Congratulations on Getting Everything Wrong

This recent article in L.A. Weekly starts off with a terrible title and goes downhill from there:

Bad Dogs Die in L.A.’s Pound

Are they really so “bad” that they must be killed?  According to whom?  What about the “good” dogs – what happens to them?

Regarding manager Brenda Barnette who has reportedly driven some volunteers away from the pound:

“From the beginning, the people engaged in animal issues were deeply divided on Brenda,” says Ron Kaye, former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News, who as a blogger at has kept a watch on Animal Services. “She won over some segments — the classier segments.”

So anyone who doesn’t support the person in charge of needless pet killing at the pound has no class.  Nice.

Official “volunteers” work with specific shelters, and are generally calmer than “rescuers,” who tend to be older, single white women with boundless energy — and often uneasy relations with paid staff.

Oh gee, speaking of no class…

“I think she’s doing the best she can,” says Cheri Shankar, a donor and activist, who argues, with plenty of facts behind her, that zealous rescuers have hated every general manager the department’s ever had, from Dan Knapp to Jerry Greenwalt to Ed Boks. “If St. Francis of Assisi came to Los Angeles to run the shelter, rescuers would complain about him.”

Right.  Because rescuers just hate.  It’s not that all the previous managers have also killed pets instead of doing their jobs, inviting condemnation from people who believe they are wrong to kill, it’s that hysterical old white women who can’t find husbands just hate.

No-kill means killing 15 percent or so of animals.

No kill means saving every healthy/treatable pet at the shelter.  It’s not tied to a specific percentage although Nathan Winograd, director of the No Kill Advocacy Center, recently used the phrase “saving upwards of 95% of all animals” to describe the dozens of open admission no kill shelters in the U.S.

To reduce the killing, L.A. would have to persuade city residents to spay and neuter to prevent litters of animals. That means Animal Services — and by extension the City Council and Villaraigosa, who have cut its budget — would have to pay to better publicize and enforce a mandatory city spay-and-neuter law that’s widely ignored.

Right, MSN is failing in L.A. because it’s ignored.  Because otherwise, MSN would totally be working, even though it has never worked to significantly reduce the killing of shelter pets anywhere it’s been tried.  Ever.

“You can’t adopt your way out of the problem,” says Shawn Simons, who runs Kitty Bungalow Charm School for Wayward Cats[.]

Well yeah, you can – if anyone wanted to quit regurgitating the tired excuses of the past and open their eyes to the successes of the present.  No kill is happening – in the north, south, east and west.  It’s happening in large cities and rural communities.  It could be happening in L.A. – today, if anyone involved wanted it.

(Thanks Jan for the link.)

L.A. Shelter Kill Tech Fired Over Cruel Killings

Allegations of atrocities in the kill rooms at shelters in Kentucky and Alabama have recently made the news and resulted in criminal investigations.  Now a Los Angeles Animal Services employee has been fired under similar circumstances although the director has not filed a criminal complaint and no investigation has been launched.

Manuel Boado, 64, was discharged by the city’s Civil Service Commission, which concluded that he failed to sedate the dogs he was trying to euthanize, brought dogs into a room with other dead animals and inserted euthanizing needles into jugular veins — a practice officials say was not permitted.

During the termination hearing, shelter employees who worked with Mr. Boado testified to witnessing him in the kill room, repeatedly jabbing at the neck veins of dogs causing them to bleed, shake in fear and lose control of their bladders.  One worker said he walked into the kill room and “found two dead dogs on the floor and a third half-covered in blood”.

By failing to provide sedation, putting live animals next to dead ones and yelling, Boado needlessly created a “fear factor” among animals being euthanized, said Brenda Barnette, the department’s general manager who recommended his firing.

“It is totally unconscionable to add an element of fear if you’re about to take an animal’s life away,” she said.

I would add it’s also totally unconscionable to kill a healthy/treatable pet.  I guess Ms. Barnette forgot that part.

Mr. Boado’s lawyer had an explanation for everything.  His client killed live pets next to dead ones because the refrigerator unit for storing carcasses was broken.  And he “never received proper training from the department in how to euthanize the animals”.

So if you don’t get the training you need, I suppose the only possible recourse is to repeatedly jab pets in the neck with kill needles while they piss themselves in fear.  I mean, what other option could there be, right?

I think the case should at least be referred to the district attorney.  Let that office decide if the acts are prosecutable under the law.  On the other hand, it was apparently a challenge to even get the guy fired:

Barnette sought Boado’s termination, but last month a city hearing officer found that penalty to be “too extreme.”

Hearing officer Stephen Biersmith recommended that Boado be reinstated and only have his pay docked, saying the department had not consistently enforced policies for its employees. He also argued that Boado had not intentionally violated the rules.

The Civil Service Commission reviewed the case and voted unanimously for termination.

Dock his pay?  What’s the going rate for torturing pets in the kill room – 50 cents less per hour than non-torturers get paid?  I find the admitted acts to be “too extreme” to not refer this case to the D.A.


Friday Debate

A family moved out of their foreclosed home in Los Angeles leaving a dog in the house and another in the garage.  Neighbors heard them crying and called AC for help.  AC refused to enter the home:

“Possibility the people could come back and then they could turn this around and sue the city,” explained Animal Services Officer Hoang Dinh.

The city is required to give a written warning to the owners before entering the home or removing the dogs.

A man named Hans Peterson went into the home and rescued the dog inside.  As he was walking out, he was arrested for “interfering” with AC.

So are you on Team Hans or Team No Government Entry to Private Property?