16 comments:

by  Anonymous

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 1:53 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
Nathan Winograd, also now affiliated with pit bull breeder lobbies and other breeder lobbies looking out for their interests

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 2:39 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
I wonder if like failed PACCA Chief Operating Officer Dougie Rae, he will be able to land another No-Kill gig and ruin another city's A/C department?

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 3:15 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
And yet another blow falls on the "no-kill" movement. When will these cities wise up and realize these people are bad news? At best they are severely misguided bleeding hearts who seem to believe that hoarding animals and allowing them to succumb to injuries and disease is somehow kinder than quick euthanasia. At worst, they're outright criminals running a con game and even supplying animals to dog fighters on the sly. The "no-kill" movement as it is needs to go the way of the dodo. It can't happen fast enough.

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 4:17 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
This was probably the real reason for his termination...not leaving the $millions in unrecovered license revenue on the table, nor the vast medical bills of pit bull victims.

http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2009/04/37536.php

This reminds me of how Jere Alexander fired the 28 year A/C Technician in Fulton County, GA.

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 4:28 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
"No kill" shelters give regular shelters a bad name. "No kill" shelters are very selective and will cherry pick the animals coming to their shelter (at least in my experience where I live). They don't take pits or pitmixes, they don't want any aggressive animals or unsocialized animals. Most of the people bringing animals to the county-run shelter say they tried to get a "no-kill" to take the animal, but were refused for whatever reasons. And yet people say things like "You work there? That's where they kill dogs."

No, we do the job the "no kill" won't do. They don't want the mean pit bulls. Well, no one else wants them either. But you can't keep them forever when there are 100s of new animals arriving daily. Where do you put them all? It's never-ending.

by  FoolMeOnce 4/28/2009 5:39 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
Geez Louise! Disgusting! Colleen, you should write a book about all the Pit Bull conspiracy across the country. This is really horrendous.

by  bitbypit 4/28/2009 7:52 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
There will be a delay in publishing comments today. Keep posting them, they will be published this evening!

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 7:57 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
The San Francisco SPCA? Isn't that also where Winograd came from? What a place! And the gal that created the distorted "Balloons" book?

http://www.amazon.com/Dogs-Bite-Balloons-Slippers-Dangerous/dp/1888047186

Don't forget SF/SPCA volunteer dog training instructor Anna Klafter -- it was her off-leash pit bull that attacked the mounted police rider and bucked off...

by  Honesty Helps 4/28/2009 8:02 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
The evidence was there BEFORE Boks was appointed of his failures. But because of the pressure from the ADL-LA and other ignorant groups, The Mayor appointed a "no kill" guru. Although Winograd was promised the gig by the ADL-LA and there are emails to back this up, and he packed up suddenly and left for LA, it didn't happen. Now there will be a push on to put the Whino in the job. Boks did state on his blog that he was recommended by Winograd.

Another case where a director was caught bedding his employees, a cruelty charge and missing donations, yet he was given a good recommendation WHILE ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE FOR NAILING HIS EMPLOYEES, so he moved on to a cushy job in San Jose. Same thing here, he will be given a good recommendation and will go destroy another agency. "No Kill" has to be stopped first in order to do anything about the pits.

by  Anonymous 4/28/2009 1:05 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
But No Kill at animal control is a whole new kind of evil

At least with No Kill private shelters there were REAL animal control shelters to do what No Kill refused or failed to do

But when AC is No Kill, it's a total disaster

Either animals (including pit bulls) are getting hoarded and dying in the shelter of disease or fighting, or they are handing them out to hoarders and dog fighters, or as in San Antonio (and Winograd's Tompkins County mess and many more!) they just STOP ACCEPTING ANIMALS and have "wait lists" or some other foolishness so the animals get abandoned on the streets to die or attack people

by  Honesty Helps 4/28/2009 6:35 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
Prior to the horrid Hayden Act in CA, open door shelters could make rational decisions about pits. They could put pits down at their discretion based on temperament, etc. Then with the Hayden, they had to put Fluffy down instead of the vicious pit that just came in. Before they could keep Fluffy and put the pit down, then with the holding times of the Hayden, it reversed. The CA shelters have a high population of pit/mixes. Then along comes "No Kill" and all the shelters became afraid of euthanizing even when they knew it was right. Animal control can no longer make decisions based on their experience. And this has meant more pits on the streets. I don't blame animal control for the mess as much as I blame the crazed "No Kill"ers and public pressure.

by  St Francis 4/28/2009 9:01 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/27855/

One alliance member snipes, “Boks’s programs had catchy names, but they had no substance and weren’t sustainable.”

Sounds just like the nutter choir, "they will only lick you to death" or "Punish the deed not the breed". No wonder the pit nutters and ninnygrad love him.
I am sure Boks is responsible for a number of classic pit platitudes. Mindless gibberish.

by  corrupt incompetent boobs 4/28/2009 9:03 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2009/04/37536.php

Since Boks has come to LA he's managed to garner the wrath of personnel, volunteers, animal rescuers, the public and even City Council, a first for any Director. It's been one mistake after another from the "Hooters for Neuters" bikini contest to the Pitbull Academy run by ex-cons to incurring countless lawsuits. Through all of this Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has stood by his side, even after Boks was reported for driving the City vehicle drunk and sexually harassing female rescuers. This is on top of Boks' poor performance with increased euthanasia and three times as many animals dying on their own in the shelter from illness and injury.

by  Anonymous 4/29/2009 3:09 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
Public pressure is a big problem, as are the animal activist nuts in LA. They don't have a clue about the realities of a shelter environment or the population pressure of the homeless, unwanted, and aggressive animals. They get their panties in a knot about people "killing puppies" and don't have to see the reality of what their idealism creates. Shove the lot of them face first into an overcrowded, disease laden shelter and tell them to clean up the mess. Tell them to start with the pits that have been confined for a year or more. They'll be singing a different tune in no time, assuming they don't get ripped to shreds first.

by  deeLite 7/02/2009 1:03 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
Ed Boks departed LA's Animal Services today. Where will he go now?

"Boks' inability to fulfill his mandate to make L.A. a no-kill-shelter city, along with his unilateral suspension of a popular spay-neuter voucher program, a messy sexual-harassment suit and his ill-advised plan for a Hooters for Neuters event, combined to force his resignation last April."

http://blogs.laweekly.com/ladaily/city-news/ed-boks-exits-and-a-dog-named/

But no one can fulfill the "No Kill" promise. It's an undoable, unrealistic goal. "No Kill" is merely a political term that hooks animal activists. The so-called magic formula of Winograd's "No Kill," can be found on the underside of any bottle cap.

Post a Comment »