LB's 6-figure City Manager Pat West and Mayor Garcia Let Rescuers Do the Heavy Lifting. Again.5/20/2016 Pat West - laughing his way to the bank on his 6-figure taxpayer funded salary while shelter pets die - lets rescues do the heavy lifting in Long Beach. Again. The big story in animal welfare in LB right now is SpcaLA's heartlessly removing young puppies from an LBACS-impounded pittie and leaving her alone to face a near certain death. This is just the most recent lethal insult to LBACS shelter animals and just one of many that happen each and every day and lead to the killing of thousands of animals a year. When Stayin' Alive Long Beach started publishing LBACS' kill numbers and calling for shelter reform in LB 3 years ago, the rescue community rushed to the animals' aid, doubling their own intake and saving hundreds of animals from death at the shelter -- in effect, doing the City's job on shoestring budgets, trying to balance work and family duties while working themselves literally to the bone to help animals and keep them from being killed at the shelter. It still wasn't enough - with the killing machine fueled by the LBACS/SpcaLA "partnership" (collusion is more accurate) in place, thousands of animals still face their last day looking at the sharp end of a euthanasia needle. Now the rescuers are doing the City's job again - calling for the SpcaLA to stop its cherry picking of LB shelter animals and share their wealth with LBACS. However, the biggest issue with SpcaLA is not the lack of sharing. According to a meeting we had with LBACS manager Ted Stevens early in our fight, it's the fact that SpcaLA has a stranglehold on City Manager Pat West, vehemently fighting any attempt by our city shelter to have a strong adoption program. The bottom line, if Stevens is to be believed, is that Pat West is whipped by SpcaLA President Madeline Bernstein (as one rescuer put it) and has been for almost a decade. This has resulted in literally tens of thousands of animals dying at our shelter. And Mayor Garcia watches on from his Superman lookout and nods approvingly. The good news is - the rescue community is ready to speak out. Rescuers are doing the City's job again (and again and again) and taking their protest to SpcaLA's facebook page. That is great, and we hope they continue. However, if anyone is equipped to stand up to the insidious, money-grubbing, profiteering-on-the-backs-of-shelter animals SpcaLA, wouldn't it be the City Manager and Mayor of the 7th largest city in California? They have the resources - attorneys, political influence and legislative power - to make the shelter strong and counter SpcaLA's selfish influence. But they don't. And there are those in the rescue community who still defend the City and LBACS management in spite of the fact that they cave each and every day to the SpcaLA profit machine. And kill thousands of animals while doing it. Pat West makes nearly $340,000 a year in salary and benefits paid by the taxpayer. Mayor Garcia is living the life of a figure-head celebrity, doing little more than give speeches and congratulatory slaps on the back, while pushing for tax increases and increased regulation on the people of Long Beach. City Council does the same. Our City should be the ones fighting this fight, instead of leaving it to a bunch of exhausted, compassionate and financially-strapped rescuers to defend the animals yet again. People in the animal welfare community and all people who have had enough of the killing need to go to City Council and express their outrage. They need to hold sit ins and protests to educate the public about what's going wrong at our shelter. They need to flood City Council's e-mails and Facebook pages and tell them we've had enough of our money being used to kill animals. They need to notify the Press and sit outside of City Hall, where Pat West, Mayor Garcia and City Council have their offices, until the press come and until Mayor Garcia is embarrassed enough to take the issue seriously. Failing that, thousands more animals will continue to be killed in our city shelter.
0 Comments
Mayor Garcia - Pulling the wool over the eyes of Long Beach's animal loving community - AGAIN2/2/2016 Why on earth would a politician promise animal lovers in Long Beach to go visit the Sacramento shelter to learn about their adoption program, fulfill his promise by going and then NOT TELL ANYONE HE WENT? That's what Mayor Garcia did last week. This picture shows him and one of his aids with Gina Knepp, Manager of the Front Street Animal Shelter. This was what Garcia promised in October 2014 in front of more than 200 animal advocates in Long Beach. And yet, our media-savvy, facebooking -everything Mayor didn't say a word to anyone publicly about it in Long Beach. This picture is our only indication he went, taken by staff at the Front Street Animal Shelter. Mayor Garcia facebooks his every moment - why not this one? We're guessing he doesn't want to be held accountable for putting into place the programs he saw so well in evidence at Front Street. If people don't know he went, then they can't hold him responsible for doing the work he said he'd do -- increase adoptions at the Long Beach animal shelter. Instead, late last week, his media team went into high gear hyping the performance of the low-performing LB animal shelter, talking about reduced impounds and euthanasias, but saying nothing about the pathetic performance on adoptions in 2015 -- the year that Garcia was going to change everything and increase adoption rates significantly -- or so he said. In spite of his promises, progress on adoptions has been almost glacial. LBACS went from 403 adoptions in 2014 to 471 adoptions in 2015 – compare that to Sacramento Animal Care Services, which did more than 4400 adoptions last year with fewer staff and a slightly lower budget. Even doing half of those 4400 adoptions in Long Beach would bring us to No Kill status immediately. Instead, since Mayor Garcia was elected, the shelter has actually killed more than 4500 animals. It's really still 'business as usual' in spite of all the hype we're hearing about reduced impounds and euthanasias. The only difference is that Garcia has now dedicated his media team to pulling the wool over the eyes of Long Beach animal lovers by cherry picking LBACS statistics and downplaying the shelter's mind-boggling bad performance on adoptions. Even worse, in a news article last week, SpcaLA stated that they're doing all adoptions for LBACS now so that LBACS can focus on doing animal control. This is completely contradictory to what Mayor Garcia promised about increasing adoptions on the LBACS side of the shelter a year ago. We absolutely oppose the idea of SpcaLA taking over all adoptions for three reasons:First, SpcaLA's website specifically says it doesn't support the term “No Kill,” so we can't assume that all of the animals that go to SpcaLA are saved, and there's no way to know because we lose all transparency once the animals leave the City shelter. We need transparency as to what happens to our shelter animals so that the people of Long Beach know that their tax dollars are being spent in a way that supports their values by finding homes for our shelter animals instead of shipping them off to other shelters or euthanizing them. Second, SpcaLA only takes in 28% of the animals and leaves nearly 3 in 4 at LBACS to die. LBACS clearly needs to do adoptions and do them aggressively, like Sacramento does, if we're going to achieve the kind of lifesaving Sacramento has. Third, leaving adoptions to a partner shelter cedes revenue from adoption fees to an outside organization with a 7 million dollar revenue stream - we're shocked that the City would choose to hand over thousands of dollars in taxpayer revenue to an organization that only takes in 28% of the animals at our shelter. We're sorry, Long Beach - we asked you to vote for Mayor Garcia because he said he would help our shelter animals. Instead, he's put all of his influence behind maintaining the status quo. Our shelter animals deserve better. Today, we'd like to talk about Huey. He was a 7-month old kitten who, along with 1,070 other kittens, have been killed in our shelter since January. Today Huey is kitten #1,071. Here is his story: Huey entered the shelter on August 9. His medical record says he was Bright, Alert and Responsive. He had no signs of illness, but his medical records say he was kenneled with a cat that had possible signs of a cold, so he was watched for illness. (If there had been a foster program at LBACS, he wouldn't have been kenneled with a sick cat.) He held strong for 9 days -- an eternity for a little kitten -- and on August 18, his medical notes say that he was quiet and had some sneezing. (If there had been a foster program, his illness could have been completely prevented or nipped in the bud.) He held on for 10 more days and seemed to improve a bit - no runny nose, but by this time, he had gotten a cold-related ulcer on his tongue and the vet said: "May not be the best adoption/rescue candidate due to long course of URI [cold]." (His illness was predicted. They knew it would happen and yet no foster program is in place to help kittens like Huey.) In the end, Huey was killed "due to illness and time/space" on September 2 after coming in healthy but then languishing in the shelter for 3 weeks. We can only imagine how lonely and sad life was for Huey in those 3 weeks. What can we learn from Huey's story? Huey was killed because he had a cold. He came in healthy and it was life in the shelter that made him sick. Huey was killed because there was no foster program to get him to safety (remember -- Sacramento has over 200 animals in foster care every month). This is the story of thousands of cats and dogs at our shelter every year. But today, it's Huey's story and he deserves to have it told. If you are upset about Huey's story, please know that only YOU can save cats like Huey from the shelter. No magical person is going to come in and do it for you. The Mayor and City Hall need to hear from YOU, personally and repeatedly, because they are fighting change and they think they can put a happy face on the shelter and sweep Huey and the 1070 other kittens that have been killed so far under the rug. How you can help: http://www.stayinalivelongbeach.org/how-you-can-help.html There's a sample letter there and other ideas to help you get started advocating for shelter animals in Long Beach. Please don't let Huey's death be in vain. Take Action Now. Share this post, write a letter, tell a friend about what's going on at our shelter. Post this to the Mayor's Facebook page or the page of your City Council member (see below for their links). Because our shelter pets are dying and the people in charge are not doing their jobs. And they're using YOUR money to do it. Mayor Robert Garcia https://www.facebook.com/robertgarcialb District 1: Lena Gonzalez https://www.facebook.com/lenagonzalezlb District 2: Vice Mayor Suja Lowenthal https://www.facebook.com/councilmembersuja.lowenthal District 3: Suzie Price https://www.facebook.com/councilwomansuzieprice District 4: Daryl Supernaw https://www.facebook.com/LB4thDistrict District 5: Stacy Mungo https://www.facebook.com/stacymungo District 6: Dee Andrews https://www.facebook.com/joinandrews District 7: Roberto Uranga https://www.facebook.com/robertourangalb District 8: Al Austin https://www.facebook.com/CouncilmemberALAUSTIN District 9: Rex Richardson https://www.facebook.com/rexrichardsonlb Do it today. Do it for Huey. The ASPCA has released a "Position Statement on the Responsibilities of Animal Shelters." It is a call to "elevate the expectations we have of shelters." Many of the things the ASPCA now advocates for are the things Stayin' Alive advocates for at the Long Beach animal shelter. Here's a short statement from the ASPCA President: "This call to elevate the expectations we have of shelters—and of one another—means setting baseline standards on housing, sanitation, medical treatment, disease control, socialization protocols, and other behavior interventions. It means removing delays to making surrendered animals immediately eligible for adoption. It means acting without prejudice against people—based on economic, social, racial or cultural reasons. Likewise it means not acting against animals based solely on breed. It means ensuring shelters have the flexibility to reduce or waive adoption fees. We simply can’t afford to put barriers between suffering animals and safe homes. It means continuing our efforts—with the highest standards—to transfer shelter pets to rescue groups or to areas where they stand a better chance of adoption, and doubling down on efforts to reconnect owners with their lost pets. It means legally requiring ID tags for all owned dogs and cats living or venturing outdoors, and ending any use of hold times as a reason for euthanasia. Finally, it means shelters committing to transparency—releasing data on intake and outcomes, including euthanasia. Transparency is one of the most effective ways to build community trust and support; secrecy is one of the fastest ways to lose it." ong Beach Animal Care Services fails to maximize the opportunities it has to save lives by not following many of the recommendations here, particularly this one, which is contained in the statement itself: "[A]nother critical responsibility of all shelters is finding homes or placement options for the animals in their care. Shelters should be required to take all steps necessary to ensure the placement of as many animals entering their facilities as possible, whether they arrive as owner surrenders, strays or through other means." No Kill is quickly becoming the mainstream view -- only out of touch shelters will continue to follow the traditional control-oriented model of sheltering. Out of touch is what we are in Long Beach. More than 3,000 animals have been killed since Mayor Garcia took office. How many more animals need to die before our City acts? Read more here: http://www.aspcapro.org/…/message-president-aspca-position-… And here: https://www.aspca.org/…/position-statement-responsibilities… Can Long Beach Lead in No Kill? Yes, we can – Patricia Turner, Ph.D. Mahatma Gandhi famously said “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” This quote is compelling because it contains a truth – how we treat animals is important, and no California city believes this more than Long Beach. Last week, P-T columnist Tim Grobaty asked whether Long Beach can become a No Kill city – his response was a resounding “no.” As an animal welfare group that advocates for lifesaving programs at our shelter, we have to say we respectfully disagree. But first – let's talk about where we do agree. We agree that people should spay and neuter their pets, should adopt, rather than buy, and shouldn't breed. We agree that irresponsible people contribute to the problem of animal homelessness. If there's any disagreement, it's on how to deal with the problem. It has become an unquestioned truth in animal welfare that the “irresponsible public” is to blame for shelter killing and that little can be done to stop it until the public has fully embraced spay/neuter. Unfortunately, irresponsible pet owners will always be with us. That doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't educate, but blaming people rarely changes hearts and minds. It simply alienates the very people we in the animal welfare community most need to reach. To be sure, blaming the public is easier than rolling up our sleeves and solving the problem, but in no other area of civic life do we do this. Imagine if all neglectful or abusive parents were required to become model parents before we could help the children who suffer neglect. The results are unthinkable. So we put programs and laws in place to protect children. Yet in sheltering, we blame rather than help. And it's the animals who suffer. In our lifetimes, we will not see the complete elimination of irresponsible pet ownership. Realizing this, we have to take a different approach - our shelter has to be a place where animals can have a real chance to be placed in homes. This chance is provided through planning, programming and policies that save lives. No Kill's approach is to put effective programs in place at the shelter that reduce intake and increase placement of animals into good homes. Mr. Grobaty says it's about keeping animals for long stays in the shelter – a common misunderstanding. Instead, it's about reducing the time an animal spends in the shelter and engaging in problem-solving to get animals into homes. Programs that do this are low-cost spay/neuter, but also a strong adoption and foster program, medical and behavioral rehabilitation, community outreach (like a help desk to help people solve the problems that lead them to surrender their pets to the shelter), and public-friendly adoption policies. We advocate for these programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter because many of them don't exist now. This month, Sacramento Animal Care Services adopted out 200 animals during a 4-day adoption event. Long Beach took 6 months to adopt out that many last year. We believe if Sacramento can do it, Long Beach can do it, too. But it will require changes to the policies and programs at our shelter. Over 3,200 animals were killed in our shelter in 2014; most were healthy or treatable. Many could be saved if we had a strong adoption and foster program at the shelter. This is what Stayin' Alive advocates for. We think that Gandhi had it right – and Long Beach can be great. Patricia Turner is the spokesperson for Stayin' Alive Long Beach, an initiative that advocates for lifesaving programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter. She worked in animal welfare in Long Beach for over a decade and holds a professional certificate in Animal Shelter Management from the University of the Pacific. Today we are officially letting you know that we no longer believe that Mayor Garcia is willing to do what is necessary to make Long Beach a No Kill city. We have thought about and discussed this at length, so the decision is well-considered, and it's not without regret that we must come to this conclusion. However, if our goal is to save animals by advocating for change in harmful policies and programs at LBACS, we have to admit that over the past year, Mayor Garcia has failed to bring meaningful change to the LBACS animal shelter. We base this observation on the following: ** One year after the Animal Care Town Hall Meeting, Mayor Garcia has done little to improve the culture, programs and policies at LBACS. Although he committed last October to hiring an adoption coordinator, the reality is that that position already existed, and he merely added 20 hours to that position's work week. This is the absolute minimum that he could have done, and since the new coordinator was hired in April, we have seen virtually no improvement in adoption numbers. Substantial changes must be made to make LBACS a progressive shelter, and this is not happening under Mayor Garcia's leadership. You can read our full One Year Report Card for Mayor Garcia by clicking on the link at the end of this post. **Mayor Garcia promised during last year's mayoral campaign to visit the Sacramento Animal Care Services shelter, which has a strong record of doing adoptions – adopting out thousands of animals per year. As of our last communication with the Mayor's office, he had not visited the Sacramento shelter. This is in spite of the fact that he had originally promised to do this within the first four months he was in office. He then extended it to a year. More than a year later, he has not gone. **In June, we sent Mayor Garcia a letter asking him to publicly commit to making Long Beach a No Kill city. Specifically, we asked him to publicly request that the City Manager prioritize adoptions and put in place adoption goals at the shelter. We also asked him to implement a foster program. Mayor Garcia declined to respond, though he was given ample opportunity to make his position known. You can read the letter we sent to Mayor Garcia at the link below. **We also asked Mayor Garcia to consider a lifesaving plan for increasing the save rate at LBACS. He never responded. You can find our lifesaving plan at the link below. **Rather than work to improve programs and policies at LBACS, the Mayor has adopted LBACS' practice of cherry-picking euthanasia statistics to make LBACS look like it's making more progress than it actually is. We alerted Mayor Garcia to LBACS' practice of publishing limited statistics and manipulating the numbers more than a year ago. He said at the time that he would look into it, but never addressed the issue subsequent to our request. More than a year later, he himself is using these numbers to make our low-performing shelter appear to be doing a better job than it really is. This is not only bad for shelter animals; it is a betrayal of the public trust. Mayor Garcia's cat adoption event at City Hall, while it showed what he's capable of, was essentially a “one-off” – an isolated event not part of any systematic approach to changing the LBACS policies and lack of programs that are detrimental our shelter animals. An adoption event here or there will not lead to saving 90% of the animals in our shelter. It will take the reversal of a number of bad policies and the implementation of many good programs to make Long Beach a No Kill city. Mayor Garcia, by his actions, is telling us that he is not the man to lead this change. No Kill is about saving animals' lives not five years from now, not ten years from now, but NOW. You can get to No Kill in two ways: one way is to take the super-highway using good programs, good policies and good management, much like any high-performing company would. The other way is to take a meandering route, slowly adding a program or an adoption event here or there. No Kill takes the super-highway. Mayor Garcia is apparently on the meandering route, much to the detriment of our shelter animals. Working with city government is always the preferred route in animal advocacy. However, we have seen Long Beach City government resist change at all levels. We will continue to advocate on behalf of Long Beach's shelter animals, but it is unlikely that any change will occur except very slowly by small steps. In the meantime, thousands more shelter animals will be killed by our shelter using our taxpayer dollars in our names. We have come to believe that the only way real change will occur at the LBACS animal shelter is when a large group of people come together to peacefully protest the way things are done at the LBACS shelter. The shelter animals need YOU to be their voice. Stayin' Alive's letter to Mayor Garcia:http://www.stayinalivelongbeach.org/salb-news Stayin' Alive's Lifesaving Programs Plan sent to Mayor Garcia:http://www.stayinalivelongbeach.org/model-no-kill-resolutio… Stayin' Alive's Animal Welfare Report card for Mayor Garcia:http://www.stayinalivelongbeach.org/mayor-garcias-2015-repo… In June of this year, we wrote to Mayor Garcia asking for clarification of his stance toward bringing lifesaving programs to the Long Beach Animal Care Services Animal shelter. In particular, we asked him to publicly request several things that are key to improving lifesaving at LBACS.
Mayor Garcia declined to respond to our questions. The Mayor's lack of response shows that Long Beach's shelter animals are not the priority for him that he led us to believe they were during the election. We addressed the letter to Mayor Garcia's Senior Administrative Deputy, Tim Patton, who, soon after the election, we were asked to contact for all things shelter-related. Here is our June 15, 2015 letter to the Mayor which the Mayor never responded to. Letter from Stayin' Alive Long Beach to Mayor Garcia asking him to commit to key actions to make Long Beach a No Kill city June 15, 2015 Dear Tim, Thank you for your response to our e-mail of March 20 regarding the status of our shelter animals in Long Beach. We appreciate the Mayor’s interest in increasing the live release rate at LBACS, and we were very happy to see that you attended the meeting about helping homeless pets in Long Beach that was held in Belmont Shore last month. We have several follow-up questions about the Mayor’s views on adoption programs and foster programs – two areas of growth in sheltering best practices that are proving to be both lifesaving and cost-saving at many shelters nationwide. Our questions are: 1. What action, if any, is the Mayor willing to take to make adoptions a priority at LBACS? Although the Mayor has stated that he is in favor of any program that helps to decrease the euthanasia rate at the shelter, all programs are not equal. Flying animals out of Long Beach to shelters hundreds of miles away, which is the transport option mentioned in your last e-mail, is very stressful for the animals, and such transports save only a small number of lives. It is much more efficient to promote adoptions locally, for example, by taking animals to local off-site adoption events and including “after 5 pm” adoption hours at the shelter. Is the Mayor willing to publicly request that the City Manager prioritize local adoptions as a method of live release at the shelter? 2. Is the Mayor willing to publicly request that the City Manager establish quarterly adoption goals for LBACS? As you know, all organizations, including government agencies, must establish performance goals in order to assure success. We have not seen such goal-setting at LBACS. Stating goals for adoptions would mobilize the animal-loving public in Long Beach to increase support of LBACS, thus decreasing the funds the city currently spends to house animals, while saving more lives. We follow the Mayor's activities closely and have seen him publicly commit to many other worthy and progressive goals for Long Beach. Is he, or is he not, willing to add increased adoptions to his list of goals for Long Beach? 3. Does the Mayor support a foster program for LBACS? A number of cities, including Los Angeles and Sacramento, use foster programs extensively to increase the shelter’s cage space. Foster programs also increase permanent placements for animals because the animals are cared for in private homes rather than in a shelter environment. They are therefore healthier, and more fully socialized. This increases their adoptability. Is the Mayor willing to publicly request that the City Manager officially implement a foster program on an ongoing basis at LBACS? 4. When we last met with the Mayor, we submitted a proposed ordinance that would help Long Beach become a No Kill city. A copy has been attached to this e-mail. Has the Mayor reviewed the ordinance? Is the Mayor willing to publicly recommend that such an ordinance or key elements of the ordinance be introduced at City Council? 5. The policies referenced above are key to the No Kill approach to animal sheltering, an approach that the Mayor once supported when our organization was campaigning on his behalf. Does the Mayor publicly support making LBACS a No Kill shelter? If he does support the concept of a No Kill City, a concept that many California cities are now adopting, in what time frame does he think this could be accomplished? 6. Finally, we have noticed a disturbing trend in the past five months in which LBACS is turning more animals over to spcaLA with no increase in accountability, indeed, no accountability at all that we know of. SpcaLA is not a No Kill shelter, and their organization has actively opposed lifesaving policies advocated in a white paper authored last year by the ASPCA, Humane Society of the United States, the San Francisco SPCA, Found Animals and Maddie's Fund. We feel that increasing the number of animals sent to spcaLA, with no increase in accountability as to the outcomes those animals experience, is irresponsible. What specific action will the Mayor take to ensure that there is transparency and accountability as to the animals released from LBACS to spcaLA so that these animals' outcomes are public knowledge? We appreciate your interest in this issue, and thank you again for your response to our previous correspondence. We look forward to hearing from you again. Best regards, Stayin’ Alive Long Beach Cc: Daniel Brezenoff, Deputy Chief of Staff to Mayor Garcia Sharon Weissman Senior Adviser to Mayor Garcia For the past 3 years, Stayin' Alive Long Beach has been advocating for a foster program at LBACS. We were repeatedly told it couldn't be done. A mere 19 months ago, LBACS manager Ted Stevens stated in a local newspaper article that Stayin' Alive's suggestion that LBACS implement a foster program for cats was too expensive and “unrealistic.” After years of saying it couldn't be done, and after thousands of kittens have found death at the end of a syringe filled with sodium pentobarbital, it appears it CAN be done after all. Let us be clear. We're thrilled to see that LBACS is seeking fosters this kitten season. If this is an actual change in policy and not a one-shot deal, we are overjoyed to hear it. But we'll remain cautiously optimistic for two reasons. One is that nothing that Mr. Stevens has said or done in the past three years has indicated that he is truly interested in doing the hard work and providing the leadership necessary to significantly decrease the kill rate at the LBACS animal shelter. In fact, the vehemence with which he has fought No Kill has been singularly impressive, and it will take time to believe that he is genuinely interested in decreasing his shelter's kill rate. The second is that we have always said and will continue to say that until an adoption program, foster program and other essential lifesaving programs are codified in Long Beach city ordinance, our shelter animals will continue to be at the mercy of whoever is running LBACS. If we want a sustainable No Kill shelter, one that has lifesaving programs in place for decades to come, regardless of who comes and goes in positions of power at LBACS, it will require an actual ordinance that requires LBACS to put those in place. So far, City Council has not been interested in taking action – they will need to continue to hear from you – the public – that the killing of nearly 1500 kittens per year in our city's animal shelter is not acceptable. This is good news, but it's only a beginning. We'll continue to watch and advocate for better and more efficient lifesaving programs at the Long Beach animal shelter. But for tonight, we're celebrating....for the kitties' sake. LBACS' newest so-called solution to the animal homelessness problem in Long Beach consists of transporting shelter animals thousands of miles away out of Long Beach by plane to cities in states that supposedly need more animals to adopt out. We often wonder how it is remotely possible that Long Beach animals aren't displacing needy animals in those other communities. And we wonder why it would be more desirable to put animals through a long, stressful plane trip rather than take them to a local adoption event to be adopted in our off-the-charts animal-loving city of more than half a million people. Here's the perspective of some of the folks in these receiving communities. "While Greenhill continues to turn away animals that are already living here; they keep importing dogs from California. No doubt these dog deliveries are planned, and they have to empty the kennel in preparation, keeping empty kennels unoccupied for who knows how long. Today Greenhill Road has 21 dogs. Eighteen of those dogs are imports. EIGHTEEN OF TWENTY-ONE. While I do not begrudge these dogs homes, by being able to continually export dogs, this keeps California from cleaning up its own mess, and deprives dogs already living here of assistance. If Greenhill were meeting the needs of animals already here in this community, then helping dogs from elsewhere would be more appropriate." The fact is, it's easier to pass the buck to another city or state and expect others to do the work that is needed to save our community's animals. But that doesn't make it acceptable. We agree with the writer above - we don't begrudge the animals these homes, but there are more efficient, less expensive and less stressful ways to place animals in home locally, and that should be our animal shelter's Job 1. Especially if by sending our animals out, we're condemning other communities' animals to death. Read more here: https://www.facebook.com/NoKillLaneCounty/posts/850824274991747 Three Years and Thousands of Lost Lives Later Back in 2012, we sent the manager of LBACS several suggestions for increasing the number of volunteers at LBACS and thus make it possible for additional programs, such as offsite adoptions and a foster program, to be put in place. They were ignored. We met with the manager, Ted Stevens, a year later, and were told that volunteers could be difficult to manage -- in other words, more trouble than they were worth. That year, LBACS had only 28 volunteers according to LBACS records obtained under the California Public Records Act. Since that time, the suggestions have also been available on our website, and we hoped that LBACS would avail themselves of them. We just checked suggestion #5 and see that 3 years and thousands of lost lives later, LBACS has finally implemented it. Becoming an animal shelter that consistently saves 90%+ of its animals doesn't happen by giving lip service to programs. It doesn't happen by implementing programs in a piecemeal fashion, here and there, hoping that the community will take up the slack. It's the shelter management that MUST provide the leadership and the vision to save the animals and to do so in an efficient and cost-effective way. We hope that LBACS has changed its attitude about volunteers. In the news article covering the recent community meeting about volunteers, Mr. Stevens said that he would like a base of 100-150 volunteers. We can't help but notice that this change came about after we spoke at City Council last August, pointing out that Sacramento had logged over 36,000 volunteer hours the previous year, whereas Long Beach had logged only 2300. We are thrilled that LBACS now has a goal, where goals were never mentioned before, of over 100 volunteers. If the amazing goodwill and energy of Long Beach's animal-loving community are properly directed toward effective lifesaving programs, there is no doubt that Long Beach can become a No Kill city. We encourage people to volunteer at the city animal shelter. If they are allowed to do what is needed, they will play an absolutely VITAL role in saving the 90+% of animals at the shelter that CAN be saved. But we think it's important for people to know the history of how this came about and to know that advocacy works. Citizens speaking out to change the system -- a very broken system that has been in place for a very long time -- is the only way that we will make key and sustainable changes in the way our animal shelter is run. LBACS still doesn't have a strong adoption program, nor does it have a strong foster program. It's clear that advocacy on behalf of the shelter animals to reform LBACS policies is still needed. We'll continue to advocate for the shelter animals in Long Beach. We need a shelter where no healthy or treatable animal dies in our city shelter. And we don't have that yet. |
Archives
June 2022
SALB
An initiative to make Long Beach a No Kill community. Categories |