"We have also not refused to release any adoptable animal to any trustworthy rescue, foster home, or adopter. In fact, 60 dogs were adopted, rescued, or placed in foster homes in just three weeks."

and this is supposed to make up for the discrimination the front end at lhs engaged in throughout the last 12 months? i have seen adoption applications trashed because certain people didnt like the "look" or "dress" of the person filling out the applications.

i have seen employees talk down to other employees/volunteers of certain races while speaking respectfully to those of other races.

i have seen employees repeatedly step OUT OF their job description at unwarranted times and for inappropriate reasons.

i have seen employees debate tactlessly with potential adopters and decline adoption applications based on those debates.

i suppose equal opportunity looks good on paper but it's difficult for some people to persue once they get a tiny bit of power and a few "friendships" going, however lhs is not thriving, and it cannot take the stress these people bring to it. no establishment can honestly.

but i am happy these so called great changes have been in effect for the past 3 weeks. now if it continues lhs may actually begin to benefit animals in the manner it should. however, some lhs employees need to follow behind the last board and just resign if they havent done so already...and save us ALL the headache.

Quote:



Thank you -- very well put!

alanwright says:

Quote:

Fair point. It has always been my intent to inform people both about the claims being made and those making them. If in the process I have enflamed trollesque passions I apologize. I just re-read my posts throughout this thread and can see that I very well may have done so in some places.

Also, just for clarity's sake, all of the posts under HAA Member are me, and after doing a little digging in our own backyard I am confident that those are the only posts from an HAA member on this thread.

- David Norman

This might be the first open letter or press-release since the old board resigned on July 15th. A month-and-a-half later... I think this is too late! Waaayyy too late. But, is it too little? The competing messages from angry/ disgruntled volunteers (some anonymous), self-appointed watchdogs (JCList and Facebookers), related humane organizations (HAA, for example), and nouveau rival humane societies (Pets Alive) have dictated the acidic tone of the conversation. Many from the above groups have called for greater transparency and communication; I have as well. In the interim, David Norman and others from the HAA have provided both useful information and "fodder" for critics... perhaps unintentionally enflaming their trollesque passions. Also, Pets Alive responded at length to a Jersey Journal article which they thought unfairly portrayed their interactions with LHS. They've also created a lengthy blog post. (Both are reposted a few entries ago also). So, here we have it. Something official. Just in time for it to be churned under by the swells of Labor Day Weekend. Or, does it have enough buoyancy to float atop the waters swirling around it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Open Letter from the Liberty Humane Society Board of Directors Aug. 31, 2010 http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... ciety-board-of-directors/ Supporters of Liberty Humane Society, So many of you have dedicated your time and energy to the animals at Liberty Humane Society over the past months and years and without your support we would have a city pound where the outlook of the animals would be bleak. Due to your efforts, literally tens of thousands of animals over the past six years have found refuge from the streets; a safe place to lay their heads, heal from their wounds, and find their forever home. Many of you have worked alongside us during good times and some not so good times. Together, we built Liberty Humane Society (LHS). There really aren?t words to express the thanks you deserve or the gratitude we feel. Obviously you are aware that in the past six weeks there have been many changes at the shelter. The interim board and paid staff, as well as long time volunteers, have had the overwhelming job of keeping the organization from complete collapse. In this time we have eased the suffering of many animals that were being inhumanely housed. Sick animals are now provided with the medical care they deserve and the spread of disease is slowing. While we have brought the shelter back up to or close to state standards, we believe the animals we care for deserve a higher standard than the basic minimum that the state mandates. LHS is committed to providing them with the highest degree of care possible. We have managed to adopt, or transfer to rescue a record number of dogs and cats in a matter of weeks. The staff work incredibly hard and rarely complain. They are amazing. Despite these efforts, there have been great misunderstandings. As a board we apologize if we have not always been able to reach out and respond to the questions being asked of us every day. You have been left to wonder about things that haven?t been explained. That is not okay. We were given a very, very short deadline to ease the overcrowding which led to inhumane conditions and that has been our main focus. Our time has been spent and will continue to be focused foremost on the well-being of the animals in our care, working extensively with all the reputable animal advocates and rescue organizations that have come to our aid during this crisis. Current Challenges We Still Face We had our re-inspection by the state this past week and many of the most serious violations dating back to last November have been rectified. While the accommodations for the animals are not completely up to where we want them to be, they have vastly improved. Our Vet, Dr. Bloom, has done an incredible job setting up protocol for all the animals so that they are properly medicated and evaluated. One huge challenge we face is that the State has told us that none of the cages we have are large enough for dogs over 45 pounds. A major challenge we face is that last year, the state changed the regulations on minimum size requirements for dogs over 45 lbs. That left LHS in a position where we needed to obtain larger runs for our dogs. Thanks to a grant awarded by the ASPCA to purchase some larger runs, and Mason Kennels for providing us runs at a deep discount or even donated, we are well on our way to meeting those new requirements. Rumors We know you may have concerns over some rumors that have been circulated. LHS would like to take this opportunity to address some of those false and slanderous statements. First off, we have not euthanized animals purely to make room for other animals nor do we intend to do so. We have also not refused to release any adoptable animal to any trustworthy rescue, foster home, or adopter. In fact, 60 dogs were adopted, rescued, or placed in foster homes in just three weeks. During this time period it is true that we have had to euthanize some animals. The sad reality of animal sheltering is that not all animals are adoptable. It came to our attention when we stepped in that in an effort to avoid euthanizing, dangerous and aggressive dogs were removed from public view while adoptable dogs were placed in smaller and smaller cages to make room. This led to overcrowding, suffering, and the stockpiling of dangerous dogs. It also meant that we had to contend with a large number of dangerous dogs ? dogs that could not be safely placed in a home ? all at once. The choice we faced was to either release these dogs on an unsuspecting public and hope no one or no animal was hurt or attacked or to humanely euthanize the dogs. That is an awful choice for anyone who loves animals to have to make. In the end, 26 dogs deemed to be too dangerous to be placed into our community, were put to sleep. That is heartbreaking. Not only to you, but to our staff and everyone on the board as well. Evaluations To determine whether a dog is adoptable or not, we asked two outside agencies with nationally recognized expert trainers to assist us in performing behavioral evaluations on the dogs. These evaluations have been the source of rumor, innuendo, and blatantly false statements. Who did the evaluations; how those evaluations have been interpreted; what they said about what dog; allegations that dogs passed, but were euthanized anyway. We can?t blame you for being confused after everything that?s been said. Our critics have completely distorted the truth and we?ve watched in horror as the rumors get worse and worse, the allegations get more and more grotesque, and the personal attacks get more and more vicious. How You Can Help As animal lovers, we can understand your concern over what you may have heard, but we want to assure you that LHS stands by our staff, our decisions and our practices. We will not allow these vicious attacks to distract us from our mission and we need your help. As a friend of LHS, we ask that you stand by us and continue your support. We want to show everyone the challenges we are facing and how we are overcoming those obstacles by opening our doors to the media. In the coming days and weeks, our Acting Director, Nicole Dawson, will be setting up interviews with the media and giving tours of the facility in order to dispel some of the myths being circulated. The truth will soon be revealed that LHS is dedicating to protecting the animals and people of our community. Sincerely, Board of Directors Liberty Humane Society

i am a newbie *hi everyone!!!* but i definitely have had my experiences with LHS, and i have to admit, i knew this mess was going to happen at the end of 2009 when i left my position as a volunteer there. i was actually one that called the manager a hoarder of animals (im not saying thats the statement they read, however i know it was in anemail i sent to the board)...and i emailed the entire board a few months before they resigned (this was during the time frame of june 2009 and december 2009)...i shared perhaps about 4-5 emails with the members, but that was the last i heard of the situation before this sudden resignation story popped up. does anyone have any information on how many of the employees have left/resigned/been fired since this situation began back in july? i am interested in returning as a volunteer but not until they change managers and executive staff members. i have been a volunteer there for well over 1.5 years STRIAGHT, donating well over 20 hours a week to the shelter when im there, and easily over 500.00 total, but the staff members got so ridiculous that i had to leave. and it was a shame because i developed some great relationships with the people and animals there, and honestly, i miss it. my only requirement is to get respect and be spoken to with respect, and that lacked sorely the last time i was there, and the last time i checked, i didnt get paid to be there more than most paid personnel....so i am wondering if it's improved? ayone know?

As to Steve's concerns about Half of the animals being put down - perhaps he could be taken more seriously if he had a real source for those numbers instead of what he is hearing by rumor or as a result of his own bad math.

Again - if you start on Day 1 with 89 dogs and on day 20 you have 40 dogs, that does NOT mean 49 dogs have been killed, unless you assume no adoptions and no new animals in.

The reality is that LHS averages 2,5000 dogs in it's doors a year, or slightly more than 200/month. As I have stated before this is why live release rates are the accepted standard in Animal Control, not percentages that come from different samples.

I cannot speak to the entire time the new board has been in control, but for the 3 1/2 week period that I have figures for 60 dogs were sent to rescue groups, 20 dogs were sent to foster homes or adopted, and 25 were euthanised. That is a live release rate of 76%. That is ABOVE the national average and very close to the average among No Kill Shelters of 82%.

This is despite inheriting a shelter where the sick dogs and the healthy dogs were intermixed and several vicious dogs were being held secretly in the back out of view, forcing adoptable dogs up front into collapsible crates too small for them.

Yes, No Kill is an admirable goal. Yes, with a lot of work it is achievable. But for so many to look at what has happened at LHS in the five weeks since the people being attacked here saved it from becoming a POUND and to then rip them apart instead of offering help is hard to understand.

Steve - If I remember correctly at any one time you had 5 - 7 dogs in your in-home rescue. When you left Jersey City did you find someone to take that operation over for you, or did you just move on and are now attacking at a distance an organization that has seven less slots to put dogs into?

Daily Kos article about Pets Alive:


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11 ... -Sanctuary-or-Animal-Scam

Having discussed this with Matt at Pet's alive, and talked with others who have as well, I can come to the following conclusions:

1 - He is dishonest in his intentions. He states that he was willing to meet with the Board about becoming No Kill. What he in fact did was lay down an ultimatum to them, without having met them or done any investigation into the situation, that he would only meet with them if they first agreed to become No Kill, BEFORE hearing his plan on how to do it. He refused to submit a written plan, and he refused to take three dogs he had preciously said he would take unless all killing immediately stopped. This of course was without finding out what killing was actual;ly happening, choosing to believe the words of people he had never met or had any previous contact with.

2 - He is dishonest in his claims. He states in his letter that he has no intention of suing anyone, however he made it very clear in an email to me after I provided him with the names of the Board Members that he was looking for their home addresses as well because "not only am I going to sue the shelter but I am going to sue each and every one of them personally." Does that sound like someone who is not intent on suing.

3 - He is dishonest about his own business. In discussing the great success of Pets Alive in pulling off no kill he fails to mention that as of December of last year they were facing property foreclosure. He talks on his blog about the evils of what happens in secret, but has actively lobbied for a law in NY that would assure that organizations such as his remained EXEMPT from inspections.

4 - He is threatening in his demeanor. It comes through in all of his emails to individuals, it comes through in his comments on his blog about my post he never put up, that simply told him who the board was and asked that he learn more about the situation in New Jersey before he take actions that could result in the shelter becoming a pound. When I asked him why he had not posted it while he continued to say in his blog that the Board was a secret and suggested that Niki Dawson was a Board member when, in fact, he knows she is not - all information I had provided him with, he simply replied that he had "something special" in mind for me. On another site that I will not publicize here, he has posted statements that have resulted in people hinting at physical violence against shelter staff and has then remained silent on those comments. He has discovered and distributed the Board members home phone numbers. Remember, some of these people have been on the Board LESS THAN TEN DAYS and rather than reach out to them he is taking action that is threatening to them.

5 - He makes claims of his own abilities that are not true. He talks about the great success of Pets Alive without mentioning that what really has occurred is the Great success of the organizations that came in and rebuilt the whole system there from scratch in 2007 after the founder died and it was discovered that she had been hoarding animals - hundreds of them - in a secret room for years with no light and nowhere near enough food. It was described by the rescue groups who went in as "resembling Auschwitz." This was all done by the woman Matt calls his mentor and a saint, yet we are also to believe he had no idea this was happening under his nose.

To anyone who is serious about making LHS No Kill, and who has complaints about how it is being run, you should take them to the city and the press, but do so with your own facts and not rumors from others. If you have a plan on how the shelter can both go No Kill and pass state inspections so as not to be shut down you should present it to the board and present it to the press and the public so you know it will be listened to.

There are legitimate complaints to be made about how the shelter is being run, but for god's sakes STOP believing outrageous numbers just because people who believe as you do about No Kill state them. The fact that they believe as you do is not a guarantee of their honesty and integrity. I know many of them, and some while I may not agree with their approach to the current crisis I know to be people of integrity. Others I know to be people of no integrity whatsoever, willing to say anything if they think it will help their cause while giving no thought to the consequences if it does not.

Do your own research. Go down to the shelter and ask for a tour. If you have questions about policy or what you see ask them. If you have a plan, as I said before, present it. But for gods sake don't allow your belief in No Kill to be used by others more interested in their own self righteousness than anything else to spoon feed you falsehoods and make good people just trying to find a way to make things work feel threatened.

Some of these staunch no kill advocates make me laugh. I had a friend who worked at North Shore and she was a big supporter of no kill. What I found a bit funny was how at lunch she had no problems going to a McDonalds and ordering a big Mac. I found that a bit odd, I mean factory farmed animals were ok? But I guess pets were a no no.

I don't know is it me or does the whole thing seem a bit hypocritical sometimes?

What I do not understand is why they are allowing volunteer workers to work these dogs if they are not adoptable. I would think that if a dog is unadoptable because of its behavior why would LHS subject any volunteer workers to that but then again how bad could these dogs be for adoption if we were walking them?

I just read this on Pets Alive Blog...

Honestly I don't know what to believe anymore but Pets Alive seems to know the facts


http://petsalive.com/blog/2010/08/30/ ... ain-board-spins/#more-908


Is this another HCSPCA right now.. with no SOLID answers it really is quite disheartening

Quote:

Again, who are you and what experience do you have that you can in any way judge what I have to say?

You're continually making assumptions about things you know nothing about.

For instance, Rottweilers sometimes have a condition commonly referred to as "Rottie Rage". It is a form of epilepsy whereby the dog goes into an alternate zone, attacks, then returns to his normal state without any recollection of the incident, no adrenaline rush, nothing. It is sad but these dogs must be put down. It is a medical condition, not behavioral. It is rare but it occurs.

The Rottweiler who mauled my vet was brought to this particular vet directly from the shelter for shots and neuter to go to rescue. He was in the hands of experienced professionals and showed no signs of behavioral issues until he went into rage unexpectedly.

When you work with thousands of dogs this happens on rare occasions.

And you "suspect" the number of Pit Bulls that are dangerous is higher than the amount that I put forth. Why do you "suspect" this? Do you have any experience in this area? How many Pit Bulls have you met, handled, rescued, fostered, owned, trained?

Who are you?

If you don't take the killing of dogs lightly, why do you so vehemently defend people who kill them by the hundreds for space and convenience?

It is absurd that you defend the killing of healthy, adoptable pets and call those who defend them facists. You actually make no sense whatsoever.

But a dangerous dog under your care mauled a person. I see a lot of room in between being a dog who mauls their vet and a mentally healthy, adoptable animal. Enjoy your math, but there's a qualitative issue that you fail to address. I am of the opinion that not every dog is savable and I suspect the number of hazardous pit bulls ending up at an inner city shelter is higher than the .1% you throw out there.

Quote:

Perhaps you should try a little honey because the no-kill side of this argument has been coming off as a group of unreasonable fascists. Stop acting like anybody takes lightly the idea of putting down dogs.

Quote:

Really? Several thousand rescues and 2 go down, that sounds like terrible judgment to you? Sounds like you need a math lesson.

By the way, all of you with your personal commentary and all of you sticking up for these people who have killed half of the animals in this shelter, why don't you put your name to your comments?

Snide, ignorant remarks, vehement defenses of people who kill with abandon, weird, creepy facebook stalking, I guess I wouldn't put my name to this kind of stuff either, actually.

Quote:

Sounds like you have terrible judgment in evaluating a dog's temperament. Reckless devotion to the no-kill ideology is helping no one.

Deputy Dawg,

I don't know what your point is exactly. Yes, I have a dog that I need to consider putting down. This has nothing to do with what is going on at the "shelter" - some dogs, very few but some, are actually too dangerous to adopt out.

I lived in Jersey City for 11 years and have been active in dog rescue for all of that time. I just moved to New Orleans. I have rescued a couple of thousand dogs and have put down 2 - a Rottweiler that mauled my vet and a Chow Chow that was so vicious you couldn't even approach him to put a muzzle on.

This particular dog is a Black Lab mix. Breed has nothing to do with it. And nobody has suggested that dangerous dogs be released for adoption though it's abundantly clear that shelters, including Liberty, put down dogs who are not dangerous all the time and label them dangerous to excuse their failures and to hide the fact that they kill animals for space and convenience - I know, empirically from my own work, that a dangerous dog is one in a thousand.

For the record, my dogs are not around people until they have been assessed. They are always in my house, in a fenced yard or on leash. I always foster dogs in my home, at my own risk, before I adopt them out.

So next time you go on about 'people like me', try getting to know something about 'people like me'. You seem to know equally little about 'dangerous dogs' and the causal relationship between insurance premiums and breeds.

Please read a quote from Steve Sacchitelli facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/p ... 2051251&v=wall&ref=search

Steve Sacchitelli writes: Smell ya later, New Jersey! Good riddance! Don't let the door hit you.. okay, you get the idea.
August 6 at 8:51am

Rebecca B writes: So how are things down in New Orleans?? Are you kinda settled in yet?
August 11 at 10:04pm

Steve Sacchitelli writes about one of his dogs: He got in a fight with my Pointer and I went to break it up. This is like his 8 or 9th bite. Decision time...
August 11 at 10:35pm

What decision, Steve?
What if this was a child that was bit 8 or 9 times?

These people don't live in Jersey City or even the State of New Jersey. Pets Alive is located in upstate New York and you live in Louisiana. Are you aware 85% of the major developers in Hudson county have now banned certain breeds because of the insurance liability? People like you who want to adopt out the dangerous dogs give the same breeds that aren't dangerous a bad wrap. Instead of going after the people at the shelter start going after the assholes that breed them for drug money and social status. Let us know when you go to the heart of the problem. I'm sure they will welcome your group on MLK and Ocean Avenue with open arms.

Please read the letter from the President of Pets Alive to the Jersey Journal.


Hi Melissa,

I have to say that I was disappointed to read your coverage of Liberty Humane Society.
...
I?m not sure where to start. First off, I am the President of Pets Alive Animal SANCTUARY in Middletown, NY and Elmsford, NY. While we are by definition a shelter, we act as a sanctuary for animals. We have been no-kill for 35 years and will continue to be.

The article characterizes the ?board? of Liberty Humane Society as victims that no one will help. And Pets Alive as an out-of-state organization that is going to sue them into being no-kill.

Neither of those are in any way true.

We contacted Liberty Humane very early on in this debacle and asked how we could help. We took two dogs immediately, and I arranged with the SPCA of Connecticut for them to borrow some outdoor runs to get the dogs out of the kennels, making it unnecessary to kill them, at least for the time being.

We then offered to sit down with them and help them map out the right way to be no-kill. We can?t SUE them into being no-kill any more than they can write a 5 year plan for becoming no-kill. Either you are going to kill the animals in your care or you are not. No-kill has not failed Liberty Humane. Liberty Humane has failed no-kill, and has abdicated their moral responsibility in the stewardship of these animals.

We are talking about a comprehensive plan that includes best practices for adoptions, training, fostering, working with rescues and anything else we can think of to help them get animals out the door instead of in the ground.

The boards, past and present, are textbook examples of the mindset chronicled in Nathan Winograd?s book Redemption, where he proves a theory that the egos of boards and shelter managers are the reason dogs and cats are being killed in places like Jersey City. Why is it that no-kill has worked or is working in San Francisco, Reno, Las Vegas, St. Paul, Tomkins County, NY, Austin and individually in thousands of shelters around the world? Is Jersey City that unique? No?it just has leadership that would rather kill animals and stroke their own egos than accept being wrong and make things right.

LHS is hiding behind temperament testing as an excuse to kill dogs that could be in rescues or in homes. We?ve seen it a million times and certainly we?ve seen it before from Liberty Humane. Take a look at Moet?.http://petsalive.com/moet.jpg

Moet is a senior dog (11 years old) that was deemed ?aggressive? by the testers at Liberty Humane. Volunteers were outraged, and pleaded for the life of this dog. Liberty Humane refused. At the time the idiotic policy of the shelter was that ?pit bulls? like Moet could only be adopted to rescues anyway. So that ensured the deaths of many of them BEFORE the temperament tests get them. A group of Pets Alive volunteers pleaded with us to take Moet, so we did. Moet was adopted a few weeks later and is still in a forever home. That picture was used for our Holiday card last year because it so perfectly depicts the love between animal and caretaker.

Where would Moet be at the hands of these people at Liberty if not for the volunteers that cared so much about the dog? DEAD?a fate that is befalling more and more animals at Liberty Humane. And that doesn?t have to be.

No-kill is what the volunteers at LHS want. It?s what the community wants. It?s the reason they got the contract from the Mayor of Hoboken. Yet they would rather kill dogs and cats.

We offered to work with them for free to come up with a plan to save the animals of Jersey City and Hoboken. We will bring in other experts where we need to, including Best Friends Animal Society, Nathan Winograd, the Tomkins County SPCA and anyone else whose advice would help make this a success. As the old adage says?if you want to be successful hang out with people who are. We are, and we can bring people to the table and work this out.

The board refused.

Someone told me that one of the board members felt like we we?re giving them an ultimatum. Actually, I guess we are. Either stop putting your own egos before your moral responsibility to those animals or get the hell off the board.

We are not going away. I have twenty or so emails from volunteers, ex- and current employees and concerned members of the community and in looking at them a pattern emerges rather quickly?Liberty Humane is disorganized, unresponsive, incompetent and hostile to those who simply ask for information or question what they do. I would be happy to share some of these with you if you wish.

In fact, until the light was shined on them, LHS was refusing to return phone calls from organizations and shelters (including ours) who wanted to take animals from the crowded cages they were stuffed into and waiting to be killed. This is not the behavior of an organization dedicated to the lives of these animals.

Pets Alive has put LHS on notice that we?re watching. We, unlike them, are listening to their volunteers and employees and even the Mayor(s) who trust them with their constituents? animals. They want transparency. They want to know about the disposition of specific animals. They want cogently articulated policy on which animals are being killed, and they want to know when an animal is about to be killed so they can work with rescues to commute that death sentence, even if LHS won?t. All of this information is arguably required to be provided by New Jersey?s Open Public Records Act (OPRA). We are collecting the requests that they have not responded to, and we may consider a class action lawsuit to get the information on behalf of the citizens of New Jersey who want to know. Those are the kinds of lawsuits we are contemplating.

It?s about right and wrong. Killing these animals when there is another alternative is wrong.

http://petsalive.com/moet.jpg
petsalive.com

Greenville chick -

Because the number is not static. It is not like dogs stopped coming in between the two inspections. At one point 11 dogs came in at once. The numbers go up, then down, then up again. That is why "live release rates" rather than % euthanized is the standard measure of shelter performance. Live Release Rate is calculated as percentage of dogs who leave the shelter that leave alive. A flat euthanasia % does not account for population at the beginning or end of the year. Thus the two numbers - animals in and animals euthanized during the yearn- are not statistically related. They come from two different samples.

That said, it would be perfectly legitimate to ask LHS what their release rate has been since taking over the shelter, keeping in mind that the previous management having hidden vicious dogs in the back and thus forced large dogs into small pens in front is bound to have had some impact on the current rate.

Also, while I cannot give overall shelter numbers or speak for the lad few weeks, I can say that the HAA rescue outreach program has placed 60 dogs with rescues since it began roughly four weeks ago.

Quote:

Hi : ) Greenvillechick,

The numbers do not reflect the same dogs and cats that were counted the first time.

Every dog tied to a fence, left in a vacated apartment, put in an abandoned building or basement, running at large or just dumped on a street goes to the shelter. As fast as some dogs/cats go out, others come right in. The intakes never stop. The owner reclaim percentage is small which means that these dogs were not just "lost pets" waiting for their owners to come get them.

This is very sad and very difficult for people like you and I to understand this since our pets are part of our families.

and yet cat woman you were at that meeting, did speak, and made no mention of it. Interesting how your bravado of what you would do evaporates when it means being seen doing it, unless of course it is a news camera.

I'm guessing it's because "most of the animals" includes cats.

Okay sooooo

At the time of the inspection the state counted 66 dogs and 162 cats, down from 93 dogs and 289 cats during the Aug. 4 visit.

Jeffrey said most of the animals have been adopted or given to rescue groups. She said 24 dogs were put down.


ACCORDING TO MY CALCULATIONS

93-24= 69

THAT MEANS 3 DOGS HAVE BEEN SENT TO SHELTERS OR RESCUES... HOW IS THAT MOST??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Pet shelter cited for poor conditions has to make plan for improvements
Saturday, August 28, 2010
By MELISSA HAYES
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER
Liberty Humane Society has failed another state inspection, but the Jersey City animal shelter won't be forced to close.

The state Department of Health and Senior Services is giving the shelter two weeks to develop a plan to address concerns detailed in a seven-page report.

The state sent a letter to the board earlier this month giving it a week to address inhumane conditions observed during an Aug. 4 inspection.

Interim board member Diana Jeffrey said all of the dogs have been removed from inadequate pop-up cages and dividers were removed from cages to give animals more room. But the state says the cages are still inadequate.

Jeffrey said the shelter's new board, which includes three interim members appointed when the old board quit in late July over a disagreement with management, is trying to fix problems caused by the previous shelter management.

The Aug. 24 report also cites the shelter for failing a recent fire inspection; having leaky pipes and other maintenance issues; improper storage of pet food; insect issues; need for improved sanitation; and a need to improve isolation areas for sick animals.

The dog cages, which met state requirements when they were purchased in 2000, are all too small.

"There's nothing we can do about that except for build a new building or take out all the cages and put in new cages," she said.

At the time of the inspection the state counted 66 dogs and 162 cats, down from 93 dogs and 289 cats during the Aug. 4 visit.

Jeffrey said most of the animals have been adopted or given to rescue groups. She said 24 dogs were put down.

Shelter volunteers and rescue groups have lashed out at the board for euthanizing dogs. A volunteer released a video of Fuller, a pitbull who was put down this week, saying the dog passed an ASPCA behavioral test.

But Jeffrey said the dog failed several evaluations and was too dangerous.

She attributes the spike in euthanasia to the previous management hoarding dogs in an effort to become no-kill. She said normally three or four dogs would have been killed a month.

Matt DeAngelis of New York-based no-kill shelter Pets Alive has criticized Liberty Humane on its Facebook page and in his blog on http://petsalive.com threatening legal action if the shelter doesn't become no-kill.

But Jeffrey said that won't happen overnight.

"There would have to be a five-year plan to go no-kill and I think that would be a great goal," she said. "If people would stop attacking us and start helping us we could reach that goal much faster."

That's a dam shame what happen to those dogs at LHS, I could see to some extent if LHS was strap for money and had no other alternatives but this isn?t the case. They had plenty of choices that could have been made such as brining in larger cages or just paying for those dogs to be housed somewhere else until the facility was straighten out with the State but instead they took the easy way out by just killing them. Maybe this is why they decided to use pig's ears to test the dogs as oppose to using anything else because for some reason or another my 2 dogs will fight each other if I don?t keep them apart while they our enjoying their pig?s ears. Does that mean I should have my dogs put to sleep? No, it just means that I know better not to give them that kind of treat unless I keep them apart and I am supervising them. I can?t believe that LHS resort to that type of trickery to decide the faith of a dog.

I attended the Board Meeting last week and listened to people express their concerns with the current euthanasia status at LHS. Some of them were staff workers and volunteers who have witnessed the dog evaluations. They were upset over how the tests are being preformed and feel that the dogs are being set up to fail. They all expressed the same sentiment "Let us help LHS save these dogs" but that request went on deaf ears and 15 dogs are being put down today.
If I was running that meeting my opening statements would not have been to criticize the previous management and board but I would have pleaded with everyone in that room to go home and get on your PC's and find reputable rescues, get valid recommendations and referrals, put out email blasts to all your friends, co-workers and family and ask them to help. I would have enlisted and signed up everyone in that room including the reporters to come down to the shelter to help clean and walk dogs. I would have asked everyone in that room to come up with new ideas on fundraising, networking and fostering but instead the parties running that meeting had already made up their mind what they were going to do to resolve the issue at LHS.
R.I.P. my four legged friends and I'm sorry we couldn't help you.

oh wow. I see. The page you linked is a rival to LHS! dang

You are not kidding they are really going at it on Facebook; Liberty Humane Society Uncensored.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Liberty ... 21665741216260?ref=search

For those of you who are still paying attention, the Liberty Humane Society is now in a battle with a "no kill" group called "Pets Alive" through their Facebook page. Quite publicly, in fact. If you have a stake or a viewpoint on that discussion, you should probably take a look.

On DOGS JC (or maybe the discussion does not occur there anymore), JCList.com, and now Facebook.com... the mostly-irrational pissing-contest discussion continues and LHS's credibility suffers. Wow.

It's bewildering, confusing, and frustrating to see this happen. But, it is an entertaining soap-opera drama as well.

http://www.facebook.com/LibertyHumaneSociety

SledgeHammer, the inspection was done on Tuesday.