Monday, April 2, 2012


Imagine my response when I received a copy of the "No Kill"s Dollar and Sense Guide (NKDS Guide) on April Fools Day? The Guide states "The Economic Benefits of "No Kill" Animal Control, reduce costs, increase revenue, support community business. A community cannot afford NOT to embrace "No Kill".

In San Bernardino County, one municipal animal shelter elected to establish a “No-Kill” model of animal sheltering six years ago and as of today still has not achieve No-Kill status. Using this shelter as an example, when the County of San Bernardino provided animal control services to this community and operated the animal shelter on the City’s behalf, the total cost to the City was less than $400,000 (net city costs). The total cost today is over $2,000,000 (net city cost). This is five times the amount the City was paying the County of San Bernardino to provide the same state mandated services.

Using this facility as an example, they are now spending over $2,000,000 of tax-payer funds to pay for animal services that were previously provided at a cost of less than $400,000. This is an additional $1,600,000 per year. Multiple this amount by six years and you get a minimum additional cost $9,600,000. In some years the city spent even more than the additional $1,600,000. So let’s look at the first statement alleged in the NKDS Guide. Reduce Costs. In this case, we would question when the City will receive the return on their $9,600,000 investment and actually reduce cost below the $400,000 level the City was previously paying the County. For some reason, we do not believe this will happen in our lifetime.

On to the second statement, Increase Revenue? Revenue has been static in this jurisdiction since they have focused all of their attention on pet adoption. Dog licenses have actually decreased from over 14,000 dogs licensed when the County operated the shelter to just 8,767 licenses sold in 2011. Who needs additional revenue or license sales when the City is paying an addition $1,600,000 to provide the same service? Even with increased adoptions, the cost to provide those adoptions has increased as well which has resulted in significant additional cost to the tax-payers and stagnant revenue. You know that when you spay/neuter, vaccinate, and provide extensive services to cats that are Trapped/Neutered and Abandoned, there is no revenue generated from this activity only increased costs in operations. For canines, the same services are provided and then the dogs are released to rescue groups at absolutely no cost to the receiving rescue group. Just another tax-payer subsidized program that generates
absolutely no revenue.

Now for the third and final statement, Support Community Business. This may be accurate if you take all of the adopted pets to local veterinarians and give the veterinarians all of that additional tax-payer funded money that will subsidize giving the “free” tax-payer funded pets to the "No Kill rescue" groups so they can make money and profit from this program. This is a win-win for the veterinarians and "No Kill" rescue groups. Just keep doling out those tax-payer dollars so the private “No Kill rescuers” can make a killing off of the tax-payers backs. This is why the “activists” are so critical of any shelter that is not “No-Kill.” They may lose all of those tax-payer subsidized animals and lose the financial gain they can make by sensationalizing their appeals to donate now to save the next pet from the Killers!!! There is no stronger motivator than money. And that is all the “activists” care for is how much money they can make to continue their “Holier Than Thou” crusade.

Now ask yourself, can a community afford “No-Kill” and the additional costs of millions of dollars in this economy? In wealthier communities possibly, those who have not been hard hit by the recession. But in low income communities, like many of those served by San Bernardino County, the answer is no.

Here is another view of this April Fools Joke from the only State to fall for "No Kill". It is a miserable failure as it has been in so many other places.

One of the first things I noticed was the absence of Austin TX in the publication. Since Austin has been discussed in my various posts on this blog, and I addressed the sustainability issue at Working to Help Animals, there is no need to address that issue further. I guess the advocacy center did not want to explain away the fact that Austin's budget has been increasing over half a million every year.


  1. The true animal rescue folks are going to be in trouble when the new world order comes knocking. They are going to be led around by their noses by people claiming to "know what's best for them".

    Sad, sad and sad. And the saddest part? You can't wake these people up from their stupor.

  2. Just like the GARA (Ga. Animal Rescue Act) that the NKers/dog breeders are trying to pass -

    The bill would allow shelters to start charging animal rescue groups for pulling animals from animal controls and shelters.

    And the sad part - the true animal welfare groups are all over the internet saying "Vote YES" on this bill. Why? Because they haven't even read the bill - and probably won't. All it takes is for a "NK" person/org to tell them it's a bill that will help animals and they jump on the bill's bandwagon, never once reading the bill or researching into WHO is supporting and pushing it.

  3. Just like the Hayden in CA in 98, no one bothered to think it would pass because it was horrible. But it did and now everyone regrets it except the rescues. They have run all over the shelters wrecking them in CA. It is a sorry state of affairs in CA, creating true monsters under the guise of "No Kill" rescue.

  4. Well - one thing is for certain - and that's that, in time, this entire dog breeder supported NK agenda WILL be exposed. Unfortunately, it will be at the (continued) price of the true innocent victims: the shelter animals.

    The ignorant supporters of the NK agenda are going to be having to endure serious buyer's remorse - as well as guilt for unknowingly helping dog breeders to destroy our animal welfare progress thus far.

  5. And if you check Google,you'll see that it's not just Hayden and California - it is nationwide in every state.

    My money is on Akc is the one paying the bills for these NK groups to infiltrate the nation's animal controls and humane societies.
    What other anti-animal group could afford to hire Rick Berman for their dirty work.

  6. This website has a list of other anti-NK websites on it's menu. That's what needs to be done - start listing all groups that are trying to alert others about this NK fraud - that way it'll be easier for people to find info.

  7. Strangely enough, it is the kennel club in San Bernardino that is standing up for Devore. I agree with you, I think "No Kill" has been endorsed by the AKC and other kennel clubs all along. However, in this case of Devore, it may play a different role. The activists have been pushing for an animal commission, thinking they will fill the seats. They didn't think that maybe those seats will now be filled by the kennel club members. You know, the people who bring business to SB, the ones who pay taxes, the ones who are organized and can vote. So why would the politicians put the activists in those seats, activists who don't make political contributions. The animal commission will be a snake that turns on the activists and bites them, as if they don't deserve that.

  8. Those animal control "advisory" boards and committees are just a tool that the dog breeders/NK are using nationwide - to gain a foot in the true animal welfare door.

    Once they get in there, they begin changing/voiding and adding new/their wording in the way of policy and ordinances. There are numerous examples of that in counties and cities across the nation.

    These NK pushers are, in my opinion, being flown in all over the United States to different cities - for the purpose of creating chaos and conflict at the local county or city animal control, demand the firing of the director - and then get one of their NK people in as director. Look no further than L.A. Animal Services - among many others across the map.

  9. That's been proven time and time again, yes. Warren Palitz, in Indianapolis, was a dog trainer specializing in hard to handle dogs (pit bulls, gripping dogs) and he was the chair of the animal board in Indy. He recommended Doug Rae for the position of AC director, not telling the City of Rae's complete failure in Philly. Both were fired within 10 months. They found cats stuffed in the ventilation ducts so the shelter would not look overcrowded. ACOs were testifying that they were told not to pick up strays, it would affect their numbers. A complete mess.

  10. Exactly - a true "no kill" shelter would have to have unlimited kennel space - and money.
    Private rescue shelters can do this.
    Govt. funded animal controls cannot.

    That is the bottom line - I don't care how many conferences he holds, or number of books he sells.

    He is selling a "product" for someone - that's it.

  11. A product that has so many failures it needs to be on the recall list.

  12. And you have no telling how many dog breeders who are also lobbyists, and they beg their way onto these local advisory boards and don't let the officials know who they truly are.
    Gwinnett Co. Animal Control in Ga. is but one example. They have an Akc breeder lobbyist on their "animal advisory" board - who is also quietly pushing the nk agenda, as well.,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=ce7868657b5cb0e2&biw=1006&bih=501
    If you have to "win" by deception, you have sold your very soul for that "win".

    And the NK agenda, and Akc, have sold their souls - many times over all across the nation.

  13. lol @ the recall list.

    I'll up you one and say that these groups need to be investigated for fraud - b/c they are soliciting for monetary donations claiming their product as "no kill" when it is not.
    And claiming they are "animal welfare" organizations - when they are not.

    Dog breeding is NOT animal welfare - it is animal USE.

  14. These are just some of the dog breeders' "no kill" shelters that have been in the news:

    Sayreville, New Jersey – In danger of closing

    Porter Co., Indiana – “…the troubled no kill shelter”








    FORGOTTEN FELINES – no kill shelter for cats – CLOSED



    Davidson Co., North Carolina – NO KILL SHELTER EUTHANIZES OVER 5000 ANIMALS

    Brooklyn, Ohio NO KILL SHELTER Closes

    Raeford, North Carolina – State to put down no kill shelter for five years of failed inspections – 2009 animal count was 746 dogs and 592 cats

    Las Vegas No Kill Forced To Shut Down Due to Conditions

    San Antonio, Tx No Kill Forced To Close - Evicted

    Gilmer County No Kill Rescue Closing – Lack of Volunteers

    Charlotte, North Carolina Cat Rescue – “Too many cats”

    Colorado No Kill Shelter Served “Cease and Desist” Order -

    Henderson, North Carolina No Kill Rescue -

    Stephenville, Canada No Kill Shelter Forced To Close – “...suffering severe neglect”

    Picqua, Ohio No Kill Shelter Condemned By City Health Officials

    Kingman, Arizona No Kill Shelter In Front of Judge – 174 dogs along with 88 cats and 13 pigs.

    Texas City, Texas No Kill Rescue - county authorities seize 187 cats and find 27 dead -

    Lynchburg, Virginia No Kill Requests More Than Triple Budget Increase

    Marion County< W. Virginia No Kill Shelter Faces Possible Shut Down

    Boone County, W. Virginia No Kill Rescue – Abuse Investigation

    Bloomingdale, Chicago No Kill Rescue – state officials claim “crowded and unsanitary” conditions

    Jersey City, New Jersey No Kill Shelter – State threatened to shut down due to health problems

    Jersey City, New Jersey No Kill Spca Shut Down For Health Violations

    South Africa No Kill Shelter – Exposed for Conditions

    Washougal, Washington No Kill Shelter On Verge of Shut Down

  15. Anon the links to each of those stories is on the nokillexposed site in case someone wants to do their research.

    In CA, Kern County has a breeder on their commission. I haven't check lately to see if she still was but she was there for quite awhile. Not unusual. Breeders have a vested interest in being on a commission.

  16. And you know, it's not that I have a problem with everyone being heard - no matter their opinion - but the problem I have is that most of them are not disclosing that to these boards and advisory commissions.

    Just like the NAIA (fraudulently - in my opinion) claiming to be an "animal welfare organization". That is misrepresentation of a non profit 501 who solicits for public donations. i.e. deceptive practices in order to obtain monetary donations.


Remember no accusations without proof. Rant if you will, it won't be published.