Still The Band Played On

Still The Band Played On

This blog was created with a purpose of informing local pet owners on the laws and rights of pet ownership in our county. It is presents a vision of how we can work together in reducing the number of pets who are senselessly killed in our new shelter when life saving alternatives do exist.

There is a paradigm of killing that is embraced by those who control our animal welfare policies who are resistant, down right stubborn, to any suggestions of change that would focus on life saving alternatives instead.


While history has praised the band that went down with the Titantic as heroes, there are no heroes for those who defend the the practice of killing innocent yet homeless animals.

Initially, the focus of my writing was to protect all of my hounds from the county’s attempt to include their lives as part of any plea bargain with the court. There has never been a reasonable explanation why a first offense, amounting to three minutes of barking, could send me to jail for twelve years.  Instead, this type of "behavior by the court" was used to extort a guilty plea in exchange for the lives of ten of my hounds.

For my role in speaking out, I have paid a heavy price, including the loss of my freedom,  I was was sentenced to thirty days in jail for “violating probation” which ultimately lead to the death of one of my beloved hounds Bam Bam.

That type of sentencing extreme would be common for violent criminals, drug offenders, sexual predators or even white collar criminals but for three minutes barking offenses?

Since the solicitor never presented any evidence of my incident being anything more then a first offense, the county attorney's office should have offered a nolo plea, with a reasonable fine, which I probably would have accepted.  Had we reached an agreement the county would have come out ahead as opposed to opening up the vault in a desperate attempt to punish me.

Instead, the case mutated into a costly nightmare that included several pre trial hearings, a full blown trial (Dog Barking Case of the Century) covered by the media, which lead to a finding of guilt and a sentence of two years jail time (served on probation) and that my property be “brought into compliance with all zoning codes within 45 days”.  In the end the county emerged battered and bruised in the court of public opinion, the hounds became heroes oblivious to all the new found fame..

I was content with an outcome that didn’t include the court placing a “pet limit” on my property.  Judge Muise did correctly rule that doing so would amount to the court invoking zoning requirements, which is outside of the courts juristiction.  Nor did the court include any fines due the county.

The county attorney's office wasn’t content on simply silencing the hounds.  Instead, an effort was made to silence me as well.   I was told that as a part of my two year probation term I would be prohibited from speaking out, either verbally or through my writing, with any negative comments about the solicitor’s office, animal control or any of the witnesses who testified in my case.  Those witnesses included Lilburn City Councilman and tax cheat Eddie Price).

As an advocate and a writer these conditions were clearly not acceptable.  There has never been any precedence that would include surrendering one's first amendment right to "free speech" for a misdemeanor offense   Clearly, the lengthy probation term was more about silencing me as opposed to “bringing peace and tranquility" to a neighborhood that has overwhelmingly supported the hounds.

While one would assume that attempts at limiting discussions on governmental policies might be expected in some third world areas where oppression rules the land, one should be outraged that the "law of our land" would include such outrageous conditions.  Since I also intended on changing the nuisance barking law that was used to manipulate my case, this condition was tempered but ignored.

Once the hounds were safe, I moved forward with having the barking law changed.  There were a number of issues in the old law that clearly violated pet owners rights, including the issue that allowed citizens to file a criminal complaint with no policing agency being required to investigate whether a crime had indeed been committed. Nowhere in the constitution are citizens granted such broad policing powers.

The other changes involved requiring complainants to actually live nearby where the alleged complaints were filed. Both witnesses in my case, realtor Porter and Councilman Price lived several miles away with their only interests being rental property they owned.

Finally, the sentencing guidelines that allow animal control and more importantly the animal advocating attorney who wrote the law to threaten and extort pet owners into surrendering their family pets or go to jail had to be removed in it’s entirety.  This is the area where I went nose to nose with our self proclaimed animal advocating attorney who not only wrote the previous law but wanted to strengthen any new law by limiting barking where any dog that barked six times for thirty seconds would be a violation of the ordinance.

Animal advocacy is, in a certain sense, standing up to tell true life

stories that are not being heard; true life stories that most people are

ignoring. The first step in animal advocacy is to help people see things

differently. Animals are somebody, not something. - Tom Regan

The public saw through this madness and sided with the barking provisions recommended by "We the Pet Owners.  With her law now extinct it became clear that the county attorney’s office and the court was not happy with my involvement in rebuking her idea of advocating for animals by sending them to our high kill shelter simply because they bark. 

No longer could she build her career by sending innocent dogs and cats to animal control despite her claims "where they would be adopted".  Had she ever bothered to really get her "hands dirty" by investigating the truth on the fate of animals entering our shelter, especially our new shelter, she would have realized that for most this was a death sentence.  While it may be understandable that animals living in "squalor" might be better off dead (something I don't advocate for) hounds who are living in a responsible, loving home would never be better off dead.

Maybe, she was upset because I hurt her feelings.

Instead of thanking me for streamlining the court process and saving the county money by having these cases resolved through mediation my efforts were instead greeted with six attempts to revoke my probation for much mundane offenses like failure to pay probation fees of $129 and for alerting the county tax office of Councilman Price’s fraudulent claim of a homestead exemption on property he owned nearby.

The county attorney’s office proceeded with six attempts to revoke my probation including attempts to. One would assume that the courts would focus on jailing violent offenders that present a danger to the community, especially during an economic downturn that has many fellow citizens struggling financially. In fact, even when presented with prior Supreme Court rulings (Georgia vs Bearden) where the court upheld the Fourteenth amendment which prohibits incarcerating citizens simply because they have an inability to pay fines or fees.

In that ruling, the court suggested that non violent offenders be offered alternatives to jail not limited to changing fines or fees over to community service instead. My repeated attempts at offering to pay back “restitution” with community service were denied.

This makes absolutely no sense, of course, in lieu of recent studies by “Engage Gwinnett” that point out the cost of incarcerating a person to taxpayers is about $45 a day – thirty days incarceration comes at a cost of $1,350. Even with the good time provisions that allowed me to “only” serve 15 days the cost to taxpayers was $675 – for a failure to pay Sentinel Offender Services $474 in fees – none of which were due the county of Gwinnett. 

Since when does the court have a responsibilty to improve the bottom line for a private company like Sentinel by acting as a collection agent with tactics one would expect from the mob - not our courts.
Anyone else who used threats and intimidation to collect money would be charged with a RICO violation.

These are the facts in my case – even though my case is officially over – even though I have no further business with the court – the court is now attempting to intimidate me from speaking out about my dreadful experience.  This has never been about seeking justice for something the hounds may have done – it’s about punishing me for my dissent.

On July 28th I wrote an entry that explained how our court case was now over with the following article which was only initially released to the rescue community.

http://by20hounds.blogspot.com/2010/07/dog-barking-case-ends-with-30-jail.html

Sittin' and starin' out of the hotel window.

Got a tip they're gonna kick the door in again

I'd like to get some sleep before I travel,

But if you got a warrant, I guess you're gonna come in. –

Words from Grateful Dead – “Trucking”

This article was released early in the morning. Within the hour two animal control trucks pulled up wanting to “inspect my house”. I simply informed animal control's "cruelty officer" that the court case was over, probation was over (which never included allowing inside inspections of my home since the barking incident occurred outside) and that absent any proof of a specific cruelty or neglect complaint there would be no inside inspection of the hounds or my property.

The law is clear on this, policing agencies are required to attain warrants before storm trooping your home, looking under your bed, rifling through your belongings, invading the sancity of your home looking for alleged criminal activity with no prior proof that a crime has or will be committed.

Further, AC was advised that if they were truly concerned about issues with the hounds they could simply go to FACEBOOK (like everybody else) where I have shared dozens of pictures of the hounds inside our “castle’ and that was as close as they would get.  The truth be known, why would I trust the judgment of  animal.control with a history of being complacent with killing?

Our shelter director can not explain why she choose to send two trucks with two officers who spent at least two hours “investigating” my property simply because of something I wrote on a blog. This is an abuse of power which she should be held accountable for, especially since she has repeatedly claimed she can’t implement programs that save lives at the shelter she manages because the citizens in our community don’t give her the resources needed to do the job. She has the resources; she simply squanders these resources in her attempts to punish anyone who has the nerve to hold her accountable.

One would think that would be the end of those in positions of making responsible decisions on spending resources that should be directed towards the real crime issues we face in Gwinnett. Tuesday morning I answered a call from someone who identified himself as an “Officer of the Court” who wanted to discuss comments I had written on my blog.

After pointing out that all of the comments I had written were protected under the first amendment and after he assured me I wouldn’t be arrested for those comments I agreed to meet him outside to clear up any questions he might have.

According to the two officers who showed up, a court clerk had brought this posting to the attention of the court as “threatening” and they just wanted to make sure I had no intentions of being “violent”. It was pointed out that there was nothing in the post were threats were made that could even remotely be viewed as threats as opposed to what appeared to be one more desperate attempt to silence my comments by intimidation.

What bothers me is why would the court assign a clerk to monitor private emails I have written in the first place?  Would they prefer I send them an advance copy for their review? 

Since this happened early in the morning with the court in session I would assume the court could find more productive duties.  Not only was the court clerk’s time a waste and abuse of the court system but to send two officers to my house when they had my cell number where any misconceptions could be cleared up is mystifying.   This isn't about justice, it's about protecting personal agenda's and appeasing political special interests.

Anyone smarter then a fifth grader would be able to see that the only weapon I have ever used is my keyboard.  The only way I’ll give up my keyboard is when the county pries it from my cold dead fingers.

I was bold in the pursuit of knowledge, never fearing to follow truth and reason to whatever results they led, and bearding every authority which stood in their way.

Thomas Jefferson

The right to dissent is a core value and foundation with which our country was founded.

All the flag waving in the world doesn’t make us free if we are intimidated against speaking out against those who are supposed to uphold the law. The court is free to answer why they deemed this case so important to proceed in the irresponsible manner as they have.

Over the years I have volunteered over 5000 hours of my time trying to place hounds in homes. Still I am saddened by the fact I no longer feel safe living in this community. While I do feel safe inside my home I certainly don’t feel safe outside. How ironic that it’s not the fear of being victimized by a criminal element that concerns but instead a fear I now have for our county government instead. Love my country but fear my government.

It should be obvious that these latest acts of desperation from the court and from the leader of animal control come from those who are trying to protect that power to kill - acts of desperation coming from an obsolete killing mechanism that's sinking faster then the Titanic. With a ship hell bent on killing sinking fast, this band of characters still plays on.

We have two political positions on the fate of animals sent to animal control being actively discussed in our community. Those who want to protect a paradigm of killing that is embraced by animal control, our county attorney’s office and the court and those who want to change the focus to proven life saving alternatives instead.

The question for those on the fence is what side of the issue do you want to end up on? The side that will continue to abuse their power in a feeble attempt to bale out the water on a sinking ship OR the many No Kill Advocates who are offering life boats to anyone who is willing to abandon this killing philosophy.

Your typical city involved in a typical daydream

Hang it up and see what tomorrow brings.

Sometimes the cards ain't worth a damn, if you don't lay'em down and play your hand.,

I guess they can't revoke your soul for tryin',

Get out of the door and light out and look all around - Grateful Dead

One would assume that these recent threats would cause me to throw down my “axe” in disgust but in doing so I would dishonor all of the brave souls who through the years fought and died to keep this country free.

For those dumber then a fifth grader, an “axe” is British slang for a “tool used to create words that cut deep”, no violence intended there either.

Now, excuse me while I answer the door…. It’s the band still playing on….. disconnected.

Dismantling the Killing Machine

Shelter’s killing dogs and cats by the thousand

“If we are to reach the goal of a No-Kill Nation, we must move past the notion that animals are being killed because of pet overpopulation (not enough homes), because we don’t have enough laws, or because the public is irresponsible – Nathan Winograd

Contrary to what many shelters falsely claim are the primary hurdles to life saving, be it the public’s irresponsibility or lack of homes during this period of economic downturn, the greatest impediments are actually in the shelter manager’s hands.

Animals in shelters, like Gwinnett, are being killed because shelter management clings to kill oriented practices.

For far too long animal advocates have remained silent to this abuse – yet sanctioning or allowing these practices to continue will never bring this killing to an end.

In the end, this is not a war of words or ideas but a life and death struggle to save all the healthy and treatable animals we claim to advocate for. In the end, this issue is not about “too many”, “not enough” or “more or less”, the question that begs for a moralistic answer is “why do we kill healthy pets at all”?

Yet, every dog and cat that enters our shelter is more likely to be killed as a result of our broken animal shelter system. For nine out of ten cats that enter our shelter there is absolutely no chance at survival. Dogs don’t fare much better.

The public is increasingly aware of just how broken our shelter policies are and will support proven “No Kill” alternatives. What the public won’t support is a defeatist attitude that wants to blame them for the killing.

The public is left to believe that it is their irresponsible actions as pet owners who is at fault for this failure. Yet, its not the irresponsible public who fails to implement life saving programs at our shelter, nor is it the irresponsible public who fails to hold the animal control staff accountable either. It’s definitely not the irresponsible public that decides the only workable solution for shelter dogs and cats is the “blue solution”.

Effectiveness in our shelters goals and operations begin with competent leadership that sets realistic life saving goals and holds her staff accountable for reaching those goals.

Our battle is against those who claim to be part of our movement but fail to recognize the killing of shelter animals as the ultimate betrayal

It is time that pet owners in our community have an open discussion, not on the excuses given for killing healthy pets but why we kill healthy pets in the first place.

The fact is killing is neither kind, nor necessary, nor does it prevent any future animal suffering. The decision to kill an otherwise healthy animal is not only the ultimate act of irresponsible behavior but it is clearly immoral as well.

In contrast, animals that enter our shelter should be cared for and be saved – no excuses – no blame game.

That is the right thing to do in a community that is compassionate about our pets. A morally acceptable way to run our shelter. Ultimately, does it really matter how they arrive at the shelter as much as how they leave the shelter?

Shelter “Death by Numbers”


“There is nothing so wasteful as doing with great efficiency that which doesn’t have to be done at all. – Anonymous

Our shelter continues to “kill it’s way” to animal control with a majority of animals entrusted to their care paying dearly with their lives. Yet one might suggest that despite all of this killing our shelter is more out of control then anytyime in recent hisory.  The shelter has failed to set a mission to control the killing.  Staff accountability, effective life-saving programs, and good relations with the community currently do not exist.

The following spreadsheets are a compilation of five years of shelter statistics – including three years from the old shelter (2005-2007) and two years with results from the new shelter (2008-2009). The data represents only the live animals that entered the shelter. Since the shelter officially opened in the last quarter of 2007 some of the numbers for 2007 were skewed upwards

Felines Handled           2005     2006     2007     2008     2009
Feline Strays                1707     1771      1981    2487     2836
Felines Surrendered     2642    2257      2051     2343    2298
Total Incoming              4349    4028      4032     4830    5134
Felines Killed                3084    3079      3169     4025    4588
Felines Return/Owner      57        28          43         18      108

What is telling about these numbers is the dramatic increase in feline cats entering our shelter system after 2007. The number of cats killed at our new shelter went from an average of slightly over 3000 to 4500 in 2009 or an increase of 50%. The number of cats being surrendered has remained constant at around 2300. Since the shelter doesn’t report separately on cats that are adopted or that go to rescue the increase in killing of cats (1500) is a combination of increases in strays picked up in the field and a decrease in the number of cats going that are adopted or go to rescue.

Yet, not once has our Animal Advisory Council or the shelter’s management brought up the issue of cats during the meetings this author has attended for the last two years. It would appear that killing cats has become acceptable to those who manage our shelter..

The fact remains that there isn't a leash law for cats.  Any cat picked up as a stray is impounded despite the cat not violating any of the ordinances.  Nor is animal control required to pick up stray cats.  With a 90% kill rate on cats this author has questioned the reasoning behind management's decison to continually round up cats she knows are going to be killed.  That's not a policy I would expect a compassionate director to implement.  While all cats are impacted by this policy it's the feral cats who are most in danger.

I have heard from several local volunteers who maintain trap/neuter/release colonies for feral cats and they are concerned that the county does not care whether a feral has been altered or whether someone has accepted the responsibility of feeding the colony.

Not only is the rampant killing of feral cats (Hemingway’s) morally wrong, it comes at a huge expense to our animal control budget as well.  Money that could be spent helping low income families alter their pets, help open the shelter more hours for potential adoptions and a variety of other pet friendly programs are squandered by this policy alone.

History has shown that killing has never been a solution to contolling feral population numbers – Trap/Neuter/Release programs have been successful in that area.

Canines don’t fare much better……..


Canines Handled            2005    2006     2007    2008     2009
Canines – Strays            3026     3068     3095    3539     3823
Canines Surrendered      2493     2011     2047    2068     2106
Total Incoming               5519      5079    5142     5607    5929
Canines Killed                2145     2320     2673    2966     3020
Returned to Owner           891       860       865      924       885

The numbers on canines are down for owner surrenders but there are huge increases once again in the number of strays that enter the new shelter. Some of this explanation could be as simple as poor customer service which has local pet owners concerned that the shelter will simply kill any pets that are turned in or perhaps it may account for pet owners who have been told that owner surrenders that enter the shelter without shot records are killed immediately. Pet owners might choose not to surrender a pet if they want to avoid an surrender fee. Unfortunately, any or all of these issues ends with the pet owner simply dumping the dog and letting it fend for itself.

No Kill is an open door facility where the shelter actually lives up to it’s name of providing shelter for pets with no where to go. Since there is little or no evidence that animal control officers are trying to return stray dogs in the field, one way to reduce the number of strays that ends up at the shelter is to aggressively scan for microchips or ask neighbors if the dogs owner is known.

It is far too simplistic to simply blame the public for a problem that management has spent little or no time determining if there were programs that might reduce these numbers instead. Absent a proactive management approach to problem solving the problem and costs associated with strays in our community will likely get worse.

The Killing Machine Continues

Since the shelter has failed to develop an infrastructure that saves pets, any increase in the number of pets entering the shelter results in a corresponding increase in the number killed. Not only has our shelter management fasiled to develop new programs that increase adoptions but it has failed miserably in building a partnership with Gwinnett’s diverse rescue community.

Dogs/Cats               2005       2006      2007       2008      2009
Animals Adopted     2326       1756      1982       1906      2093
Animals Rescued      1335       1492      1770       1201     1071

One could argue that adoption averages have remained constant from the results of the old shelter versus the new shelter except – we were told that by building a new shelter adoptions would increase. We do know that the shelter is capable of adopting out more – after all the best year was 2005. Is it poor customer service, lack of advertising, lack of promotions? Who knows – this is another area that management doesn’t seem to care about. Of course, the reduced hours of operation are probably suspect as well.

The biggest failure of shelter management can clearly be seen in the dramatic drop in the number of dogs and cats going to rescue. Those numbers dropped by 700 from 2007 to 2009 alone. This author would once again point out that not only is the reduced number of dogs and cats going to rescue a reflection of the failure of shelter management to work in partnership with the rescue community, but in fact, had management built these partnerships those numbers should have shown a dramatic increase instead.  That increase might have all but wiped out any increases in shelter intake.

One fact is beyond dispute – dogs and cats - going to rescue has been down by 30% for the last three years now. There's the new shelter that opened in 2007.  One would assume that the increaed killing isn't becuase a new facility was built.  With the new shelter came a new management agenda of focusing on enforcing the draconian animal ordinance passed in January of 2007.

Who wants to put themselves in potential harms way when the shelter management is threatening those who rescue with jail, huge fines and even loss of their personal pets???

Totals                            2005           2006       2007       2008       2009

Total Canine/Feline In    9868           9107       9174     10437      11063
Total Out Alive              4609           4136       4660       4049        4157
Total Out Dead              5229           5399       5842       6991        7608


What does it all mean? The number of dogs and cats killed has increased from 5200 in 2005 to an astounding 7600 in 2009 – we’re not only not approaching No Kill in our brand new state-of-the-art shelter but were going in the other direction at warp speed.

The buck stops at the Gwinnett Police Department’s management door. That’s were the decision was made to replace a shelter manager who had developed a partnership with the rescue community with a bona fide beat cop who knows how to write citations. Are they really surprised with the chaos that we now have?

The result of this colossal mistake is we end up with a totally unqualified shelter manager who finds enforcement, punishment and the killing of innocent animals entrusted in her care easier then developing the programs and partnerships to do otherwise.

The current shelter manager lacks management skills that manifests into poor community relations, poor customer service, a lack of lack of leadership in setting life saving goals for employees to meet. The job of management is not just supervision, but more importantly it’s leadership.

Management must work on sources of improvement, the intent to deliver a quality of service to the community’s pet owners, and off setting high expectations that all staff members would focus foremost on the shelter’s responsibility to save lives not end them.

Rather then removing employees who fail at their jobs, poor performance is tolerated and becomes the norm. There is no incentive for employees to go above and beyond in trying to save an animal’s life when it’s far easier and less time consuming to kill them. Since each shelter death is a failure, our shelter fails over 60% of the time.

Why else would management keep the current rescue coordinator in her position.  Her numbers alone would have been enough cause to at least move her where she couldn’t kill any more animals.

Instead, she has been rewarded with job security despite the number of animals placed with rescue is consistently down by 30% for three years in a row? Rewarded for what – because she’s valuable for not doing her job?

To this day, this rescue coordinator still refuses to post urgent lists to the rescue community – claims she doesn't have time.  Rescue is often the last resort for many of these pets.  Gwinnett remains the only shelter in the Atlanta area that doesn’t put out a weekly urgent list in the hopes that they can save more animals.

As Forrest Gump would say “That’s all I gotta say about that” cause it makes me ill to think anyone could shirk there responsibility to the pets they are about to kill.

Stay tuned for the rest of the story...............

Georgia Animal Control Association lack of unified opposition to gassing

The Georgia Animal Control Association was founded in June of 1987 by concerned Animal Control Personnel from across the state of Georgia. The sole purpose was to form an organization in which animal control personnel - whether management, shelter worker, or field worker - would have a support system, informational center and training agency to address related needs of Georgia's animal control agencies.

Historically, the Georgia Animal Control Association (GACA) has been filled with shelter's that are opposed to or have poor partnerships with the rescue community, fail to implement offsite adoptions, enforce failed pet limit laws, lack any meaningful free or low cost spay/neuter programs and appear to be completely unaware of the other innovative programs which have proven to cause a decline in killing. The blind follows the blind down a path of control that knows only how to kill.

Animal shelter reform isn't only about how shelter's kill off society's homeless pets but why we can't seek out the alternatives.

Killing our companion animals is preventable, killing is a tragedy and there is still too much of it going on in Georgia's Animal Shelters. How we reduce that killing from it's current levels and make sure that any killing is done in a humane and compassionate manner is nothing less than a dishonest and disgraceful writing of our animal welfare history.

Georgia Animal Control Association Mission
"PROFESSIONALIZE ANIMAL CONTROL"

Stopping the senseless slaughter in our animal shelters starts with leadership. Leadership in our animal control industry that is sourly lacking. The leaders of the "animal control industry" have to provide the leadership to give shelters and their communities the tools they need to succeed. Instead, all they promote is an enforcement mentality that blames the public for the killing rather then address the root causes that feed the killing frenzy.

Policy that focuses on a "legislation, education, and sterilization” (LES) mandate that blames the public for the mass and senseless killing rather then taking the lead to prevent it.

LES remains nothing but a failure.

First, LES DOES NOT put any responsibility onto the shelters that are actually doing the killing, nor does it question if a shelter’s own actions are causing increases in shelter death rates (as indeed many are).

Second, it takes the onus off of poorly performing shelters by blaming the public for shelter failures that are themselves animal cruelty centers.

Third, it does not question the perceived need to kill.

Fourth, the "plan" focuses only on how efficient and cost effective that killing can be rather then on focusing on preventative programs that have demonstrated success in stopping it.

Finally, it promotes punitive legislation—such as cat licensing, leash laws, limit laws and mandatory spay/neuter, nuisance animals on threat of citation and impound—which not only diverts resources away from lifesaving programs to bureaucratic enforcement, but leads to increases in killing in those very same shelters which the laws are passed.

Georgia Animal Shelters - A State of Crisis Control

The need for a clearing house of progressive information is critical. Many of Georgia's animal shelters in a state of absolute disarray. They operate under sub-standard conditions and lack a unified plan for reducing high kill rates. The foundation of a unified plan is the formation of a partnership between the animal shelter and the rescue community. Working as partners, they can successfully build a more humane shelter system that both minimizes companion animal deaths and insures a truly humane euthanasia when there are no other options.

There simply is no acceptable explanation why, despite overwhelming public opposition to gassing shelter pets, a few facilities in Georgia persist in ending pets’ lives in torturous, inhumane, outmoded, unregulated and unsafe gas chambers. Instead of addressing the abuses that gassing includes we are left with lifetime of excuses why gassing must continue.

House Bill 606 and its Senate counterpart, SB 232, would have closed the loopholes that allow several Georgia counties and cities to continue using animal gas chambers. Had they passed, humane lethal injection or oral ingestion of sodium pentobarbital would have been the only method of euthanasia allowed statewide. The bills also would have prohibited the cruel method of heartstick except on unconscious or comatose animals in certain situations.

Yet, the Georgia Animal Control Association (GACA) failed miserably to "unify” in support of bringing all shelters into compliance with citizens’ wishes. Since the vast majority of previously gassing animal shelters in Georgia have ceased the practice, there simply is no good reason for the remaining gassing shelters to cling to this barbaric method of killing animals.

There is clear evidence that shelters still using the gas chamber do so without proof of exception. Worse yet, they offer no excuses for operating illegally and do so with an air of arrogance. Worst of all, their illegal actions are protected by the very state agency charged with the responsibility of “Animal Protection”. All of these factors raise serious quality of care issues in gassing shelters and indicate a gross lack of compassion for the suffering of animals entrusted to their care.

Killing by gas is not only wrong, it is a state-sanctioned act of animal cruelty committed on an innocent, sentient being who deserves much better.

Meet the Georgia Animal Control Association's
Board of Directors

President - Tommy Condrey from Metter County email: animalshelter@pineland.net

Vice President - Regina Wells - Tift County, Tifton: rwells@tiftcounty.com

Secretary/Treasurer - Cindy Weimann - City of Madison Animal Control: cindy@georgiaanimalcontrol.org

District 1 - Past President Glenda Ott - Cobb County, Marietta: Cobb County is in violation of the court order for illegally installing a gas chamber in 1995. glenda.ott@cobbcounty.org

District 2 - Past President Bobby King - Toccoa/Stephens County. Officer Bobby King recently won the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Georgia Animal Control Association despite Toccoa/Stephens being one of the few shelters that still allows shelter dogs to be sent out to research. Phone 706) 282-3275

District 2 - Steven Eades - Barrow County - Phone 770) 307-3012

District 3 - Robert Ellington - Thomaston Police Department: bellington@cityofthomaston.com

District 3 - Henry Freeman - Cowetta County, Newnan Phone 770-254-3736

District 4 - Christine Tillman - Putnam County, Eatonton pcac@communicom.com

District 5 - Connie Easn Collins - Evans County, Claxton eccode@bellsouth.net

District 5 - George Smith - SCMPD Animal Control, Savannah Phone 912-652-6575

District 6 - Rebecca Bruner - Tift County, Tifton rwells@tiftcounty.org

District 7 - Oscar Hulett - Jeff Davis County, Hazelhurst oohulett@dhr.state.ga.us

Conference Classes: Georgia Animal Control Association

On March 5th and 6th 2009, GACA sponsored a workshop on "Animals and the Law". The course outline focused on enforcing animal cruelty laws, but there was an obvious disconnect regarding gassing shelters who are in effect committing egregious acts of animal cruelty.

Key speakers for the workshop included persons in leadership positions with the Department of Agriculture and/or members of the Department’s "Companion Animal Advisory Board". These speakers were well-positioned to garner support for legislation aimed at ending this inhumane method of killing in our state's shelters, yet they failed miserably to do so.

Companion Animal Rights Movement - lack of action - lack of a unified plan

One keynote speaker who missed a golden opportunity to encourage support for banning gas chambers was Claudine Wilkins, a founder of Georgia Legal Professionals for Animals (GLPA) and who represents Best Friends "No More Homeless Pets" in Georgia.

The web site for GLPA states their opposition to gas chambers and although Ms. Wilkins does not represent GLPA, as an attorney, she would have been more qualified than most speakers to address some of the language issues of HB 606 and SB 232 that were raised by animal control personnel in attendance. Furthermore, these issues should have been discussed and resolved during her actual presentation.

On the second day of the workshop, Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), delivered an update on current animal legislation pending in both the House and the Senate. Again, pulling the plug on all gas chambers in Georgia shelters should have been the centerpiece for discussion by HSUS and - yet, the GACA still failed to come to an agreement supporting these critical bills. This writer suggests that it is this failure that all but sealed HB 606 and SB 232 to be declared "dead on arrival" only days later.

Carolyn Danese, President of the Humane Association of Georgia (HAGA), was the next speaker and she too covered state legislative initiatives. It is unconscionable that HAGA would take a neutral position on such critical legislation that would effectively put an end to this cruel method of killing our state's animals.

The third and final speaker of day two's seminar was none other then the head of Animal Protection in Georgia - the Department of Ag's Mary Greene. Not only has the Department of Ag thumbed their noses to the will of the people but they are in violation of a court order that requires them to enforce the laws concerning licensing and inspections of some of the most egregious gas chambers that are STILL killing our innocent homeless pets.

If we can not count on the leadership of groups like the Humane Society of the United States, the Georgia Legal Professionals for Animals, the Humane Association of Georgia and the Georgia Animal Control Association to UNIFY against ALL forms of animal cruelty, especially when those acts are being conducted in publicly funded shelters, with a "wink" of protectionist approval from the Department of Agriculure's "Animal Protection Division", then we have a much bigger problem in protecting ALL of our sentinel beings as opposed to just those were it is convenient in doing so.

An act of animal cruelty committed by the public is no different when committed by a thoughtless shelter policy that ignores the pain and suffering these creatures endure only to be discarded in the nearest landfill. Some might suggest the later is more egregious since it is conducted by those who take an oath to uphold ALL the laws that protect animals from this suffering.

We can not effectively adopt our way out of a killing mentality without a formidable plan. This plan will require more people willing to adopt from a shelter. To be successful a comprehensive adoption program includes public access hours (in the evening and on weekends) when working people and families with children, our most sought after adopter demographics, can visit the shelter. To truly be effective shelters must be transformed from "killing centers" to pet friendly shelters that the public feels comfortable in visiting.

The public WILL NOT visit and adopt from shelters in the numbers necessary to save rather then destroy adoptable pets IF they are gassing shelters. The public simply lacks the stomach needed to condone this act of cruelty under the excuses that allow it to continue.

Lowering the slaughter numbers requires shelters that organize offsite adoption locations in their communities. Locations where people live, work, and play, not the county landfill where they dump their garbage. Not the county detention center where they house sex offenders.

Many of Georgia's animal shelters are located in these remote "dual function" locations and thus effectively kill off any adoption prospects that might be possible.

Building an adoption program in the community good responsive customer service; fair, but not overly bureaucratic, adoption screening; clean facilities; a good socialization and care program so that animals are happy and healthy, and more. When all these programs are comprehensively and rigorously in place, the shelter makes it easy to do the right thing, and experience has shown that the public does.

Only then can the advertising campaign leverage people’s love of animals, and their desire to bring about an end to the killing, an end to the gassing to its full potential.

Here is a list of counties or cities still using the outmoded gas chamber in Georgia. If most Georgia counties and cities can use EBI, why can't they all? An attached study based on North Carolina shelters proves EBI is less expensive and also doesn't carry the risk of danger to workers. So why keep costly gas chambers?

1. Ashburn, City of (in Turner County; no county facility; chamber housed in City of Ashburn.)
2. Barnesville, (City of) Animal Shelter (In Lamar County; no county facility; chamber housed in City of Barnesville.)
3. Butts County Animal Control
4. Cordele, City of (In Crisp County)
5. Cuthbert, City of (In Randolph County; no county facility; chamber housed in City of Cuthbert.)
6. Haralson County Animal Shelter
7. Hawkinsville, City of (In Pulaski County; no county facility.
8. Henry County Animal Control
9. Lakeland, City of (In Lanier County; no county facility.)
10. Macon, City of (In Bibb County; no county facility; chamber operated in City of Macon, under the jurisdiction of Macon Police Animal Control. Macon City Council voted unanimously June 2008 to cease using chamber by July 1, 2009.)
11. Mitchell County Animal Control
12. Spalding County Animal Shelter
13. Vienna, City of Animal Shelter (in Dooly County; no county facility)
14. Warner Robins (In Houston County; no county facility)

UNITED FOR PROGRESS" is a prophetic overview of what can and will be when all Animal Control/Animal Care Personnel come together in one mind and one accord to become professionals in this vocation.

To visit GACA's web site: http://www.georgiaanimalcontrol.org/index.html

Georgia Department of Ag - Companion Animal Advisory Board

The bill, H.B. 606 and it's Senate counterpart SB 232, would have shut the loopholes that allow several Georgia counties and cities to continue to use animal gas chambers. The bill would also have prohibited heartstick except on unconscious or comatose animals in certain situations and mandate humane lethal injection or oral ingestion of sodium pentobarbital as the only means of euthanasia allowed throughout the state of Georgia.

The Georgia House Livestock, Poultry and Aquaculture Subcommittee and Senate Agriculture Committee, both heard testimony on HB 606 and SB 232 respectively with no vote taken by either committee, meaning the bill remains pending and will be taken up next year.

Attorneys Rebecca Guinn, Director of Lifeline Animal Project, and Steve Shi, as well as veterinarian Dr. Will Mangham, testified in support of the bill. Linda Cordry, an animal control officer from Liberty County and Rabbi Schlesinger from Macon, also urged passage of the bill.

Cindy Wiemann, representing the GA Animal Control Association, did not oppose the bill but whose group took a neutral position on the bill and asked for an exception that would allow the immediate euthanasia in an emergency of a dangerous or diseased animal or one suffering irremediably. Sponsors were prepared to offer such an amendment.

Senate Committee Chairperson Sen. John Bulloch and House Subcommittee Chairperson Rep. Gene Maddox decided not to allow a vote. The bills were only recently introduced and more time is needed to persuade legislators and obtain important cost information.

For all practical purposes both bills were "Dead on Arrival" because they lacked the support of Tommy Irvin's Animal Protection Unit which would be charged with enforcing the new proposals. Too much emphasis has been placed on a top down approach in lobbying support for passage of anti-gassing legislation without understanding the concepts of developing a "groundswell" of support from the bottom up.

Breakthrough thinking that moves away from a trickle down approach to solving our animal shelter reform issues by attacking from the top needs to shift to a lobbying effort that brings support to change from the bottom up. Those on the top levels of the animal shelter pyramid are not as likely to relinquish the power and control that the status quo offers. Animal advocates need to change the thinking of advocates "in the trenches" which prevent breakthrough thinking from succeeding. That effort must come from the bottom up.

Tommy Irvins "Companion Animal Advisory Board"

One such group that continues to impede passage of the much needed anti-gassing legislation is Tommy Irvin's own "Companion Animal Advisory Board" - read on....

The Companion Animal Advisory Board of the Georgia Department of Agriculture was established by Commissioner Tommy Irvin on March 25, 1997. Irvin created the advisory board because the "companion animal industry had experienced phenomenal growth over the years that makes a tremendous impact on the economy of Georgia.” That statement alone is a telling story as to why the Department of Agriculture under Irvin's helm has such a dismal record on animal protection issues including cracking down on substandard breeders and pet stores with a history of complaints and has allowed many of the county animal shelters to use the horrible abusive gas chambers in killing off "excess" pets.

A pair of bills that would have outlawed the gas chamber for stray animals won’t be going anywhere this year. House Bill 606 and Senate Bill 232 would both outlaw the practice, which is currently used in Macon, statewide. Advocates say it's inhumane, that animals suffer when Carbon Monoxide is used to gas them, and that sometimes they don't even die. They would prefer lethal injections, but that can be more expensive, since doses have to be administered one at a time. However, there is empirical data that prove EBI is less expensive to administer than properly operated gas chambers.

From a technical standpoint, House bill 606 did not die in committee, but committee's failure to allow an honest hearing, allow for debate on the issues outlawing gassing and call for a vote killed the chances of closing gas chambers by traditional legislative process for but another year. In reality, this bill was "dead on arrival" because of the lack of support from Georgia's Department of Agriculture's Animal Advisory Board (AAB) and indirectly from a neutral position taken by the Georgia Animal Control Association.

True Animal Advocates don't let friends gas our pets.....

"These animals howl, they scream, they cough, they scratch to try to get out," said Linda Cordry, of Liberty County. One dog that survived the process in Liberty County came out "alive, covered in (vomit), fecal matter and urine," she said.

LInda's right, gassing an innocent dog or cat is a horrible method to end its life, but unfortunately Linda would never be considered for a position on Irvin's AAB. To be nominated for one of those prestigious positions, you have to be invited. Who does the inviting? Well, Tommy of course. Those who may enter this "political arena" with ideals of "advocating for animals" quickly learn that to stay in this exclusive club you must be willing to "adapt" to the reason the AAB was created - that reason is to support the phenomenal growth of the companion animal industry.

Meet the Board of OUR Department of Agriculture's Animal Advisory Board

All of the information I am about to release was obtained through an open records request with the Department of Agriculture's Animal Protection unit. It is NOT available in any transparent form, including meeting dates, times and location, on the Department of Agriculture's website. Since this information is considered public record I will share it, along with my personal comments based on the investigation I completed.

From the bylaws of the AAB, all twenty members are appointed by Commissioner Irvin. All board members serve "at the pleasure of the commissioner" and may be reappointed annually. This single line clearly illustrates why any opposition to Irvin would have a detrimental effect on remaining on the board.

Make up of the Companion Animal Advisory Board

My investigation thus far has only uncovered background information on eighteen of the twenty members. They are (along with email addresses):

Ruth Tracy-Blackburn - Chairperson - Ruth is a successful business woman running her grandfather’s pecan business (hence a long time friend of Tommy Irvin) and has a passion for advocating for animals.

Animal activist Ruth Tracy-Blackburn claims "animal control officers are unsung heroes" and yet remains silent on the issue of allowing shelter employees to continue gassing. Compassionate animal control officers know firsthand the suffering animals endure in gassing shelters. “Richmond and Columbia counties are so fortunate to have animal control facilities. People can sit there and criticize them all day long, but it's the people's fault the animals are out there,'' said Ms. Blackburn, Vice-President of McDuffie County Friends of Animals.

E-mail Ruth at ruthtracy@tracy-luckey.com and ask her to tell her friend Tommy Irvin that "friends of animals don't let heroes in animal control gas innocent companion animals.

Bill Garrett has been a long time member of the AAB with a tenure that pre-dates his role in running the Fulton County Slaughterhouse. Garrett is the past President of the Atlanta Humane Society and Society For Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals, Inc. Garrett is now a trustee for the Hall County Humane Society.

Atlanta Humane Society took in close to $5.9 Million dollars in donations in 2007 against $4.4 Million in operating expenses netting an astounding $1.4 Million in profits. According to Guidestar, this resulted in AHS accumulating over $30 Million in assets at the close of the year (2007). Yet, there mission statement used to drag in these donations is "To Prevent neglect, abuse, cruelty and exploitation of animals and to assure that their interests and well being are fully, effectively and humanely protected by an aware and caring society."

Shouldn't some of that donated money be used to lobby for preventing cruelty and exploitation of animals in Georgia's gassing shelters? In a caring society, don't these animals deserve the same humane protection against state sanctioned acts of cruel and abusive policies?

During the changing of the guard in Fulton County's own nightmarish rein of terror, one of the few supporters of Garrett's leadership at AHS and its role in Fulton County was Carolyn Danese, founder of the Humane Association of Georgia.

Garrett's political connections include Govenor Sonny Perdue who awarded Garrett the distinguished rank of "Colonel in the Georgia State Militia" in 2006. Email Bill at russelleva@bellsouth,com and ask him to talk with his friend Carolyn and assure her that gassing animals simply because of a shortage of euthanasia drugs ten years ago isn't a good enough reason for humane friends of animals to allow gassing to continue.

Richard Rice left his position as the Humane Society of United States Regional Director shortly after the failed Katrina Rescue Operation for his current post with the Atlanta Humane Society where he is Director of Operations. Joining Richard is Carl Leveridge who left Peggy Adams to become President of AHS. Both come from strong national animal "rights " organizations which should actively oppose gassing as a barbaric and inhumane method of ending any companion animal’s life, yet, their silence on this issue is deafening.

Email Richard at richardr@atlantahumane.org or call him at 404-974-2828 and tell him that you expect him to actively support enforcing the courts orders banning the use of gas in Georgia shelters and holding the Irvin's Department of Agriculture accountable. Remind him and Carl Leveridge that "Friends of Animals" do not donate to animal rights groups that look the other way while shelters in Georgia continue to abuse the law. Tell Richard that you expect him to fully support passage of House Bill 606 and Senate Bill 232. Carl can be contacted by email at president@atlantahumane.org or call 404-974-2888.

Edwina Barnes is listed President and founder for the Humane Association of Georgia and yet, Carolyn Danese is also claims to be President and founder of HAGA. Humane Association of Georgia, Inc., is a nonprofit organization advocating humane treatment for all living things.

From to the HAGA website "We encourage strong legislation for animals at all levels of government. We encourage and support cooperation among the animal protection community, the veterinary community, government agencies and the general public."

When the Board of the Humane Association of Georgia (HAGA) was asked to discuss gas chambers, Carolyn Danese wrote in a "white paper" on gassing , "We prefer to focus on decreasing the number of animals killed." Much of that focus is on seeking donations and participating in the state's funds generated from spay/neuter speciality tag.

Yet, when given the opportunity to support a state wide ban on gassing animals HAGA seems only concerned about not running out of "blue juice".

Danese explains, "No matter which method is used, strict protocol should be followed. Indeed, there is the possibility of cruelty charges for noncompliance. Discussions are starting in other states and countries to make the killing of animals by animal control, under any circumstances, cruelty.”

There are human considerations as well. Killing animals by any means causes stress and depression among animal control staff, contributing to high turnover. Animal control professionals tasked with killing these excess animals daily may need alternatives for mental health purposes. What some people observe as laziness in animal control may be a manifestation of depression. The ability to comfort an animal during lethal injection is less stressful to some, where others feel more stressed having to use a needle. Vocalization disturbs professionals and volunteers alike, although vocalization and dog paddling may be exhibited using either method, or simply when coming out of anesthesia, and are not always tied to pain, so training may reduce stress.

The HAGA position on gassing suggests that the per-animal costs of either method are comparable over time. Efforts to mandate more inspections, accurate statistics and greater control of existing gas chambers would be difficult considering the Georgia Department of Agriculture's Animal Protection Division's annual budget is only approximately $1 million for this overworked statewide division that is under a hiring freeze.

You can contact Carolyn Danese at Carolyn.Danese@turner.com . Edwina Barnes can be reached at edbarnes@aol.com . Tell them that "humane friends of animals believe EACH and EVERY companion animal’s life is scared and deserves respect, especially when society "chooses" to end that pet’s life.” Her position on gas chambers is out of touch with those shared by animal advocates throughout the state. WE expect their role is to advocate for companion animals and not to be an excuse maker for Irvin's Department of Agriculture.

Gail Laberge holds a number of titles. Gail is the founder and president of the Georgia Canine Coalition (GCC), on the Board of Directors of the American Kennel Club as the legislative liaison, Chair for Gwinnett County's Animal Advisory Council and past president for the Lawrenceville Kennel Club. The Georgia Canine Coalition mission is to support fair legislation governing animal abuse and neglect, yet, in theory the very kennel groups that the AKC, kennel clubs and breeders represent compete directly with "used/defective" shelters dogs in the marketplace.

The Georgia Canine Coalition has no interest in increasing "market share" for "used/defective" shelter dogs at the expense of those seeking to market puppies - how the shelters kill off the excess is of little consequence.

"A 'legislative superstar,' Gail has spent years working with Georgia officials to make sure that the interests of purebred dog owners are well represented," said Noreen Baxter, AKC 's VP of Communications.

Maurice Woolfe, a breeder from Buford, is also a board member of the GCC and past member of Gwinnett's Animal Advisory Council. It is unclear what educational prospective Woolfe brings to this committee.

The Georgia Canine Coalition opposed HB1060 in 2008 because it defined a public shelter agency as “any facility operated by or under contract with the state or any political subdivision of the state for the purpose of impounding or harboring seized, stray, homeless, abandoned or unwanted animals. Such term shall include any veterinarian or veterinary clinic which operates for such purpose in addition to its customary practice.”

The GCC had serious concerns with this bill as it was written and therefore opposed it. Of course, how many veterinary clinics are there that "impound or seize stray, homeless, abandoned or unwanted animals AND own and run a gassing facility as part of its customary practice?” I suggest that the GCC's opposition is more intuned with their lack of concern over the fate of shelter dogs in general. You can email Gail at outland@laberge.org , Maurice Woolfe has no contact information.

Bonnie Turner is listed as a current member of the companion animal board but a Bonnie Turner was killed in Floyd County by a tornado in 2008. In 2005, Gail LaBerge of Buford , Georgia , received the AKC Community Achievement Award for her efforts defending and protecting the interests of the canine community. Bonnie Turner wrote in her nominating letter, "Gail LaBerge is a tireless and extremely effective defender of the rights of dog owners in the state of Georgia." Turner, a board member of the Georgia Canine Coalition, continued, "Her efforts have earned her the respect of local and state officials, and a reputation as an advocate for fair and reasonable legislation as it relates to the state's breeders, kennels and pet owners."

Neil Bates, Alpharetta breeder with the AKC, contact bates@bellsouth.com .

Mike Miller, DVM, is affiliated with the Duluth Animal Hospital. My guess is Miller, Woolfe and Laberge, all from the Buford area, are interconnected. You can write Dr. Mike and ask him to OPPOSE gassing in Georgia shelters at mike@deluthanimalhospital.com.

Dr George McCommon, is an associate professor of veternary science and City of Macon's veternarian in charge of the Macon Shelter. He did NOT support the recently passed resolution that will end gassing in Macon in June of 2009.

His support of gassing is perplexing especially with his impressive resume that seems to support his opposition to animal cruelty.

When associate professor of veterinary science George McCommon gathered with representatives from the state's Department of Agriculture, GEMA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to mingle with extension agents and local and state politicians in the first of its kind Georgia Emergency Management Conference McCommon stated "People (and animals) are very vulnerable to any hazard — natural or man-made, when a tornado or hurricane hits, it’s imperative to maintain safe plant life, animals and food. To that end, the workshop is expected to focus on topics from media relations to animal protection."

Yet, McCommon fails to see the correlation of protecting companion animals "from the man made disaster of being slaughtered in the state's antiquated and inhumane gas chambers.

“The state of Georgia has been proactive when it comes to animal health and agriculture in general,” McCommon said. “Georgia is trying to stay ahead of the ball.”

Georgia remains one of the few states that clings to the ancient technology of primitive and non functioning gas chambers

Macon's policy of gassing animals is not the only quality of care issue that has dogged the city run shelter for years. It is disheartening to consider that despite all of McCommon's educational training he has failed to offer any suggestions that might/would improve the plight of Macon's homeless pets. It is simply not reasonable to suggest that mass killing and disposing of unwanted pets is acceptable shelter policy.

District Attorney Kim Schwartz (Bibb County) has hinted that Dr. McCommon had threatened to quit being the City of Macon's vet because of the recent attacks on the City's practices.... that he "does the job because no one else will do it" because he has a genuine interest in caring for the shelter animals. Yet, there is no evidence to support his complaints. In order for real change to happen in Macon perhaps his resignation would allow for improvement to take hold. A lack of change is manifested when good ideas are ignored but more importantly when those who settle for poor standards are allowed to fester.

McCommon's unwillingness to publicly oppose Macon's antiquated gas chamber is equally troubling as a board member of Irvins AAB. If he supports gassing in Macon, then he supports the failed policies of the department of ag in failing to enforce the law on shelters that use gas chambers.

Steve Zerelli represents the Pet Company. Is there any wonder why the Department of Agriculture allows the pet store industry to operate with little or no oversight?

In effect, Tommy Irvin's departmental policies all but support the puppy mill industry and it's tremendous growth potential. This is reflected in the dismal record that the Department of Ag has on enforcing and closing down substandard puppy mills as well. The puppy mill trade flourishes throughout the state of Georgia, in flea markets and in Nickelson type mass breeding farms. Obviously, the Pet Company could care less about gassing animals in Georgia shelters. Until the Department of Ag sets policies and enforces reasonable breeding standards killing off the excess is simply a product of theiur onw malfeasonance. Those changes won't happen on Zerelli's watch. If you’re inclined to contact Steve Zerelli, he can be reached at sizerelli@petcompany.com.

Claudine Wilkins is the founder of the Georgia Legal Professionals for Animals. Georgia Legal Professionals for Animals, Inc. (GLPA) is a non-profit corporation comprised of professionals who espouse an ethical and moral precept which maintains that animals are sentient beings, with a capacity for pain and suffering and an intrinsic right to their own lives.

She is also legislative council for Best Friends, and will be one of the speakers at the No Kill Conference: Bringing Sheltering into the 21st Century, happening May 2-3 in Washington, D.C.

The No Kill Advocacy Center is teaming up with the animal law program at George Washington University Law School.

The conference features both a shelter/rescue track and a legal track, though attendees can attend workshops in both areas. “Both tracks are important”, says Claudine Wilkins, legislative council for Best Friends, who will be one of the speakers at the conference. “You have to have the public drive and awareness and the legal advancements for real change to happen for animals,” Wilkins says.

Conference workshops will cover a wide variety of current topics, including rehabilitating and adopting dogs and cats with special needs; harnessing community compassion; reforming animal control; overcoming internal obstacles to success; legislating no-kill; rethinking dangerous dogs; legislating and litigating an end to puppy mills; and protecting free-roaming cats and their caregivers. What it won't be covering is why Georgia continues to gas out of the stone age year after year.

The Georgia Legal Professionals for Animals took a position opposing gassing on their website and yet, failed to address the house committee when the gassing bill died in committee. You can e-mail Claudine at wilkinslaw@comcast.com to ask her what it's going to take to get the Department of Agriculture to abide by the court ruling that upheld the ban on gassing.

Betty Crawford represents the Rescue League in Atlanta Georgia. Betty appears to be the token representative for all of Georgia's rescue groups. Her contact is esmithcrawford@aol.com

Donna Strickland, is the executive director for the Albany Humane Society. Their mission statement claims, "We speak for those who can't speak for themselves". Each year, Albany Humane responds to hundreds of requests to investigate the possible pain and unnecessary suffering of animals. Their efforts are far-reaching: dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, deer, pigs, chickens, goats, to name a few... have all received care at our shelter.

Clearly, speaking out against the horribly cruel use of gas chambers is the only hope for the thousands of voiceless pets that are killed in Georgia's gassing shelters each year. Ask Donna to speak to Tommy about putting an end to state mandated acts of animal cruelty - Georgia's shelters should be better then that. Her contact info is humane@isoa.net

Miguel Abi-Hassan, having worked in animal welfare in Venezuela, Ohio, and Florida, is the Director of Animal Control in Fayette County. His lifetime of experience with animals and degrees in animal welfare and industrial psychology are put to good use. You can reach Miguel at miquela@fayettecounty.com. Ask him to use his influence to end the use of gas in Georgia shelters.

Grace Woodford runs Dog House Kennel and Grooming in Newnan. Polite e-mails to Grace can be sent to doghouseknnl@bellsouth.com . Ask Grace to support passing HB 606 and put an end to the cruelty of killing shelter animals with gas.

Vanessa Sims-Green ( vsimsgre@agr.state.ga.us ) and Mary Greene, Animal Protection Manager ( mgreene@agr.state.ga.us ), are both non-voting members of Irvin's Companion Animal Advisory Board. They serve in an advisory and leadership capacity and have a voice in the deliberations, but no vote.

My investigation was unable to identify two members, a Chuck Corley ( chcorley@gmail.com ), and Sherrie Miller ( sherriemiller@yahoo.com )- anyone with information can forward that to me.

The Companion Animal Advisory Board meets four times a year at a time and a place determined by the chair and the Animal Protection Manager. Special meetings may be requested by the chair, by a majority of the Board members, or by the department.

The next scheduled meeting is scheduled to be held on May 2nd at 1:00 PM, 19 Martin Luther King Jr Drive SW, Atlanta, Ga 3033. For further information,contact Mary Greene.

Anyone who represents an animal advocacy group and who thinks it's appropriate to let these shelters continue to gas for another year or two or more is failing to acknowledge the severity of what is wrong about gas chambers. Tommy Irvin has never directly stated his reasons for not opposing/supporting the gassing of shelter pets. After all, as a reasonable man should he not have a reason, shouldn't he?

This research builds a foundation of the interesting relationships between the anti-players who work towards blocking any attempts in changing Georgia's few remaining gassing shelters. We need to convince a majority of these players to join our side in supporting HB 606 and SB 232 in the 2010 legislative session. The bills may have been "killed" for now, but the groundswell of opposition lives on with a determined group of compassionate animal advocates that know killing innocent and defenseless homeless pets in such a cruel and in humane manner is simply not acceptable public policy.

Please explain to the animals who are being gassed this week, next week, next month, next year...who are "dead forever”, that we are working on getting the bill just right, then we'll help them.

Next, the role Georgia Animal Control Association has in keeping the status quo....



Permission to cross post