Monday, September 17, 2012


The ASPCA originally issued this statement concerning No Kill, Winograd style.


A member of the community will begin to adopt the talking points of the Extremist Agenda using aggressive and divisive language to describe the state of that community's animal welfare organizations.

The proxy forms an organization (i.e. No Kill San Bernardino/Austin/Philly) that will act as the local brand for the Extremist Agenda and begin to use social networking to expand.

The No Kill organization lobbies local public officials and candidates regarding the euthanasia rates at the municipal shelter. In many cases, there does exist public attention to the need to reform the sheltering system to increase lifesaving. The proxy will get involved in providing questionnaires and financial support to candidates perceived as sympathetic to the Extremist Agenda.

The Extremist Agenda slanders the existing shelter director and any local humane organization that is deemed as sympathetic to the status quo. The aim of the slander is to put enough pressure on the director to step down (which is often achieved).

A new "compassionate" director sympathetic to the Extremist Agenda is put into place by effective lobbying. The Extremist Agenda organization will often advocate a candidate with little or no experience who will essentially do as they are told.

The Extremist Agenda displaces blame when the program becomes unsustainable by blaming either their own director or local public officials for not backing sufficiently.

Attacking unfavorable media is commonplace for the Extremist Agenda when a story runs that questions any component of implementing overnight solutions while demonizing hard working welfare organizations.

Sunday, September 16, 2012


There is a part of No Kill that really disturbs me and that is the one concerning owner surrenders. Sure we all know the occasional excuse that the pet didn't match the new sofa, but most of the time the reasons are quite different. Especially in this poor economy where people are losing their homes, their lives, and they are forced into surrendering their pets.

Rancho Cucamonga is a good study example of what happens when owners are turned away. When Rancho went No Kill, suddenly Rancho residents were showing at the surrounding shelters trying to surrender their pets because Rancho was turning them away. Of course, Rancho denied that but it was pretty obvious to everyone. Two news articles referred to the long lines waiting to surrender when No Kill was declared. These articles referred to pets being abandoned at the shelter as well. It is no coincidence that the number of public surrenders increased.

Public surrenders are when a good Samaritan picks up an animal off the streets and brings it to the shelter. Rancho's public surrenders increased dramatically after becoming No Kill. That means that owners were turning their pets in as strays in order to get the shelter to take them. These owners and pets were already traumatized but to make it worse is when the pet is left with no history - no name. How cruel can No Kill be to rob a pet of their name, a name that could help them survive better in the shelter. But this is what is happening with the No Kill shelters.

This story reminded me of this cruelty bestowed by the No Kill movement.

They told me the big black Lab's name was Reggie, as I looked at him lying in his pen. The shelter was clean, no-kill, and the people really friendly. I'd only been in the area for six months, but everywhere I went in the small college town, people were welcoming and open. Everyone waves when you pass them on the street. But something was still missing as I
attempted to settle in to my new life here, and I thought a dog couldn't hurt. Give me someone to talk to. And I had just seen Reggie's advertisement on the local news. The shelter said they had received numerous calls right after, but they said the people who had come down to see him just didn't look like "Lab people," whatever that meant. They must've thought I did.

But at first, I thought the shelter had misjudged me in giving me Reggie and his things, which consisted of a dog pad, bag of toys almost all of which were brand new tennis balls, his dishes and a sealed letter from his previous owner.

See, Reggie and I didn't really hit it off when we got home. We struggled for two weeks (which is how long the shelter told me to give him to adjust to his new home). Maybe it was the fact that I was trying to adjust, too.
Maybe we were too much alike.

I saw the sealed envelope. I had completely forgotten about that. "Okay, Reggie," I said out loud, "let's see if your previous owner has any advice."
____________ _________ _________ _________

To Whomever Gets My Dog:

Well, I can't say that I'm happy you're reading this, a letter I told the shelter could only be opened by Reggie's new owner. I'm not even happy writing it. He knew something was different.

So let me tell you about my Lab in the hopes that it will help you bond with him and he with you.

First, he loves tennis balls. The more the merrier. Sometimes I think he's part squirrel, the way he hoards them. He usually always has two in his mouth, and he tries to get a third in there. Hasn't done it yet. Doesn't
matter where you throw them, he'll bound after them, so be careful. Don't do it by any roads.

Next, commands. Reggie knows the obvious ones ---"sit," "stay," "come," "heel."

He knows hand signals, too: He knows "ball" and "food" and "bone" and "treat" like nobody's business.

Feeding schedule: twice a day, regular store-bought stuff; the shelter has the brand. He's up on his shots. Be forewarned: Reggie hates the vet. Good luck getting him in the car. I don't know how he knows when it's time to go to the vet, but he knows.

Finally, give him some time. It's only been Reggie and me for his whole life. He's gone everywhere with me, so please include him on your daily car rides if you can. He sits well in the backseat, and he doesn't bark or complain. He just loves to be around people, and me most especially.

And that's why I need to share one more bit of info with you...His name's not Reggie. He's a smart dog, he'll get used to it and will respond to it, of that I have no doubt. But I just couldn't bear to give them his real name. But if someone is reading this ... well it means that his new owner should know his real name. His real name is "Tank." Because, that is what I drive.

I told the shelter that they couldn't make "Reggie" available for adoption until they received word from my company commander. You see, my parents are gone, I have no siblings, no one I could've left Tank with .. and it was my only real request of the Army upon my deployment to Iraq, that they make one phone call to the shelter ... in the "event" ... to tell them that Tank could be put up for adoption. Luckily, my CO is a dog-guy, too, and he knew where my platoon was headed. He said he'd do it personally. And if you're reading this, then he made good on his word.

Tank has been my family for the last six years, almost as long as the Army has been my family. And now I hope and pray that you make him part of your family, too, and that he will adjust and come to love you the same way he
loved me.

If I have to give up Tank to keep those terrible people from coming to the US I am glad to have done so. He is my example of service and of love. I hope I honored him by my service to my country and comrades.

All right, that's enough. I deploy this evening and have to drop this letter off at the shelter. Maybe I'll peek in on him and see if he finally got that third tennis ball in his mouth.

Good luck with Tank. Give him a good home, and give him an extra kiss goodnight - every night - from me.

Thank you,

Paul Mallory
____________ _________ _________ _______
I folded the letter and slipped it back in the envelope. Sure, I had heard of Paul Mallory, everyone in town knew him, even new people like me. Local kid, killed in Iraq a few months ago and posthumously earning the Silver
Star when he gave his life to save three buddies. Flags had been at half-mast all summer.

I leaned forward in my chair and rested my elbows on my knees, staring at the dog.

"Hey, Tank," I said quietly.

The dog's head whipped up, his ears cocked and his eyes bright.

"C'mere boy."

He was instantly on his feet, his nails clicking on the hardwood floor. He sat in front of me, his head tilted, searching for the name he hadn't heard in months. "Tank," I whispered.

His tail swished.

I kept whispering his name, over and over, and each time, his ears lowered, his eyes softened, and his posture relaxed as a wave of contentment just seemed to flood him. I stroked his ears, rubbed his shoulders, buried my
face into his scruff and hugged him.

"It's me now, Tank, just you and me. Your old pal gave you to me." Tank reached up and licked my cheek.

"So whatdaya say we play some ball?" His ears perked again.

"Yeah? Ball? You like that? Ball?"

Tank tore from my hands and disappeared into the next room. And when he came back, he had three tennis balls in his mouth.

Thursday, September 13, 2012


This is a re-print with permission of a blog post that is quite interesting.



That's what it appears to be. A few weeks ago, Colleen Lynn of www.DogsBite.ORG, presented a factual report to the Public Safety Commission in Austin that plainly showed that a 35% jump in dog bites coincided with the city's adoption of No Kill. Ryan Clinton of No Kill presented his report. At the next meeting, these reports were discussed. Seems Ryan had no confidence in his report. Where were you that day, Ryan? You didn't bother to go to the meeting to "defend" your report. Could it be that you knew you would get reamed a new one so you stayed away?

Austin, TX - recently reviewed 5-years of dog bite data gained from the City of Austin under the Freedom of Information Act. The data shows that dog bites have increased substantially since the city adopted a No-Kill policy in 2010. Between 2009 and 2011, dog bites increased 35%. The primary offenders of all bites were pit bulls and their mixes, responsible for 22% (1,288) followed by Labradors and their mixes, which inflicted 12% (682) during the 5-year period.
Dog Bites
Top Biting Breeds 2007-2011
Pit bull
German Shepherd
The City of Austin ended its Pet Licensing Program in 2008/2009. 

Seems this has gotten Ryan Clinton's panties all in a wad and he fired back with his own "report" which, of course, states there is no correlation between the adoption of No Kill and the 35% rise in dog bites in Travis County. 

However, the Public Safety Commission begs to differ. Seems they are a little upset about the poor report Ryan turned into them. Even taking to waving it in the air as they talked about being "very very disappointed" in the report. You did yourself in, Ryan and now your credibility is questioned. About time.

Commissioner (Vice Chair) Kim Rossmo speaking of Ryan's report to the Commission.

I just would have to say, I wanted to warn other commissioners that this is ... a very poor report.
Again we see the use of acronyms without explanations.
You'll note that this particular graph; we are not through 2012, so what may look like a drop has really no meaning. We don't know what the cut off point, what month it was.
They have no idea how to do a trend line.
Bottom line is the relevant issue is what has occurred since 2009. Going back to 2000 only washes out data.
I just pulled some of my own figures off my iPhone, and bottom line Travis County's population went up 3.6% since 2009. The number of bites went up 35%, which is a 30% per capita rate -- which is quite significant.
I don't know, it's only two years; it's hard to know if it is an ongoing thing, but I am very very disappointed in this report, which I think was designed to confuse not help us make a proper decision.
My final thing is, I am not quite sure why a mandatory neutering policy is in conflict with what they are trying to do, but I did not think this was designed to help us make the right decisions [holds up the report].
I would urge you all to be very careful looking at the report and feel free to examine the numbers yourself.

Poor little Ryan, his house of cards is falling, just like the house of cars of his Messiah has already fallen. Ryan is a slow learner, he hasn't jumped ship yet but he will before it is over. I must say it couldn't happen to a "nicer" guy. Stay tuned, Ryan, there is more.

Friday, September 7, 2012


This is a riveting story of a reporter who went into a No Kill shelter and was appalled at what he found. Please watch the video. As difficult as it may be to watch, you must see the suffering of animals under this movement of No Kill.

During a recent visit to the Cattaraugus County SCPA (CCSPCA) in Olean, NY., we found a shocking perversion of No Kill, one which defies imagination. After identifying the CCSPCA as a self-proclaimed No Kill facility, The Reporter decided to visit the Olean shelter to observe its operations on a normal business day. 

While walking through the room, it was disturbing to see that many cats showed obvious signs of upper respiratory distress, with nasal discharge, ocular discharge, and open mouth breathing. Exiting Kitty Kingdom, one approaches a corridor leading to a length of dog kennels. The majority of the animals in this area were literally bouncing off the walls, some circling repeatedly at high speeds and some appearing to self-mutilate, continually chewing on their paws and tails [VIDEOS AVAILABLE ONLINE]. These same behaviors were repeated in all other areas of the facility where dogs were kept.

The stench of urine and feces throughout the facility was overpowering. We observed mice scurrying down hallways and under doors. The roof, viewed from the outside of the facility, shows signs of damage and is partially covered with tarps. While leaving the facility and passing the FIV cats in the front lobby, it was noticed that one of the male cats, sitting on a cat perch, was shaking his head repeatedly and sneezing, which finally resulted in him falling sideways off the perch, landing on his side. These were not healthy or happy animals.

According to Kelly Chaffee, former CCSPCA President and current Board Member, “the facility has been No Kill since 1985.” 
Chaffee’s claim that CCSPCA is a No Kill shelter is based on her belief that, if animals cannot be adopted, they should remain at the shelter indefinitely. Chaffee reports that on a given day, from 250 to 400 animals are housed onsite at the Olean facility, including cats and dogs. She explained that the facility no longer offers a low cost spay/neuter clinic, stating that the majority of animals are adopted out unneutered.  

The descriptions of what was found at this No Kill shelter would turn your stomach. Yet this is acceptable to those who follow this movement. This isn't the only example, there are hundreds just like this shelter. Now I ask, is this what you want for the Devore shelter? Stand against Nathan Winograd and his cult followers if you don't want Devore to fall.

Thursday, September 6, 2012


Devore needs the paperwork for those pending adoptions, where is it? Those pending adoptions are the rescues who have pulled animals out of Devore. Those pulls can't be counted as adoptions until the animals are placed in a real home. What can it mean, that this many have been pulled and not placed? Are they sitting in boarding kennels, where are they? 

Please get that paperwork in so that Devore can get the $100,000 from this challenge. That can go a long way to help many animals. Isn't that what we all want?

Wednesday, September 5, 2012


The previous post on cyber bullying was a result of Shelby County, Kentucky announcing that it would drop it's four year attempt at being No Kill. After four years of being No Kill, Shelby County finally admits that it just isn't working for them.

A reduction mandate means dogs and cats will have to be put down.
The Shelby County Animal Shelter has been far over capacity for several months. A room that used to be someone's office is now filled with cats.
"We are basically overwhelmed," said acting Animal Control Director Rusty Newton.
"It's a struggle every day," said animal control director Bradley King.
About 210 cats and dogs are now now at the shelter, which was designed to handle 60 dogs, 10 puppies, and 80 cats.
"We've tried to run it beyond that and it's just not working. It's not safe, it's not healthy for the animals," said Newton.
"There's no circulation in this room, so we've been fighting a little more sickness lately," said King.
Officials said space isn't the only problem. There are also budgetary constraints: Extra animals means more food and medicine.
It also means additional staff to adequately care for the numbers, something the shelter doesn't have the funds for.
This shelter had animals stuck in rooms without ventilation, anywhere they could put them. No one thinks about the health of these animals when they do that. Disease loves these conditions. PeTA sent a basket of vegan treats from Allison's Gourmet, the business that No Kill cyber bullied, to this shelter. Thus the attack by the No Kill cult terrorists. An innocent business fulfilling an order and No Kill attacked them. Why didn't No Kill attack PeTA? Because No Kill attacks PeTA every day. No Kill attacks any organization that breaks up puppy mills or hoarders. Why does No Kill do that? Because No Kill is backed by hoarders, lab bunchers, flippers, abusers, and in particular the unethical breeders of the world. I am not talking responsible breeders, but those who thrive on cruel breeding. 

Those who are attracted to the No Kill movement are the radicals, the outcasts of the humane community. They rely on the notion that people think if you "save" animals, you must be a good person. But with the amount of raids of these followers of No Kill, one can only put these No Killers in a group of people who could care less about the animals and care only for their own egos and agendas. These are the ones who come after Devore, bullies, nothing but a bunch of bullies who are intimidating San Bernardino constituents into silence.


Tuesday, September 4, 2012


Over this past weekend a small business owner was attacked, and yes I mean attacked, by No Kill followers. All this small business owner did was fill an order. 

No Kill relies on intimidation to silence those who would speak against it. It is a tactic used time and time again against good people who do good things. Non profits (rescues) who dare to speak against Nathan Winograd and No Kill are labeled murderers, animal killers, and worse by the followers of No Kill and often by Nathan Winograd himself. If you read his blog, it is full of hate, vengeance, vile accusations with no proof, and nothing you would want to read to your children at night.

This particular blog summed it up nicely and therefore I ask that you read it in it's entirety. I have selected some quote from it below.

No-Kill Movement - The New McCarthy Era

Even more concerning is that community leaders have allowed the minority voices of a few to become so emboldened that they feel entitled to shout down the masses, even on a small business Facebook page. 

This small business owner responds:

I am disheartened by today’s assaults against my business, Allison’s Gourmet. For 15 years, I have poured my heart and soul into this delicious little company. My entire life is dedicated to compassion for animals, which is the guiding principle for everything I do, personally and professionally.
While this hurts me deeply on a personal level, what pains me even more, is the divisive undercurrent I’ve witnessed in the vegan/animal rights community over these past 15 years.

Keeping in mind that the only thing this business did was send a gift basket to a shelter for a client, below are the comments that can only make one reminisce about the McCarthy era, when people were forced to denounce friends, coworkers, and others who McCarthy suspected of associations with communism, no matter how much of a stretch the accusation was.  To be honest, what took place this weekend was about Un-American as anything I've seen in decades. 

And this quote from Edward R. Murrow in 1954 says it best. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always, that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep into our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men. 

When officials ask where are the others, just remember this example. They are there, they just can't speak because of fear. I ask that the elected officials of this country listen to the silent majority instead of the McCarthy of No Kill.


Monday, September 3, 2012


This is an excellent piece written by Pat Dunaway for Opposing Views. Dunaway has been victimized by the No Kill movement and Nathan Winograd.

Scams abound now linked directly to No Kill and it's followers. Know who you contribute too. These people aren't saving lives, they are scamming for their own personal gain.

Saturday, September 1, 2012


I came across this from Nathan Winograd and asked that very question. Everyone knows of the infamous interview between Rick Berman of the Center for Consumer Freedom and Nathan Winograd. It is like Jesse Jackson granting an interview with Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.

Let me introduce you to Rick Berman in case you don't know the name. He attacks Mothers Against Drunk Driving. He tells you that smoking is good for you. He defends the "right" to cruel puppy mills, cruelty in agribusiness, and the list goes on. A downright Mr. Evil.

Rick Berman also campaigns against the major national organizations that stand between him and his cruel cohorts. He uses his millions to buy billboards against HSUS. Wonder how much use that money could be to solve the overpopulation problem.

And every word from his mouth comes right out of the mouth of Nathan Winograd. But Winograd just swears that he is not the puppet of Berman. Who stands to gain the most if Berman succeeds in his vendetta against HSUS, PeTA, and the ASPCA? Why, Winograd of course.

Here's a link that proves the relationship between Berman and Winograd. Why would Berman pimp Winograd's books when they stand for everything Berman says he is against?
In this piece on Berman's site, he uses Winograd to prove his point.

And from that same site is the infamous interview. Once you read about Berman, you realize that this is not a man who could possibly be interested in helping animals.

Winograd's response to someone asking him about this? He's never talked or met Berman? Berman could have been a maker of crush videos and would Winograd have cared?

I've never talked to or met "Rick Berman," do not get any money or information from the "Center for Consumer Freedom," do not have a relationship with them, and do not agree with their views about animals. I have a vegan cookbook
 being published in December (see All American Vegan) and guarantee that they won't be promoting it as it promotes everything they are against. 

A number of years ago, I got an e-mail from someone at that organization asking if I would be willing to answer some questions about my book, Redemption. I agreed so long as they did not change my answers and if they edited them, I retained the right to veto their publication. Ironically, a few months earlier, I had received an e-mail from HSUS asking me if I would agree to an interview. I told them the same thing. I would do it but only on condition that they not change my answers and if they edited them, I have the right to veto their publication. The Center for Consumer Freedom said ok. I did the interview, they posted my answers verbatim (editing only for grammar). HSUS said no, I did not do the interview.

Now I ask you, do you really believe that he never talked with Rick Berman?