders from anyone. I see with my own eyes and think with my own mind and write with my own hands. I generally support true No Kill measures, and support people genuinely embracing any portion of the actual platform that’s been put for by the No Kill Advocacy Center, but I don’t have anything to do with them, nor do I just blindly agree with everything that they say. There is so many people out erroneously fudging what it means to be truly No Kill, that that talking point is almost always as divisive as they come.
You can call me a “complainer,” you can call me “petty,” you can say that I “rant” with no meaningful substance. You can claim that I’m a “No Kill activist” playing from a playbook that’s meant to “frustrate staff.” You can claim that I’m “removing kennel cards and then complaining about a situation I created” (Not sure how, as Devore has no kennel cards). You can claim that people like myself are “causing animals to die.” You can blame me for being the “real culprit” of the shelter killing at Devore and everywhere else. Do what you’ve got to do. But just know that I think you’re full of shit. I think that your entire blog was setup as a PR-stunt on behalf of the actual shelter. Hell, someone working at the shelter probably runs it. You probably spend more time on your blog, while on the clock, than you do promoting your impounded animals. There’s something else that’s awfully prominent… You love to lean on this “unsubstantiated claims” talking point, while at the same time carrying water for one of the most untransparent shelters in the entire state of California. The Devore shelter disallows volunteers for the love of God. Pretty convenient for your bogus repetition.
As for the meeting and “no one showing up.” How many people even knew about it? I certainly didn’t. I saw nothing about it online, nor was it being talked about by anyone that I know. I’m not saying that it wasn’t publicized, just stating my own observation. But where was it promoted? And most importantly, when is the next one?
After typing that last sentence I picked up the phone and called Greg Beck, Program Manager at Devore, and the next meeting will apparently be on Friday, October 4th at 9am. This meeting will be held at the Department of Behavioral Health Auditorium on 850 E. Foothill Blvd. in Rialto, California.
People with a care and concern for what goes on at the Devore shelter: You folks better engage yourself and become aware of the minimal opportunities that you are being given to voice and document your concerns to this “commission.” Make sure that you note this next meeting and please plan to attend. Worth mention is the 4 month gap between meeting #1 and meeting #2. Why? I have no idea. But this commission has already established a dissolution date of June 30th, 2014. Wow. This date was made from the start, even though it took them “well over a year to even name their commissioners.” Wow. And now they’ve had 1 meeting, and the 2nd isn’t until October 4th, a mere 8 months before the commission is done away with for good. Take notice people!
In an email dated June 2nd (and in response to Lancelot being killed) I asked the manager of the Carson shelter, Gil Moreno, many questions… This is just a sampling: “Did anyone even note this dog’s disposition outside of a kennel? Does that ever matter? Does the dog’s personality not matter?” Gil responded, but failed to even acknowledge that I asked those questions. What he did do was essentially blame Dianne (my girlfriend, who is now an official Carson shelter volunteer) for Lancelot falling through the cracks. He writes, “I do have a question for Dianne, why didn’t she inform anyone that she was working with this dog? As a volunteer, she has the privilege to network one animal at a time for 10 days.”
Well… If by “inform” you mean write all over the dog’s kennel card (becomes relevant below) then she most definitely did do that. Not to mention that I put together a video of him being the absolute biggest ham in the history of the universe, a video that heavily features Dianne and is accessible to anyone that wanted to see it. But I guess that didn’t exist. And the reason that she didn’t place a “volunteer networking hold” on Lancelot is because she had already placed one on another dog and was disallowed from doing anymore.
So in response I tried again: “But the bigger and far more relevant question that I had is how was Lancelot’s personality (or any dog’s personality) not notated by the staff that determines who lives and who dies? How is myself and Dianne the only people who noticed this dog’s personality? Do you think we are just incredible dog-whispering people who have the ability to make all Pit Bulls friendly and approachable? All it takes is a little interest. All it takes is a little interaction outside of a run. Why are these dogs not being given the opportunity to show their true personalities, like Lancelot clearly showed on this video? Shouldn’t you (or the other officers that make the decisions, I don’t know the exact process) at least want to know a dog’s personality and have that be a factor prior to deciding whether it should live or die?”
This was Gil’s response: “We actually rely on the volunteers to make appropriate notes on the kennel card. The staff has enough time to rush the dogs in and out to clean their kennels and then feed in the afternoon. We don’t have the staff or time to sit in the play yard like you and Dianne to evaluate every dog.”
I wrote back: “Regarding the kennel card notations by volunteers… So that’s how officers decide who goes and who stays? Dianne wrote on a specific dog’s kennel card 3 different times, and each time she came back a new card had replaced the one that she wrote on. Lancelot, the dog in the video, had very warm and nice notes written on his kennel card. The next morning he was euthanized.”
Gil: “Please have Dianne stop by and see me next time she is here. I can’t explain all this in an email and I don’t want to ignore you. I will explain it to her and she can relay it to you.”
Okay, fine, I thought. I do appreciate the dialogue. Dianne took that meeting and actually met with Gil for almost 90 minutes on Monday, June 10th. It was during this meeting that Gil told Dianne about a transport that was set for that Saturday night, scheduled to have at least 10 Carson dogs going out on it and off to eventual safety. Gil complained about not having any help to load the transport, and Dianne immediately offered to do it. Gil told her, like he told me, how he relied on the volunteers to note the dog’s temperaments and personalities. Dianne made clear to him that she’s been doing that, and will continue to do that. He mentioned that a shelter worker supposedly walks the aisles every morning and looks at the kennel cards, noting if any dog barks at them while they do it. Dianne also let him know that she had placed a new “volunteer networking hold” on a dog named Ruby.
Ruby was another AMAZING dog that had thus far been consistently overlooked. An email was sent for the hold on 6/2, pending the temperament test being given to Ruby first–so that she could then be properly networked and so that Dianne would know the restrictions (if any) that would be placed upon the dog. Ruby had miraculously been at the shelter since the end of April and yet was never once temperament tested by the staff. Lieutenant Real emailed back saying “Your networking hold will begin tomorrow and end on 6/13/13.” There was a problem with that, as Ruby wasn’t even temperament tested yet! Lt. Real said he’d try to have it done on 6/3. It wasn’t. 4 days went by and Ruby still hadn’t been temperament tested. It was finally done on 6/7, after Dianne sent them another email to remind them to please do it. Ruby scored an “A” and was given the notes: “This is a dog that would make a great pet for most people. Highly adoptable for all types of families.” Ruby’s “volunteer networking hold” should have started at this time, and Dianne was under the realization that it had been adjusted. She even asked Gil about Ruby’s networking hold during the meeting on Monday. He told her that it should and would start from the time that she was temperament tested.
After she got home from her shift at the shelter she wrote Gil an email thanking him for taking the meeting and going over some of the other things that she spoke to him about. It was in this email that she reiterated all of these things again… Saying that she’d do “whatever it takes” to make sure that the 6/15 transport happens, providing him detailed notes on the dogs that she’s interacted with (in case he also wanted to note them in the computer system), and reminding him again that she has a “volunteer networking hold” on Ruby that runs through 6/17.
A portion of Gil’s response reads: “The notes below can go on the kennel card but we don’t make them part of their permanent record, unless observed by a staff member.” This directly contradicts a volunteer email that was sent out on 5/2 regarding “new procedures” pertaining to system “socializing notes.” Also, Gil notified Dianne that the transport for Saturday had been cancelled.
All of this becomes relevant, and the details highly important, as Ruby was killed at 8:30am Saturday morning. As in Saturday, June 15th. As in 3 days prior to Dianne’s “volunteer networking hold” coming to an end. We just found out mere hours ago. Dianne is crushed, as she always is, but more-so this time because she did everything (and more) that she was told to do. Making matters worse… Ruby had a foster home aligned and a potential rescue on board and ready to pull her. It would have very likely been done on Monday. Funds were continuing to be raised online and upwards of $550 had already been pledged for her. People were working hard behind the scenes and there is a lot that goes into making sure that a shelter dog doesn’t get pulled from the shelter only to be placed into another kennel (this time at a boarding facility). This is what the networking hold is supposed to represent, a guaranteed window, at least for that specific dog.
Thoughts firing in my head…
1) Gil tells us that the notes written on the kennel cards by volunteers is the main piece of information that the staff, too busy to get to know the dogs themselves, uses when it comes to formulating the euthanasia list. But yet kennel cards with notes are always disappearing, and dogs with wonderful notes are still being killed (my observations). And then days later he says that a staff member has to “observe” the behavior themselves before these kennel notes become legitimate and worthy of placement in the computer system. Um, but I thought the staff was too busy and you were relying on the volunteers to do this service for you? So the implication is that written notes on a kennel card really do not matter, unless the behavior is verified by a staff member that is admittedly too busy to verify them, even though Gil claimed just days earlier that a volunteer’s written notes were of utmost importance, even though they really aren’t. This cannot continue to be something that goes both ways whenever convenient.
2) A hold is created for Ruby, yet a temperament test is never done in correlation to the hold period. 4 days go by, the temperament test is finally done, but the hold period is evidently never adjusted? Not by the Lieutenant, not by Gil. Even though the Lieutenant was asked about it, and Gil was told about it twice. Gil even confirmed to Dianne that the hold starts when the dog is temperament tested, yet it was never done for Ruby.
3) Ruby gets an “A” on that eventual temperament test and is deemed “highly adoptable for all types of families.”
4) Ruby is then chosen for and given a “glamour shot” on 6/9 that should have bought her an additional 10 days of safety. “Glamour shots” are when a photographer affiliated with the shelter comes in and photographs certain (chosen) dogs that have been brought out of their kennels, with the goal of getting really good networking pictures.
5) The transport leaving on 6/15 that would have saved at least 10 Carson shelter dogs gets cancelled by Gil. Dianne’s request to help didn’t matter. I even told Dianne that I could find 10 people myself to come out and assist with this “loading” of animals. That was quickly shot down by Gil, likely for liability reasons and because these persons (myself included) wouldn’t have been officially trained in the ways of being a volunteer. So it’s essentially hiding behind technicalities instead of accepting help from the community. Dianne could have also banded together a few other volunteers, yet she was never given this option. And yet, Gil still found it appropriate to complain to Dianne about the lack of volunteer help, and ended up cancelling Carson’s inclusion on the transport for what was probably his definition of “lack of volunteer help.”
6) Ruby gets killed Saturday morning at 8:30am, an hour and a half before the shelter even opens for the weekend. Who kills on a Saturday morning? My God. This is conveniently the same day that the transport was scheduled to leave on, thus creating numerous empty cages, had Carson participated. Instead those 10 dogs remain and more kennels remain full. And Ruby is now dead. Dead, 6 days after getting a “glamour shot.” Dead, 72 hours before Dianne’s “volunteer networking hold” was supposed to realistically end. Dead, with a foster in waiting. Dead, with rescuers emotionally invested and scrambling to organize the best plan. All under the guise of a network hold that didn’t even hold true.
7) If my assumption holds weight and they, in hindsight, attempt to play dumb on the true and verified ending date of Ruby’s networking hold… Well, it gives even more insight into another chilling dynamic of the killing process. Not only do they not want to get to know the dogs, and make excuses for not getting to know them, and kill the many that never get a chance. But they finally got to know Ruby, have video evidence of her awesomeness, gave her at temperament test (which she passed with flying colors), gave her a “glamour shot” less than a week ago, and still killed her as soon they deemed her hold to have run out. It’s almost as if a buzzer went off and she was then executed. That’s how they’ve treated this situation. Ruby, the beautiful individual, didn’t seem to matter to any decision maker. It’s as if nothing about her mattered to them at all. That is so very wrong, at every level. (Did she fly under the radar, and did the hold finally put her on the shelter’s radar? That could explain why her website photograph lingered in the “lost” section for the entirety of her shelter impoundment.)
I don’t know. In my opinion this is apathy and mismanagement in action. The evidence about how this facility is run is all over my website, and this is just the latest example. Human error? Then that person needs fired. A beautiful dog is dead because someone who has a job to do didn’t do a simple task that is undoubtedly within their job description. A task that amounts to a few keystrokes and a few seconds of their time and energy… A small act, but one of utmost importance, especially if their goal is to indeed save lives. I mean, isn’t this the primary and most foundational aspect of their jobs? I’d think and hope so. Yet it continues to seem like there’s no ownership ever being taken over the decisions made by Gil Moreno or the decisions being made by others in his name. To me there’s no difference in those things, as he is the manager and should know what is going on under his roof. If you just can’t ever be bothered then you are unfit for command and there’s very few other ways to cut it.
How? Why? Is Dianne going to be blamed, yet again? And will she now be retaliated against for, God forbid, talking to her own boyfriend about this?
…Upon finding out that Ruby was killed Dianne sent a frantic email to Gil in search of some answers. Something, anything. The phone operator was offering no information. As you could imagine, it was emotional in tone and written by a genuinely stunned person. Gil actually responded to her within 30 minutes… “Let me get back to you once I look into what happened. I’m having log in issues, so I cant access my desktop from home.” No apology, no feeling of her pain, no acknowledgement of her sadness for Ruby. I mean, there was no humanity in his typed words at all. The desensitization of that moment speaks volumes to me. Not only is it apparent that so many prominent shelter-affiliated people are desensitized to the plight of shelter dogs, but further, they are also desensitized to the emotional connection that some of their best volunteers have to those shelter dogs. This is a massive flaw and not one that any shelter manager (or worker) should ever have.
It’s been brought to my attention that L.A. County DACC director Marcia Mayeda has started a new policy regarding dogs “who have bitten people or other dogs.” These dogs are now not allowed to be made available to the public, and further, no longer able to be saved by partnered rescue’s who are even willing to sign a liability waiver.
More importantly… How do they know that the dog has ever bitten a person or another dog? Does a surrendering owner’s admission suffice? Because if so, that’s simply the word of someone who’s chosen to abandon their dog. I know from seeing it with my own eyes that many people will often just make something up as to take the onus off of them as they are doing the surrendering. Per a recent conversation with one of my animal attorney friends, they’d deem a dog constituting a “legitimate exception” to the Hayden Act as one that’s had “multiple incidents” of dangerous or vicious behavior and that such behavior “must have been documented by animal control” prior to the animal being impounded.
So this question begs to be asked: How many dogs are being killed, being refused a chance at safety even when somebody wants them, because of an unsubstantiated claim made against them? If there is any truth to this new policy existing then at best it’s something that needs clear caveats attached, and at worst something that is being instituted illegally. It sounds like in many cases it would be a violation of the Hayden Act to me.
The immoral stuff being done at the San Bernardino City shelter just continues to happen. Atrocious killing aside, let’s focus on some very specific (and shoddy, shady, absurd) decisions that so often lead to that end…
This was posted today by Maria Sanchez. Please go there and read her testimony, and I will also try to break it down in my own way…
*Maria’s thread has since been “flagged” by someone on Facebook and removed. Not sure on what grounds. Probably no grounds, because that’s how Facebook rolls. You can reach a more PC-version of the new thread here.
First you have to understand how the San Bernardino City shelter operates. This is my interpretation of their policy document. Those strays coming in from Tuesday through Friday get a 6-day hold, are made available to be adopted on the 7th day and then killed on the 8th day. Those strays coming in on Saturday and Sunday get 1 less day. Those strays coming in on Monday get 2 less days! I’m left to assume that this is done because the shelter kills from Wednesday through Saturday. Owner surrenders (implied from the document) can either be made available immediately or killed immediately, based on how their temperament is assessed upon intake. I’m pretty proof positive that the killing portion of that is a direct violation of the Hayden Act.
Anyways, this sweet Pit Bull, now named Harrison and spoken about at her link, was “adopted out” over the phone on 6/1. His Pet Harbor link was then taken down and any other online networking was stopped because those advocating for him (like Maria) were given the impression that he was safely adopted. I can’t tell if the dog physically even left the shelter at all, or if he was simply held onsite for the phone adopter and placed in an area where the public could not see him. But apparently the phone adopter ended up giving the wrong ID# to the operator when adopting him over the phone, so it’s told as if this dog was actually adopted mistakenly. He is then “returned,” freshly neutered and all. Again, not sure if he ever left, or was just returned to the public floor of the shelter. That’s when Maria notices him again. She goes and requests his kennel card. She then notices that both his “intake” date and his “available” date now reflect 6/6. Maria tells a worker that if he came back on the 6th then his new available date should reflect the 13th. She requests that it be changed, the worker claims she updated it, Maria asks for a printed copy as proof and that is what you can see below.
Knowing the worker’s antics, she called later that night to make sure the new available date was still the 13th. Sure enough, it was changed back to the 6th. So the worker essentially attempted to pacify Maria with a false document, not thinking that she’d ever know the difference. Maria then contacted the shelter manager, Ryan Long, and attempted to discuss this with him directly. He claimed that the dog had already been held for its “stray hold” and that the available date would remain the 6th. Why this is important is because Harrison can now be killed, per their policy, as soon as yesterday. As I type this he is still alive, so please visit hismanythreads in an effort to further network Harrison to safety.
In what could be called their most callous, hateful move to date, shelter supervisors have declared that they will no longer allow staff or volunteers to contact rescues to save underage puppies or kittens dumped at the shelter without their mothers. If a rescue is present at the time the babies are impounded the rescue can take them, but if no rescue is there the puppies or kittens will be taken to the back and immediately killed.
No rescue coordination, no foster program for bottle babies, no innovation or care at any level. Just death. Again, Maria was actually onsite to witness the dumping of these babies and attempted to let Ryan Long know that she’d be immediately networking them for assistance…
Ryan told Maria not to bother; that she would be wasting her time. That’s when she learned of the new policy – and the deaths of the babies. Ryan and many of the other employees appear to be totally desensitized to the plights of the animals in the shelter. Perhaps staff members suffer from compassion fatigue as they seem to be without concern or care for the innocent lives they take each and every day.
And how about the killing of these 5 puppies a mere 2 hours and 17 minutes after this video was shot on 1/2/13. Wait for it… They were killed for having “parvo.” The puppies were obviously healthy, but even if they were sick, there they sat in general population. The 4 Pit Bull puppies were killed together in less than 1 minute. The Shepherd puppy was killed 2 minutes before they were. Hmm… Using “contagious disease” as an excuse to murder puppies days before they were even made available to the public… Haven’t heard that one before. Actually I have, which is atrocious in and of itself. This is most definitely being done (here and elsewhere) far more often than anyone wants to believe.
I also shot a video that addressed Ryan Long’s attempted retaliation towards Maria Sanchez back in January of this year. If you’d like to reach out and make contact with someone in regards to this type of continued conduct then please see below…
San Bernardino City Council: council@sbcity.org
Mayor Patrick Morris: morris_pat@sbcity.org
Chief of Police Robert Handy: handy_ro@sbcity.org (Police dept. oversees the city shelter)
Shelter manager Ryan Long: long_ry@sbcity.org
Above all else, it is my belief that if you are working in any field that involves the welfare of animals then you should be a compassionate person. This is a fundamental necessity, a mandatory trait that one must have. Being compassionate is not a saying that you can slap on a bumper sticker and then feel good about yourself in any genuine capacity. It is a way of being and a way of thinking, a consistent response that radiates from one’s heart.
I find it appalling that in the United States of America so many shelter “managers” continue to passively and dismissively allow so much of what is being done to be done in their names and under their watch. What are they managing exactly? Is it the sheltering of animals? Is it the engagement of community? Is it the brainstorming of programs? Is it the betterment of environment, both physical and mental? Or is it the killing of dogs? Is it the moving of bodies? Is it the fudging of numbers? Is it the handcuffing of allies? The initial statement from this paragraph could just as easily be applied to a rather large chunk of society as well. I realize and acknowledge that, and see these issues going hand in hand. One could lead to the solution of the other, and that goes in both directions. Yet no vision is ever shown, no faith is ever had, no attempt is ever made.
My heart hurts when individual dogs are treated as if they never mattered or existed. My heart hurts knowing that each has a unique personality and that that personality is never noted, or attempted to be seen or brought out, or attempted to be rounded in any positive way. My heart hurts when someone of “authority” in this realm hides behind things like “liability,” or “not enough time,” or “not enough money,” or “not enough resources.” How about not enough ambition? How about not enough work ethic? How about not enough integrity? How about not enough transparency? How about not enough interest in the lives that you were hired to actually give a damn about?
I’m tired. I’m tired of the same old invisible crutches being thrown out from the same old people who could easily learn how to walk if they just took a step. I’m tired of the same old people thinking that their actions wouldn’t make a world of difference for that 1, or 2, or 3 dogs that would very likely benefit from a strategical shift in direction, no matter how small. I’m tired of this unspoken screaming that says it is not in a manager’s job description to actually get to know the dogs that his or her facility houses. I’m tired of these manager’s not delegating tasks that are intended to make a positive difference. I’m tired of these manager’s not holding those underneath them accountable, or not taking an interest in what those people could then find out, at the behest of a busy manager, and then pass along to said manager in the interim. I’m tired of the emotional connection being cut at the nub. I’m tired of the emotional investment in one’s job being empty. I’m tired of morally bankrupt individuals being put into positions of influence as countless sweet and completely innocent souls routinely hang in the balance that that creates. I’m tired.
What I am speaking of is a dereliction of duty. If you, as a manager, disagree with the lot of what I’ve tried to express then I think that you, as a manager, are patently unqualified for your job.
Thousands of dogs die a day across the country. I want to focus on 3 that I knew. Maximus. Tigre. Lancelot. These are 3 dogs, no more important than any other nameless dog that may have died at this same facility, Carson; no less important than any dog fortunate enough to make it out. Little things matter. Effort matters. Interest matters. Thought matters. Intent matters. It all matters, and on no matter the scale. It all makes a difference for someone, for something, somewhere. God damn it, we are better than this.
I recorded observations in the honor of both Maximus and Tigre. I don’t want sympathy from someone that can’t even take 10 minutes out of their day to listen to, and ponder, the observations. This is important stuff that I am talking about. This is where a foundation is made. Are we continuing to promote the house of cards, or are we ever desiring to focus on those things that are, to whatever degree, actually within our control? That’s the definition of a root. There is injustice happening. I’m calling on people to give a damn, and to want to notice it. I’m calling on the manager of Carson, I’m calling on the managers elsewhere, I’m calling on my supporters, I’m calling on my readers, I’m calling on my haters, I’m calling on everyone to do a little more than just bring something in 1 ear and robotically pull it out the other…
And then onto Lancelot… The below video quickly sums up the “sheltering” system better than most of the stuff that I can ever say. In a little over 3 minutes it will show you what you might see if you breeze on by, shows you what you would see if you took the time, creates an emotional connection, hits you in the face with the harsh reality and then gives the impression of some retaliation to top it all off…
In closing, I don’t want anything other than the chance to ignite something within your heart or within your mind, or both. I’d definitely prefer the person whose heart and mind is interconnected and working in some form of harmony. Just the chance. If you think that I’m full of shit, fine. At least you took the time to come to that conclusion on your own. But if you think that I’m the opposite, make it worth all of our while. Be a voice. Multiply the information. Put your own spin on it. Better, be better than me. Be you. Engage. Be my partner, or somebody else’s partner, and let’s all have the courage to want to make a positive impact. Making even an incremental difference could mean the difference between life or death for any number of dogs. This is important stuff to the dog whose life might be saved. That’s all for now.
The Carson shelter attends very few offsite adoption events per year. One of the ones that they do seem to partially attend is the annual Best Friends Super Adoption event at the La Brea Tar Pits. This event runs for 3 days, Carson usually attends for 1. This year it took place this past Friday through Sunday. As this blog title states, the Carson shelter routinely disallows any Pit Bull-type dog from attending any offsite adoption event that they attend. It’s clear discrimination and they hide behind technicalities and the general public’s unawareness to achieve this “policy.” This has been going on for at least as long as I’ve been visiting this shelter (over 2 years now), and very likely far longer.
To my surprise a very docile Pit Bull-mix who had already passed her temperament test with an “A” was all set to go to this event on Sunday. This dog was then magically marked as being “sick” on Saturday night and then conveniently left behind come Sunday morning. Knowing this, I visited the shelter on Sunday, not only to document how many of the big dogs were left behind but to also spend some time with the alleged sick dog. As you can clearly see, she was not sick…
I’ll just go ahead and claim that this was an excuse given in order to block this dog from attending while still giving certain volunteers the illusion that the shelter staff were willing to take her, had she only been healthy. Maybe I’m wrong, but I doubt it.
Now fast forward to the event, and how the shelter actually fared. Of course every single dog that they took was actually adopted or rescued. Further, this event specifically aims to have rescue partners from all over come together at the end to make sure that every dog that every attending shelter chooses to bring ends up being rescued. The Carson shelter knows how this event functions, as they’ve attended before. I bring that up because “worst case scenario” for the staff, they allow a few Pit Bull-type dogs to go and they don’t end up being adopted by the public… The adoption event’s rescue setup is always there as a backup. The shelter knows this. So if they view Pit Bulls as “difficult to adopt out” dogs that “take up too much cage space” and are “most routinely killed,” then why not take a few, knowing that they’d at worst be rescued? Logical enough, right? But put all of that aside…
The dog that was supposed to be going would have absolutely been adopted straight out, no need for a rescue. That would have happened had she been allowed to go. Should the shelter have considered a few more? Of course, and I can think of 3 easy adoptions right off of the top of my head that would have been givens to be adopted had they been brought…
Bella, a 4-month-old Pit Bull-mix puppy, is happy and healthy and easily adoptable. She isn’t up for offsite adoption event consideration. Why? Because she’s part Pit Bull. And furthermore, oh, she’s probably not even temperament tested yet so that’s another excuse that will be predictably thrown out. Really? You need to temperament test this dog?
Diamond, a 4-month-old Pit Bull-mix puppy, is also happy and healthy and easily adoptable. Again, she isn’t up for offsite adoption event consideration. Why? Because she’s part Pit Bull. And furthermore, oh, she’s probably not even temperament tested yet so that’s another excuse that will be predictably thrown out.
Luna, a 11-month-old German Shepherd puppy, is also happy and healthy and easily adoptable. You don’t think she would have been snatched up by one of the many thousands of people that make it a point to visit this huge event?
All 4 of these pictured dogs would have been adopted before Sunday came to a close. No need for rescue. I’m not advocating for these specific dogs taking another dog’s spot, just simply pointing out that 1) Any dog called a “Pit Bull” by staff cannot go, and 2) The Carson shelter could have attended more than 1 day and ultimately saved double or triple the amount of dogs that they did.
So the “sick” dog who got an “A” on her temperament test, and Bella, and Diamond, and Luna; they all still sit inside of the Carson shelter. They each could potentially be killed for space or for some other God forsaken reason. As do all of the big dogs, most of which went unmentioned here and are in some way mixed with “Pit Bull.” They sit, and they wait. And this shelter continues opting not to attend (or create themselves) other offsite opportunities. And the few that they do attend, they themselves ban the Pit Bulls from attending. And then they claim that they can’t ever adopt them out. Well, they can’t do anything when they haven’t put the effort into anything, and when they haven’t ceased at subtly (and blatantly) villainizing the dogs at every turn.
Here’s a video of all of the big dogs that were left behind on Sunday. The majority of which are Pit Bulls and would never be considered for offsite adoption event attendance due to current Carson shelter “policy.”
I guess you could call the below video a greatest hits from the latest Rancho City Council meeting that took place on Wednesday. As you can tell from the tone of my voice, I am angry about this. I should probably dial it back a few notches, but goodness, I can’t get beyond the basic and fundamental wrongness of axing your volunteers. On top of that, how these fired volunteers have shown such persistence in going back and going back and going back, only to have the Council members blankly stare back at them with no action ever deemed necessary. It’s all just wrong. The fired volunteers are all so polite, too. How can this be happening to them? It’s infuriating. I think I take it so hard because I KNOW that this is going on at so many other shelters around this country, and that very little is being done about it. Watching myself back I hope that I’m not hurting their cause, and instead, adding another dynamic to it. Who knows. All I do know is that I’m not good at hiding my disdain for something that seems so calculated, so in lockstep from the shelter management to the City Council. But anyways, these public comments were awesome and Mrs. Fincher should be thoroughly embarrassed.
And then they finally opted to at least acknowledge the fact that this issue isn’t going away, and address it publicly for the first time. John Gillison tap dances around some of the generic questions that he was asked by the Council members, but listen to Councilman William Alexander at 9:25… Someone is listening. It seems that he’s putting the rest of his colleagues on notice that he also believes that something is in fact wrong with all of this.
And here’s the great public comments from mid-April’s City Council meeting…
Yesterday while photographing the dogs at the Carson shelter I personally counted 43 empty kennels onsite. This is out of a total of 144 publicly displayed kennels, 48 runs x 3 buildings. And yet dogs are always dying there! Why? Why are they giving killing a thought with essentially a third of their shelter space free?
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!
