This comment deserves a lot more play than it’s going to get:
If LMAS leaders were so busy saving animals that they didn’t have time to proofread their business cards, that would be one thing. But they’re still killing like the Mayor never campaigned on going no kill, like the Council never passed a No Kill Resolution, like No Kill Louisville has stopped all advocacy for the No Kill Equation and just works with the shelter to provide direct care and is publicly silent about the continuing need for systemic change. Oh wait, NKL has done that. Louisville’s citizens get the government that they accept. Keep putting up with this sh*t, and you’ll forever get more and more of it.
Austin, TX, which actually implemented the No Kill Equation at the same time Fischer could have done so, is now saving 95% of all animals at its open-admission shelter. Louisville, despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars donated to NKL, rescue groups, and LMAS, is still killing thousands.
Pay close attention to the section in bold.
12 responses so far ↓
1 G'town Reader // Nov 22, 2011 at 2:44 pm
There’s a local animal advocacy publication that also has a Facebook page. The past few months I have noticed that they COMPLETELY AVOID any “negativity” about LMAS or its young “director.” Religiously so. When I interject a criticism of either, I am quickly deflected or “corrected.” I swear, it’s like they’ve created their own little perfect world. But to me it’s a world in which they themselves, the so-called advocates & rescuers, are “beating a dead horse.”
2 No Kill Supporter // Nov 22, 2011 at 5:44 pm
Yes, G-town. Several rescues are still in the”give him a chance” mentality and refuse to speak up. They feel that if they do, they won’t be allowed to pull animals. Which is completely absurd. By keeping their mouths shut, they’re like the kid who watches a kid get bullied and says/does nothing.
3 samantha ell // Nov 22, 2011 at 9:02 pm
It’s just like enabling an alcoholic.
4 Eileen // Nov 22, 2011 at 9:54 pm
“They feel that if they do [speak up], they won’t be allowed to pull animals.” I’ve seen and heard that, too, but it is full of implicit assumptions that don’t speak well of the rescues that go along. In order to feel that way, they MUST assume that LMAS leadership has as its first interest maintenance of power and control, not saving the lives of the animals. Because for LMAS to use animals’ lives as hostages to make rescue groups shut up and go along, LMAS has to be willing to kill animals to control rescues. And if the rescues are acting as if that is the case, if they feel LMAS is willing to kill for control, they are all the more obligated to speak up because they cannot rescue every animal, and the ones they can’t rescue, they are leaving in the hands of people they believe are willing to kill for control.
I agree with them; LMAS, including Sadiqa Reynolds, is willing to kill animals to control people. Fischer and the Council are fine with that. I also think it is both stupid and immoral for the rescues to go along silently, trading the lives of many dogs and cats in order to be allowed to save a few. If they just got the damn fight over with and won it, they could save every possible animal, as Austin is now doing. Is there anyone in Louisville with the moral courage to stand up for what works, to confront LMAS, and to brave peer pressure from the conformist rescues, and continue to advocate for implementation of the No Kill Equation and saving every animal that can be saved?
5 I told you so // Nov 23, 2011 at 12:57 am
Eileen’s observations are 100% correct. The rescues have painted themselves into a corner. By being allowed to save a couple of animals each month, they have to keep their traps shut and play by the LMAS rule book. Gille Miloche, for all his faults, had one thing correct. He once said that if all the rescue groups would stand together, they would be an unstoppable force. But by choosing the path of silence to save a few, they empower LMAS. Unfortunately, if they do band together and practice a little “tough love” with LMAS and stop pulling from them short term, many more animals will die.
6 Eileen // Nov 23, 2011 at 10:14 am
The rescues don’t have to stop pulling. They just have to start speaking up. The two are not mutually exclusive.
7 I told you so // Nov 23, 2011 at 9:44 pm
But the reality is, for a short period, they will be forced to stop pulling animals (not by choice) because Metro will not work with them if they dare criticize.
8 jake // Nov 23, 2011 at 9:50 pm
They’re completely shut out if they criticize, ask legitimate questions or raise urgent concerns.
Need proof? See No Kill Louisville.
9 Eileen // Nov 23, 2011 at 11:17 pm
Business as usual: just when it looks like the case for action has been made, here come the defeatists to let everyone off the hook. And here we go with yet another round of complaining about “them” and still no action. How many years are you all willing to have a no kill resolution, a No Kill Louisville with 16,000 fans and a 50%+ kill rate?
Speak up! Make them shut everyone out and make them explain it.
Rescues should continue to pull–and speak up about the killing. When LMAS shuts them out, they should document that and go to the Council, the Mayor, the media, and every public forum possible.
How does it improve the situation for rescues to anticipate LMAS’ jackboot tactics and apply them to themselves? LMAS can honestly say, “We didn’t shut anyone out for speaking up” if the mere anticipation of it works to silence the rescues.
I have never seen so many people so willing to be complicit in their own oppression, and if it were only people, I’d say, “You’re adults. It’s your own problem.” But the animals continue to be killed.
Rescues will be shut out? What difference are rescues making now? For all the hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations and the incredibly hard work of volunteers, the labor and cost have just been transferred from LMAS to volunteers, and the kill rate hasn’t changed! The live release numbers have moved from the adoptions column to the rescues column without changing the bottom line, which is that of every two animals brought in to LMAS, at least one is not going to get out alive.
Do you want real change or don’t you? All that effort could be reducing the kill rate to less than 5%, and instead it’s just doing LMAS’ job for them. Is there anyone in Louisville with the moral courage to act?
10 YouKnowmyName // Nov 24, 2011 at 1:24 am
Y’know,
There’s a reaction for every action. The animals will be killed for leverage against the rescues if they speak up and criticize. It has been done before, but to the volunteers, there is no reason to think they won’t do it to rescues. Right now, they’re saving some. Like it or not, it’s better than none.
Also,
I don’t know why you think any kind of public or media pressure will change anything in Louisville. Especially while that heinous witch is still in charge of “community building”.
We had an opportunity to get a really great director in that would at least attempt to get the funding for the No Kill Equation (which won’t happen without the money & staff). But no, we got a 26 year old, inexperienced, over-paid, kid who was hired behind closed doors.
We could have had NKL come in, but no, we wasted money by subcontracting with KHS and excuses were made to why NKL wasn’t qualified.
The Mayor and the Council aren’t going to cave for anyone. It doesn’t matter how much bad publicity they get. They will spin it and audit it, and hire new faces until the people forget and they always do. That’s the reality of Louisville.
In conclusion,
If the rescues were to be kicked out from pulling from LMAS by speaking up, here is what will happen. LMAS will hide their kill rate for as long as possible. Eventually, the media will do a sensationalistic piece on it. Everyone will be up in arms over it for a while. The government will make excuses and spin it saying they deserved it for whatever BS reason. A resolution or audit into rescue policies will occur, then you’ll never hear about it again. Business as usual. The only ones who will suffer are the animals not being pulled.
Lastly,
You keep mentioning Austin, Tx as a no kill city. There are some major differences between Austin in Louisville.
1. Austin ( in terms of government) WANTED to go No Kill
a. They put in a director who had that drive and vision to make it happen.
b. The Mayor gave the shelter the RESOURCES to go No kill. It’s impossible to implement the no kill equation without money and staff. Period.
The biggest difference between Austin and Louisville is desire. Austin (government) made being No Kill a priority and hired, and budgeted accordingly to make that happen.
Louisville has no desire to be No Kill (in terms of government). The resolution was passed merely to placate animal lovers and win votes. That’s it. Louisville metro government is unwilling to allocate funding, {they can’t even budget to build a new bridge without tolls}, hire an experienced staff with drive to go no-kill, and even uphold the laxest of sanitary conditions in the current facility.
This city’s government isn’t going to go no kill. They’ve done ZERO to improve anything for the animals despite all the pressure from the public and even groups like NKL.
What would you have people do and why in Greg Fischer’s history do you think it would matter or change anything??
11 Eileen // Nov 24, 2011 at 12:09 pm
The reason behind every excuse you trot out–nothing will ever change, we’re powerless victims– was used to argue against abolitionists taking a stand, was used to argue against suffragettes, was used to argue against civil rights activists, was used to argue against every progressive movement ever undertaken. Such arguments are used by those timid souls who say they are for whatever progressive movement is under discussion, but want credit for the sentiment without actually doing anything that takes them out of their comfort zone. If people had always acted on your reasoning, we’d still have legal slavery, women would still be property, and African Americans wouldn’t be able to vote.
I already said what I’d have people do. I did it while I was there. I am very thankful not to be there anymore, and I guess I should stop reading the stuff people in Louisville keep sending me, because if the only person arguing for action is doing so from another state, regardless of the fact that I still pay property taxes in your benighted city, the animals of Louisville have little hope.
Why don’t you grab a bottle of Kentucky bourbon and crawl in, and stop arguing against doing what’s right because you’re so timid and self-defeating? The hundreds of thousands of dollars and hours could be achieving a save rate of 95%. Instead, all that donated time and money have left the save/kill ratio virtually unchanged, which means you’re wasting your money and time. It may make you feel good to save the lab mix puppy, but the pit bulls and the 900 cats are still dead. Keep saving the labs, by all means, but speak up about the pit bulls and the 900 cats, too.
12 jake // Nov 24, 2011 at 1:03 pm
I think public pressure changes things in Louisville because, uh, I’ve watched it happen repeatedly the past several years.
These names ring a bell?
All got shit canned after tons of public pressure – mostly from a well-hated gay who won’t shut up.
Do I need to talk about how things have happened on a state level with officials and public pressure?
Metro Council caves after pressure. Jim King always caves after he gets publicly embarrassed. Tom Owen will continue making excuses, as will Tina Ward-Pugh, but the rest won’t. Kelly Downard will pop a cap in somebody if things don’t change.
LMAS can’t hide their kill rate. As I’ve proved, I ALWAYS get the information I want because I’m not afraid to do what it takes to get it. They cannot hide from me – and here’s the ego talking – they should expect me. Even today I have sources inside LMAS, obviously, who give me the information I need, public record or not.
1. Louisville WANTED to go no-kill, Metro Council passed a resolution and Greg Fischer campaigned on it
a. We have a director who has drive… but no vision, no experience and no competence. He’s a little douchebag who can’t say what he needs to say to my face (Hi, Justin, we’re your worst nightmare until things improve)
b. The mayor here gave LMAS the resources it needs to go no-kill. $300,000 worth of new staff (three people). They’re just fucking incompetent tools who can’t make it happen.
LMAS already has the budget and staff it needs to be 100% no-kill. At this very moment. But those fucks can’t even manage to feed the animals they’ve been able to keep alive as it is. And that’s why I think the place should be bulldozed and government needs to get out of the way if things can’t be improved.
Leave a Comment