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. 

ASPCA Flim-Flams the Feds

Publicly-ish Accountable Law Enforcement

Privately employed, self-described "humane authorities" training civil servants and law enforcement personnel on the Fed's nickle. Nation, perception is everything.

You just gotta love Stephen Colbert:

It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. The perception of authority The ASPCA goes to great lengths to mimic public servants answerable to tax-payers and voters -- truthiness! gotta have it! -- but in reality ASPCA employees are private contractors responsible to a privately-controlled corporation which is effectively shielded from public scrutiny. The Freedom of Information Act doesn't apply to the ASPCA. They mostly don't have to tell us shit if they don't feel like it. ASPCA's privately employed personnel are responsible to its own privately-elected board of directors. Not "We, the People". U. S. Department of Justice underwrites ASPCA jive ASPCAPro.org (an ASPCA offshoot that has "gathered information and knowledge from our experts, along with profiles, sample materials, and inspiration from proven programs in the field, for you to share and use") recently announced a free, online training program for law enforcement personnel on "dogfighting detection." The program is financed by the U. S. Department of Justice. Knowledge from their experts, huh? "Experts" like Melinda Merck?

Is the DOJ okay with the ASPCA's scorched earth policy for "pit bull" owners in Georgia? Working hand in hand with Norred and Associates -- the private, for profit, security-firm-turned-humaniac-tool that boasted of initiating 19 raids leading to the deaths rescues of "fighting dogs" in Georgia in 2009 alone -- the ASPCA has been instrumental in violating the civil rights of dog and animal owners. Just as a reminder, here's a shot of the Merck tucking one of Joe Woodall's puppies under her arm and walking off with him. She dumped the pup in a dog pound 250 miles away, along with the rest of Joe's dogs. Merck never looked back.

Some "expert" she is. Woodall was never arrested, never charged with any crime. . .despite Merck's "expert" opinions. How many dogs have died due to ASPCA "expertise" ?

Privatized law enforcement: hunky-dory with the DOJ? The American Dog Breeders Association is calling for an investigation into interference in law enforcement functions by private corporations, including the ASPCA, in Georgia: The Governor or Attorney General of the State of Georgia should implement an immediate and thorough investigation into the undue and corrupt influence of these private corporations in law enforcement training and procedures. The citizens of Georgia cannot continue to be victimized by privately employed individuals operating in the public sector with the assistance and blind support of law enforcement and prosecutors throughout the state. Fair and lawful enforcement of Georgia statutes is the responsibility and exclusive domain of our public servants. I think the ADBA is right, and I hope the citizens of Georgia get their investigation. Your tax dollars at work: ASPCA training for civil servants Looking at the list of resources provided -- and there is plenty to choose from -- I have to wonder just what kind of crappola persons trained by Agent Orange are likely to receive. Planted in the ASPCA-dominated resource material are any number of truthy fake facts, like:

Tethered dogs and dogs not surgically sterilized are more likely to be "aggressive."

Castration leads to a "longer, healthier" life for pets.

"Many" "puppymills" thrive because the operators are animal torturers.

Private persons who take in large numbers of animals are "hoarders", and keep the animals in deplorable and squalid conditions.

And there's more. Lots more. Fake cops doing fake jobs

In the radical animal rights movement, each of the four main players has its own area of dominance. Sure, there's some overlap in activities, but there are no real policy differences between PeTA, Best Friends, HSUS and the ASPCA.

An extremist idea -- for example "doggy gonads just have to go" is first dramatized by PeTA.

Legislation to eliminate objectionable dog testicles and etc. is then lobbied by HSUS. . .

and resulting anti-testicle laws are subsequently enforced by the ASPCA's private army.

Finally, Best Friends steps in to make us feel better about the whole thing. We are promised that in compensation for genetic oblivion, the sterile dogs will get to live out their days in permanent seclusion in the middle of a desert.

Some shit, huh?

Perception-based government

Transparency-ness and public-ish accountability.

Anybody else got a problem with the DOJ handing over hard-earned dollars so that the ASPCA can mess with the minds of local sheriff's department employees? Who authorized the DOJ to bankroll an animal rights indoctrination program? Dude. Who stole my country?

Wayne Pacelle's 2009 Nightmares

Blunders Wayne Pacelle Wanted to Bury Not everything went according to plan in 2009 Showered in Shit in Louisville The resignation of Metro Louisville Animal Control Director Gilles Meloche became effective on December 31. Back in the day, Meloche was HSUS's fave candidate for the job. He'll soon blow town with his tail tucked between his legs, in a firestorm of charges involving animal abuse, sexual harassment, financial irregularities and demands for his prosecution. Parts of the animal control ordinance Meloche used like a weapon against Louisville citizens and their pets were struck down by a federal court judge earlier this year, and the decision may serve as a model for reform in other jurisdictions as pet owners compare the provisions of the discredited Louisville ordinance with their own. In a sworn deposition, HSUS's man in Louisville reminded the world of what HSUS stands for: negative profiling, the encouragement of discriminatory practices and the steady harvest of low-hanging fruit -- like pets belonging to the poor: On "poor people" and dog license compliance, Meloche stated under oath: They just don't license, period. On "poor people" and access to veterinary care: First, we know one thing, they barely go to veterinary clinics. On "poor people" and cruelty to animals: Most of the cruelty that I've seen --that we see are from, of course, poor neighborhood, and it's dynamic. But, hey, HSUS's Kentucky State Director Pam Rogers thinks Gilles Meloche is "easy to work with" and HSUS helped Metro Louisville write the ordinance that empowered him. I hear there are enough claims pending from Louisville pet owners who suffered irreparable harm under Meloche's tenure to sue Louisville back into the Stone Age. Will Wayne Pacelle assume responsibility for that train wreck of an ordinance, and that freak of an animal control director? Nursing Puppies "Too Dangerous" to Live In February of this year, animal lovers were shocked and then sickened as HSUS employees John Goodwin, Chris Schindler and Amanda Arrington insisted that 127 dogs seized in North Carolina pursuant to dogfight charges--including 60 puppies, some so young they were still nursing--had to die. HSUS personnel cynically testified that the dogs were "too dangerous" to live and claimed that it would cost $190,000 each to rehabilitate them. The authorities listened to HSUS. None of the dogs was evaluated for potential placement. They were all killed. Setting aside the gut-wrenching, heartless leadership role HSUS played in forcing the slaughter of innocent animals, the public relations blowback suffered by HSUS and its crew of Dog Fight Czars was instantaneous and unrelenting. No-Kill advocate Nathan Winograd called the massacre "The Death of Hope."

HSUS critics were so implacable that two months later HSUS was forced into orchestrating an "emergency summit" (and whitewash opportunity) for what it called "pit bull stakeholders" in Las Vegas. Pacelle announced a revised and enlightened position on pit bulls. . .and immediately got caught pushing a breed specific policy in Indianapolis.

Animal lovers--and bloggers--aren't fooled so easily. Not any more. When the HSUS donation machine attempted to usurp the story of "Faye" -- attempting to foist HSUS off as the benefactor of a pit bull injured by dogfighting and begging for cash from a trusting public -- outrage quickly followed. It's getting harder and harder to find a pit bull owner that thinks HSUS is friend. Pit bulls are the coalmine canaries in HSUS's extremist war against pets and the people who love them. HSUS's blunders and flailings this year made it clearer than ever. John Goodwin: Animal Theft Under Color of Law Documentation of HSUS's Dogfight Czar himself seizing friendly, happy dogs from the homes of innocent people broke in 2009. John Goodwin was caught on videotape, partnered up with private security firm Norred and Associates, the ASPCA, and local authorities, and raiding a home. Videos of the seizure of beautiful, healthy dogs from Joe Woodall in Gilmer County, Georgia remain up on You Tube for all to see. What do you call it when privately employed individuals working for a not-for-profit corporation instigate a raid of some one's property, seize well-cared for dogs, dump them in a dog pound 250 miles away. . . and then walk away? Woodall was never arrested, never charged with a crime. HSUS just showed up and took his dogs. It cost Joe more than he could afford in lawyer's bills and eight weeks of sleepless nights before he got his dogs back, and they were a mess when they finally returned to him. So, what's the word for that? I'm thinking "theft" hardly does the sequence of events justice. Quick note for the many people who have asked: More than a year since the raid, Joe reports that "Weeman" -- the puppy that came home with down pasterns after eight weeks on the dog pound's cement floor and incorrect food -- is doing much better. Handsome, athletic and playful Weeman and the Woodall family that loves him stand ready for the challenges 2010 will bring. Footloose and fancy free with the feds In late December the Spay and Neuter HSUS campaign was launched. The campaign is calling for the revocation of HSUS's tax-exempt, charitable designation due to its excessive lobbying activities. The campaign provides 14 pages of questionable HSUS tax filings, policies and activities and requests the IRS fraud division to investigate them. Want a piece of the action? Follow the link above. It's not too late to join the thousands of animal lovers everywhere who have written to the IRS and to their own federal representatives demanding answers. We look forward to a response at your earliest possibility, Wayne-o. This ain't over. Not even close. But the start of the new year is a good time to take stock. These were some of HSUS's failures and flailings that meant the most to me. Best wishes for the coming year to Blue Dog State readers. And a heartfelt flip of the bird to you, Wayne Pacelle.