ASPCA Hires Dogfighter

while $50,000 Buys an HSUS Make-over for Michael Vick.

It's coming on Christmas, but we're gonna get nothing but moral turpitude from "humane" animal extremist flagships like HSUS and ASPCA.

The ASPCA Proudly Welcomes Confessed Animal Abuser

Terry Mills, diplomatically described as an "animal fighting specialist" in the ASPCA's press release, was recently hired by the private, non-profit corporation to "collaborate" with publicly-employed law enforcement personnel and "spearhead" dog and cockfighting investigations conducted at public expense.


With a mission to supplant the function of public servants who ultimately are responsible to the tax-payers controlling their jobs, Mills' function runs parallel to that of the ASPCA's fraudulent forensic animal "expert" and puppy thief, Melinda Merck.

Mills will be "training" law enforcement personnel, and public funds will cover the cost.

Terry Mills had retired after 30 years with the Missouri State Highway Patrol when the ASPCA picked up his contract.  According to the ASPCA, Mills' prime qualification was an 18 month stint "as an undercover officer, gaining access to the underground world of organized dog fighting and collecting extensive evidence."

But let's take a closer look at what Mills really did during his 18 months of "collecting extensive evidence."

ASPCA blows off felony animal cruelty

Mills had way, way more than mere "access."

By his own admission, to further his work he acquired 40 American Pit Bull Terrier dogs, and about a dozen puppies.  He conditioned them for the purposes of fighting, trained them for the purpose of fighting, and transported them to fight venues.  

He deliberately -- and call me crazy, but I believe this was malicious -- fought them.

A number of Mills' dogs died as a result of the injuries they sustained in the fights Mills arranged.

Mills abandoned the surviving dogs when the investigation concluded.

How "humane."

Funny how the ASPCA didn't mention any of this.

Do the ends justify the means?

Maybe.  If the "ends" are career enhancement and a certain amount of personal glory.

In 2009 the various personalities involved in "dogfighting for the greater good" --Terry Mills, his partner Jeff Heath, the ASPCA's  Tim Rickey, and Kyle Held of the Humane Society of Missouri -- were all named the ASPCA's Law Enforcement Officers of the Year.

Do I hear a "woo-hoo!" out there?  No?

One of Mills' prime cohorts in the humane dogfight ring, Tim Rickey, left the Humane Society of Missouri to become the ASPCA's senior director of field investigations and response.  He'll join fellow immoral "humane champions" Melinda Merck and Chris Schindler, the bastard who agreed in court testimony that unweaned pit bull puppies are "too dangerous" to live.

And Mills just got himself hired by the ASPCA. 

These people are in like Flynn -- rolling in the clover.

Laura Maloney, ASPCA alumnus and veteran pit bull killer, already moved on to the HSUS.  Greener pastures, dontcha know?

The $50,000 Price-tag for the Redemption of Michael Vick 
 

O, Wayne, where art thou?

Vick and his humaniac controllers put down $50,000 cash money for the purpose of cleansing Vick's soul reputation.  

And Wayne Pacelle and HSUS snatched it up. 

No questions asked.

Pacelle, who lost no time in using Michael Vick's infamy as a factory fundraising tool,  all the while calling for the death of Vick's dogs, now claims that Vick would "do a good job" as a pet owner.

So how come Vick's not feeling the love ?

Outrage on the internet

Facebook is in flames.  People just aren't happy with the thought of Vick-as-responsible-dog-owner.  Nope.  Not at all.  No amount of "social networking management" is gonna make this go away.
 
Could it be the pet-loving American public won't be manipulated quite as easily as HSUS and its spin doctors thought?

Are people finally, finally, sickened by all the killing in the farcical name of the "humane" treatment of animals?  Anybody else have a problem with "humane" dogfighting rings?  Cause I sure do.
 
Will potential donors sidestep that vast sea of holiday-themed "Donate NOW!" bullshit? Will they avoid getting sucked into ethically bankrupt fundraising campaigns?

I sure hope so.

ASPCA's Melinda Merck Checks in at Smackdown Hotel

Forensic Puppy Thief
No Damn Expert

Florida Circuit Judge Kicks Merck to the Curb

Blue Dog State readers will remember the key role Merck played in the shameful seizure of Joe Woodall's dogs. 

Merck okayed the impoundment of Woodall's healthy, happy dogs for "evaluation on suspicion of dogfighting." 

The dogs were dumped in a county animal control facility 250 miles from Woodall's home.  No "evaluation" was ever conducted.  Merck and the rest of the animal extremist private army that raided Joe Woodall never looked back. 

It took Joe eight weeks, and more than he could afford in attorney's fees, to secure the return of his dogs.  Woodall was never charged with a crime, but his life changed forever.

Cats and "professional", "serial" cat killers

Leveraging her "forensic" credentials as she ascends the animal extremist hierarchy, Merck continues to play a critical role in the seizure of animals on suspicion of heinous crimes and sending unknown quantities of dogs to their deaths based on her "expert" opinion that they were used in dogfighting.

You can fool some of the people all of the time. . .

In Miami-Dade, coverage of the "serial cat killer" responsible for the "surgical evisceration" of 19 pets alternately thrilled and terrorized South Florida residents for months as a young man faced allegations of criminally depraved behavior.  The Discovery Channel just couldn't get enough of the story.

18-year-old Tyler Weinman endured house arrest, an electronic monitoring device, court-ordered psychiatric evaluations, and heavy bond requirements.  He received death threats, and he faced 158 years in prison if convicted.

As the country's foremost "forensic animal expert" Merck told authorities that in her opinion the dead cats had been cruelly sliced apart with sharp instrument, presenting in a stereotypically deviant way.  The ASPCA's other "authority", Randall Lockwood, added a little more fuel to the twisted fire, as he explained that . . .

. . .cruelty toward cats, as opposed to other animals, can fulfill a deeper need for control. Cats, unlike dogs, can be more difficult to control. They don't come when they're called and are often more independent (said Dr. Randall Lockwood of The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and author of "Forensic Investigation of Animal Cruelty").

Things just couldn't have been sicker, according to the ASPCA.

Except the charges against Tyler Weinman quickly fell to pieces.  An expert brought in by the defense to examine the cat remains peeled back the fur on the corpses, and found bite marks.  Not scalpel marks. 

Instead of a demented cat-hating psycho on the loose, the cats were killed by the usual suspects:  animal predators.  "Forensic expert" Merck was forced to change her interpretation of the evidence and agree with the defense's witness.

Charges against the defendant were quickly dropped.

Judge fed up with imaginary serial cat killers and phantom dog rapists

Only two weeks later, in considering the Armand Pacher dog-sexploitation charges, Judge Trawick was outspoken in his rejection of Merck's expertise:

"She doesn't have any credibility with me right now," Circuit Judge Daryl Trawick warned a prosecutor during a pretrial hearing. . . If you're going to rely upon her, she's going to have to come to this courtroom and testify. . .I will judge her credibility based upon what I see from the witness stand."

Pacher, a retired business executive in poor health and with no prior criminal record, made an off-colored joke when he brought his Great Dane in to a University of Florida veterinary clinic. 

Pacher's stupid joke about having sex with his dog triggered (what else?) a forensic investigation by Melinda Merck.  His attorney described a police raid "in full tactical gear and armed with automatic weapons, ransacking the high-rise condo and seizing "dog leashes, collars, grooming tools, as well as computers, files, photos, documents, videos and virtually everything else that could be physically removed from the defendant's apartment.''

The cops based themselves on Melinda Merck's examination of the dog and her findings of vaginitis, human sperm and other indications of sexual abuse.  Merck provided police with an affidavit supporting the search and the seizure of Pacher's computer and other personal items because "this type of sexually deviant behavior has a definite voyeuristic component.''

Sounds pretty bad, doesn't it?  Except the cops didn't find any perverted, weird crap in Pacher's home.  The only "evidence" against him was Merck's examination of the dog.  And guess what?

The four board certified theriologists who reviewed Merck's test results, and the conclusions she drew, disagreed with her.  Majorly.  Nearly violently.

In fact, Dr. Bruce Elits of Louisiana State University concluded that Merck "made false statements in this report in order to exaggerate the true facts."

Charges against 65 year-old Armand Pacher were also promptly dropped.

Attention media hounds and ASPCA watchers:  Watch for civil law suits from both Pacher and Weinman.  The various instigators of the destruction of their lives may not have heard the last of them yet.

Peers review the ASPCA's forensic head honcho

In evaluating Melinda Merck's work on the Pacher case, other experts in animal reproduction were not impressed either:

Dr. G. Reed Holyoak of Oklahoma State University:  "It would appear, in the end, there was no sperm where they thought sperm had been and what they thought was sperm was probably something else.''

Dr. Hannah Glanlantino-Homer of the University of Pennsylvania:  "I have found nothing in any of these records that supports Dr. Merck's repeated assertions that [Pacher's dog] 'Christie' suffered from sexual abuse by her owner.''

Miami veterinarian Dr. Ray George Bailey:  "[W]ith the total lack of any supporting evidence from the start, making these type of accusations, taking Mr. Pacher's dog away for months, arresting Mr. Pacher, newspaper and Internet articles about his arrest, defamation of his character, not to mention legal expense, is all just wrong.''

When "animal CSI" goes wrong. . .way wrong

Dr. Patty Khuly, vet and writer of the popular veterinary blog, PetMd. writes:

In a stunning breach of ethics and/or competence, self-styled "animal CSI" expert, Dr. Melinda Merck (of the ASPCA) either misled the courts for the purpose of advancing her personal/professional agenda, or she displayed shocking incompetence in the field she pioneered and through which she rose to prominence.

and it just keeps getting better. . .

Merck runs Univ. of Florida's Veterinary Forensic Training Program

She's "training" more "animal CSI" "experts."  With a $300,000 stake from the ASPCA Merck co-founded UF's "Animal CSI" program in 2009.

The whole corrupt idea is that privately-employed individuals should be  "training" employees of other private corporations (SPCA's and "humane societies") in the enforcement of laws which govern all of us.

Merck, the employee of a private corporation with no responsibilities other than to the board of directors of that private corporation, influenced the issuance of search warrants and the prosecution of two individuals in Florida for crimes that, apparently, are figments of her own sick (really sick) imagination.

Or her blind ambition.  Or God complex.  Whatever.

Florida Circuit Court Judge Daryl Trawick has her number.  Merck is, literally, incredible.  I just hope the judges and prosecutors in other cases Merck instigated are paying attention. 

Humane Double Standards: NFP's and everybody else

What's IRS tax filing status got to do with animal care and expertise?

That's what I want to know.

As fallout from the Death of Oreo's Law continues, and pet lovers spot abundant hypocrisy in responses from a certain Oreo's Law proponent . . .

Why aren't "animal rescue organizations" clamoring to be inspected for compliance with the minimum standards of care so often required of dastardly "breeders"?

Aren't they supposed to be the shining examples? 

Apparently not.  

Nonprofit Doesn't Mean "Good"

It doesn't mean "humane."

It doesn't mean ethical.

Looks like it doesn't mean competent, either:

People thought he was so cute and everyone wanted to adopt him. Three of them even tried and returned him the next day. We told people it would take at least two weeks before he stopped trying to bite you, but …still, he came back, all full of himself, and almost…proud that he outlasted another one. Giggle. We couldn’t stand it, it was so funny and so cute and he was such a holy terror.

"Giggle." ???  How clueless can you get?

Blue Dog's Modest Proposal

Not long ago, Blue Dog State answered an honest question, which later morphed into last week's blog on the merciful death of Oreo's Law and the humane food fight that rapidly ensued.

In response to Yes Biscuit's request for "criteria or guidelines . . .to be sure that rescue is a reasonable place to send the animals" Blue Dog suggested. . .

501(c)3 “rescue” organizations should be designated “pet dealers” under NYS law, subject to the same scrutiny, the same inspection for conformity to the same minimum standards of care as other pet dealers operating in the state of New York.

Support for the suggestion was. . . well . . . mixed.  At least in that forum.

Some felt that my modest proposal would mean the end to foster homes, but I believe that issue is readily fixable.

On the other hand, I'm not too big on double standards.  

I don't see why NFP status should provide a shield from inspection and regulation

As far as I'm concerned, it is either appropriate and necessary to regulate facilities selling animals in volume. . .or it is not.

So, let's give it another shot:

Take the dang Poll!

Note that Blue Dog's Modest Proposal assumes the presence of regulations governing  commercial kennels or pet dealers which typically exempt smaller "hobby-type" facilities.

Also, you may have to hit the lefthand "submit query" in order to vote.  The righthand "submit query" leads me to the poll results.  Go figure.

Proposed: 501(c)3's should be regulated like pet dealers or commercial kennels.
	Thumbs up! tax reporting status is meaningless in this context.
	Thumbs down! NFP's are just different. Hell if I can explain it.
	Licensing and regulation of facilities selling animals is unnecessary. Period.
	License and regulate any person or facility selling any animal under any circumstances.
pollcode.com free polls

What say you all?

Oreo's Law Smackdown

Winograd vs. ASPCA vs. Best Friends vs. Pets Alive vs. Animal Law Coalition vs. Mayor's Alliance vs. . . . 


Tantrums!  Deceit!  Megalomania!


And the needs of the People of the State of New York?  Did anybody even ask?


Oreo's Law goes down in flames in Albany


In mid-June, despite a last ditch effort by Oreo's Law proponents across the country to push the bill forward, the New York State Assembly Committee on Agriculture wasted little time in moving to table the controversial proposal.  Oreo's Law makes the transfer of shelter dogs or cats scheduled for euthanasia to any 501(c)3 that wants them mandatory and a matter of state law.


Tabling a young proposal is not unusual in New York, where successful bills typically spend six years in committee, under discussion and being refined, before passing into law.  New York isn't California.  It's not Utah, either.


Oreo's Law (A9449/S6412) was first introduced in the state legislature in January, 2010.  It was amended four times in five weeks.  Legislators might have wanted the ink to dry, maybe consult with their actual constituents, before making a decision.  I dunno.  It's just a thought.

Vengeance is Mine

Oreo's Law died in committee.  The shit storm commenced the day before, with Pets Alive's co-Executive Director, Matt DeAngelis leading the charge:


Let’s show [New York legislators] that in the end the PEOPLE of New York decide the POLICIES of New York, not some power hungry elitists with our money spilling out of their pockets.

I, Matt DeAngelis, promise that should [Assembly Agriculture Committee Chair] Mr. Magee table this bill I will personally pour my own personal time, energy and money into ensuring he is defeated this November, WHEN HE IS UP FOR RE-ELECTION.


Oh, brother.  So, it's okay for DeAngelis to pour his money into New York politics, but not for his opponents to do likewise?   

Pets Alive's co-executive director says he speaks for the "PEOPLE of New York" . . .but he lives in Connecticut.  DeAngelis doesn't want to live in New York, and legislators please note, he thinks the New York government is "insane."


Pets Alive is forming a Political Action Committee, which of course is a tool for influencing legislation and legislators based in large part on financial contributions, but Matt has a problem with "power hungry elitists" spending their money in a similar way?


This is all so confusing. 


DeAngelis took a swing at Best Friends Animal Society, too.  On June 29 the Connecticut resident blogged:

Best Friends never really understood New York and New Yorkers. This ain’t some rinky dink little town in Utah. If you want our money you need to actually get off the fence and take a stand. We’re tough and we’re smart. You don’t get a pass because you’re Best Friends, and you can’t spin your way out of your mistakes. We bent over backwards on Oreo’s Law to meet demands we thought were frankly, ridiculous. And then you reneged on your promise to support Oreo’s Law and went silent. You’re getting called on it now. If you want to keep spinning instead of doing the right thing and admitting your mistake and supporting the right side of this, you do so at your own peril. You might want to save the civility card for Best Friends Europe.

But four days later, Best Friends was Pets Alive's best friend in the whole wide world:

Thank you to Best Friends Animal Society for being our best friends. . .

Winograd:  "God History will absolve is on our side"

It wasn't only Pets Alive and Matt DeAngelis venting their rage on the internet. All kinds of dirty laundry is still swinging in the breeze.

Soon after the bill was introduced in Albany, Nathan Winograd of the No Kill Advocacy Center in Oakland, California was deeply involved in negotiating its terms with the ASPCA and using Best Friends Animal Society of Utah as an intermediary.  In his January letter to the Ed Sayres, Winograd makes a number of offers in an effort to garner their support for his proposal.

The ASPCA and Sayres apparently rejected them all.


After the bill was tabled in the state legislature, in a scathing and likely defamatory series of blogs Winograd calls Sayres . . .


a bad, small-minded and hard-hearted individual. . . .[who] has defended killing and killers throughout the nation, providing them political cover which allows them to remain in their positions and kill even more. . . . . Time and time again, [Sayres] has misappropriated donor funds given to save animals to promote their killing instead. . . .


Best Friends Animal Society didn't fair much better.  Winograd blogs that. . .


Best Friends not only took an indefensible position of neutrality on Oreo’s Law, abandoning the rescue groups and animals who made them who they are, but also tried to get Animal Ark and Animal Wise Radio to withdraw their support for this lifesaving legislation . . . .Their contradictory responses have been a bitter disappointment. . .No self reflection. No thoughtfulness. No truth. All politics. . . .[Best Friends] lashed out, lied to cover their behinds, and in doing so, proved me right.

Micah Kellner:  Whose elected official is he, anyway?


In the June 20 interview Oreo's Law sponsor Assemblyman Kellner did with AnimalWise Radio (interview begins at 1:09 mark), Kellner tells the tale of how his colleagues in the NYS legislature failed to  "stand up for animals."


He describes how Nathan Winograd helped him draft the proposal, and how Deborah Bresch--the ASPCA's Albany lobbyist--lied to him about whether the ASPCA was secretly working to rally opposition. Kellner and the show's host discuss how Best Friends (of Utah) "aggressively" lobbied Animal Wise (of Minnesota) to withdraw their support.


Kellner lists Oreo's Law's biggest supporters as:  the No Kill Advocacy Center (of California), Taimie Bryant (the UCLA animal rights law professor who wrote California's Hayden law), and "rescues from across the country."

No mention of his Manhattan constituency, by the way.

Kellner then goes on to explain that it isn't all bad news:  he was able to block the ASPCA's access to funding from increased intact/neutered license fee differentials anticipated in NY City.


Worth noting:  Maddies Fund contributed $24.4 million over the last five years to fund low cost spay-neuter efforts in NYC.  The ASPCA apparently claims to perform an additional 30,000 surgeries there.


Like radio host Mike Fry comments, how much more money do they need?   There are fewer than 30,000 licensed dogs in the City of New York, and with a neutering rate of roughly 80% among "responsible" dog owners, how much money does Kellner imagine an increased surcharge will raise?


The future of "No Kill":  Special interests, PAC's and more backroom wheeling and dealing?

Enacting a law, any law, isn't a pretty process.  But this is not normal.


Pets Alive's Matt DeAngelis feels the need to shut up those who dare voice concerns with a weird mix of defensiveness, bravado and ego-centric, testosterone-infused internet posts:


I’ve been following your defense of the ASPCA and Best Friends all over the place. 

You are dangerous in that you are giving people half the facts, and are totally missing the point. . . .And we are going to get Oreo’s Law passed without the ASPCA and with or without Best Friends. The only thing that seems to be in the way are well-meaning but sadly misinformed people like you. . . .Before you even ASK me about my credentials, go through the Pets Alive website. I’d put my credentials up against anyone else in this fight.

Oh, my. 

Nathan Winograd made a terrible blunder in pushing Oreo's Law as hard as he did, and using Pets Alive to do it.  And stuff like this: 

Read Dr. Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Think of the animals being killed when you do rather than African Americans being denied civil rights.

Not helpful at all.

Sometimes, boys, ya just gotta step away from the computer.

Gone, baby.  Gone.

I'm a pit bull owner.  There is nothing I want more than for "pit bulls" and other healthy, happy dogs to survive their shelter experiences.   I agree that shelter management, not their customers and definitely not the dogs themselves, is responsible for the slaughter.

But what we are witnessing is not democracy in action.  It's a freaking carnival ride. 

No one made a fact-based case for Oreo's Law. 

No one knows what it would do, although the evidence is clear that 501(c)3 status doesn't have anything to do with the proper care and management of animals.

Instead, Oreo's Law proponents are trying to cram it down the throats of 19 million New Yorkers based on emotion and a single incident involving one, very troubled dog.

My faith in Winograd's judgment--and maybe his sanity--is gone.  This isn't animal advocacy.  It's ego and obstinacy. 

Is this where "no kill" is headed?

- - - - -

Comments:  Something is going on with Blogger, and some comments are not posting.  They are not lost, and hopefully the dancing chimpanzees will fix the problem any minute now.  Until that happens, missing comments will be posted here--within the blog text itself.

Forensic Persecution: Latest ASPCA Growth Opportunity

Dogfight DNA Database:


Using "science" to kill dogs and profile dog owners 


The "humane" war against pit bulls and their owners has raged for 30 years or more and continues to kill defenseless dogs belonging to persons who have not yet gone to trial.   It continues to fill the coffers of corporate "humane" killing machines"

Playing to the audience, and their wallets


But you knew all that.  The scourge of pit bulls and their pesky owners dogfighting has to be the most reliable source of revenue ever identified and exploited dangerous and ever-growing crisis ever combated by HSUS, the ASPCA and their various toadies.


But whoring out the field of genetic research in order to more efficiently ruin dog breeders, destroy their families and kill their dogs?


How low can you go? 

The ethics of building a genetic law enforcement database

It seems that for the last 18 months the ASPCA has been collecting DNA samples from dogs seized during "dog-fighting investigations (sic)" and from "suspected (sic) dog-fight venues."

So the pit bull genes in the database are guilty until proven innocent.  Which sounds about right, coming from Agent Orange.

But here's the thing:  The ASPCA is a private corporation with limited law enforcement authority ONLY within the City of New York.   Its employees are not public servants.  Did the ASPCA obtain the consent of the dog owners involved before genetic samples were taken ?  If not, who authorized the sampling?

Did they steal the genetic material?

ASPCA watches CSI Miami, too

Melinda Merck, the ASPCA's forensic head honcho, says that "juries expect forensic science to support the evidence that's presented to them, and animal cruelty cases are no exception. This database breaks new ground in supplying that evidence for dog fighting investigations. . . ."

But Merck is a liar. 

An established genetic relationship between two dogs is evidence of an established genetic relationship between two dogs.  Not dogfighting.

Hint:  Every single American Pit Bull Terrier on the planet has an established genetic relationship with fighting dogs.  Every last one of them.  Every APBT breeder on the planet breeds dogs with a "genetic relationship" with fighting dogs.  Every trainer trains them, and every APBT owner owns them.

Until 50 years ago, or less depending on the state, dogfighting was a legal activity.

Get where I'm going with this?

In the never-ending debate, and faked pedigrees, and loaded litters, and bullshit about "fighting lines" and "game bred" dogs and which dogs go back to which, there is one thing that is certain:  there are plenty of people with happy, healthy pets that share a lot of genetic material with "fighting dogs."

And somebody, somewhere, bred them.

The DNA database is evidence of nothing.  It's a frame up.  A fake.  A money-grubbing farce.  And an insult to the general public's intelligence and sense of justice. 

"Establishing connections" in order to kill dogs

In its press release, Merck and the ASPCA claimed that. . .

"DNA analysis and matching through the database will help law enforcement agencies to identify relationships between dogs, enabling investigators to establish connections between breeders, trainers, and dog-fight operators."



Tim Rickey, who came to the ASPCA from the Humane Society of Missouri (and HSMO is a DNA Database partner) blew right by the ethical issues: 

"This will be an important tool. They can tie animals back to one or more convicted dogfighters and show they're from the same bloodline. It's a solid piece of evidence in a criminal case."


Exactly.  If your dog goes back to fighting dogs, you're going to jail and your dog has to die.  The database  "proves" it.

Its all so simple.  And Tim Rickey should know.  

Keep your eye on the bouncing ball

Rickey is a "graduate" of the National Cruelty Investigations School -- a 5 day program costing  $600 - $650 (10% early bird discount!) -- run under the auspices of the University of Missouri and established in partnership with. . .wait for it. . .

the Humane Society of the United States. 

Rickey may even have been taught by HSUS "experts."


Under the new partnership, HSUS experts on animal cruelty will teach some of the classes. This partnership is part of The HSUS’ Humane Society University, which provides professional development opportunities

Feeling better yet?

No?

Hopping aboard the Dogfight DNA Gravy Train

It's not just Merck and the ASPCA lining up to kill dogs based on cheek swab results. 

In addition to Missouri Humane, there's the Louisiana SPCA -- the very people that killed Floyd Boudreaux' pit bulls on arrival at the shelter, and tried to brush off the slaughter as "an assumption." 

And the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at the University of California at Davis.

They've all partnered up with Merck and the ASPCA.  They all want a piece of that sweet, sweet CSI Humaniac pie. 

U C Davis:  All dressed up and ready to party

Like the ASPCA, LASPCA and HSMO, Davis has its hand out, too.  Its not just the "humane community" that uses dogfighting as a fundraiser.

Persistent concerns from civil rights-minded advocacy groups about racial profiling and genetic privacy?

Calls for "ethically rigorous and practical guidance for investigators and research ethics boards"?  Not a U C Davis Veterinary Genetics Laboratory problem. 

Davis apparently sees no conflict in genetically profiling dogs which will almost certainly be exterminated as a result, participating in the misuse of genetic research in a pathetic and desperate attempt to convict dog owners of felonies, their joined-at-the-hip partnership with the extremist animal rights ASPCA, and their mission as veterinarians.

When public universities ally themselves with private corporations in order to make money, kill dogs and send people to jail,  I've got a problem with that.

U C Davis' School of Veterinary Medicine has a Dean, and an advisory council.

Could they all be okay with prostituting the University of California at Davis? 

Let's find out.

________________________

June 22 post script:

Blue Dog State is hearing from APBT owners and breeders that previously used U C Davis to screen for genetic illnesses. They fear DNA from their animals was used in the "dogfight" database. 

I encourage any dog owner, and especially any "pit bull" owner that used Davis for genetic testing, to contact the Dean and his advisors and express your concerns in a frank and uninhibited manner.  Be sure to mention that the DNA in their database appears to have been stolen, placing them in receipt of stolen property.  U C Davis could (and should) be sued.

See link above for contact info, or for phone calls, faxes and snail mail:

Dean Bennie I. Osburn
University of California
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
Phone:  (530)-752-1360 FAX: (530) 752-2801
Manager: Linda Ybarra



Executive Associate Dean - Academic Programs: John R. Pascoe
Manager: Erin Seay Phone: (530) 752-1324 FAX: (530) 752-2801


Associate Dean - Academic Programs: Jan E. Ilkiw
Manager: Erin Seay Phone: (530) 752-1324 FAX: (530) 752-2801


Associate Dean - Clinical Programs: David Wilson
Manager: Bill Herthel Phone: (530) 752-2992 FAX: (530) 752-9620


Associate Dean - Student Programs: Rance LeFebvre
Manager: Yasmin Williams Phone: (530) 752-1383 FAX: (530) 752-8315


Associate Dean - Research and Graduate Education: Kent C. Lloyd
Manager: Juanita Humphrey Phone: (530) 752-6865 FAX: (530) 752-2801


Assistant Dean - Research Development: Juanita C. Humphrey
Phone: (530) 752-6865 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Associate Dean - Public Programs: Donald J. Klingborg
Manager: Jan McCarthy Phone: (530) 752-6895 FAX: (530) 752-7563


Assistant Dean - Administration: Doreen E. Franke
Manager: Kathleen Spurr Phone: (530) 752-1370 FAX: (530) 752-2801


Assistant Dean - Development: Kelly J. Nimtz
Manager: Willa Weiand Phone: (530) 752-6261 FAX: (530) 754-8774

Be sure to communicate with the referring vet you used, and feel free to post a copy of any correspondance here.



Way to go, Davis. Partnering up with the ASPCA is a wonderful way to encourage confidence in your clients.  Not.

In Defense of Animals Crowns Scotlund Haisley

HSUS and Wayne Pacelle's Cowboy Scot 
Now IDA's President Cowboy Scotlund


So get with the program, pet lovers.


No bad deed goes unrewarded.  Not in the mixed up, muddled up, shook up world of animal rights extremism.


Convincing people to rescue and adopt


According to former President and current COB Eliot Katz, In Defense of Animals is all about the need to ". . .convince people to rescue and adopt instead of buying or selling animals, [and] to disavow the language and concept of animal ownership." 


IDA's Katz is unequivocal:  "It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership."

And now IDA has Scotlund Haisley as its enforcer-in-chief.


Adrenalin junkies:  playing SWAT or "convincing" the public and "convincing" sick, old dogs?

HumaneWatch.org's summary of the leadership role Scotlund Haisley and HSUS played in the illegal the seizure of 172 dogs belonging to a South Dakota dog breeder paints a vivid picture of what "convincing" entails in Cowboy Scot-speak.

A South Dakota judge ordered the dogs that somehow survived Haisley's "rescue" effort returned to their owner, who is still struggling to regain custody of his dogs and reassemble the pieces of his life.

Before the South Dakota debacle, there was HSUS's muscle-bound raid, led by Haisley, on the shelter Norman Pang operated for six days in Oahu.  

Pang struggled to administer to the needs of animals in a hospice his wife operated before her death, but made the mistake of turning to the "humane" community for assistance. 

Instead of help, Pang and the animals got Scotlund Haisley and his crew, who quickly labeled Pang a "murderer", "hoarder" and "collector." 

All because, following his wife's death, Pang realized he was out of his depth and immediately asked for help. 

Pang brought a civil rights lawsuit against HSUS, its Hawaiian Humane Society toady and others involved in the travesty.

IDA rolls out the welcome mat

In his press released welcome note to Haisley, Katz managed to delicately underscore the testosterone component:   "Scotlund Haisley has been a dynamic force in the animal protection world . . .[and he will] maximize IDA's efforts to become a more powerful voice and force. . . ."

Dynamic forces and powerful voices? 

Or did an organization claiming to exist for the "defense" of animals just hire an unemployed cowboy whose out-of-control and legally questionable behavior made his position at HSUS untenable? 

What kind of word games are these people playing?

It's all about the animals.  [Not.]

Frequently cited, rarely clarified --  and often thoughtlessly uttered -- this statement needs translation.  What it really means is:

The ends justify the means.


We'll do anything we want, and we think we won't be questioned.

We operate in plain view because we are so intoxicated by our own audacity that we think no one will question our authority, our motives, and our agenda. 

We say anything we want, offer any explanation handy.  We own the media.  We own the legislature.

We're above the law. 

It's "all about the animals."  Right?

uh. . .right?

Whole 'nother posse saddling up

and Blue Dog is just loving it.

This stuff with the billboards and newspaper ads and Facebook?  It leaves a mark, and Wayne Pacelle knows it.  HSUS ditched Scotlund Haisley when he became too great a liability.

Let's just hope John Goodwin and Chris Schindler are next.

As for IDA?  They'd better keep  their insurance premiums paid up. 

heh.

Souring "No Kill" in New York

Animal Extremist Flagship Scrambles for Cover. . .

. . .as Nathan Winograd puts the screws to the ASPCA, the NYS Legislature mulls "Oreo's Law" and Pets Alive still hasn't filed mandatory tax forms with the NYS Charities Bureau.

The curtain is about to go up on The Clash of the Titans, Act II.  So make yourself some popcorn.

 And grab a box of tissues, if you're not okay with a lot of political posturing at the expense of defenseless animals used as pawns in the this "humane" brinksmanship extravaganza.

 Barbarians at Ed Sayres' gate: animal extremists protest at ASPCA



These are not days of wine and roses at E. 92nd Street, and it  just     gets     worse  for Agent Orange -- the "voice of the voiceless" --  as things spiral downward.

Meanwhile, at the state capital. . .

 ASPCA's not the only one hearing voices

Invoking the name of a dog tormented by a criminal then rescued tormented by a criminal, exploited for her fund-raising potential, and finally killed by the ASPCA, agents for the "humane" treatment of animals are administering their own litmus test in Albany:  "Oreo's Law" -- For or Against?

The proposal makes the transfer of shelter animals scheduled for euthanasia to another shelter or rescue that wants them mandatory and a matter of state law.  Amended four times since it was first introduced in January, "Oreo's Law" appears to be slowly strangling in its own red-tape, procedural requirements and specifications.

Why would non-profits operating lawfully in the State of New York invite government involvement in what was their private, lawful business, anyway?

Oreo's unintended consequences

Here are a few questions for New York's elected public officials:

What if the "NONPROFIT, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE ANIMAL RESCUE OR ADOPTION ORGANIZATION" is fiscally irresponsible and has no competence whatsoever with dogs like Oreo, that -- for whatever reason and with an unknown capacity for improvement -- keep trying to bite people?

What connection is there between an organization's tax reporting status and its ability to manage problematic dogs?

Doesn't the mandate of elected officials include protecting the safety and welfare of the People of the State of New York from the blunders of outfits like Pets Alive?

What mechanism exists to protect the welfare of animals in the custody of  those "adoption organizations"?  They are exempted from humane standards of care requirements made of similar facilities with a differing tax-filing status, and are not routinely inspected by the State of New York.  Dogs with temperament issues could spend a lifetime sequestered at a private "adoption organization."  Who's going to check on them?

Will all of those tax-exempt "adoption organizations" stand up to public scrutiny?

Pets Alive:  Still crazy.  After all these years.

Pets Alive of Middletown, New York, occasionally known as "Best Friends, East Coast Division",  doesn't seem to notice subtle warnings.

 As of April 15, 2010, the self-styled "hero" of the campaign to pass Oreo's Law remains a scoff-law private corporation risking its tax-exempt status by failing to submit IRS Form 990's to the New York State Charities Bureau, as required by state law.  The Charities Bureau hasn't heard from Pets Alive since 2003.

In 2007, Pets Alive also needed to file for exemption from 2008 property taxes.  Neither its founder, nor any member of the Pets Alive Board of Directors, fulfilled the requirement.  Pets Alive was billed $46,000 for 2008 taxes and when they failed to pay, the county moved to foreclose.

Last month Pets Alive narrowly escaped disaster when the county executive took up their cause.  Would Ed Diana -- the elected public official that Pets Alive says "has our back" -- intervene on behalf of the rest of the people in Orange County, New York if they didn't make timely submissions to the tax assessor's office, too?

It isn't clear how the Town of Wallkill and the Pine Bush School District, short-changed when revenue from Pets Alive taxes failed to materialize, will manage without the income they expected.  Does Diana have $23 thou for the Pine Bush School District?  Cause they're looking for the funds. 


Business as usual at Pets Alive

In addition to its on-going failure to comply with state law, Pets Alive also continues to sell "cranky" dogs to "self-centered, arrogant, egotistical and yes, stupid people" who later return the dog, ask for their money back, involve their lawyer when Pets Alive refuses to issue a refund, and complain to the Better Business Bureau.

The beg-a-thons continue. 

The rationalizations for importing more and more animals from all over the country, and Puerto Rico, increasingly sound like a page from a hoarder's diary.  Days away from last month's near-miss with foreclosure, Pets Alive was busy bringing in more animals:

But they refuse to stop rescuing animals — [co-Executive Director] DeAngelis was in West Virginia over the weekend, rescuing more than 80 dogs and cats.  "We just can't stop on the possibility that we might close," [co-Executive Director] Clair says.

The Road to No Kill ?

This isn't working for me.  Not at all.  It leaves a sour taste in my mouth -- and I'm a person who really wants to believe in "no kill."  Or very, very low kill.

The pissing contests and political correctness assessments involving the ASPCA and the state legislature are bad enough. 

But legislation that would further empower a dysfunctional group like Pets Alive, and mandate placement of vulnerable and possibly dangerous animals to their care?  

I'm not buying it, and I don't think the people of New York should be compelled to buy it, either.  This is no where.