There are plenty of dieting options out there, some quite bizarre and dangerous ("The Tapeworm Diet," anyone?).
I've got a new one (at least I think it's new)...
The "Having A Dog Diet." (copyright pending)
Here's how it works - Get a dog and.... that's it! Easy, no?
Here's why it works...
Before I had a dog (or dogs), on evenings that I was home, I would pretty much eat all night. Seriously, I have trouble sitting still for 15 minutes without checking the kitchen for "What else do I have?"
Then, I got Stewie, and subsequently, Kilo (tangent - Holy crap, I cant believe how skinny Kilo was when we got him...making me rethink this blog post!) and River.
Of course every time I went to the kitchen to get something, they'd follow me in to get their fair share of the booty (I know, I'm a sucker). The good thing is that by sharing whatever I got, I was only eating 50 to 75% of the snack! Helloooo weight loss!!!
Not only that, but given that dogs can't eat chocolate, I am less likely to bring chocolate into the house as I hate seeing their sad faces when can't oblige them (see sucker comment above).
So, there ya have it!
Get a dog and lose weight!*
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
* Only works if you're a sucker
Friday, November 4, 2011
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Notes From The Underground
As anyone who knows me knows, the ACC is a freaking nightmare.
This is no secret to anyone even remotely involved (even if various public officials and heads of "important" animal-related non-profits suggest otherwise).
What we don't know is what goes on inside, and that's because any staff member or volunteer will be fired if they speak out against the ACC (in fact, rescues wont go on record either as they will be kicked out of the Mayor's Alliance, thereby losing funding, if they speak out).
So, how can we find out what the volunteers think?
We can go HERE - A link to the Shelter Reform Action Committee's Notes From the Underground, which will publish any stories they get from staff/volunteers, with the promise of anonymity.
The first one is already up here.
It will no doubt be an infuriating, but important series.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
This is no secret to anyone even remotely involved (even if various public officials and heads of "important" animal-related non-profits suggest otherwise).
What we don't know is what goes on inside, and that's because any staff member or volunteer will be fired if they speak out against the ACC (in fact, rescues wont go on record either as they will be kicked out of the Mayor's Alliance, thereby losing funding, if they speak out).
So, how can we find out what the volunteers think?
We can go HERE - A link to the Shelter Reform Action Committee's Notes From the Underground, which will publish any stories they get from staff/volunteers, with the promise of anonymity.
The first one is already up here.
It will no doubt be an infuriating, but important series.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Mayor Mike Bloomberg is a Piece of Shit
I really don't want to write these things.
I swear, I have so much effin' things to do - day gig, a wife, ten month old baby at home, two dogs, animal rescue, comedy "career" - I really don't have the time.
But I'm compelled to...
Cause our Mayor, Bloomberg, is a sack of shit.
He's always been arrogant and dismissive, that's his MO when dealing with any criticism. Usually, I don't make a big deal about it, because I figure, eh, what's the use.
But now I figure if I can change one person's point of view about him, I have to do it (okay, I have to change more than one...at least like seven...yeah, seven).
As many of you know, a carriage horse died in the street several days ago in NYC. Bloomberg, as usual, not only didn't seem the least bit sorry about it, he didn't offer the usual platitudes of any investigation forthcoming, no, he seemed, well, arrogant and dismissive. Here are his money (irony intended) quotes from the article....
Days after a carriage horse collapsed and died in Midtown, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on Wednesday dismissed calls for a ban on the carriage industry, saying he could not imagine why “anybody wants to destroy something that is part of New York’s heritage and that tourists love.”
“I have no idea what goes through their minds,” the mayor said of opponents of horse-drawn carriages.
“The horses here are supervised by the health department, the A.S.P.C.A.,” he said. “They’re well taken care of. And most of them wouldn’t be alive if they didn’t have a job.”
First of all, he's mentioned the tourist aspect several times - There isn't a tourist in the freaking world who comes here simply to ride the horse drawn carriages...sure, maybe some have it on their "to do" list while here, but not a single one isn't going to come to NY because they can't ride a horse.
Secondly, he has no idea what's on the minds of opponents? If that statement is true, then he's even more of an asshole than I thought. I mean, I can understand how he can object to us thinking the way we do, but to be so devoid of empathy is quite frankly scary.
The next sentence I pasted here is worthy of a reprint (even though I just pasted it a few lines up)...
"The horses here are supervised by the health department, the A.S.P.C.A.,” he said. “They’re well taken care of. And most of them wouldn’t be alive if they didn’t have a job.”
Why is that sentence worthy of a reprint? This came out yesterday.
They are "well taken care of?" Oh, really?
Apparently, this horse, Charlie as he was named, was just checked out by Dept of Health vets (I assume they have vets) in June. Meanwhile, as per the ASPCA's necropsy report, indications are that "Charlie was not a healthy horse and was likely suffering from pain due to pronounced chronic ulceration of the stomach and a fractured tooth."
When Bloomberg was asked about Charlie's death again, he responded, "Like everyone, eventually they die...some die on the streets."
I hope someone eulogizes him the same way.
RIP Charlie
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
I swear, I have so much effin' things to do - day gig, a wife, ten month old baby at home, two dogs, animal rescue, comedy "career" - I really don't have the time.
But I'm compelled to...
Cause our Mayor, Bloomberg, is a sack of shit.
He's always been arrogant and dismissive, that's his MO when dealing with any criticism. Usually, I don't make a big deal about it, because I figure, eh, what's the use.
But now I figure if I can change one person's point of view about him, I have to do it (okay, I have to change more than one...at least like seven...yeah, seven).
As many of you know, a carriage horse died in the street several days ago in NYC. Bloomberg, as usual, not only didn't seem the least bit sorry about it, he didn't offer the usual platitudes of any investigation forthcoming, no, he seemed, well, arrogant and dismissive. Here are his money (irony intended) quotes from the article....
Days after a carriage horse collapsed and died in Midtown, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on Wednesday dismissed calls for a ban on the carriage industry, saying he could not imagine why “anybody wants to destroy something that is part of New York’s heritage and that tourists love.”
“I have no idea what goes through their minds,” the mayor said of opponents of horse-drawn carriages.
“The horses here are supervised by the health department, the A.S.P.C.A.,” he said. “They’re well taken care of. And most of them wouldn’t be alive if they didn’t have a job.”
First of all, he's mentioned the tourist aspect several times - There isn't a tourist in the freaking world who comes here simply to ride the horse drawn carriages...sure, maybe some have it on their "to do" list while here, but not a single one isn't going to come to NY because they can't ride a horse.
Secondly, he has no idea what's on the minds of opponents? If that statement is true, then he's even more of an asshole than I thought. I mean, I can understand how he can object to us thinking the way we do, but to be so devoid of empathy is quite frankly scary.
The next sentence I pasted here is worthy of a reprint (even though I just pasted it a few lines up)...
"The horses here are supervised by the health department, the A.S.P.C.A.,” he said. “They’re well taken care of. And most of them wouldn’t be alive if they didn’t have a job.”
Why is that sentence worthy of a reprint? This came out yesterday.
They are "well taken care of?" Oh, really?
Apparently, this horse, Charlie as he was named, was just checked out by Dept of Health vets (I assume they have vets) in June. Meanwhile, as per the ASPCA's necropsy report, indications are that "Charlie was not a healthy horse and was likely suffering from pain due to pronounced chronic ulceration of the stomach and a fractured tooth."
When Bloomberg was asked about Charlie's death again, he responded, "Like everyone, eventually they die...some die on the streets."
I hope someone eulogizes him the same way.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Friday, October 14, 2011
Eff The New York Post (and Bad Pittie Owners)
The New York Post today has a story with this headline -
Pit-bull horror on Upper E. Side
The article is about a guy who was murdered yesterday, found with bite marks of his roommate's pit bull, Bones.
The second paragraph says, "Authorities believe the dog, named Bones, may have mauled the victim’s body after he was killed, allegedly by suspect Shaun Dyer, a source said."
First of all, I love the sensationalistic "mauled" adjective to describe the bites.
Secondly, it seems the focus should be how this guy killed his roommate and set up his dog as the killer, no? (Which would be funny to me if I wasn't worried about the public perception of pitties) - The headline used makes it sound as if the pit bull killed him.
Let's look at a few other sentences, further down in the article....
The dog should have been off the street years ago,” railed neighbor Bruce Miller, 65, claiming that Bones bit him on June 17.
"I walked out my door and the dog attacked me. [The owner] was watching him chew on my arm, and he was laughing.”
Others, who asked not to be identified, said the owner abused his animal -- turning a once-tame pet into a snarling beast.
“I knew him when he was a good-natured and good dog,” said one man. “I took him for a walk once. The dog takes on the personality of the owner.
“If the dog is mistreated, he’s going to mistreat others.”
The man said he hoped Bones’ life would be spared -- and that the blame would not be laid at the pooch’s paws.
Postal worker Rafael Reveron, 42, said he didn’t think the animal would have been capable of such horrific violence.
“I’ve worked in the area for five years,” Reveron said. “I’ve seen the dog three to four times a week.
“The dog does not seem aggressive -- it doesn’t even bark.”
This appears to be a classic case of the wrong owner owning the wrong dog, and who's gonna pay for it?
The pit bull breeds.
Sorry guys, we are failing you.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Pit-bull horror on Upper E. Side
The article is about a guy who was murdered yesterday, found with bite marks of his roommate's pit bull, Bones.
The second paragraph says, "Authorities believe the dog, named Bones, may have mauled the victim’s body after he was killed, allegedly by suspect Shaun Dyer, a source said."
First of all, I love the sensationalistic "mauled" adjective to describe the bites.
Secondly, it seems the focus should be how this guy killed his roommate and set up his dog as the killer, no? (Which would be funny to me if I wasn't worried about the public perception of pitties) - The headline used makes it sound as if the pit bull killed him.
Let's look at a few other sentences, further down in the article....
The dog should have been off the street years ago,” railed neighbor Bruce Miller, 65, claiming that Bones bit him on June 17.
"I walked out my door and the dog attacked me. [The owner] was watching him chew on my arm, and he was laughing.”
Others, who asked not to be identified, said the owner abused his animal -- turning a once-tame pet into a snarling beast.
“I knew him when he was a good-natured and good dog,” said one man. “I took him for a walk once. The dog takes on the personality of the owner.
“If the dog is mistreated, he’s going to mistreat others.”
The man said he hoped Bones’ life would be spared -- and that the blame would not be laid at the pooch’s paws.
Postal worker Rafael Reveron, 42, said he didn’t think the animal would have been capable of such horrific violence.
“I’ve worked in the area for five years,” Reveron said. “I’ve seen the dog three to four times a week.
“The dog does not seem aggressive -- it doesn’t even bark.”
This appears to be a classic case of the wrong owner owning the wrong dog, and who's gonna pay for it?
The pit bull breeds.
Sorry guys, we are failing you.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Yeah, Right!
Kilo has really bad breath sometimes. I asked my vet about ti and he suggested some breath mint for dogs.
I responded, "Yeah, I can't get him to sit for two seconds, I'm gonna get him to suck on a mint?"
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
I responded, "Yeah, I can't get him to sit for two seconds, I'm gonna get him to suck on a mint?"
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
The One Second Rule
Just like a lot of homes, we live by the five-second rule when food drops to the floor.
Unlike others, our five second rule means that if we don't pick it up within five seconds, one of the dogs will.
Who am I kiddin', it's more like a one second rule.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Unlike others, our five second rule means that if we don't pick it up within five seconds, one of the dogs will.
Who am I kiddin', it's more like a one second rule.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Monday, October 10, 2011
NYC's Animal Care and Control Manages To Lose Money Doing Fundraisers
Here's what I don't get...
The "Humane" Society of the U.S. (I put that in quotes because I think they're a horrible organization - start HERE if you wanna see why) did a benefit in NYC and raised a freakin' million dollars...
Just to show that's not out of the ordinary, the ASPCA also had an event here, and yes, they too raised over a freakin' million dollars!
(BTW - The ASPCA sucks too.)
So, you may wonder, how much does NYC's Animal Care and Control make off of their fundraisers?
It must be easy as pie to raise funds as the HSUS and ASPCA show - I mean, this is NYC, mecca of money, celebrity...not to mention people who are insane about their animals. And, I'm sure they were able to use the fact that they are the self-described "largest pet organization in the northeast" (per their website) to get the money flowing...
They must do a ton of them, right?
I mean, they complain about being underfunded (which they are), and what better way to make up for the lack of funds than pushing up your sleeves and going to work.
I believe Richard Gentles, making six figures, as the Director of Development (fancy!) is the person on their management team in charge of getting the money flowin'!
And, he shlould have plenty of help, in the form of their impressive roster that is their Board of Directors (After all, this is what BOD of a non-profits is supposed to do - Look at number 4 here)
Speaking of their BOD, they are lucky enough to have not one, but two Wall Street titans on there, Mssrs, John M.B. O'Connor (former partner at Morgan Stanley, now CEO of J.H. Whitney Investment Management) and Bruce Doniger (hedge fund trader). In addition, they have Patrick Nolan on the Board - He is the Director of Marketing at Penguin Books - Surely, he can share his marketing prowess to help, instead of just keeping a seat warm.
Given all of this, I am excited to see how money they have raised due to their collective fundraising efforts...
So, I took a look at their latest Form 990, which are a non-profit's financials, and guess how much they made in their last fiscal year from fundraisers?
$26,943.
Huh?
Actually, it's even worse than that (believe it or not).
If one takes into account expenses associated with these fundraising "efforts," they raised a total of, are you ready...
($388)
That's right, they lost money.
I guess I have to retract my earlier comments - NYC's Animal Care and Control should immediately stop doing fundraisers!
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
The "Humane" Society of the U.S. (I put that in quotes because I think they're a horrible organization - start HERE if you wanna see why) did a benefit in NYC and raised a freakin' million dollars...
Just to show that's not out of the ordinary, the ASPCA also had an event here, and yes, they too raised over a freakin' million dollars!
(BTW - The ASPCA sucks too.)
So, you may wonder, how much does NYC's Animal Care and Control make off of their fundraisers?
It must be easy as pie to raise funds as the HSUS and ASPCA show - I mean, this is NYC, mecca of money, celebrity...not to mention people who are insane about their animals. And, I'm sure they were able to use the fact that they are the self-described "largest pet organization in the northeast" (per their website) to get the money flowing...
They must do a ton of them, right?
I mean, they complain about being underfunded (which they are), and what better way to make up for the lack of funds than pushing up your sleeves and going to work.
I believe Richard Gentles, making six figures, as the Director of Development (fancy!) is the person on their management team in charge of getting the money flowin'!
And, he shlould have plenty of help, in the form of their impressive roster that is their Board of Directors (After all, this is what BOD of a non-profits is supposed to do - Look at number 4 here)
Speaking of their BOD, they are lucky enough to have not one, but two Wall Street titans on there, Mssrs, John M.B. O'Connor (former partner at Morgan Stanley, now CEO of J.H. Whitney Investment Management) and Bruce Doniger (hedge fund trader). In addition, they have Patrick Nolan on the Board - He is the Director of Marketing at Penguin Books - Surely, he can share his marketing prowess to help, instead of just keeping a seat warm.
Given all of this, I am excited to see how money they have raised due to their collective fundraising efforts...
So, I took a look at their latest Form 990, which are a non-profit's financials, and guess how much they made in their last fiscal year from fundraisers?
$26,943.
Huh?
Actually, it's even worse than that (believe it or not).
If one takes into account expenses associated with these fundraising "efforts," they raised a total of, are you ready...
($388)
That's right, they lost money.
I guess I have to retract my earlier comments - NYC's Animal Care and Control should immediately stop doing fundraisers!
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Friday, October 7, 2011
Oh, Kilo
Yesterday (and today), I spent my day at work thinking about our dog, Kilo... not cause I missed him, but because thanks to give going after another dog on our morning walk, my right hand is swollen and in pain (not broken).
Thanks Kilo!
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Thanks Kilo!
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
NYC Comptroller (Sorta) Audits Animal Care and Control
So, here is the full report, and here it is in brief.
First of all, this isn't a true audit, it was merely a follow-up to an audit they did over five years ago (great that it took them five years to follow up to see if what they deemed important was implemented, huh?).
In other words, they weren't looking for anything new, or even to see if what the AC&C was doing satisfactorily previously was now in disarray; no, they just wanted to see if Farley/Bank et al fixed what the Comptrollers office thought was broken in 2006.
Naturally, they didn't...
How much is still broken is tough to say, say the auditors, because...are you ready?
The AC&C and DOH (Dept of Health) wouldn't cooperate with the auditors' requests for information and the ability to speak to staff and volunteers (Hmmm... I wonder why)
The AC&C claims it was concerned that their volunteers' privacy would be compromised, even though, not only does the Comptroller's Office have the authority per the City Charter (The DOH isn't big on following the law, are they?) and is required by law to keep them confidential, so, in reality, the AC&C didn't really have to worry about that, and was just stonewalling.
Even funnier is that in the report it states that initially, the AC&C claimed it was "legally entitled" to withhold information. When challenged, AC&C couldn't provide the legal basis for its claims.
I'm picturing Thomas Farley swearing he read it somewhere, while leafing through his copy of the City Charter, knowing he didn't read it anywhere, while several auditors are surrounding him. I can't blame him for trying.
Okay, some points about what the Comptroller's office was able to look into and did find...and my thoughts on it....
1 - Underfunding "plagues" the agency - True, and that's why the DOH has no business being in the animal budiness. They've run it (into the ground) since 1994 with no sign whatsoever that funding will ever be adequate (even with Bill 0655, funding is less than half what is needed per HSUS, and that assumes all the backloaded funding makes its way to the AC&C in 2014 - yeah, right)
2 - Auditors found cleaning procedures to be implemented - Huh? I guess the NYC Comptroller's Dept doesn't know how to google, or they'd find this story, among many others. My guess is that either they announced when they were doing an inspection, OR somehow the AC&C was tipped off.
3 - Sick Animals are Sometimes Separated From Healthy Animals - The AC&C actually disagreed with this, claiming they are always separated - How can they disagree? Either the auditors found it to be true and showed them, or they didn't, in which case, they wouldn't have included it on the report.
4 - Dogs are now being exercised - Huh? Again, looking back at this article, check this section out (Gentiles is Richard Gentiles, Director of Development and Communication)...
We obtained dog-walking schedules that show dogs not getting out for as long as 3 days.
WALLACE: So wait. It's not unusual to have a dog not being walked for three days?INSIDER: Not unusual.
"We want all of the dogs to be walked every day," Gentles said, admitting that it does not happen. "It's not acceptable. That's why we want volunteers to come into the volunteer program."
Again, maybe if they insisted to be able to speak to volunteers and/or staff without threat of termination, the auditors would've reported back differently.
Heck, they didn't even have to worry about speaking to current employees. A quick google search woulda given them someone to speak to who would be more than happy to point them in the right direction. I'm guessing they didn't get a chance to speak to former employees/volunteers like Emily Tanen or Jeff Latzer about that.
5 - Missing animals aren't always being investigated - I'm only bringing this up due to this excerpt -
"Forty four percent of missing animals were cases where foster care adopters did not return the animal to the shelter. AC&C's policy does not discuss procedures for investigating or acting on missing animals not returned by foster caretakers."
Good Lord...
Later, in their response to this point, the AC&C said, "The AC&C ... will update its Foster Care program guidelines to include investigation of missing foster care animals."
I hope this is already implemented as it shouldn't take more than a week, especially with all the new volunteers they claim to have thanks to their "revamped" program.
6 - They had a problem in 2006 with the "Level of Adoption Efforts," recommending that adoption services should be provided at the Queens and The Bronx receiving centers - In this audit, this finding was considered "no longer applicable" because the leases in The Bronx and Queens don't allow for adoptions there.
This is exactly why the DOH shouldn't be running the AC&C (Well, the fact they have sucked at getting funding for their non-profit is really why, but this is a secondary reason)...
God forbid they try other means of getting animals adopted - They refuse to think outside the box - What about offsite adoption events? Why don't they have long-term partnerships as other rescues do (Why did they let the Petsmart partnership dissolve?). Why not have special events at the shelter (like a pitbull awareness class led by a pro bono trainer) to get people accustomed to the walking in the building. AC&C has to know that there is an element of emotional trauma to walking in a "kill" shelter for most animal loving adopters.
7 -
That was from 2006, when they had five licensed vets and 25 vet techs.
In 2011, they have two licensed vets and 13 vet techs, and yet, the AC&C argued that this finding was unwarranted, I assume because they now have 14 unlicensed vet staff members, whereas they didn't have any in 2006.
To summarize, they have about the same number of total vet employees - they are just far less qualified than five years ago, when the staff was deemed insufficient. Mmmmkaaaay!!!!
8 - The auditors recommended that the in-house computer system (Chameleon) be changed so that it can distinguish between animals missing and/or lost in the agency's care or in the care of outside sources.
The AC&C's response? We agree that it's needed, but, hey, its not our system, we just lease it - If they wanna upgrade it, it's up to the lessor.
I dunno about you, but judging by their responses, I get the feeling Farley, Bank, et al really aren't into this whole animal saving thing.
I think you guys get the gist -
To summarize, this audit wasn't a real audit, merely a follow-up to an audit done five years ago, and yet, of the 13 recommendations made at that time, only seven were fully implemented (and I'm not sure that I agree that they were - the cages are clean?!? the volunteer program is robust?!?)
Thing is, does it really matter? Any and all deficiencies will continue to get swept under the rug as long as the DOH is in control of the AC&C.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
btw - If you wanna read more about this joke of an audit, click here.
First of all, this isn't a true audit, it was merely a follow-up to an audit they did over five years ago (great that it took them five years to follow up to see if what they deemed important was implemented, huh?).
In other words, they weren't looking for anything new, or even to see if what the AC&C was doing satisfactorily previously was now in disarray; no, they just wanted to see if Farley/Bank et al fixed what the Comptrollers office thought was broken in 2006.
Naturally, they didn't...
How much is still broken is tough to say, say the auditors, because...are you ready?
The AC&C and DOH (Dept of Health) wouldn't cooperate with the auditors' requests for information and the ability to speak to staff and volunteers (Hmmm... I wonder why)
The AC&C claims it was concerned that their volunteers' privacy would be compromised, even though, not only does the Comptroller's Office have the authority per the City Charter (The DOH isn't big on following the law, are they?) and is required by law to keep them confidential, so, in reality, the AC&C didn't really have to worry about that, and was just stonewalling.
Even funnier is that in the report it states that initially, the AC&C claimed it was "legally entitled" to withhold information. When challenged, AC&C couldn't provide the legal basis for its claims.
I'm picturing Thomas Farley swearing he read it somewhere, while leafing through his copy of the City Charter, knowing he didn't read it anywhere, while several auditors are surrounding him. I can't blame him for trying.
Okay, some points about what the Comptroller's office was able to look into and did find...and my thoughts on it....
1 - Underfunding "plagues" the agency - True, and that's why the DOH has no business being in the animal budiness. They've run it (into the ground) since 1994 with no sign whatsoever that funding will ever be adequate (even with Bill 0655, funding is less than half what is needed per HSUS, and that assumes all the backloaded funding makes its way to the AC&C in 2014 - yeah, right)
2 - Auditors found cleaning procedures to be implemented - Huh? I guess the NYC Comptroller's Dept doesn't know how to google, or they'd find this story, among many others. My guess is that either they announced when they were doing an inspection, OR somehow the AC&C was tipped off.
3 - Sick Animals are Sometimes Separated From Healthy Animals - The AC&C actually disagreed with this, claiming they are always separated - How can they disagree? Either the auditors found it to be true and showed them, or they didn't, in which case, they wouldn't have included it on the report.
4 - Dogs are now being exercised - Huh? Again, looking back at this article, check this section out (Gentiles is Richard Gentiles, Director of Development and Communication)...
We obtained dog-walking schedules that show dogs not getting out for as long as 3 days.
WALLACE: So wait. It's not unusual to have a dog not being walked for three days?INSIDER: Not unusual.
"We want all of the dogs to be walked every day," Gentles said, admitting that it does not happen. "It's not acceptable. That's why we want volunteers to come into the volunteer program."
Again, maybe if they insisted to be able to speak to volunteers and/or staff without threat of termination, the auditors would've reported back differently.
Heck, they didn't even have to worry about speaking to current employees. A quick google search woulda given them someone to speak to who would be more than happy to point them in the right direction. I'm guessing they didn't get a chance to speak to former employees/volunteers like Emily Tanen or Jeff Latzer about that.
5 - Missing animals aren't always being investigated - I'm only bringing this up due to this excerpt -
"Forty four percent of missing animals were cases where foster care adopters did not return the animal to the shelter. AC&C's policy does not discuss procedures for investigating or acting on missing animals not returned by foster caretakers."
Good Lord...
Later, in their response to this point, the AC&C said, "The AC&C ... will update its Foster Care program guidelines to include investigation of missing foster care animals."
I hope this is already implemented as it shouldn't take more than a week, especially with all the new volunteers they claim to have thanks to their "revamped" program.
6 - They had a problem in 2006 with the "Level of Adoption Efforts," recommending that adoption services should be provided at the Queens and The Bronx receiving centers - In this audit, this finding was considered "no longer applicable" because the leases in The Bronx and Queens don't allow for adoptions there.
This is exactly why the DOH shouldn't be running the AC&C (Well, the fact they have sucked at getting funding for their non-profit is really why, but this is a secondary reason)...
God forbid they try other means of getting animals adopted - They refuse to think outside the box - What about offsite adoption events? Why don't they have long-term partnerships as other rescues do (Why did they let the Petsmart partnership dissolve?). Why not have special events at the shelter (like a pitbull awareness class led by a pro bono trainer) to get people accustomed to the walking in the building. AC&C has to know that there is an element of emotional trauma to walking in a "kill" shelter for most animal loving adopters.
7 -
That was from 2006, when they had five licensed vets and 25 vet techs.
In 2011, they have two licensed vets and 13 vet techs, and yet, the AC&C argued that this finding was unwarranted, I assume because they now have 14 unlicensed vet staff members, whereas they didn't have any in 2006.
To summarize, they have about the same number of total vet employees - they are just far less qualified than five years ago, when the staff was deemed insufficient. Mmmmkaaaay!!!!
8 - The auditors recommended that the in-house computer system (Chameleon) be changed so that it can distinguish between animals missing and/or lost in the agency's care or in the care of outside sources.
The AC&C's response? We agree that it's needed, but, hey, its not our system, we just lease it - If they wanna upgrade it, it's up to the lessor.
I dunno about you, but judging by their responses, I get the feeling Farley, Bank, et al really aren't into this whole animal saving thing.
I think you guys get the gist -
To summarize, this audit wasn't a real audit, merely a follow-up to an audit done five years ago, and yet, of the 13 recommendations made at that time, only seven were fully implemented (and I'm not sure that I agree that they were - the cages are clean?!? the volunteer program is robust?!?)
Thing is, does it really matter? Any and all deficiencies will continue to get swept under the rug as long as the DOH is in control of the AC&C.
Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
btw - If you wanna read more about this joke of an audit, click here.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn Doing Excellent Jobs... At Screwing NYC Homeless Animals
Holy Crap...
That's all I can say...
I am writing this after everything went down so there's nothing left to do but recount the timeline of how it was politics as usual in NYC, and who lost out? Those who can't vote (or speak).
1994 - The ASPCA gives up ownership of the NYC shelter system because they didn't want to be so closely associated with the killing machine that was the NYC shelter system.
You don't believe me? Read this. (That deserves it's own blog - How the ASPCA basically abandoned NYC's animals when they needed them most because it was a PR nightmare and was costing them donors)
April 2000 - The NYC Council passes a law, mandating new shelters be built for the two shelter-less boroughs - Queens and The Bronx. The law was passed following a scathing audit by the City Council’s Contracts Committee showing the inhumane conditions in the ACC’s overcrowded shelters.
2000 – The DOH budgets $7.8MM for running ACC. 2002 - Mayor Bloomberg gets an extension on building the new shelters.
2002 - The DOH allocates $8.5MM for the ACC.
2006 - Bloomie's extension passes...No one on the City Council says a word.
2009 - Animal rescue group Stray from the Heart says, "Eff this...You don't wanna obey the law, let's see what the courts have to say about it." They file a lawsuit, against the DOH and NYC, in hopes of forcing the city to obey it's law (I couldn't make this up if I tried).
Stray From The Heart won! A Superior Court Judge judge says the city must come up with plan to obey their own law!
NYC appeals (becaaaause...they don't want to follow their own law?)
April 2011 - NYC wins - For some reason, an appeals panel ruled that Stray from the Heart didn't have the "standing" to sue (if they don't, who does?)
SUMMER 2011 - Bloomie, Speaker Quinn, Councilmember Lappin, the ASPCA, and the Mayor's Alliance meet in a dark, smokey, backroom (I'm assuming) somewhere and upon emerging, announce Intro Bill 0655.
I'm not going to get into why this is a horrible bill, just read this statement from Stray from the Heart here.
The worst part of it is because it reverses the law that the City Council passed in 2000, mandating shelters for Queens and The Bronx, two boroughs so large that population-wise, if they were cities, they'd be in the top 15 in the U.S.
A few other things stood out about this bill...
1 - The vast majority of the "new" funding is backloaded to fiscal 2014 - If anyone believes that the AC&C will see that money, I've got new shelters in Queens and The Bronx to sell ya, if ya get my drift.
2 - I put "new" in quotes because, not only does some of this "new" funding only gives back funds previously cut, if you take inflation into account, even if all the funding does come in, it barely makes it back to 2002 levels, when the shelter was killing about 70% of the animals that came in.
3 - Many don't think mandatory spay/neuter works.
4 - The fact that they are suddenly willing to give all this money to the ACC, given the dire economic straits that the city and the people in this city are in (I don't think links are needed here) tells me that things are even worse at the shelter than we previously imagined. I mean, we've read and saw stories about the filthy cages, animals being killed who weren't supposed to, a volunteer program without volunteers, dogs not being walked, and an executive director so enamored with power, that she's managed to alienate pretty much everyone, from her staff to rescue groups. Is there even more!??!
5 - This op-ed, by Ed Sayres (he runs the ASPCA), telling us why this bill is awesome, kills me. Especially these sentences...
Nevertheless, a few detractors are upset because the city did not agree to build animal shelters in Queens and in the Bronx. Let me be clear -- of course, I want the city to build animal shelters in the boroughs that currently do not have them. But the reality is that the city does not have to do this based on a recent appellate court's ruling (in re Stray from the Heart, Inc. v. Dep't of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York, April 19, 2011) that a rescue group did not have standing to challenge the City's failure to open animal shelters in Queens and in the Bronx.
Given the appellate court's decision, I believe the agreement we brokered with the city has the animals' best interests at heart for the immediate future
This is funny to me because...
SEPTEMBER 2011 - Stray from the Heart convinces the NY Court of Appeals to hear their appeal from the mid-level decision. All of a sudden, it appears that our State’s highest court is verrrrrrrry interested in deciding whether a rescue group does have standing to sue a City for violating its own law. If Stray From the Heart wins the appeal, it means not only that it had standing, but that the City must build those shelters!!
So, now that the "reality" has changed, I assume Sayres will go back to his buddies (Bloomie, Quinn, Lappin et al) and tell them that he stands by his belief that the city needs the two new shelters and that they should amend the bill to remove the deletion of the law requiring NYC to build them. Right?
Wrong.... Instead...
SEPTEMBER 2011 - We get this Daily News headline
City Council fast-tracking bill to let city wriggle out of obligation to build animal shelters
(slaps my head)
which leads to this...
This.
Excuse me while I vomit.
Harris Bloom
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)