Becoming sicker and sicker of Carson’s ways makes me fight harder and harder against their ways. This shelter is going to continue to be talked about, exposed. You think I’ll lose heart and get emotionally caved in? You think my apathy will eventually overrun my desire to want to help? Nope. Gil, you’re wrong. I’m going to keep coming at you my brother. I’m going to keep saying hi, keep visiting your shelter, keep photographing “your” dogs. There’s nothing that you can do to change that. You’re going to keep killing the Pit Bulls, keep stereotyping them, keep justifying the doing of all of these awful things to them. I’m going to keep talking about it. You’re going to keep protecting those who don’t do their job, keep protecting the compassionless, keep handcuffing the ones who give a damn. I’m going to keep talking about it. You’re going to keep doing the same old things and pretending that you’re making a difference, keep sitting on your hands and pretending that you’re making the genuine efforts. I’m going to keep reminding people that you’re not. You cannot shut me up. You will not shut me up. Killing more dogs to get back at me, like a spineless little goblin, isn’t going to make me go away. Targeting specific dogs that you see me network, like a vindictive little coward, isn’t going to make me go away. I’ll just keep talking about it. I see wrong, it’s you. I see wrong, it’s Marcia. This will be stated, over and over again. That is all.

Recently I had been a part of an ongoing thread that was meant to network a 9-month-old Pit Bull mix that was dumped by her owner at the Carson shelter. The actual surrender took place on 3/24 and was witnessed by a good Samaritan, who documented everything, with both pictures and words. It was explained how this dog was brought in (connected to a yard chain), and then shoved into the small intake cage by her surrenderer, him slamming the door on her face so inappropriately that a volunteer actually ran out and felt it necessary to say something. This individual then attempted to walk through the shelter runs, presumably to look for another dog. He was stopped by that same volunteer, and it was implied that he should leave.

This dog was extremely shaken by the experience. If any indication is to be had from the callous way in which she was dumped, she was likely neglected in numerous ways throughout the length of her young life. Still, in the face of it all she remained sweet and calm.

Fast forward to 3/29, and the prior owner had apparently called the shelter wanting to reclaim the dog. How was this found out? Because the networking efforts had secured a rescue for her, and the rescuer was actually in the office trying to place a CTA (commitment to adopt) on the dog’s file. This dog had rescue, and Carson disallowed it because the prior owner now wanted her back. Now I’m all for a genuinely remorseful person, realizing their mistake and attempting to make it right. I’ll never personally understand surrendering your dog to a kill shelter, but everyone is different. Point is though that dogs, by and large, love their people, regardless of how they are treated. If there is genuine remorse being shown by a person that was put into a tough situation, then who’s to seriously stop that? Everyone certainly makes mistakes. A dog being redeemed by someone they love, as an alternative to the shelter killing them, is always preferable, obviously. But look at this circumstance specifically… Tough to make that argument. Then you add in the fact that rescue is there, ready and willing. Sadly, for this dog, she was ultimately picked back up by the person that discarded of her just days prior.

This is all leading to my ultimate point…

I asked whether this individual had to pay to reclaim the dog. That was curious to me because I know that in the past, Carson has charged huge sums of money (upwards of $300) for people to redeem their dogs that were LEGITIMATELY LOST and impounded at their facility. We are talking fees that are 2-3x their adoption fees. We are talking fees that are 10x their rescue fees. All for someone who has legitimately lost, misplaced, had their dog stolen, etc. Wouldn’t it be a gigantic hypocrisy if someone who has legitimately lost (and now taken the initiative to find) their dog, then had to pay far more money to redeem that same dog, than the individual who carelessly dumps their dog like trash, only to come back and try to reclaim it 6 days later? Isn’t there something inherently wrong with that?

I called the shelter and tried to get some answers. The phone operator told me that since a “stray” dog breaks a “leash law,” that that is how the higher fine is incurred. It doesn’t matter under what circumstance the dog ever were to get loose. If it were to happen, it automatically classifies the dog as a “stray,” and thus, in violation of the leash law. Whereas, if some rotten person actually dumps their dog on the shelters doorstep, slamming the cage door in its face on the way out for good measure, they don’t incur any fee whatsoever and have actually “done the responsible thing” in the eyes of LA County. They’ve “broken” no law. Yes it’s true, there’s no law on the books for being a heartless scumbag.

The worst part about all of these thoughts firing in my head is this… I was told last year by someone who frequently visits the shelter that they were aware of a family that had legitimately lost their dog, and that it was then impounded by the Carson shelter. The family was contacted by the shelter. They came in, they confirmed and visited, they absolutely wanted to redeem their dog. Just so happens, Carson had tied numerous fees to the eventual release, as well as a per day fee for housing the dog (prior to the owners even being eventually notified). Once the owners were onsite, they made the shelter aware that they couldn’t afford to pay those fees, but that they most definitely wanted their dog back. The shelter knew of these owners, knew of their intentions and that they wanted their dog back. Instead of working with this family, they gave them an ultimatum and would not let them leave with their dog. After a few days, the shelter opted to euthanize their dog. The family found out about it from a phone call.

What this does is it disallows the public from walking in between the 3 kennel buildings. With the runs being half inner and half outer, any given dog can now be missed, or if it’s shy, may just choose to avoid interaction, leaving the person with no other options. If you are taking networking photos this presents another set of challenges. Worse yet, it totally blocks the public from seeing any of the dogs that are present on the right (inner) side of the quarantine section. From the inside of the building, that particular section is always gated and locked off, but at least you can normally walk OUTSIDE and interact with the dogs. With the caution tape out, they sit, totally unbeknownst to the public. This tape has continued to be up for many days in a row. What’s the deal?

The perplexing part of it all is that I was told that the tape is up because “the high winds at night blow shingles and debris off the roofs of the buildings.” Okay. So? Why can’t someone pick all that crap up before they open? They don’t open until noon each day, it’s not that difficult. Even if there was a legitimate excuse for the thorough tape job, why isn’t it being removed once they open their doors to the public? If they have to put it up again each night after they close, so be it. I don’t know why that would be necessary, but I’m not trying to argue with their logic. But for the love of God, at least go out of your way to take some of it down, so it doesn’t continue to give the majority of the public the visual impression that half of the shelter is OFF LIMITS. I can tell you this, there’s no construction going on. The only reason for that tape is if they were laying new concrete, and they aren’t doing that. So what gives? Why does the Carson shelter continue to blatantly do things that just overtly give the impression that they don’t care?

Tonight I was taking part in a thread, and some person hit me with the “In order to save all of the homeless dogs in the world, every man, woman and child would have to adopt 7 of them” argument. Have you ever had this argument thrown at you? This person even cited a certain Pit Bull rescue that actually stated the same argument in one of their promotional videos, in an attempt to paint the picture of overpopulation. Goodness gracious, I don’t know who made this thing up but by sheer numbers alone, it’s totally impossible. The fact that Pit Bull rescues are being duped into using this fuzzy math, unbeknownst to them, is even more troubling.

Nathan Winograd has spoke about this plenty of times, but allow me to just quickly illustrate how faulty that argument is…

There is roughly 313 million (313,000,000) people in the United States.
When you multiply that by 7 (313,000,000 x 7), you get 2.19 BILLION (2,191,000,000) dogs and cats.

Now, we all know that roughly between 4 and 5 million animals (dogs and cats) are killed inside of United States shelters every single year.
So, if the 2.19 BILLION number is even remotely correct, that would mean that after subtracting the 5 million killed, there’s 2.189 BILLION of these animals THAT NEVER SEE A SHELTER. That’s absolutely ludicrous.

Put another way,
Let’s take the high number of yearly kills (5 million) and work that into the figure that you come up with (2,191,000,000) when you accept the proposed notion which states that each person in the United States would “have to adopt 7 pets”…
If you divide 2,191,000,000 (amount of animals this “7 pet” scenario invents) by 5,000,000 (amount of yearly kills), that would inexplicably mean that there are 438.2 times more dogs and cats (per year) in homes than those that end up dying (per year) in the shelters.

Put another way,
If you divide 5,000,000 (amount of yearly kills) by 2,191,000,000 (amount of animals this “7 pet” scenario invents), that would inexplicably mean that only 0.00228% of all dogs and cats in the United States will actually be killed by a shelter this year. That would mean that by default, 99.99772% of all dogs and cats in the United States currently have homes!
Really? 99.9% of all dogs and cats have homes? I don’t think so. But that’s what the numbers say, if in fact this country truly had enough animals for each person to “have to adopt 7.”

How do I know that? Because there is a CONFIRMED number of shelter animals being annually killed, that’s how. So that’s what happens when you have a confirmed number of something (5,000,000), and then a made up number of something (313,000,000 x 7 = 2,191,000,000). The 2.19 BILLION# clearly isn’t possible, yet it’s being used (vaguely, minus the actual math) as a pretext for why they must keep killing. These individuals, with their claims, are implying that there are 2.19 BILLION “stray/homeless” dogs and cats in this country. Yet, there is confirmed numbers of yearly shelter intakes, as well as confirmed numbers of yearly shelter kills… So what happened to the other 2.189 BILLION animals??? Well, by default, they’d either have to be in homes, or currently still out roaming the streets. Please see through this bullshit.

If you don’t quickly understand how completely asinine these numbers prove that argument to be, then I don’t really know what else to say. I don’t necessarily blame people for accepting a catch phrase on its face, especially when certain people parrot it around over and over. But to see that the actual math thoroughly proves the point insane, and to still go around believing it, or to still not have a shift in perspective… Well, that’s just sad.

Recent Carson shelter call list…

Recent Downey shelter call list…

I’m pretty honored to have Sway featured in the upcoming American Dog Magazine. And it’s amazing to have us featured alongside such wonderful company. Thank you to ADM for the inclusion, is very humbling to say the least. The below issue is their “Spring 2012” run, so I don’t believe it’s available quite yet. Stay tuned!

In a recent interview, Brenda Barnette estimated that of the roughly 20,000 dogs killed by LA City in 2011, that around 8,400 of them were “irreparably suffering.”

Last year, in Los Angeles we put approximately 20,000 (out of approximately 56,000) pet animals to death. By most standards, at least 10 – 15 percent of the 20,000 was irreparably suffering (8,400) and could not be saved. So, do the math: 20,000 did not make it out alive and 8,400 were suffering and could not be saved, leaving 11,600 who were unnecessarily put to death for the reason of no space available.

I’m only making this post because I find that estimation to be not only false, but incredibly misleading.

First of all, 15% of 56,000 is 8,400.
15% of 20,000 is 3,000.
56,000 is the total intake amount that she cites, while 20,000 of them were killed.
So when she implies that 15% of those killed (20,000) is 8,400 animals, and that those 8,400 animals were “irreparably suffering,” well, that’s just not true, and for 2 different reasons.
She then subtracts the 8,400 from the 20,000 killed, which gives her the figure (11,600) that represents those “unnecessarily put to death.”
The real way to get to that figure is to subtract 3,000 from 20,000. That will show that around 17,000 animals were killed for space.
Instead, she’s trying to imply that they had to kill almost half of their animals because they were “irreparably suffering.” That claim is absolutely bogus, and here’s why…
1) Let’s assume the 8,400 number is correct. There is no way in hell that that many animals were suffering so bad that they had to be legitimately “put out of their misery.”
2) Many of the rescued dogs ARE the worst medical cases, the ones in the most dire of straits, yet she dumps that whole section into the “eventually killed” column without accounting for the percentage that actually made it out alive.
3) She uses the high end of her estimation (15%) and pulls a completely inaccurate total out of her kill total, leading many people to view the scope of the shelter problem (the current reality) in a much more promising light.

So while I most definitely applaud her actual point–the statement about the term “pet overpopulation” being inaccurate–she knowingly (or unknowingly) fudged the numbers, which drastically lowered the total figure of animals that she claimed were “killed for space.” This is not an honest conversation, nor does it thoroughly portray reality.

LA City is still killing LOTS of dogs for space, just as LA County continues to do (at an even quicker and larger rate). The first dogs being killed, and the most dogs being killed, are Pit Bulls. They are not “irreparably suffering,” they are just killed. Please don’t try and curtain that reality. Please don’t try and dress it up. That’s my only angle. Those continuing to be killed (of all breeds) are by and large healthy and mentally sound, loving animals.

While I was at the Carson shelter on Saturday I noticed a couple of overly sad dogs. You see a lot of sad dogs in these types of environments, and understandably so, but these 2 specific dogs were visibly distraught with depression. Little did I know that once I got back home I’d realize that the 2 dogs that I noted as being overly depressed were actually dumped together and from the same household! These are things that you don’t fully catch onto in the moment, especially when they’ve been separated and potentially housed in different buildings. But sure enough, while sitting at my computer compiling all of the appropriate information from the kennel cards I noticed the same intake dates, then the same surrendering circumstances, and finally the ID numbers coming right after each other. And unfortunately, I noticed it not once but twice.

This is Rocket & Cisco, 2 dogs from the same household that were surrendered together on 2/13. Rocket (A4395776), the white male, didn’t move from his spot in the corner. He would just watch you from the doorway, spending most of his time sleeping and likely dreaming of being back home. Cisco (A4395775), the red female, also felt most comfortable in the outside corner. She wouldn’t even come into the run, opting instead to just stay outside and look for her person (or maybe Rocket) to come back. These are the 2 dogs that I noted as being “visibly distraught with depression.” They are both still alive…

*Update* Rocket & Cisco were both killed on 2/24.

This is Sam & Violet, 2 dogs from the same household that were surrendered together on 2/10. Sam (A4395191), the tricolor male, is a super loving boy who seems to be a volunteer favorite. He had very enthusiastic notes written on his kennel card detailing how sweet he was and that he walked great on a leash. Violet (A4395190), the gray female, is the gentlest girl in the world. She is extremely calm, totally beautiful, and has some of the most soulful eyes imaginable. They, too, are both currently still alive…

*Update* Sam was adopted on 2/22, Violet was killed on 2/23.

If you’d like to save any of these 4 dogs then please call or stop by the shelter at any time. You can reach the shelter by calling either 310-523-9566 or 310-527-5158. Also, please note the correct ID number when calling. For those wanting to visit, the shelter is located at 216 W. Victoria St. Gardena, CA 90248. It is urgent that you note your interest, if indeed interested, as these dogs can and will be killed at any time.

Westminster Dog Show just recently opted to sever ties with Pedigree after 24 years of sponsorship service. This decision was apparently made after an overwhelming amount of people who make up their “primary audience” voiced concerns about the commercials promoting the adoption of shelter dogs.

How sad is that? That people are so apathetic and cowardly that they’d rather not be subjected to a 30 second commercial, showing a betrayed dog behind bars, because of “how it makes them feel.” Screw how many people might see that commercial and feel inspired to visit a shelter and adopt, screw the fact that the commercial is visually accurate in its portrayal of what you would see if you’d visit a shelter, screw the fact that millions of shelter animals are actually killed every single year inside of this country because of a lack of awareness (among many other things). And here we have a short commercial that may help make a dent, may help some of these dogs find homes, may actually inspire or initiate an emotional response… Well, too bad, many Americans are just too cowardly to even watch. They don’t want to pay attention to a reality-based world because they’re too busy living inside of their bubble. Surprised? Out of sight, out of mind. What a disgrace.

You people that would rather remain silent, or turn away, or close yourself off from tragedies, or from information, or from discussion, or from things that may not affect you directly–you people are worthless. You people are the reason this world is so completely fucked up. Because y’all grossly outnumber the people who actually give a shit. And then ignorance reigns. And then oppression reigns. Yes, this is just a commercial. But yes, I just took it there–to a political perspective, to a societal perspective–because at the end of the day, it’s all the same, it’s all relatable. This is the reason that we get what we get. This is the foundational reason why all of the injustice this world serves up consistently continues to happen. Because the people as a majority do not care. They would much rather look away, they’d much rather not be bothered with it. We are better than this.

Be forewarned: The CA Gov. is coming after the Hayden Act! This is a law that currently guarantees all of the dogs a certain number of days before they are legally able to be killed by the shelters. Dog Park Media’s newest video (pictured above) features Tom Hayden, former Senator & author of the now 15 year old shelter legislation, addressing Jerry Brown directly… Please share this throughout California, with any and everyone who loves animals. This is EXTREMELY important. I’m proud to have my photos featured alongside this message and in support of such a worthy cause. I cannot stress how big of a deal remaining vigilant is in the face of this blatant attempt at passing the buck. These politicians are clearly more than happy to defund legitimate and worthy compassionate programs, while at the same time wasting money in other areas by the millions. Only the dogs will suffer here. If this legislation is repealed or picked apart, a shelter that now kills Pit Bulls in 6 or 7 days will likely start killing them in 3. That is completely wrong and deplorable. Stand the hell up California. This cannot happen, ever.

Things you can do to voice your opposition:
Sign this petition.
Call the Governor’s office at 916-445-2841.
Fax a letter of opposition to 916-558-3177.
Email the Governor’s office (choose BUDGET as the subject).
Mail a letter of opposition to Jerry Brown ~ c/o State Capitol ~ Suite 1173 ~ Sacramento, CA 95814.
Post to Governor Brown’s Facebook page.
Tweet the Governor and make him aware of your opposition.
Contact your local representatives and make it clear that you oppose any repeal of any portion of the Hayden Act (simply enter your zip code).
Share! Share! Share!

Worth note: Apparently the slimy Humane Society is making the case that there has been a “paradigm shift” inside of California shelters, rendering the Hayden Act “unnecessary.” They are in essence giving their very public blessing to the stripping away of this legislation. This “paradigm shift” nonsense is completely false and a fairytale no matter which way they try to spin it. Even if it was true, it’s like saying that a country has learned to “use free speech,” and thus, we don’t need the law anymore that guarantees its existence. A politician shouldn’t be trusted, and neither should the HSUS, who are part of the problem.