How a Bombshell ‘Truth in Rescue’ Document—Distributed at BFAS’ Own Conference—Ignited an Awakening to Decades of Mismanagement, Misplaced Priorities, and Municipal Betrayal
Thank you for your continued reporting. While dealing with a deeply unethical situation involving Best Friends, multiple Los Angeles rescuers privately told me that Best Friends is the problem—but none would speak publicly, fearing retaliation. One rescuer even shared (yes, hearsay) that Julie Castle once said, "We haven't yet figured out how to monetize spay/neuter."
What’s clear is that they have figured out how to monetize full shelters, no-kill messaging, and displaced fire dogs. Elected officials should prohibit Best Friends from operating in certain capacities (including transporting livestock guardian breeds into urban areas), and corporate donors and celebrities should reconsider their support. Resources should go to the rescues actually doing the hard, underfunded work of helping animals—not to a marketing machine that prioritizes optics over ethics. If Best Friends was ethical -- they'd keep the marketing machine going and turn that money over to rescues who ethically help animals -- and remove their unattainable no-kill metrics (that leads to adopting out aggressive dogs in urban areas and/or reduces intake of dogs who need help...even if that means euthanasia).
Bev, thank you for sharing this. It’s deeply troubling—but sadly, not surprising—to hear that even local rescuers fear speaking out against Best Friends. If true, Julie Castle’s alleged remark is both cynical and revealing, reinforcing concerns that financial priorities—not animal welfare—are driving their decisions. The focus should be on real solutions, not manipulating optics at the expense of public safety and ethical rescue work. Your call for accountability from officials, donors, and celebrities is crucial. It’s time to shift support to those actually on the front lines, doing the hard and necessary work for animals.
Pushback from within the animal care & control community against the Best Friends Animal Society's practices & policies began long before Paulette Dean of the Danville Area Humane Society in Virginia spoke out in 2021. In this regard must be mentioned that those practices & policies mostly originated not with Best Friends, but rather with Maddie's Fund, founded in 1998 with an endowment twice the size of that of any other animal advocacy organization ever. Had it been spent to further spay/neuter of at risk animals, we could have been a "no-kill nation" many years ago; but it wasn't. Meanwhile, I pointed out both in person and in print the absurdity & impracticality of the "90% live release rate" to Maddie's Fund founding president Richard Avanzino & then-Best Friends president Michael Mountain as early as 1999. As of the adoption of the Asilomar Accords, concocted in 2004 by Avanzino & Mountain, I had been a featured speaker at 19 national humane conferences, including 10 of Best Friends' No More Homeless Pets conferences, but after I criticized the "90% live release rate" at the Best Friends' conference in April 2005, the American Humane Association conference in 2006, the Ohio Dog Wardens' Association conference later in 2006, and the Animal Care Expo in 2007, soon after the Michael Vick dogfighting bust made pit bull rescue & advocacy the focal activity of Best Friends in particular, seven years elapsed before I was asked to speak again to any U.S. animal care & control gathering. The message was clear: speak out and you will be muzzled. However, as editor of independent media, I was at liberty to speak out anyway, & have, ever more so since founding ANIMALS 24-7 with my wife Beth in 2014, herself a longtime animal care & control professional. We have also, from the beginning, often given voice to other critics of the misdirection of the no-kill movement as guest columnists. The problem has never been lack of people speaking out; the problem has been lack of people paying attention.
Thanks for sharing this important historical context, Merritt and Beth. Your firsthand experience and continued efforts to expose the flaws in the no-kill narrative are invaluable. The pattern of silencing critics is unmistakable, but as you’ve proven, the truth has a way of breaking through. Grateful for the work you both do at ANIMALS 24-7 to keep these conversations alive!
I commented below, but I'd like to add that I never liked the framing of "no-kill" and I always doubted it was achievable. Metrics are dangerous: "be careful what you measure, because that is what you will get." Rigidity in metrics is undergirded by the fallacy of precision performance/outcomes ... maybe in A.I. or code or financial transactions but not when humans are involved. Penalizing "underperformers" without adequate investigation of what levers and control were granted will perpetuate bad systems measuring the wrong things.
This is not only happening with large orginizations like BF, the shut up don't question things, don't offer suggestions has been going on for years at the small humane society where I volunteer here in Minnesota. It is very easy to be labled a trouble maker or a know it all or what ever when the director and board are all in bed together. So it's a problem all over large and small orginizations.
I hear you, Dee Ann, that is why it is important to insist on transparency and accountability and to expose the bullying tactics of of managers and board directors.
Julie Castle's alleged remark "we haven't yet figured out how to monetize spay/neuter" is perfectly clarifying. I've evaluated business structures professionally and it's plainly obvious their business model and that of partner orgs/merchants is based on overpopulation and shelter crisis.
Clearly, Best Friends and Consortium's goal is monetizing the national shelter system and animal welfare landscape building out a network of associated business based on pet overpopulation and special software DATA BASES, like control of nation's shelter system with "Shelter Pet Data Alliance" shelter software. They are building a pet overpopulation commercial-industrial complex.
This elephant in the room is everywhere, there is no meaningful policy for s/n and therefore overpopulation and shelter crisis is perpetual as BF calls for more "community engagement"--rescues, adoptions and fosters as overpopulation remedy, cruel for animals and exhausted helpers, fosters, rescuers that care about them.
Carmen, you lay out a compelling and troubling perspective on the structural incentives that seem to perpetuate, rather than solve, the shelter crisis. The lack of a meaningful national spay/neuter policy while BFAS pushes "community engagement" as the solution raises serious questions. If true, the alleged remark from Julie Castle would only reinforce what many have long suspected. Thank you for adding your expertise to this conversation—this is exactly the kind of critical thinking needed to challenge the status quo.
Hi Ed, thank you for this. I would love to get pointed in the right direction to read the "Truth in Rescue" document and to follow the author online if she has any social media or Linkedin pages that I can find her at? Thank you for shining the light on the unethical practices of BF.
Hi Cathy, thanks for your support! At this time, the author has chosen to remain anonymous, given the concerns many have voiced about retaliation for speaking out against Best Friends. However, I’ll be sure to share any updates if that changes. In the meantime, I appreciate you staying engaged and helping to spread awareness about these critical issues!
As a local Tucsonan location of Best Friends/Maddies Fund Pima Animal Care Center where Monica Dangler and Kristen Hassen (now of Outcomes Consulting exploiting Riverside County for a 2.5 million contract) were past directors, I can attest that ignoring the importance of spay/neuter was deliberate to be in alignment with Best Friends/Maddies ideology.
Friends of PACC even donated a million dollar mobile van for outlying areas and zip codes where most of the intake animals and hoarding cases were were coming from, that Monica Dangler (then director) resisted deploying. A credible account of someone in Pima County government asking Dangler why the van wasn't deployed adequately and Dangler responded "what good is it to s/n 8,000 dogs?" to which the Pima County gov employee emphatically replied "because very soon 8,000 dogs become 50,000 dogs!!"
Look at all the businesses the national animal welfare grifters are connected with, based on pet overpopulation and shelter crisis....developing software and data bases to control animal welfare narrative and circumvent shelters.... shifting responsibility to communities that simply cannot foster, adopt or rescue to absorb overpopulation. Further emphasis on free-roaming "at large" community animals and TRANSPORTING where animals simply disappear for exporting shelters to maintain 90% no kill status.
Best Friend's motto "save them all" is grotesquely fraudulent and duplicitous as the business model is clearly perpetuating mass population to feed a massive business structure, while grifting donors and taxpayers responding to shelter and stray crisis.
If the "consortium" dedicated meaningful resources to spay/neuter, grants for vet training with shelter /lo-cost or free clinic work commitment, lobbying for commercial breeding restrictions, the overpopulation/shelter crisis would be quickly reduced and then stabilized to minimal levels.
But meaningful s/n is obvious immediate necessity, we all know how 8,000 unaltered animals quickly becomes 50,000 animals etc etc.
Hi Carmen, thank you for sharing your firsthand experience. It’s disturbing—but not surprising—to hear that spay/neuter efforts were deliberately sidelined to align with Best Friends/Maddie’s Fund ideology. The refusal to deploy a donated mobile clinic speaks volumes about where their priorities really lie. The increasing focus on data control, transport schemes, and shifting responsibility onto overwhelmed communities is a glaring red flag. “Save them all” becomes meaningless when the system is designed to keep the crisis going. Appreciate your insight and for helping expose the bigger picture!
I'd love to read it too. And know who the author is. Until the money is cut off or there is a federal investigation into this money laundering Rico scheme, the animals will continue to suffer.
Hi Juliana, I hear you! At this time, the author has chosen to remain anonymous due to concerns about retaliation, but I’ll share any updates if that changes. The need for accountability is clear, and I appreciate you staying engaged in this conversation. The more awareness we bring to these issues, the harder it becomes for them to be ignored!
PS Maddies Fund was originated by Duffield software billionaire and now multiple businesses associated with pet overpopulation and shelter crisis involve new software including Best Friends' Shelter Pet Data Alliance networking national shelter database enabling control of animal welfare narrative and gov policies. Shelter Luv is a software Best Friends has it's partner shelters install.
Julie Castle's bizarre fraudulent statistics recently presented at Best Friends National Conference is an example of the strategy that if they control the data, they can present any narrative even if their disastrous results are evident everywhere.
UCDavis Koret Shelter Medicine.....where are the trained vets going?? Apparently not to where 60% of public can afford like shelters or free/lo-cost programs but to Private Equity owned clinics and specialty providers offering human interventions like kidney transplants or for patenting exorbitantly priced pharmaceuticals.
The level of grift and fraud that is producing this crisis is monumental. Thank you Animal Politics for this valuable coverage. It's only a matter of time before this becomes a documentary produced by Netflix or other major platform.
Hi Carmen, your insights are spot on. The push to control shelter data and the broader animal welfare narrative through software like Shelter Pet Data Alliance is deeply concerning—especially when the reality on the ground tells a completely different story. The disconnect between where veterinary talent is going and where it's actually needed is another critical issue that needs more attention. The scale of this crisis is undeniable, and as more people wake up to the fraud and mismanagement, accountability will be inevitable. And you’re right—this story is big enough for a major documentary. Thanks for your thoughtful contributions to this conversation!
A donor wanting to claw back their dollars doesn't sound right to me. As a trustee for Georgia E. Hofmann Trust, I have overseen gifts from beneficiaries' accounts to veterinary schools and an endowed center for equine science. Terms for use of gift funds often collide with income taxes benefit for the donor and/or recipient.
I don't think misconduct of Best Friends, by itself, prevented "no kill" from being achieved. Ed's series on BFAS has been disheartening. I think malfeasance must be exposed but I am mindful of the Asilomar Accords and the likely universal decline in public and political support due to our in-fighting: animal rights vs. welfare; evolutionists vs. absolutists; vegan vs. plant-based.
Spay/neuter is a vital service which the pet-owning public increasingly expects to be subsidized. Or, they just won't do it.
Supporting politicians who rip away regulations has invited private equity investors to purchase veterinary practices and demand financial performance at odds with caring about animals and their clients --the mission, I thought.
We can't adopt our way out of the homeless animal population crisis.
We can't spay/neuter our way out of indifference to the wellbeing of others or our collective whole.
Either we want to share our abundance and share it freely-- accepting we have no control over the recipient's use--or keep it all for ourselves.
Leslie, I appreciate your thoughtful perspective. You raise important points about the complexities of philanthropy, policy, and the broader challenges in animal welfare. While no single factor prevented "no kill" from being truly achieved, the issues surrounding BFAS highlight how misplaced priorities can undermine real solutions. Spay/neuter remains critical, but as you note, it's only part of a much larger equation. I always value your insight—these are exactly the kinds of conversations we need to keep having to push for meaningful reform.
Ed, you likely already knew this but I just took a closer review of BF's 2022 tax return and Julie Castle's spouse, Greg Castle is on the payroll for being a board member for $220,000 a year. Yikes! Her salary as of 2022 was $527,705. Plus they each get an additional compensation package of just under 10k.
Hi Cathy, great catch! Yes, Gregory Castle retired as CEO of Best Friends in 2018 but continues to serve on the Board of Directors as CEO Emeritus. According to BFAS’ 2022 tax filings, Julie Castle’s reported salary was $527,705, with additional compensation of $9,732. Gregory Castle, despite his retirement, was listed as a board member receiving $220,000 in compensation plus an additional $9,732. It certainly raises questions about financial priorities within the organization. Thanks for taking a closer look and bringing this to the discussion!
Agree! They have had a strong hold on the animal world for 10 years. They have gotten richer and richer while the animal world spirals downward. They have caused the largest crisis in US history and accountability is coming!
Hi Tracy, I couldn’t agree more! The impact of their policies has been devastating, and the growing calls for accountability are long overdue. The more people speak out, the harder it will be for them to hide behind their marketing machine. Change is coming—thanks for being part of the movement!
I do not understand why folks are afraid to speak up? I do understand why city workers cannot speak up but as a private rescue who witnessed their CON first hand, I have been screaming it from a mountain top ever since. They are the cause of the largest animal crisis in US history along with their wingman…. Dr Ellen Jefferson who created the HASS program and founder of Austin Pets Alive. In my opinion, they should all be arrested on charges of fraud, misappropriation of funds, animal abandonment, animal abuse, animal neglect and racketeering. It’s organized crime in the animal world. They have increased their wealth year after year while the problem continues to spiral out of control. They have no desire to fix the root because they would be out of a job. Sickening group of money grubbing con artists obsessed with money, power and GREED. I cannot wait until they are held accountable. It’s coming!
Hi Tracy, I hear your frustration, and you’re not alone. The fear of speaking out is real, especially for those who risk retaliation, but voices like yours are making a difference. The more people expose the reality behind their policies, the harder it will be for them to continue unchecked. Accountability is coming, and thanks to dedicated advocates like you, the truth is finally breaking through!
I would also question if taxpayer funding of UCDavis Koret so called "shelter medicine" developing kidney transplants offered in specialty clinics for the Uber Elite who wish to subject their dog to grueling transplant and immune suppressant for minimal life extension while disposing of donor dogs or selling patents to big pharma for exorbitantly priced medications offered in Private Equity Specialty Clinics using disposable laboratory dogs and cats.
Dr. Jeff Rocky Mt Vet series has mentioned a dominant trend of veterinary specialties like human specialties including kidney transplants.
Arizona Humane Society catering to Phoenix Scottsdale elite with exorbitantly paid execs (CEO 400K+++) boasts of a vet program for fundraising. But where are the vets going?? Not noticeably to shelters or accessible volume s/n . More taxpayer and donor grift.
Maricopa County shelters (Phoenix) is chronically in overcapacity crisis with high euth rate. Around 12 dogs are scheduled for euth this morning. The huge stray population in broiling summer summer heat where their pads burn on concrete and asphalt is heart wrenching. Did Julie Castle reference AZ being a "No Kill by 2025" success story at the national conference? She must be from the planet "lie to your face".
Hi Carmen, you bring up some incredibly important concerns. The growing divide between high-dollar veterinary advancements for the elite and the lack of accessible care for shelter animals is deeply troubling. The focus should be on real solutions—like spay/neuter and effective shelter management—not on misleading success stories or fundraising tactics that don’t actually address the crisis. Thanks for shining a light on this—it’s a conversation that needs to be had!
Why is there no link to the "Truth in Rescue" document? It's frustrating when you write a whole substack article, but don't provide a link so people can read it for themselves.
Thank you for your continued reporting. While dealing with a deeply unethical situation involving Best Friends, multiple Los Angeles rescuers privately told me that Best Friends is the problem—but none would speak publicly, fearing retaliation. One rescuer even shared (yes, hearsay) that Julie Castle once said, "We haven't yet figured out how to monetize spay/neuter."
What’s clear is that they have figured out how to monetize full shelters, no-kill messaging, and displaced fire dogs. Elected officials should prohibit Best Friends from operating in certain capacities (including transporting livestock guardian breeds into urban areas), and corporate donors and celebrities should reconsider their support. Resources should go to the rescues actually doing the hard, underfunded work of helping animals—not to a marketing machine that prioritizes optics over ethics. If Best Friends was ethical -- they'd keep the marketing machine going and turn that money over to rescues who ethically help animals -- and remove their unattainable no-kill metrics (that leads to adopting out aggressive dogs in urban areas and/or reduces intake of dogs who need help...even if that means euthanasia).
Bev, thank you for sharing this. It’s deeply troubling—but sadly, not surprising—to hear that even local rescuers fear speaking out against Best Friends. If true, Julie Castle’s alleged remark is both cynical and revealing, reinforcing concerns that financial priorities—not animal welfare—are driving their decisions. The focus should be on real solutions, not manipulating optics at the expense of public safety and ethical rescue work. Your call for accountability from officials, donors, and celebrities is crucial. It’s time to shift support to those actually on the front lines, doing the hard and necessary work for animals.
Pushback from within the animal care & control community against the Best Friends Animal Society's practices & policies began long before Paulette Dean of the Danville Area Humane Society in Virginia spoke out in 2021. In this regard must be mentioned that those practices & policies mostly originated not with Best Friends, but rather with Maddie's Fund, founded in 1998 with an endowment twice the size of that of any other animal advocacy organization ever. Had it been spent to further spay/neuter of at risk animals, we could have been a "no-kill nation" many years ago; but it wasn't. Meanwhile, I pointed out both in person and in print the absurdity & impracticality of the "90% live release rate" to Maddie's Fund founding president Richard Avanzino & then-Best Friends president Michael Mountain as early as 1999. As of the adoption of the Asilomar Accords, concocted in 2004 by Avanzino & Mountain, I had been a featured speaker at 19 national humane conferences, including 10 of Best Friends' No More Homeless Pets conferences, but after I criticized the "90% live release rate" at the Best Friends' conference in April 2005, the American Humane Association conference in 2006, the Ohio Dog Wardens' Association conference later in 2006, and the Animal Care Expo in 2007, soon after the Michael Vick dogfighting bust made pit bull rescue & advocacy the focal activity of Best Friends in particular, seven years elapsed before I was asked to speak again to any U.S. animal care & control gathering. The message was clear: speak out and you will be muzzled. However, as editor of independent media, I was at liberty to speak out anyway, & have, ever more so since founding ANIMALS 24-7 with my wife Beth in 2014, herself a longtime animal care & control professional. We have also, from the beginning, often given voice to other critics of the misdirection of the no-kill movement as guest columnists. The problem has never been lack of people speaking out; the problem has been lack of people paying attention.
Thanks for sharing this important historical context, Merritt and Beth. Your firsthand experience and continued efforts to expose the flaws in the no-kill narrative are invaluable. The pattern of silencing critics is unmistakable, but as you’ve proven, the truth has a way of breaking through. Grateful for the work you both do at ANIMALS 24-7 to keep these conversations alive!
I commented below, but I'd like to add that I never liked the framing of "no-kill" and I always doubted it was achievable. Metrics are dangerous: "be careful what you measure, because that is what you will get." Rigidity in metrics is undergirded by the fallacy of precision performance/outcomes ... maybe in A.I. or code or financial transactions but not when humans are involved. Penalizing "underperformers" without adequate investigation of what levers and control were granted will perpetuate bad systems measuring the wrong things.
This is not only happening with large orginizations like BF, the shut up don't question things, don't offer suggestions has been going on for years at the small humane society where I volunteer here in Minnesota. It is very easy to be labled a trouble maker or a know it all or what ever when the director and board are all in bed together. So it's a problem all over large and small orginizations.
I hear you, Dee Ann, that is why it is important to insist on transparency and accountability and to expose the bullying tactics of of managers and board directors.
Julie Castle's alleged remark "we haven't yet figured out how to monetize spay/neuter" is perfectly clarifying. I've evaluated business structures professionally and it's plainly obvious their business model and that of partner orgs/merchants is based on overpopulation and shelter crisis.
Clearly, Best Friends and Consortium's goal is monetizing the national shelter system and animal welfare landscape building out a network of associated business based on pet overpopulation and special software DATA BASES, like control of nation's shelter system with "Shelter Pet Data Alliance" shelter software. They are building a pet overpopulation commercial-industrial complex.
This elephant in the room is everywhere, there is no meaningful policy for s/n and therefore overpopulation and shelter crisis is perpetual as BF calls for more "community engagement"--rescues, adoptions and fosters as overpopulation remedy, cruel for animals and exhausted helpers, fosters, rescuers that care about them.
Carmen, you lay out a compelling and troubling perspective on the structural incentives that seem to perpetuate, rather than solve, the shelter crisis. The lack of a meaningful national spay/neuter policy while BFAS pushes "community engagement" as the solution raises serious questions. If true, the alleged remark from Julie Castle would only reinforce what many have long suspected. Thank you for adding your expertise to this conversation—this is exactly the kind of critical thinking needed to challenge the status quo.
Hi Ed, thank you for this. I would love to get pointed in the right direction to read the "Truth in Rescue" document and to follow the author online if she has any social media or Linkedin pages that I can find her at? Thank you for shining the light on the unethical practices of BF.
Hi Cathy, thanks for your support! At this time, the author has chosen to remain anonymous, given the concerns many have voiced about retaliation for speaking out against Best Friends. However, I’ll be sure to share any updates if that changes. In the meantime, I appreciate you staying engaged and helping to spread awareness about these critical issues!
As a local Tucsonan location of Best Friends/Maddies Fund Pima Animal Care Center where Monica Dangler and Kristen Hassen (now of Outcomes Consulting exploiting Riverside County for a 2.5 million contract) were past directors, I can attest that ignoring the importance of spay/neuter was deliberate to be in alignment with Best Friends/Maddies ideology.
Friends of PACC even donated a million dollar mobile van for outlying areas and zip codes where most of the intake animals and hoarding cases were were coming from, that Monica Dangler (then director) resisted deploying. A credible account of someone in Pima County government asking Dangler why the van wasn't deployed adequately and Dangler responded "what good is it to s/n 8,000 dogs?" to which the Pima County gov employee emphatically replied "because very soon 8,000 dogs become 50,000 dogs!!"
Look at all the businesses the national animal welfare grifters are connected with, based on pet overpopulation and shelter crisis....developing software and data bases to control animal welfare narrative and circumvent shelters.... shifting responsibility to communities that simply cannot foster, adopt or rescue to absorb overpopulation. Further emphasis on free-roaming "at large" community animals and TRANSPORTING where animals simply disappear for exporting shelters to maintain 90% no kill status.
Best Friend's motto "save them all" is grotesquely fraudulent and duplicitous as the business model is clearly perpetuating mass population to feed a massive business structure, while grifting donors and taxpayers responding to shelter and stray crisis.
If the "consortium" dedicated meaningful resources to spay/neuter, grants for vet training with shelter /lo-cost or free clinic work commitment, lobbying for commercial breeding restrictions, the overpopulation/shelter crisis would be quickly reduced and then stabilized to minimal levels.
But meaningful s/n is obvious immediate necessity, we all know how 8,000 unaltered animals quickly becomes 50,000 animals etc etc.
Hi Carmen, thank you for sharing your firsthand experience. It’s disturbing—but not surprising—to hear that spay/neuter efforts were deliberately sidelined to align with Best Friends/Maddie’s Fund ideology. The refusal to deploy a donated mobile clinic speaks volumes about where their priorities really lie. The increasing focus on data control, transport schemes, and shifting responsibility onto overwhelmed communities is a glaring red flag. “Save them all” becomes meaningless when the system is designed to keep the crisis going. Appreciate your insight and for helping expose the bigger picture!
Carmen. I'm the author of the truth in rescue document. Please reach out to me - we are forming a revolution. Deniseyuliano@gmail.com
I'd love to read it too. And know who the author is. Until the money is cut off or there is a federal investigation into this money laundering Rico scheme, the animals will continue to suffer.
Hi Juliana, I hear you! At this time, the author has chosen to remain anonymous due to concerns about retaliation, but I’ll share any updates if that changes. The need for accountability is clear, and I appreciate you staying engaged in this conversation. The more awareness we bring to these issues, the harder it becomes for them to be ignored!
Is the 'Truth in Rescue' document posted on the web? Where can I find it?
I have it. Feel free to email me at tracyvoss@icloud.com
Thanks Tracy!
PS Maddies Fund was originated by Duffield software billionaire and now multiple businesses associated with pet overpopulation and shelter crisis involve new software including Best Friends' Shelter Pet Data Alliance networking national shelter database enabling control of animal welfare narrative and gov policies. Shelter Luv is a software Best Friends has it's partner shelters install.
Julie Castle's bizarre fraudulent statistics recently presented at Best Friends National Conference is an example of the strategy that if they control the data, they can present any narrative even if their disastrous results are evident everywhere.
UCDavis Koret Shelter Medicine.....where are the trained vets going?? Apparently not to where 60% of public can afford like shelters or free/lo-cost programs but to Private Equity owned clinics and specialty providers offering human interventions like kidney transplants or for patenting exorbitantly priced pharmaceuticals.
The level of grift and fraud that is producing this crisis is monumental. Thank you Animal Politics for this valuable coverage. It's only a matter of time before this becomes a documentary produced by Netflix or other major platform.
Hi Carmen, your insights are spot on. The push to control shelter data and the broader animal welfare narrative through software like Shelter Pet Data Alliance is deeply concerning—especially when the reality on the ground tells a completely different story. The disconnect between where veterinary talent is going and where it's actually needed is another critical issue that needs more attention. The scale of this crisis is undeniable, and as more people wake up to the fraud and mismanagement, accountability will be inevitable. And you’re right—this story is big enough for a major documentary. Thanks for your thoughtful contributions to this conversation!
A donor wanting to claw back their dollars doesn't sound right to me. As a trustee for Georgia E. Hofmann Trust, I have overseen gifts from beneficiaries' accounts to veterinary schools and an endowed center for equine science. Terms for use of gift funds often collide with income taxes benefit for the donor and/or recipient.
I don't think misconduct of Best Friends, by itself, prevented "no kill" from being achieved. Ed's series on BFAS has been disheartening. I think malfeasance must be exposed but I am mindful of the Asilomar Accords and the likely universal decline in public and political support due to our in-fighting: animal rights vs. welfare; evolutionists vs. absolutists; vegan vs. plant-based.
Spay/neuter is a vital service which the pet-owning public increasingly expects to be subsidized. Or, they just won't do it.
Supporting politicians who rip away regulations has invited private equity investors to purchase veterinary practices and demand financial performance at odds with caring about animals and their clients --the mission, I thought.
We can't adopt our way out of the homeless animal population crisis.
We can't spay/neuter our way out of indifference to the wellbeing of others or our collective whole.
Either we want to share our abundance and share it freely-- accepting we have no control over the recipient's use--or keep it all for ourselves.
Leslie, I appreciate your thoughtful perspective. You raise important points about the complexities of philanthropy, policy, and the broader challenges in animal welfare. While no single factor prevented "no kill" from being truly achieved, the issues surrounding BFAS highlight how misplaced priorities can undermine real solutions. Spay/neuter remains critical, but as you note, it's only part of a much larger equation. I always value your insight—these are exactly the kinds of conversations we need to keep having to push for meaningful reform.
Ed, you likely already knew this but I just took a closer review of BF's 2022 tax return and Julie Castle's spouse, Greg Castle is on the payroll for being a board member for $220,000 a year. Yikes! Her salary as of 2022 was $527,705. Plus they each get an additional compensation package of just under 10k.
Hi Cathy, great catch! Yes, Gregory Castle retired as CEO of Best Friends in 2018 but continues to serve on the Board of Directors as CEO Emeritus. According to BFAS’ 2022 tax filings, Julie Castle’s reported salary was $527,705, with additional compensation of $9,732. Gregory Castle, despite his retirement, was listed as a board member receiving $220,000 in compensation plus an additional $9,732. It certainly raises questions about financial priorities within the organization. Thanks for taking a closer look and bringing this to the discussion!
Agree! They have had a strong hold on the animal world for 10 years. They have gotten richer and richer while the animal world spirals downward. They have caused the largest crisis in US history and accountability is coming!
Hi Tracy, I couldn’t agree more! The impact of their policies has been devastating, and the growing calls for accountability are long overdue. The more people speak out, the harder it will be for them to hide behind their marketing machine. Change is coming—thanks for being part of the movement!
I do not understand why folks are afraid to speak up? I do understand why city workers cannot speak up but as a private rescue who witnessed their CON first hand, I have been screaming it from a mountain top ever since. They are the cause of the largest animal crisis in US history along with their wingman…. Dr Ellen Jefferson who created the HASS program and founder of Austin Pets Alive. In my opinion, they should all be arrested on charges of fraud, misappropriation of funds, animal abandonment, animal abuse, animal neglect and racketeering. It’s organized crime in the animal world. They have increased their wealth year after year while the problem continues to spiral out of control. They have no desire to fix the root because they would be out of a job. Sickening group of money grubbing con artists obsessed with money, power and GREED. I cannot wait until they are held accountable. It’s coming!
Hi Tracy, I hear your frustration, and you’re not alone. The fear of speaking out is real, especially for those who risk retaliation, but voices like yours are making a difference. The more people expose the reality behind their policies, the harder it will be for them to continue unchecked. Accountability is coming, and thanks to dedicated advocates like you, the truth is finally breaking through!
I would also question if taxpayer funding of UCDavis Koret so called "shelter medicine" developing kidney transplants offered in specialty clinics for the Uber Elite who wish to subject their dog to grueling transplant and immune suppressant for minimal life extension while disposing of donor dogs or selling patents to big pharma for exorbitantly priced medications offered in Private Equity Specialty Clinics using disposable laboratory dogs and cats.
Dr. Jeff Rocky Mt Vet series has mentioned a dominant trend of veterinary specialties like human specialties including kidney transplants.
Arizona Humane Society catering to Phoenix Scottsdale elite with exorbitantly paid execs (CEO 400K+++) boasts of a vet program for fundraising. But where are the vets going?? Not noticeably to shelters or accessible volume s/n . More taxpayer and donor grift.
Maricopa County shelters (Phoenix) is chronically in overcapacity crisis with high euth rate. Around 12 dogs are scheduled for euth this morning. The huge stray population in broiling summer summer heat where their pads burn on concrete and asphalt is heart wrenching. Did Julie Castle reference AZ being a "No Kill by 2025" success story at the national conference? She must be from the planet "lie to your face".
Hi Carmen, you bring up some incredibly important concerns. The growing divide between high-dollar veterinary advancements for the elite and the lack of accessible care for shelter animals is deeply troubling. The focus should be on real solutions—like spay/neuter and effective shelter management—not on misleading success stories or fundraising tactics that don’t actually address the crisis. Thanks for shining a light on this—it’s a conversation that needs to be had!
So they became hoarders!?!!? That's terrible!
Why is there no link to the "Truth in Rescue" document? It's frustrating when you write a whole substack article, but don't provide a link so people can read it for themselves.