Tag Archives: No Kill Nation

PETA Promotes Cruelty and Killing in Lake County, Florida, and Elsewhere

advocates across the nation were thrilled when Lake County, Florida Commissioners recently announced plans totransition the municipal animal shelter to No Kill. Naturally, people who care about animals are thrilled, especially since local advocates in that community have painted a pretty terrible picture of the animal care at that facility. Look at the video below, for example, from a Lake County animal advocate to get a sense of where things have been there.
The video above does not appear to be an isolated case. Advocates there also state that the way the so-called “feral” cats are currently handled is downright inhumane. Any cat deemed feral, even though it might be a terrified house pet, is put, into a group into dog kennels in a noisy room just off the main dog ward. There, the cats are held, according to local rescue groups, terrified, for 24 hours and then killed. The fact that the County Commissioners have committed to taking over the shelter, and reforming it, with the help of No Kill advocates, should be seen, therefore, as nothing but great news. But, true to form, for the attention-seekers at the so-called animal rights organization known as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), the exciting announcement was an opportunity to stir up trouble to try to derail the reform effort.
Inan article in the Daily Commercial, PETA is quoted making multiple false and derogatory statements about No Kill, while advocating for mandatory spay/neuter (MSN) laws.
Before saying more, we have to be perfectly clear: low-cost and no-cost spay/neuter programs are a critical component of theNo Kill Equation. Mandatory spay/neuter laws, however, are not, because they do far more damage than good.
What many people have thought of as “pet overpopulation” over the years has become to be better described as “shelter overpopulation.” When shelters take in animals they don’t need to take in, and when they also fail to adopt sufficient numbers of animals, or release them to rescue, or return them to their owners, overcrowding in the shelter is the natural byproduct. This dynamic is well explained in this article by Mike Fry titledPet Overpopulation: Myth, Meme and Zeitgeist.
What MSN laws do is give animal control yet another reason to seize or impound animals, leading toincreasedshelter intake.At the same time, these laws make it more difficult for people to reclaim their pets, because they need to pay the costs of spaying or neutering in addition to the costs of impoundment, etc. That results inreducing live outcomes. Increasing intake and reducing live outcomes leads to increased killing, not less.
It is, however, understandable when people outside the field of animal welfare don’t immediately understand the link between MSN and increased killing in shelters. Animal advocates have been, after all, reflexively shouting “spay/neuter” whenever the topic of killing in animal shelters comes up. That is, therefore, what our elected officials hear and are likely to focus on, when people in their communities complain about animals being killed in shelters.
MSN laws are, at their core, a way of shifting responsibility for failed shelter policies and practices from the shelters themselves to the pet owning public. The underlying message really is, “If you people would just spay or neuter your pets, we would not have to kill any.” Not only is that a way of deflecting from failed shelter operations, MSN has never been effective at ending killing in animal shelters.The communitiesthat have ended the killing of healthy or treatable have done so by changing their shelter protocols and embracingNo Kill programs, not by further punishing pet owners.
While it is understandable that County Commissioners might not understand that initially, there is no excuse for PETA to continue promoting MSN, while also actively working against important reforms at this and other shelters around the USA.
PETA, for shame.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Animal Ark: Finding the Truth Among The Lies

A couple of weeks ago, picked up on and shareda video of a dog being “trained”at Animal Ark. When we say “trained” we mean “pinned, choked and held to the ground on his back while he kicks and vocalizes in distress.”
That original reportincluded some other damning information about Animal Ark under its new leadership, like the fact that in order to get and hold control of the organization, the new Board canceled Lifetime Memberships (Animal Ark’s best donors) to keep them from voting against this Board and how that seems to have resulted in a loss of support for the once beloved shelter in Hastings, MN, because they have been forced to close the shelter two days a week, when they used to be open seven days a week. We asked people to contact the Board of Animal Ark to voice your displeasure. Apparently, they heard you and published a response on their web site, which we will get into in a bit.
The same day Animal Ark published their response to our story, our friends atFix Animal Arkpublished ablistering review of Animal Ark’s 2015 IRS Form 990. The shorter version goes something like this:
Though Animal Ark has yet to publish their detailed financial report for their donors/members, as is required by the organization’s By Laws (when people have asked, their response has been simply that the information is “unavailable”). In spite of this, Fix Animal Ark was able to obtain a copy of theirIRS Form 990, which was filed late and which had yet to be published anywhere. It shows that while Animal Ark’s new leadership canceled or gutted key programs benefiting animals and slashed staff positions (cutting $220,000 from payroll alone), their actual spending went up, not down. At the same time, income dropped to the lowest it has been in 15 years, resulting in a massive deficit of over $357,000 for 2015. It is not hard to figure out that canceling the memberships of their top donors, and other mismanagement by the Board had to have had a negative financial impact. What is unknown is where all of that money went. The IRS Form 990 does not itemize their expenses by programs or services.
To put the bleak picture painted by Animal Ark’s IRS Form 990 for 2015 into focus, we call your attention to one specific line item:

Animal Ark began the year with $309,515 in unrestricted net assets (the first number in the image above). They ended the year with -$46,388 (the second number above).
The desperate financial pickle this new leadership created at Animal Ark adds important perspective to Animal Ark’s response to our original story. They try to paint the changes they have been making as good, strong and benefiting animals. Yet, all evidence clearly says otherwise.
Fix Animal Ark wrote their own verydetailed response to Animal Ark’s statements, which prove, in our view, that Animal Ark continues lying to their members and donors about all kinds of things, and refuses to take any responsibility for the havoc they have brought to the once cherished animal shelter. We won’t repeat all of their points here. You shouldgo read them for yourself.
We do, however, want to emphasize a key point: Animal Ark claims that the video of Gomer being  “trained” was taken “out of context.” This is untrue. When we first saw the video, it was published on Animal Ark’s own Facebook page. It was being shared by current and former staff and volunteers who were expressing outrage over the treatment of this poor dog, and understandably so. When we reported the story, we took the video in its entirety and showed the full four minutes of it, including the part where you can clearly hear the trainer asking, “should we rope him?”
We understand that there are different training methodologies use by different kinds of trainers. We understand that while the sort of punishment/dominance-based techniques demonstrated in the video have been widely discredited by animal behaviorists, many people do still use them. If that is the kind of training the new leadership at Animal Ark wants to get behind, they should be honest about it and state their case about why they do, when there are other approaches that are far more humane, rather than pretending that we can’t all see exactly what is going on in the video, pinning and choking a dog into submission. A little honesty and integrity does not seem to me much to ask.
Here is the video again for your review:
Take Action!
If you are as upset about this as we are, help do something about it. Here are some easy things you can do to help
Contact Animal Ark and demand a change in leadership
Phone: (651) 772-8983 ext 206
Email: Sbell@animalarkMN.org, audrey.brick@comcast.net, elizabeth@eporterlaw.com, lauraksyring@gmail.com
Also, please consider making a donation to. We are setting up a fund to help Fix Animal Ark. Simply make a comment that your donation is going to that fund and we will apply it accordingly.
Thanks in advance. Please help spread the news by sharing this story.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Shelter Punishes Dogs for Their Own Neglect

Gomer, the dog being choked and  pinned in the images above was simply over-stimulated after being neglected in a kennel for more than a year. Rather than providing him exercise and needed socialization the “leadership” at the shelter decided that Gomer was “aggressive” and needed “training.”
For years, Animal Ark in Hastings was considered an industry leader in the world of animal sheltering. They not only focused their attention on saving the animals that were most at-risk, they also celebrated nearly 100% save rates for those same animals.
Unfortunately, two years ago, following a hostile takeover of the Animal Ark Board, all of that changed.
To accomplish the takeover, the incoming board needed to keep Animal Ark’s largest donors from voting at the annual meeting, so, they refused to count mail-in votes and arbitrarily nullified lifetime memberships.
Lifetime members were those who paid for a $1,000 lifetime membership. They represented Animal Ark’s top donors and the members who most supported the former leadership. During the time these lifetime memberships were sold, Steve Bell was the Chair of the Membership Committee.

Actual membership form from when Steve Bell was the membership chair at Animal Ark a few years ago.
In spite of that, at the January 2015 membership meeting, Bell and the new Board not only canceled all of those lifetime memberships, they hired an off-duty police officer to keep these members/donors out of the Annual Meeting to keep them from voting for Board positions.
The result of this, and other mismanagement, has been apparent, dramatic financial woes at the once respected animal shelter. They ended up closing their St. Paul adoption center and Thrift Store. Then, they began cutting the Hastings shelter operating hours, making it harder for people to come adopt pets. Unsurprisingly, the result has been a dramatic drop in adoptions. In the entire 3rd quarter of 2016, Animal Ark reported adopting only 21 dogs.
Even more troubling: When they announced the first cut to the shelter hours, by closing on Mondays, they also let their volunteers know that they would no longer be welcome to come walk dogs or socialize cats on those days, even though there were animal care staff in the building on those days who could have let the volunteers in. Here is the actual Facebook post Animal Ark made about the new hours:

On March 6 Animal Ark informed their volunteers they were closing on Mondays
and that the volunteers could not come walk dogs those days.
Animal Ark later announced they would also be closed on Tuesdays.

In other words, this new hostile management reduced adoptions, meaning dogs would remain in the shelter longer. They also reduced the amount of time dogs would spend outside their kennels being exercised and socialized by volunteers.
This new leadership also gutted or canceled many of their most progressive programs, including Doggie Play Groups (a video of which is on the right during a much happier time at Animal Ark), and other innovative activities,like biking with shelter dogs, that helped enrich the daily lives of dogs at the shelter.
With limited exercise or socialization, and with volunteers having reduced access to walk dogs, and with dogs housed in the shelter much longer, due to reduced adoptions, is it any wonder that some dogs would become anxious, and easily over-stimulated when taken out of their kennels?
Unfortunately, rather than fixing everything they broke, by giving dogs more outdoor play and socialization time, the new “leadership” at Animal Ark decided they needed to raise money to bring in a “trainer” to try to “correct” the natural behavior the dogs were displaying from being cooped up in their kennels too much. Then, as if to prove they could not do anything right, they hired a trainer whose techniques appear to be based in dominance/punishment methodologies, that have been widely discredited by credentialed behaviorists.
Before going farther, we need to make a couple of important points:
You cannot possibly train a dog who is stimulated beyond the point where they can reasonably be expected to pay attention.You should not punish a dog for being stimulated when you take them out of a kennel in which they have been cooped up for an extended period of time, without first letting them blow off a lot of steam.
In spite of these obvious facts, Animal Ark paid a trainer to come and “teach these dogs a lesson.” They then recorded a session with a dog named Gomer and posted it on their own Facebook page as an example of their um… expertise?Here is the video.
While they pin and choke Gomer, you can hear the trainer ask, at one point, “should we rope him?” The punishment… er… “training session” goes on for more than four minutes.
In response to this video, a substantial outcry has been made from experienced trainers, some of whom are equating this to animal abuse. It is hard to argue with that position. First, the organization locks dogs like Gomer up in kennels for extended periods. They reduce their exercise and socialization time. Then, they punish and discipline the dogs for the behavior the humans created in them.
To make matters worse, Animal Ark then sent a letter to those complaining. You can read it.
As if they were unaware that people complaining about the video had actually watched the video, the new “leadership” at Animal Ark only made things worse by writing things like the following:
“The trainer in the video weighs approximately 100 pounds and is only using her finger tips to barely touch the dog. She is not restraining him in any way.”
“Gomer (the dog in the video) often rolls on his back in an effort to control the handler.”
They also say that Gomer is both human and dog aggressive. And, isn’t that obvious? Don’t you know that aggressive dogs often roll on their backs in order to attack or control you?
Needless-to-say, the letter only made things worse, with many commenters on Facebook expressing this sort of response.

Though, you won’t find comments like that on the Animal Ark Facebook page. They have been busy deleting comments and banning users ever since.
Lest you believe Gomer is really dog aggressive (we believe the video proves he is not human aggressive, because if he was, that trainer would have gotten bit) here is a video of him before Animal Ark canceled Doggie Play Groups. Notice that the dog he is playing with, Peaches, mounts him repeatedly with no negative response.
Take Action!
If you are as upset about this as we are, help do something about it. Here are some easy things you can do to helpFix Animal Ark.
Contact Animal Ark and demand a change in leadership
Phone: (651) 772-8983 ext 206
Email: Sbell@animalarkMN.org, audrey.brick@comcast.net, elizabeth@eporterlaw.com, lauraksyring@gmail.com
Also, please consider making a donation toNo Kill Nation. We are setting up a fund to help Fix Animal Ark. Simply make a comment that your donation is going to that fund and we will apply it accordingly.
Thanks in advance. Please help spread the news by sharing this story.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

No Kill Nation Holiday Gift Guide

It is hard to believe that 2016 is almost over, and that the holiday season is upon us again! This year, we are making it easier than ever for you to make the holidays happy for homeless pets and the animal lovers on your holiday shopping lists. We have put together this handy shopping guide that features animal-friendly products your family and friends will love, and the proceeds go to different charities working to save shelter pets. So, let the shopping begin!
From the NationOnline Store:

All orders over $75 willget a FREE Redemption DVD(while supplies last)! Buy great stuff for the people you love and keep the DVD as a gift for yourself, or share it as a gift. Either way, it’s a great deal.
Plus:T-shirts are on sale for 50% offtill January 1. In other words, you can stock up on quality shirts at bargain prices, and get a FREE DVD besides,Start shopping now!
You won’t find a deal as good as that any time soon. All of the proceeds help to do our important education and advocacy work all over the United States.

A No Kill Nation Bag Full of No Kill Nation Swag
A perfect gift for the No Kill advocate. A beautiful No Kill Nation Tote Bag filled with 5 assorted t-shirts, decals and bumper sticker,a $120 value, for only $65.
Be sure to specify desired shirt size before check out, then give the whole swag bag as a gift, or split it up into multiple gifts.
That’s a deal that’s hard to beat.Get yours now.
From Elsewhere on the Web:
Share a bottle and share out vision… delicious, organic and vegan wine fromNo Kill Vineyards

This collection of spectacular wines is hand-crafted in Chile. Each variety includes a special message about the No Kill movement. They are available individually or in special collectors sets. They are perfect as gifts, to serve at holiday parties or to enjoy yourself. From the surprisingly spicy Gatito Negro, a deep red with a full, round flavor to the sweet Luv-A-Bull Chardonnay, there is something for every pallet. Proceeds benefit No Kill Nation andJust One Day, a national day of No Kill in shelters across the USA.
Redemption Available Steaming at Amazon.com

If you or anyone you know has not yet seen the award-winning documentary film, Redemption: The No Kill Revolution in America, It isstreaming on Amazon.com for only $1.99. And, while it might not seem like a holiday movie, we disagree. Think one part “It’s a Wonderful Life” and one part “Miracle on 34th Street,” except that it’s better, because it’s true.
Redemption tells the real story of animal advocates who have reformed their animal shelters in communities across the USA that are now saving all healthy and treatable pets. Not only is Redemption an inspiring story, it is one you can share with fellow animal advocates to help them lean how this same life-saving can happen in your own community.
So, pop some popcorn and break out a bottle of wine from No Kill Vineyards and enjoy the inspiration!
Sponsor a Pet at a No Kill Shelter or Rescue
One very fun way to help animals in shelters is to sponsor them. Two of our favorite No Kill offer offer this on their web sites.Humane Society of Fremont Countyhas one of the highest save rates in the nation for an open-admission animal shelter.Kentucky Pets Aliveis a rescue group that specializes in saving those animals needing extra medical attention. You can sponsor pets at either of these charities for your business, or as a gift to someone on your holiday gift list, or for yourself. It is really easy. To make it even easier, we have even included some featured pets from their web sites for you to look at. To sponsor a pet, all you have to do is click the “Sponsor” link on the pets shown below. The technology is provided byNo Kill LearningandRescueSuite Software. But, your sponsorship money goes 100% directly to the charity caring for these pets.
Featured pets from HSFC – Keep watching and more pets will appear below:
Featured pets from KPA – Keep watching and more pets will appear below:

If you are still looking for gift ideas, here are a few more:
Consider buying some consulting time withNo Kill Learningfor a shelter or rescue group you support, to help them save more lives in increase their fundraising.
Also, check outthese great gift ideasassembled by our friends over at Paws4Change.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Attempts to Muzzle No Kill Advocates Abusive and Illegal

Note: The muzzle on the puppy in the above photo was added digitally. We would never do that to a puppy.
As efforts around the USA continue gaining momentum, the old, regressive establishment is sinking lower in their efforts to muzzle No Kill advocates. In some cases their actions are simply disturbing and arguably Un-American. In other cases, they are violations of federal law.
Before we get into the details we will say that it is clear that some people are so afraid of No Kill they find the mere use of the term frightening. To a degree, this is understandable. Animal shelters have – for decades – been getting away with putting out glossy, animal-friendly marketing materials, while raking in millions of dollars in donations and quietly killing and disposing of animals en mass, sometimes even the majority of the animals they supposedly “care for.”
In the context of that disturbinghistory, the No Kill Movement has brought much to the table. Most importantly, it has definitively proven that the killing of healthy or treatable animals in animal shelters is optional. The response to this news from animal organizations has followed two basic paths. The path less traveled, so to speak, has been a celebration of the news that there is an alternative to killing. Shelters who followed that path quickly began implementing theNo Kill programsthat eliminate the need for shelters to kill. While this has been the path less traveled, it has still resulted in a rapid increase in the number ofentire communitieswhere all of the shelters are now saving at least 90% of the animals they see. Naturally, that is great news for homeless pets in those communities, because they are now guaranteed to receive the care and comfort they deserve if they end up in a shelter.
Unfortunately, there is a path more commonly followed by shelters: to just keep doing what they were doing; to avoid change; and, in some cases, to shoot the messenger. Some of these agencies are so afraid of change that they have labeled the mere use of the term “No Kill” to be offensive or divisive. Some take it a step beyond that and use abusive or coercive means to stop people from even uttering the words “No Kill.”
One of the key founding ideas of the United States was freedom of speech, which was included in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, and which remains a core principle today. In that light, it would seem Un-American and coercive if an animal sheltering group forbid its members from uttering the words “No Kill,” right?
Try telling that to Metro Denver Animal Welfare Alliance (MDAWA), whose website clearly displays the words:

“No kill,” an emotion-laden term for which there is no universally-accepted definition, is never used by MDAWA members.
Before getting into the other problems with this policy it has to be pointed out that there is a universal definition of No Kill. It simply means not ending the life of pets that are healthy or that have treatable or manageable medical or behavioral issues. No Kill supports the humane euthanasia of terminal and suffering animals, or seriously dangerous dogs that cannot be placed in society. The definition is pretty straight-forward, practical and easy to understand. The problem with MDAWA’s position is more problematic than that, however, because they are overtly dictating to their members what language they may or may not use.At best this could be described as Un-American because it flies in the face of people’s First Amendment right to free speech. However, when municipal government agencies are involved in these activities their behavior is a violation of Federal law, because it is illegal for a government agency to do anything to infringe the Constitutional rights of citizens. It may also be a violation of law for any private organization that receives funding from a government agency.
Constitutional law makes it more than problematic for municipalities, like the Cities of Denver and Aurora or Adams County, who are members of MDAWA and who are, therefore, promoting this violation of the First Amendment. That also applies to any other member of MDAWA who receives any funds from a government agency. All of them could be vulnerable to lawsuits in federal court for violations of Constitutional law.
Some animal organizations take the notion of censorship even farther. Consider the Lake County, Florida Sheriff’s Office (LCFSO): They have recently been accused of banning people from their Facebook page, and deleting their comments, for asking somesimple questionsabout a recent report, published by LCFSO about the animal outcomes at the animal shelter LCFSO runs.
In short, the numbers published by LCFSO do not add up. Not at all. They report tremendous save rates. But, if you do the actual math using the base numbers in the report they provided, you end up with a pathetic Live Release Rate (LRR) of only 60%. Apparently, however, if you even so much as ask them on Facebook to explain why their own math does not add up, your comment is deleted and you are blocked from posting any more comments. How can you see that as anything other than the Sheriff’s office punishing people for exercising their First Amendment rights, and doing so only for the purpose of covering their own hind ends?
As bad as all that is, the efforts to muzzle No Kill advocates gets even worse and extends all the way to withholding funds needed for animals if an animal shelter so much as utters the words “No Kill.”
We recently learned that theHumane Society of Fremont County(HSFC) was approved to receive a grant from theAnimal Assistance Foundation, whose website includes language disparaging anyone who uses the term “No Kill.” Reportedly, when the electronic grant approval came from AAF, it included a checkbox HSFC needed to mark, indicating they would not use the term “No Kill.” Reportedly, HSFC refused to be manipulated in that way, did not accept the terms of the grant, and, therefore, did not get the money. Below is an image from that portion of the AAF Grant Acceptance letter:

Shame on AAF. Are theythatafraid of open, honest discussion? Really? They have to dictate which words people are allowed to use? Are, they that willing to withhold money from animals in need in order to suppress open discussion? How can anyone see that as anything other than abusive?
Humane Society of Fremont County, it is worth pointing out, is an “open admission” animal shelter that provides impound services for their community and which maintains one of thehighest, verified save ratesof any open admission shelter in the nation: 97%. If any shelter deserves funding for their efforts to help animals, they do.
In the end, what everyone working to muzzle No Kill advocates should know is this: their efforts to suppress our voices will never succeed. The harder they try, the more overt their abusive behavior becomes.
If you agree, consider making a donation toHumane Society of Fremont Countyto help make up for the grant they lost simply because they refused to be bullied.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Animal Welfare Con Artists and The Damage They Do

In our last two blog posts, we discussed some of the con artists that operate in the field of animal welfare. In our most recent writing, we talked about PETA, and how, after stealing andkilling a family’s pet Chihuahua, they had the audacity toargue in courtthat their behavior was not outrageous and thatthe dog was worthless. As shocking as that may be, it was not an isolated case for the so-called animal rights organization that may be more aptly referred toas a pet slaughter house. The same day PETA stole and killed the Chihuahua named Maya, they also took and killed several other dogs from the same neighborhood. And, they have been doing things like thatfor a very long time. While operating a death camp, PETA has conned the American public out of millions of dollars annually under the guise of fighting for animals that have no voice.
In the world of animal welfare con artists, PETA might be one of the worst, but they are by no means alone. In fact, it could be easily argued that a large percentage of America’s animal shelters have been operating in a similar fashion for a couple of hundred years. They profess to exist to shelter and protect animals (hence why they are called “animal shelters”), yet have been killing millions of healthy and treatable pets every year, while refusing to dothe things that would save them. There is, unfortunately, an entire category of con artist made up of organizations that actively take in and kill healthy pets while pretending to be the saviors of those same animals. But, the conning of animal lovers does not stop there. There is another category of people and organizations that defend the killing and conning.
We also recentlywrote abouta keyboard advocate and blogger named Susan Houser who consistently defends poorly performing animal shelters while criticizing No Kill advocates, all the while claiming to be a No Kill advocate herself. Since we wrotethe last piece about her,she has been at it again. This time she inserted herself into a fight that has broken out in Moore County, North Carolina after they hired a new shelter director, who promptly locked all of the volunteers out of the building, with some County officials comparing volunteers to ISIS and threatening to “get out of the animal sheltering business” entirely.
In this fight, whose side do you believe an animal advocate would take – the side of the County that is shutting volunteers out of the shelter, even though the shelter has an abysmal save rate of 44% for cats and 77% for dogs, or the side of the volunteers who are observing failures and working to improve operations? If you have ever followed Houser’s blog, you will not be surprised to learn that she puts the blame for the fight on No Kill advocates. She even went so far as to describe the comparison between volunteers and ISIS as “very plain language.” Note: she did NOT call it ridiculous, absurd, outrageous, melodramatic, egregious, or any number of other things it should have been called. No. She called it “very plain language.”
Like an enabling co-dependent spouse of a child abuser she says the advocates are responsible if the County closes the shelter because of their complaining. It is like she is saying, “You see, Billy, if you just keep your head down and your mouth shut, Mommy won’t have to beat you any more.”
In writing these things, Houser gives her tacit approval of Moore County officials continuing their poor performance and abusive behavior.

The New Jersey Animal Observer addressed  Houser’s recent blog very well inthis Facebook post. They wrote:
“This blogger’s attempt to defend poorly performing municipal shelters and attack no kill advocates makes no sense in the real world. Local governments serve the people who elect them and should implement policies their voters want unless those things would violate the US Constitution.”
Very well-said.
And, speaking of New Jersey, another on our list of “great pretenders”, an organization called Target Zero (previously called Target Zero Institute, and previously called First Coast No More Homeless Pets), reportedlywrote on Facebookthat Cory Booker should “reduce the ridiculously long stray hold in New Jersey.”
Beyond a doubt, shortening the period shelters must hold stray pets harms animals, at least according toa growing number of lost and found pet experts. Yet, here is an agency professing to be working toward No Kill (or “Zero” kill, in their lexicon) that is working to make it easier for shelters to kill animals faster. Naturally, that is not how they sell their position. What they do say is, at best, a lie of omission. They, and some of their “partners” have advocated shortened stray hold periods by claiming that animal shelters should not have to wait so long before adopting pets into new homes. They fail to say that these shortened periods also allow shelters to kill animals faster, and give familieslesstime to try to find their lost pets, which are critical factors to leave out of an important discussion such as that.
That was a tactic we first saw deployed byBest Friends Animal Society when they successfully lobbied for shortened stray hold periods in Wisconsin. Animal advocates nationally chastised them for this effort and since then Best Friends has been relatively quiet on this topic. Now, all of a sudden, Target Zero (or Target Zero Institute, or First Coast No More Homeless Pets) is using the same argument in another state. It is worth pointing out that Target Zero is run by the former head of animal control in Miami-Dade County, where she never managed to save more than 50% of the animals in her care. In light of that, it is a bit confusing why an agency like Best Friends would “partner” and share such damaging language with an agency like First Coast No More Homeless Pets, Target Zero, or whatever they happen to be calling themselves today. That is a question we will explore in more detail in our next installment of The Latest Cons. Stay tuned.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Animal Welfare Con Artists and The Damage They Do

In our last two blog posts, we discussed some of the con artists that operate in the field of animal welfare. In our most recent writing, we talked about PETA, and how, after stealing andkilling a family’s pet Chihuahua, they had the audacity toargue in courtthat their behavior was not outrageous and thatthe dog was worthless. As shocking as that may be, it was not an isolated case for the so-called animal rights organization that may be more aptly referred toas a pet slaughter house. The same day PETA stole and killed the Chihuahua named Maya, they also took and killed several other dogs from the same neighborhood. And, they have been doing things like thatfor a very long time. While operating a death camp, PETA has conned the American public out of millions of dollars annually under the guise of fighting for animals that have no voice.
In the world of animal welfare con artists, PETA might be one of the worst, but they are by no means alone. In fact, it could be easily argued that a large percentage of America’s animal shelters have been operating in a similar fashion for a couple of hundred years. They profess to exist to shelter and protect animals (hence why they are called “animal shelters”), yet have been killing millions of healthy and treatable pets every year, while refusing to dothe things that would save them. There is, unfortunately, an entire category of con artist made up of organizations that actively take in and kill healthy pets while pretending to be the saviors of those same animals. But, the conning of animal lovers does not stop there. There is another category of people and organizations that defend the killing and conning.
We also recentlywrote abouta keyboard advocate and blogger named Susan Houser who consistently defends poorly performing animal shelters while criticizing No Kill advocates, all the while claiming to be a No Kill advocate herself. Since we wrotethe last piece about her,she has been at it again. This time she inserted herself into a fight that has broken out in Moore County, North Carolina after they hired a new shelter director, who promptly locked all of the volunteers out of the building, with some County officials comparing volunteers to ISIS and threatening to “get out of the animal sheltering business” entirely.
In this fight, whose side do you believe an animal advocate would take – the side of the County that is shutting volunteers out of the shelter, even though the shelter has an abysmal save rate of 44% for cats and 77% for dogs, or the side of the volunteers who are observing failures and working to improve operations? If you have ever followed Houser’s blog, you will not be surprised to learn that she puts the blame for the fight on No Kill advocates. She even went so far as to describe the comparison between volunteers and ISIS as “very plain language.” Note: she did NOT call it ridiculous, absurd, outrageous, melodramatic, egregious, or any number of other things it should have been called. No. She called it “very plain language.”
Like an enabling co-dependent spouse of a child abuser she says the advocates are responsible if the County closes the shelter because of their complaining. It is like she is saying, “You see, Billy, if you just keep your head down and your mouth shut, Mommy won’t have to beat you any more.”
In writing these things, Houser gives her tacit approval of Moore County officials continuing their poor performance and abusive behavior.

The New Jersey Animal Observer addressed  Houser’s recent blog very well inthis Facebook post. They wrote:
“This blogger’s attempt to defend poorly performing municipal shelters and attack no kill advocates makes no sense in the real world. Local governments serve the people who elect them and should implement policies their voters want unless those things would violate the US Constitution.”
Very well-said.
And, speaking of New Jersey, another on our list of “great pretenders”, an organization called Target Zero (previously called Target Zero Institute, and previously called First Coast No More Homeless Pets), reportedlywrote on Facebookthat Cory Booker should “reduce the ridiculously long stray hold in New Jersey.”
Beyond a doubt, shortening the period shelters must hold stray pets harms animals, at least according toa growing number of lost and found pet experts. Yet, here is an agency professing to be working toward No Kill (or “Zero” kill, in their lexicon) that is working to make it easier for shelters to kill animals faster. Naturally, that is not how they sell their position. What they do say is, at best, a lie of omission. They, and some of their “partners” have advocated shortened stray hold periods by claiming that animal shelters should not have to wait so long before adopting pets into new homes. They fail to say that these shortened periods also allow shelters to kill animals faster, and give familieslesstime to try to find their lost pets, which are critical factors to leave out of an important discussion such as that.
That was a tactic we first saw deployed byBest Friends Animal Society when they successfully lobbied for shortened stray hold periods in Wisconsin. Animal advocates nationally chastised them for this effort and since then Best Friends has been relatively quiet on this topic. Now, all of a sudden, Target Zero (or Target Zero Institute, or First Coast No More Homeless Pets) is using the same argument in another state. It is worth pointing out that Target Zero is run by the former head of animal control in Miami-Dade County, where she never managed to save more than 50% of the animals in her care. In light of that, it is a bit confusing why an agency like Best Friends would “partner” and share such damaging language with an agency like First Coast No More Homeless Pets, Target Zero, or whatever they happen to be calling themselves today. That is a question we will explore in more detail in our next installment of The Latest Cons. Stay tuned.
Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

The Slow Road to No Kill Costs Lives

  Looking back over the past decade of animal sheltering in the Twin Cities area in Minnesota is both inspiring and shocking, in a kind of depressing way. The inspiring news is that when I began working to save animals here, considerably more than 10 years ago, shelters in the area were annually killing more than 20,000 dogs and cats. The “shelters” were NOT shelters in any interpretation of the word. At that time, a pet was more likely to be killed in a “shelter” than it was to find a new home.

Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Open Minds and Hard Work Bring Unprecidented Success to Minnesota Shelters

      When Vicki Davis, Executive Director at Tri-County Humane Society in St. Cloud, Minnesota, began working in animal sheltering – about three decades ago – there was only one known No Kill shelter in the state. Furthermore, the conventional “wisdom” in the field of animal sheltering (and that put forward by every major animal rights or animal welfare organization) was that there were too many pets in the USA, not enough homes for them. As a result, they believed, shelters “had to” kill a

Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by:

Pet Overpopulation: Myth, Meme and Zeitgeist

Myth: Noun – A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology Meme: Noun – A unit of cultural information, such as a cultural practice or idea, that is transmitted verbally or by repeated action from one mind to another Zeitgeist: Noun – The spirit of the time; the taste and outlook characteristic of a period or generation In 2005 a grotesque news story broke about People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Two employees for the national animal rights group were

Original Link: POST From the Blog of No Kill Nation Posted by: