I thought that my question was straight forward. Does anyone here knows when the Department of Health will be back to do their inspection at the shelter because I didn?t see them there on Friday? Thanks.

If you have concerns about how the place is being run you would talk to City Health. I assume you would call them, not wait for them to come by, if it is that important. Melendez's number is posted in this thread several times. Robin Pinkowitz, who is a community liaison for his office, has posted on this thread a few times. You should be able to PM her.

I was thinking about speaking to someone at the Department of Health on Friday but they didn't show up. Do you know when they will be back to do the inspection?

If anyone has any genuine concerns of animal abuse or unnecessary euthanasia at LHS they can always contact HAA. As anyone who worked with us on HCDSPCA will tell you, we retained the anonymity of everyone who came forward until they were ready to go public. Some were never ready to do so and remain anonymous to this day.

HAA's primary concern is always for the animals first and foremost. While we are currently helping LHS get back on its feet we are by no means one and the same. HAA takes every credible accusation of animal abuse seriously, but to be credible you have to at least be willing to identify yourself to us.

If you are not willing to do that then you should contact the Department of Health.

If you are not willing to do any of that it is hard to find your concerns credible.

In the end the HCDSPCA was stopped because people were willing to come forward when the physical threat was very real and very immediate. Given the evidence we currently have, I find it hard to imagine any such threat exists at LHS. Several volunteers and staff at the shelter have had public and private disagreements with the new Board about policy and treatment, including at last weeks Board meeting, and were still working at the shelter when I was there Sunday. Again, if you know differently please feel free to send me a private message via my JCList profile and I will gladly speak to you directly.

David Norman
President
Hudson Animal Advocates

I would have to agree with frank that if people want to post with hidden names, it's because they rightfully are concerned with their safety as well. In our case it was my friend who came forward against the spca years ago and they banned her from entering the shelter to take care of the dogs that she got attached too and then they turned around and killed them. How torturous that was on her, that?s something that we will never forget, so now we know better not to do it. I hope that HAAA members could understand where we are coming from, we don?t want to be banned from helping the animals out at the shelter nor do we want to ever experience it again what we went through at the spca.

If by "stick to the issues" you mean make stuff up out of whole cloth that does not even come close to the easily verified reality of what is happening at LHS today, then congratulations - well done.

I like to stick to the issues. LHS wants to reduce it's population so the shelter is cleaner and a more pleasant place with less expenses. To do this, they don't work with rescues, they stop adopters, they falsely label good dogs aggressive and they murdered innocent dogs. How can someone take a dog from a cage, see it's tail wagging, maybe get a lick from it and then do this! This is no fallacy we know what's going on.
If people want to post with hidden names, it's because they rightfully are concerned with their safety as well. Also 60 dogs were not place and if someone was to verify this it would lead to more problems. Many dogs were euthanized for no reason. If you folks want to lower cost start by being good stewards of the public money, negotiate lower insurance and stop voting for lawyers that create litigious environments. All these problems caused by people not the dogs.

Joe -

Like I said before, I am not judging you, or the truth or fallacy of those charges. I am simply pointing out that you carry as much baggage as the people you have been questioning. And when you are the Director of a city function and you go online and attack those who help make that function happen without identifying yourself, that is hiding. Is Arnold Diaz lying, or is that not you, Joe Frank, being referred to as Director of Animal Control in the "Shame On You" videos in post #76?

Methinks both of you doth protest too much, and go on too long.

Dave;

First of all I am not a director of animal control, but thanks anyway. What makes you think that I was hiding? Just because I decided to use a screen name as oppose to my real name means that I?m hiding. If you feel that I am using another screen name based on the wording of that person who is posting against you than there must be a lot of Davies out there that belong to HAA because there?s a lot of people who are in the animal advocacy world that thinks and speaks the same way you do. I think it would be in our best interest if I just contact the state regarding this matter about an an animal pound, etc.

Right now I do not want to get into it with you about the economy, LHS ACO on weekends, etc. because there is a lot of work that is going on at the shelter and people are doing their best to get the facility up and running the right way this time around. I would like to congratulate all of the workers, volunteers, etc. for a great job that they are doing and wish them the best of luck in getting the job done. Secondly As far as the cat goes that was dumped in the park at least that cat had a happy ending; not so much of what the animals went through at the shelter nor like my cat Koko that was killed by a speeding car. And the litigation that you are so intrigued about I guess is the one where a former shelter worker brought a lawsuit against the City of Jersey City as well as against me for doing my job; yes, that is the same one that was throwing out of court and it is being appeal.

Thanks for making me laugh when you mentioned about me being in charge of an animal pound over ten years ago. It all had to do in response to an emergency situation where as the HCSPCA were wall to wall with animals that the city had no other choice but to immediately erect this rundown garage as a temporarily animal pound. In doing so since it does fall under my job description as an animal control officer I had no other choice in this matter but to take on the additional duties and responsibilities of running and operating a city animal pound. I had to do what was in the best interest of the city as well as for the animals at the time. It?s kind of what just happen here with the interim board stepping in to save LHS and the animals. The only deference here is that LHS has a lot of supporters now not like when I was task with doing it. I had to juggle between doing animal control services as well as animal pound duties with limited part time staff workers that was unreliable as well as limited ACOs since 1-guy was out on sick leave and the city took forever to finally hire a 2nd ACO to help me out but by that time the city finally hire a shelter manager. It is strange when you think about it that the same volunteers/organization group back than very seldom showed up when you really needed them to help but instead of them making the most of it they didn?t but they were very good in accusing me of a lot of untrue stuffs including not running the animal pound according to state code but that was never proven. I did what I had to do for a period of about 6 months with limited to no staff workers at times, not like LHS who been at it for over 7 years with plenty of staff workers and volunteers, etc.

I am glad to hear about all of the improvements and good work that is being done at the shelter and I do hope that everyone hear learned a lesson from this as well.

Joe.

State has yet to re-inspect Jersey City animal shelter

Published: Friday, August 20, 2010, 5:20 PM Updated: Friday, August 20, 2010, 5:30 PM
Melissa Hayes/The Jersey Journal

Despite a threatening letter telling Liberty Humane Society it had until today to fix inhumane conditions, the state didn?t pay a visit to the Jersey City shelter.
?We were so disappointed, we worked so hard,? said Diana Jeffrey an interim member of the Board of Directors. ?Everybody worked really, really hard.?

The state sent a letter to the board, which until this week consisted of three interim members, giving the shelter until today to fix two main issues: get dogs out of inadequate, inhumane cages and put together a disease control program.

While the shelter has a lot more work ahead of it, Jeffrey said all of the dogs have been moved out of the small wire cages and the shelter?s veterinarian is working on the disease control plan with the state.

The shelter?s entire board quit last month over a disagreement with the shelter management. The shelter has been operating without an executive director since the interim board fired Joanna Hopkinson.

The board appointed three permanent members this week and has been working to address overcrowding issues amid criticism that adoptable dogs were being euthanized.

Jeffrey said the shelter needs volunteers and donations.

She said the shelter is buying dog runs at a discounted rate with the help of an ASPCA grant and will need to raise about $250,000 to install new dog runs and enclose and winterize the existing outdoor runs.

She is asking people interested in volunteering to go on www.petfinder.com and ?sponsoring? a pet by helping find the animal a good home.

?That would really help us out in a tremendous way,? she said.

For more information visit the shelter?s website or call (201) 547-4147 http://libertyhumane.org

Joe -

First of all, thank you for finally standing up and identifying yourself. I ask that everyone reading this thread, to go back through this thread, read what Koko wrote, and keep in mind that all of that time that was your Director of Animal Control hiding who he was as he called out people in his profession by name and questioned their ethics, myself included. If you read closely enough you will be able to figure out the second "colorful" name that is also him.

The law you cite above states the difference. A pound is defined as a place of confinement. A shelter is defined as a place for housing and distribution. A pound has no requirement to redistribute animals after the seven day hold is up, while a shelter, by the definition you just provided, does.

This is a dramatic difference. So you tell me how an organization in this city, in this economy, that has to hire LHS to fill in as ACO on weekends due to budget cuts, is going to run an animal shelter? How does an ACO who the state DHSS found dumped cats illegally in a local park as a matter of policy and who is still in litigation involving the last time he was in charge of the shelter over ten years ago going to run it now?

To be perfectly clear, I am neither expressing an opinion nor claiming to know your guilt or innocence in these things. However, you have made it clear that you believe that for the shelter to be successful it needs to shake off the clouds of its past. How is Jersey City Animal Control not one of those clouds, rightfully or wrongfully as the case may be?

In the meantime you might want to consider congratulating those who have been working at the shelter over the last few weeks - the staff and the volunteers. In the last few weeks since the change over they have placed 60 dogs in rescue, foster and/or adoption. Regardless of what you may think or feel about current management and policy, or where things should go in the future, these people have done a yeoman's job just by blocking out all the noise that we all make on threads like this one and doing their work in an environment free of the chaos that reigned for eight months. The shelter is clean, the unhealthy animals have been properly isolated from the healthy ones, new kennels of the proper size are coming into place with more on the way, and design for a long overdue expansion of dog housing is under way.

It is my sincere hope that now, with things returning to a semblance of normalcy, we can all put our bickering aside and work together to maintain the programs put in place that reordered the shelter and got so many animals placed. Perhaps we can all find the time and the money to give the shelter what it needs to be able to handle periods of higher-than-normal intake in the future. After all, it is by doing those things that a shelter can, over time, become no kill without fear of going bankrupt and being turned into a pound. It can't be done by a simple declaration and just throwing the doors open. I would hope that we have all learned that lesson from this.

- David

Quote:

New Jersey Statutes Annotated 4:15.1. Definition of;

An animal ?Pound? shall mean an establishment for the confinement of dogs or other animals seized either under the provisions of this act or otherwise.

An animal ?Shelter? shall mean any establishment where dogs or other animals are received, housed and distributed.

One of the main purposes of an animal pound is to hold a stray animal for at least 7-days in order to give the owner the opportunity to reclaim their pet from the facility. If the animal goes unclaimed after the 7-day holding period than legally the animal could be put up adoption, rescue, etc. Could you just imagine what would be happening right now if this law wasn?t in effect to protect the pet owner?s rights in getting their lost pet back from the facility?

Nowhere is it written, not even in the state law or local ordinance unless of course HAA could point it out to me in black and white that an animal ?Pound? cannot do the same functions as an animal ?Shelter?.

Joe Frank

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/

loverboy writes:

Quote:

And another anonymous person chimes in with either wrong or missing information.

Everyone on the interim board has been on A board in the past - they have never been THE board, and they have never all been on the board at the same time. Unless you are saying everyone who has ever been on any LHS board ever for 12 years has been a failure and the shelter somehow stayed open, grew and improved over time by magic perhaps you should try to learn a little about what you are talking about first.

If you did you would know that the only reason there is an interim board of ex-members is because it was the one thing in the LHS by-laws that could keep the shelter from officially being out of business when the Board mass resigned nearly a month ago. That if these ex-members had not stepped forward, the city would have legally been forced to take it over in which case it would be a "7 days and you're done" pound.

If you did, you would have by now read the statements to the press in which the Interim Board Members have repeatedly made it clear that they intend to be just that, interim, and to depart as soon as he shelter is on steady footing again.

If you did you would have by now read the inspection reports and realize that in the eight months the shelter was under a new board and management it essentially began to collapse, and to attack the people who were there when it passed inspections and didn't torture animals (again - read the reports) is inexplicable.

While you are at it, maybe you would bother to read the Jersey Journal article ON THIS THREAD to see that three new members who have NEVER been on an LHS Board before were appointed to permanent seats just this week.

Every time this thread seems to be getting sane "someone" has to jump in with lies and distortions to try to convince people that a nearly destroyed shelter that is being saved is actually a nearly-saved shelter that is being destroyed. The sad part is that you don't get that if people start to believe your BS the result would be a pound. Are you really so self-righteous that you are willing to risk ALL the animals lives to make a point? And if you are THAT self-righteous why don't you, like EVERYONE who has attacked the current board here with ONE exception, say who you are?

Or perhaps a pattern is forming on this thread of sock puppets who post for the first time, respond two or three times, are shown to be wrong, and then disappear just to have someone "new" with no previous posts appear the next day to repeat the exact same stuff while hoping that others won't go back and read the rest of the thread. At least have the courage of your convictions, as misguided as they may be.

FYI - I have added the 2008 Financials and Audit for LHS to http://thetruthmachine.net/?page_id=181

I want to thank LHS for getting the data that was not yet available on guidestar to me so quickly.

Problem-stricken Jersey City animal shelter gets new board members

Published: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 10:47 PM Updated: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 10:50 PM
Melissa Hayes/The Jersey Journal

Following a contentious discussion on the euthanasia of 12 dogs, Liberty Humane Society?s interim Board of Directors appointed three permanent members in hopes of moving the Jersey City shelter forward.

?Try to imagine the predicament we?re in,? said Diana Jeffrey an interim member of the board. ?We didn?t create the problems. We?re trying to fix it and we?re getting criticized for how we?re fixing someone else?s mess.?

Tonight, the interim board unanimously elected Michele Perotta, who helped found Jersey City-based MCP Rescue, and long-time shelter volunteer John Hanussak to the board. The board also appointed Althea Bernheim, former aide to Ward E Councilman Steven Fulop, who was not at the meeting.

?I want to have greater involvement,? Hanussak said. ?I?m ready to step up to the plate.?

The new board members face an array of problems, chief among them is the state's mandate to address inhumane conditions by Friday. But the shelter, which has been operating without an executive director since the new board fired Joanna Hopkinson just a few weeks ago, also must get its finances in order, fix a leaky roof, broken computers and other issues that were discussed tonight.

The new members join Jeffrey and other interim members Bonnie Swazo and Laura Moss. The three interim members are past board presidents who volunteered to serve after the previous board quit at its July meeting over differences with Hopkinson.

Hopkinson, who attended the meeting, said she had to limit her comments because of an agreement she signed with the board. But she did talk about the shelter recently euthanizing 12 dogs.

Hopkison said the shelter was reverting back to its old ways before she took over in 2009, killing 15 to 20 dogs a month because they're deemed too aggressive to adopt. Hopkison, who said she averaged three to five dogs per month, was transitioning to a no kill shelter and has been criticized for hoarding animals.

?I think Liberty Humane is an amazing organization,? she said. ?I wish these people luck, they have to be honest about what they?re doing.?

The state criticized the shelter for keeping too many dogs in too small cages and the interim board has said the conditions were the result of hoarding.

Tonight the new board said a contractor was visiting today to give quotes on covering the outdoor dog runs and adding more dog runs.

Jeffrey said all of the large dogs have been moved out of the inadequate cages and dogs are being evaluated so they can be adopted.

The appointments came after volunteers and supporters spent more than an hour speaking out the 12 dogs that had been euthanized.

Volunteers questioned the criteria for testing the dogs and deeming them too dangerous and said they felt adoptable dogs were being killed.

Nikki Dawson, a former manager of the shelter who is coordinating the evaluations, said top-rate evaluators have been brought in from other organizations to test the animals.

?What I would encourage you to do is take an adoptable dog that doesn?t have an issues so you can move it through because ultimately that saves lives,? she said.

Carina, a volunteer who declined to give her last name, said the board needs to work with the volunteers.

?We really deeply care. Like you we want the best for the animals,? she said. ?We?re just not sure you want us around.?

Board members said they know they are making unpopular decisions but are trying to prevent the state from shutting the shelter down.

?We?re doing the best we can,? Swazo said. ?I just hope people will work with us.?

.Quote:

Thanks Dave for clearing that up for me, all along I assumed that they have been informing you on a regular basis on what was actually going on at the shelter but apparently they haven?t, so please excuse me for that. I guess I had made the same mistakes as others did (including yourself), by listing to one side only without speaking directly to the other side. It goes to show you that there?s more to see than what meets your eyes and that?s the truth. Good luck in getting the job done.

We have been working with the shelter advising them as they consistently worked on improvements, but they started from a point where these problems did not exist. As a responsible organization with a responsible Board LHS was continuously making improvements. We met with them regularly to check out the condition of the shelter, and continuously found a shelter in good condition and getting better. The shelter is inspected several times a year. JC Animal Control is in there every day.

As I have mentioned earlier, starting with a meeting held with the just fired ED we and many other organizations were essentially locked out. The inspectors weren't, and failed them twice. The shelter I saw on my last visit there, shortly after Joanna became ED, and the shelter at the time the Board resigned were two different places. We found out what it had become in our absence only a week before then and immediately started action.

HAA is three people. We work on things as we become aware of them by making ourselves publicly available for animal advocates in the area to reach out to for support. We do the best we can when we can. Do I wish I had known about this earlier? Obviously. Should I have been more vigilant? Perhaps. Instead I trusted people who volunteered at LHS who had helped us with the HCDSPCA when they had been there. It never occurred to me that the same crap could happen and they would say nothing to me.

Have I learned from this and hope to do things better in the future? Absolutely, yet the fact remains that the ultimate responsibility lies with those who perpetrated this. As a community of animal advocates there are certainly ways in which we have all failed, which is why I said at the very beginning of this to remember that everyone involved is human and that many no doubt acted with good intentions.

None the less things now are what they are, and I am trying to help fix them and hold people accountable for their behavior. If you feel there is behavior I need to be held accountable for, that is certainly your right and you may be correct, but perhaps you should aim some of your anger at those who let this happen in front of their own eyes while lying to those who would have gladly helped if they had known. There are those of us who perhaps should have known more, but more importantly there are those who not only knew about all of it, but actually made it happen. You can recognize them pretty easily. They are the ones screaming about an impending slaughter that exists nowhere but in their imagination. The saddest part is that they have probably convinced themselves it is true. After all, how else can they justify so many deaths by fully avoidable "natural causes" and the tortured existence of other animals as being "better" than things are with them gone?

They have three choices in front of them. They can accept that their time is done, something that the ex-ED and ex Board Members, to their credit, appears to be doing. They can acknowledge that a good intent went horribly awry and try to make up for it, as many volunteers and staff are doing. The final choice is to attack everyone who is trying, in ways big and small, to help make things better - to lie about individuals pasts and about what is happening now.

I suppose those who have made that final choice are trying to convince themselves that things did not go as far out of control as they did. Maybe they simply really have no clue that while meaning well they have done something horrid, and honestly believe that the horrid people are those who dare question their actions. Fortunately there are very few who fall into the last category. I would guess - and yes it is a guess - six or seven such people out of the scores of people involved as staff, volunteers, and animal control with LHS. Unfortunately those six or seven people speak very loudly, hide their identities, and have no shame.

What do you mean more lies when you are the one who made that quote in posted #92.

Quote:

After reading your post what?s one to believe? I guess HAA did try to some extent but they didn't try hard enough. You would have never made that quote if it wasn?t true. Like I say the least thing that HAA could have done (ASP) was to report it immediately to the proper authorities.

And more lies from people who don't identify themselves. HAA became aware of the overcrowding at the shelter one week before the Board resigned, and launched our rescue effort the very next day, as explained in earlier posts. Among those who was communicated with on that first day was a representative from the City Health Department. So yes, we were in contact with the authorities as soon as we knew anything about it. I won't bother to repeat everything I laid out earlier about the previous management making sure that no one knew there was a crowding problem until the last minute, but that is what happened. What is most frightening is that the people on this thread who were there every day and DID know about it are the ones screaming now about lives being lost. So sledgehammer, I ask you, what evidence do you have that animals are "dying needlessly" now? Have you talked to anyone who has been there for the evaluations? Have you reached out to the ASPCA or St Huberts to ask what they have observed? Did you notice that when the person who made the original outlandish claims about how animals were being evaluated was called on it by someone who was there and asked to identify someone who was doing these horrible things so they could be held accountable she disappeared and started selling the same lies on Craigslist instead?

So yes, by all means, keep taking shots at the messenger. That really helps.

Do you know what really bothers me the most? Is the fact that HAA has a lot to say but the bottom line here is that HAA knew all along about the conditions at LHS and they did nothing but anticipated what they would do once it all unfolds. I guess there?s really nothing wrong with that but when you have animal?s lives at stake and they are being mistreated and abused at the shelter the very least HAA could have done was to report it immediately to the proper authorities.

Now that there is a time restraint on the shelter HAA is running around like there?s no tomorrow and animals are needlessly being put to sleep. I say needlessly because given the circumstances and the conditions at the shelter (overcrowded with animals, foul odors rifling through the shelter, animals being crammed into small cages, etc.) it is totally unfair to challenge any animal behavior especially now when there are a lot of activities going on.

If HAA would have immediately reported the inhume conditions at LHS when it was first brought to their attention to the proper authorities all of this undue hardship and the mishandling of the animals would have been limited.

I am HAAMember - Note the tag is not HAABoard, it is HAAMember. All the posts on here are from me, it is my tag. I would tend to think you know that, since you just identified me by name.

Explain how "muzzle the HAA posters who do as much to confuse and instigate as they do to clarify and explain" is to be taken other than how I took it. Then maybe try to answer some of the questions I posed to you.

And what reason other than personal convenience do you have for not separating my comments from HAA or, more importantly LHS? I just reread the entire chain this morning and I can't see anywhere that LHS itself has chimed in. Some volunteers yes, but not a single employee (at least that has identified themselves) and not one board member. One person that had commented has since become a Board Member, but has also stopped commenting.

I am sorry if you find my responses to CatWoman, JCNewJersey, or LHS_Volunteer to be rude or inflammatory, but I have watched for years as these people have told blatant lie after blatant lie without identifying themselves and without being called on it. Just today LHS_Volunteer decided to take her false post about 32 dogs scheduled for euthanasia on Friday that lost traction here and republish it on craigslist.

If I seem angry that so many people seem ready to attack the people who are currently at LHS, who inherited a mess that their attackers made and are now trying to clean it up, it is because I am - and I do not apologize for that. If I go ballistic as people post about mythical methods of evaluation even as ASPCA and St Huberts are there assuring best practices are being followed it is because one should go ballistic when people behave so badly.

People, for better or for worse, get a great deal of local news from sights like this one, not from newspapers or television. For each of us writing on here there are countless people reading this, so I am not going to hold back on the truth to be more politic. I am not running for office, nor will I ever. I am trying to make sure that people who read this know when others are misleading them. If telling the truth "confuses" that is because some people don't know who to believe. That is why I always encourage people to find out for themselves - read the inspection reports, look at the financials, OPRA the intake records. If you can, post them.

I admire CatsAndDogs for posting the documents she did, I just don't respect the misrepresentation in her description of them. That said, there are some disturbing numbers in them that I will crunch this evening. No matter who is in charge and what the official policy turns out to be, enough people here have expressed concern about euthanasia rates at LHS that you can be sure I and HAA will be keeping an eye on them and will speak up. We may be working to help save LHS, because we believe it is worth saving, but we do not work for LHS and we will hold them to the same standards as we would anyone else. In fact if you read what the state has written about conditions at the shelter under the just departed administration and compare it to our past work you will see that is exactly what we are doing in objecting to those who try to defend what the shelter became under the previous administration and previous board. Rest assured, if conditions like that continue or return I and HAA will be vocal about it, regardless of who is or isn't on the Board or working there.

As to my words "instigating", I do not know what to say to that. Instigate what? Instigate people to not become involved? The current volunteer numbers and the hours they are putting in do not, I believe, back that up. Instigate others to find out for themselves? Good. Instigate those who I accuse of lying to strike back, and call me things like a joke, in turn leading to my contributing to the general downturn in civil tone? For that I truly am sorry, but when they respond to as simple a thing as a heavily researched document meant to dispel rumors by telling lies about who I am, what I've known, when I've known it, and what I've done, calling me out by name - all while hiding who they are then I am going to respond with verifiable truths.

Can my tone be confrontational? Yes - I know that it can be, that at times I fail to choose my words carefully. I both admit and apologize for that. However, there are also people who do need to be confronted - who when they are blatantly lying need to be called blatant liars, who when they make claims that are clearly ridiculous have to be called just that. For that I do not apologize.

Sorry, David, but as you have AGAIN chosen to misread mild criticism as a personal attack... proving yourself both extremely defensive and extremely aggressive... I will not address your response at length. Your behavior is rude and unfair. In case you're wondering, I do NOT separate your statements from those of HAA or LHS.

The idea of volunteering at LHS is unattractive to me right now PRECISELY because reasonable discussion becomes so quickly vitriolic, and I am risk-averse to working with hotheaded people.

I was not at the meeting because my flight was delayed and I could not make it. But, I am glad the waters are looking calmer. If only you were, too.

From the footnotes of the documents:

Quote:

Associated has contracts in Hudson County. Even the state is saying in the foot notes that these are not 100% reliable numbers.

It is not a matter of always thinking I am right. People are certainly entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. When I state something as a fact it is because I actually bother to do my research, including reading the footnotes of the documents I present.

Please try to contain yourself. Why do you think you are always right?

Associated Humane is located in Essex County. So figure that one out okay. Their numbers are reflected in the Essex County figures.

Hoboken just signed with LHS in 2010. THose numbers are far away from being calculated.

The claim that these figures are exclusive to LHS is ridiculous. Why do you do that? Why do you make claims that are so easily, demonstrably false? What animal's life do you think you save in doing that, or is that not your primary concern here?

LHS services Jersey City and Hoboken only, and Hoboken is a very recent addition not reflected in these numbers. Most of Hudson county is serviced by Associated Humane Society in Newark, along with many more smaller shelters.

You are right about OPRA. My point was that the people who claim to have already gotten info from OPRA refuse to show the records to anyone else, just asking us to believe their summaries. Anyone here can OPRA the docs, and I encourage people to do so if they so desire. All claims to the contrary, no one currently working for or with LHS is trying to hide anything.

You can OPRA LHS quarterly reports from the City Clerk of Jersey City. They contain stats on euthanasia. It is public record.

However, the following State Dept of Health statewide intake and disposition numbers will give you an idea of what has been happening in Hudson County. These figures are exclusive to LHS. The HCSPCA never reported anything and we are not surprised are we.

2008
http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/animaldisp08.pdf

2007

http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/animaldisp07.pdf

2006
http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/animaldisp06.pdf

alanwright says:
Quote:

Why do you have a problem that when new information becomes available people start posting again? This is a conversation thread, yet you have a problem with the amount of conversation?

When people tell blatant lies, others should not post to point them out because it "confuses and instigates"?

Actually providing direct links to the financial information that people have repeatedly asked for here does "as much to confuse and instigate as [...] to clarify and explain?"

If you had been at the Board Meeting last night (judging by your comments I assume you were not), you would know that the Shelter is not in disarray but in fact coming out of a long period of disarray. Last night's meeting was packed and was even attended by the recently fired Executive Director. Do you know how many arguments over current management and plans broke out? None.

Why is it Alan that you seem to suddenly pop up every time the conversation here seems to be turning into reasonable back-and-forth where people are getting verifiable answers to legitimate questions and honest "I don't knows" when people don't know? Is there something about this thread becoming productive that concerns you?

The volunteers, god bless them, care about what volunteers always care about - the cause. They are not as interested in the politics as they are in knowing how they can help the animals. The reason that the shelter is coming back together is because the disarray resulted in volunteers increasing their efforts. Helping organizations that are doing important work but in disarray is, to many volunteers of all types in all organizations, a calling. I find it interesting that your willingness to volunteer is apparently inversely proportional to how much an organization might need your help.

very simple... to directly help the animals.


as far as numbers go there is a figure referred to as a Live Release Rate; this includes all of the animals that left the shelter to go to adoption, rescue, etc and all of the animals that died if illness, euthanized by court order, euthanized by owner consent, euthanized for failing evaluation or for any other reason. LHS is obligated by contract to provide euthanasia services, even if by proxy, for the courts.

Last year, LHS achieved its highest monthly live release rate (I believe in March or April) which was a bit over 82% if i recall correctly. this number is respectable for even a no kill shelter to achieve, nevermind a shelter contracted for municipal services.

the total number of animals can be found in the annual report (needs to be requested, i dont know where it is posted online) but it is over 2,500.

A week ago, I asked for a follow-up to this thread (#106) and a flood was unleashed.

Then, an LHS volunteer came with accusations... and another flood was unleashed.

Then, another Board meeting... another flood.

Christ.

Will it ever stop? Will LHS ever right its ship, silence the back-biters and naysayers, calm the internal disputes, or muzzle the HAA posters who do as much to confuse and instigate as they do to clarify and explain?

Anyone pushing the volunteer angle at LHS really has to look at this objectively: why would I volunteer with an organization so obviously in disarray? When the Titanic is sinking, you don't climb on board.