Everything else aside, why is BFAS giving a huge grant to a 9 million dollar nonprofit while so many municipal shelters struggle with meager budgets that don’t even cover basic care and spay/neuter?
Great question, Cara! It really highlights the misplaced priorities in animal welfare funding. With so many municipal shelters struggling just to provide basic care, it’s baffling that BFAS is funneling large grants into already well-funded organizations. Imagine the impact if that money went where it’s truly needed!
A small rescue could spend $9 million for the benefit of the animals and not the CEOs and Public Relations. The small animal rescue I volunteer for holds Open House fund raisers every month to pay for basic needs.
I hear you! It’s frustrating to realize after the fact that donations may not have gone where they were most needed. The best we can do is stay informed and support organizations that prioritize true animal welfare over optics.
Same arguments can be made without bringing a persons full name into it. That’s why that other post went “viral” which is also the wrong term. It actually got ratio’d, which is an internet term you probably don’t know at your age, but it means there are more comments than likes. It means the post got more backlash than support. You need a better understanding of how large organizations work as well as the internet as a whole.
I hear your concerns, Nick, and I want to be clear—this isn’t about criticizing any one person. It’s about examining the influence a national organization like Best Friends can have when it funds key positions within a shelter. That level of influence can shape major policies, which is why transparency matters. My goal has always been to advocate for the animals and open up honest conversations about how we can do better. Thank you for participating.
If it was not about criticizing one person, then you wouldn’t need to personally bring one of their workers into it. The hssa doesn’t act as a monolithic society.
Nick, the article is not about an employee, it is about a program and the outsized influence of a national organization on the local outcomes of the animals in your community. This influence is not unique to Tucson, it is happening in many communities across the US with the same dire consequences. The name of the employee was all over the internet long before I wrote the article, and the criticism was not personal, it was procedural. For more insight on this influence, you might find this article helpful: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/white-paper-response-comprehensive
I appreciate you reading and caring, Julie! It is heartbreaking, but awareness is the first step toward change. Thank you for being a voice for the animals!
Some recent feedback has focused narrowly on the mention of individual staff, such as HSSA's Lifesaving Outcomes Manager. I want to be clear: the purpose of my reporting has never been to target individuals, but rather to examine how national organizations—particularly Best Friends Animal Society (BFAS)—exert disproportionate influence on local shelter policy.
This story isn’t about one person. It’s about a system. HSSA’s leadership team is largely BFAS-trained and/or grant-supported, which makes the shelter’s response to the recent outbreak a powerful case study in how national priorities can sometimes override local needs.
For those seeking a deeper understanding of how this influence operates nationwide, I encourage you to read my white paper response to HSSA's CEO's dissertation on no-kill: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/white-paper-response-comprehensive It outlines the BFAS model and how its well-meaning policies can—if unchecked—lead to outcomes very different from the ones our communities deserve.
Let’s stay focused on the bigger picture: protecting the animals and restoring public trust.
You seemingly have no knowledge of the complexities of medical cases at a humane society. First and foremost, the majority of people coming to a mainstream animal welfare organizations are looking for healthy pets to adopt. Why do specific rescues and sanctuaries exist if not to find people who KNOW and WANT this kind of case. Second, HSSA is a nonprofit with no government ties. It relies on grants and donations from the public and other organizations. Third, where is that 9 million dollar number from? Not from a recent audit that can be easily found on the HSSAZ website. Where the fund allocations are also found. Doxing people and publicly shaming people who are not in charge of any major decisions is disgusting and downright awful. You're no investigative journalist; you are a coward and grossing uninformed. Take a look at PACC, a gov funded animal welfare organization and see where their med cases go with their fully staffed clinic. If you feel the need to call out specific actors, call out the bosses. Call out the hierarchy that anyone under a chief officer has to maintain. Stop doxing underpaid, undervalued staff with no authority whatsoever. It's likely that this person was following marching orders from a chief officer.
Erin, thank you for sharing your perspective. I agree that shelter medical care is complex and that every role has its challenges. Drawing on nearly 30 years of experience managing large shelter medical programs and developing protocols (as detailed here: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/innovative-approaches-to-medical ), my perspective comes from real-world experience.
My concern isn’t directed at individual staff members but at systemic practices that seem to offload complex medical cases from well-funded organizations, raising questions about transparency and accountability. I used the $9 million figure from publicly available profiles.
While tomorrow’s article will directly address the accountability of the managers overseeing these programs, my focus remains on the systemic practices that contribute to these issues. Ultimately, my goal is to shine a light on practices that may prioritize numbers over genuine animal welfare, and I appreciate the dialogue about how we can improve care for every pet.
Ed, you're disgustingly misinformed. Spreading misinformation faster than trump can say transgender rats.
You doxed a minimum wage employee. You can't (and I know you can't because I read every single available audit from 2018 to 2024) site your source on the numbers you used and I know they're wrong. You can claim you worked for animal welfare organizations for 30 years, only siting your own self inflated ego piece, but you would know how these organizations and rescues work if you did. Rescues and sanctuaries exist to get special needs animals adopted. They do not get adopted at mainstream organizations and you would know that if you legitimately had any experience. I've read your other pieces where you use AI images of blood and pitbulls to incite a reaction and get clicks. What are you? Fox news?
I can tell an anecdote about how I adopted a dog in college and he had seizures. I brought it back and the humane society in my city didn't keep him, they gave him to a rescue that specialized in special needs animals. Otherwise, he wouldn't have gotten adopted.
Just cause an organization has a relatively small amount of money, doesn't mean that the animal will be adopted and that's the goal. Even if any of the audits readily available online on the IRS website said HSSA had 9 million in donations from the public, not the government, that's not a lot of money. The people reading this think it's a lot of money, but keeping AC on in facilities like that costs 10k a day. You and the people reading have no actual frame of reference for what anything costs. HSSA, per actual sited references on the IRS website, their website, and ProPublica, got 7 million in donations last year and spent 8.5 million. All of the allocations are there and none are wasted.
Rescues are contacted about medical cases like this to get animals adopted and out of stressful environments. Stop doxing people and atop trying to dunk on a nonprofit. You're not Lebron. You're choosing to incite hatred and violence and hindering an organization from receiving the help it needs to help animals. You are not only directing violence towards a person(that you doxed), but you are contributing to a future where HSSA might not exist. Lotus doesn't seem to have the money or empathy to take all the Peaches HSSA probably takes. Shame on both of you.
Thank you again, Erin, for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns. I appreciate passionate dialogue on these important topics, but I’d like to address a few points in a constructive and respectful way.
First, I believe we can all agree that name-calling and personal attacks don’t contribute to meaningful discussion. It’s important to engage with differing perspectives in a way that fosters understanding rather than division. While I welcome critiques of my work, I hope we can keep the conversation focused on the issues rather than resorting to insults.
Regarding your concerns about misinformation, I strive to base my articles on verifiable facts and data. If there are specific inaccuracies you’ve identified, I’d be happy to review them and make corrections if necessary. Constructive feedback is always welcome, as it helps ensure accuracy and accountability.
As for the broader discussion about rescues, sanctuaries, and nonprofit funding, I respect the hard work these organizations do under challenging circumstances. My goal has always been to advocate for transparency and effectiveness in animal welfare—not to hinder or harm any organization. If my article gave a different impression, that was not my intent.
Finally, I want to clarify that I do not condone or engage in doxxing or inciting hostility toward individuals or organizations. My focus is on fostering solutions that benefit animals and the people who care for them.
Thank you again for your feedback. Let’s continue this conversation in a way that prioritizes mutual respect and our shared commitment to animal welfare.
HSSA had an annual budget of approximately $10.2 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. This figure includes total revenues of $10,157,949 and expenses of $9,250,000 during the same period.
Hey Erin, Pet overpopulation and shelter crisis is Maddies Fund and Best Friends Animal Society business model. They are firmly in control of HSSA for their new "fast track" agenda transporting animals to rural southern Arizona for "quiet disposal". Transporting animals to undisclosed destinations and outcomes is another BFAS/Maddies contrivance to boost 90% No Kill statistic as the animal left the shelter alive even if it was euthanized transported to a high kill shelter or warehoused and deteriorated to death.
It's basic math: it is unrealistic to achieve 90% No Kill without volume accessible spay neuter and population prevention (the original No Kill) which BFAS dosn't fund so they promote agendas like "community animals" (neighborhood stray dogs and cats), managed intake, TRANSPORTS and statistics manipulation.
I've literally read thousands of pages of their agenda and seminars.....not one word funding or promoting spay neuter ----the only solution to pet overpopulation and the original basis for no kill.
BFAS, worth several hundred million dollars, controlling HSSA, would be credible if they funded volume spay/neuter outreach instead of monetizing shelter crisis and pet overpopulation with merchandise--services, proprietary databases.
So don't finger point at the messengers. Ask why major animal welfare CEO's and top execs are making 500K--1 million ++annual compensation, the orgs rake in hundreds of million fundraising on distressed homeless pets when the average persona can't find affordable spay/neuter or basic medical for their pet.
The major orgs with BFAS and Maddies at the ideological center are exploiting animals and those who care for them.
Apparently BFAS is using HSSA (and by extension Pima Animal Care Center) as a launch for their "fast tracking" program. Shrouded in euphemisms but admitted in various news broadcasts, BFAS funded "fast track" program is primarily about transporting big and behavioral dogs (needing decompression cited), the difficult- to-adopt out of the shelter to unknown destinations/outcomes. Unloading medical animals is a new low. As the Little Lotus Rescue in rural southern Arizona depicts, the sprawling county is extremely resource challenged with almost no shelter facilities even for highly adoptable pets and very little access to vet care, especially affordable.
A friend forwarded Kristen Hassen Outcomes Consulting (of Riverside County Shelter 2.5 million contract controversy who espouses BFAS doctrines) newsletter touting the upcoming Humane World Expo where attendees can learn more about the "big dog superhighway".....an acknowledgment shelters/rescues nationwide are in critical overcapacity of large dogs that can't be adopted/fostered suggesting a magic formula will be offered at seminar.
Researcher friend forwards lots of BFAS and Hassen newsletters, conference and seminar material that she has registered to obtain. Anyone can go thru thousands of pages and not find one word about volume spay neuter programs. It's all about building out a big infrastructure to be monetized including propriety databases. Overpopulation and shelter overcapacity is a business model.
Publishing this harms the staff, volunteers and lower-level management who work TIRELESSLY to put animal welfare first and overcome the damage caused by previous mismanagement at HSSA. Articles like this (written by someone who has never worked or volunteered at HSSA) are detrimental to the healing/rebuilding process, especially for the resources and donations needed for homeless animals in our community. Out of curiosity, Ed, how long has it been since you last worked inside of a shelter? I wonder this because you have not considered the rapidly rising costs faced by modern-day shelters and the animal welfare industry as a whole. You have 30 years of experience managing shelter medical programs, therefore, you should have general knowledge of how expensive it is to maintain proper comprehensive care for animals in ANY shelter today. These are critical factors you should consider in your biased “case studies” moving forward.
Thank you for your comment, Tucson. I respect the dedication of HSSA’s staff and volunteers and understand the challenges shelters face today. My article was not intended to undermine their efforts but to highlight systemic issues that demand greater transparency and accountability.
The case of Peaches raises important questions about resource allocation and ethical responsibility. Despite HSSA’s significant resources, shifting a medically complex case to a small rescue highlights a troubling reliance on underfunded organizations. Transparency is essential to ensure that decisions prioritize animal welfare over optics.
Additionally, the influence of BFAS on HSSA’s programs deserves scrutiny. While BFAS may provide support, their focus on live-release rates can pressure shelters into decisions that prioritize statistics over meaningful outcomes.
My goal is to foster constructive dialogue that strengthens organizations like HSSA while ensuring their practices align with their mission. Transparency, accountability, and ethical decision-making are critical for building trust and achieving better outcomes for animals. Thank you again for engaging in this important discussion.
Taylor, as you may know, rural southern Arizona, expansive Cochise County consists mostly of economically challenged population, mostly inadequate antiquated (inhumane) shelter facilities, almost no affordable veterinary access.
So where was Best Friends funded HSSA "fast tracking" big dogs and those needing decompression in partnership with rural southern Arizona? Best Friends is promoting transports as a solution to shelter overcapacity. What shelter or rescue has a shortage of big dogs and behavior dogs ?? No one has capacity to take them, most everywhere is overcapacity.
The new BFAS funded "fast tracking" position was tasked with finding new rescues to take overcapacity animals (primarily big and behavior dogs) including medical animals as the tiny under-resourced rescue had been approached to take a dog with broken leg also.
Memo to Best Friends and Maddies: Fund volume accessible spay and neuter. Dr. Jeff Rocky Mountain Vet would medically service an entire community's animals for free. One guy and his team made a difference for whole communities while Maddies/Best Friends bang on about more adopters, fosters, transports, seminars and conference attendance collecting hundreds of millions to keep the scam going.
There was an article in the San Diego Union Tribune stating that the city municipal shelter in Bonita will be shut down. They are building a new shelter in Santee to replace it. At the end of the article, it stated the shelters are no-kill and defined that as having a 90% live release rate. They've never done that before. A tiny bit of transparency.
When I first posted on my FB questioning HSSA, many of my friends came at me telling me it was an amazing organization. I found out that at one time it used to be great (pre Steve Farley). It seems when he came in, he just wanted to advance his salary and had no idea what he was doing. It is curious that he raised him and Christian’s salary while decreasing others the year before the transport. They can the both of them and then install Best Friends associates, cat dumping commences, Farley gets a huge settlement which appears to be to keep him quiet (no other explanation because he failed his fiduciary duties so no wrongful termination there) and then it turns just as shady and lacking in transparency as San Diego Humane Society and these other large orgs. I told Christian Gonzalez on 9/1/23 he would be the fall guy. Called that one right.
Everything else aside, why is BFAS giving a huge grant to a 9 million dollar nonprofit while so many municipal shelters struggle with meager budgets that don’t even cover basic care and spay/neuter?
Great question, Cara! It really highlights the misplaced priorities in animal welfare funding. With so many municipal shelters struggling just to provide basic care, it’s baffling that BFAS is funneling large grants into already well-funded organizations. Imagine the impact if that money went where it’s truly needed!
A small rescue could spend $9 million for the benefit of the animals and not the CEOs and Public Relations. The small animal rescue I volunteer for holds Open House fund raisers every month to pay for basic needs.
I am so proud of Sandy McPadden, Director of Little Lotus Rescue & Sanctuary, for pushing back!
Absolutely! Sandy’s dedication and courage in speaking up for the animals is truly inspiring. She’s making a real difference!
I made donations to a number of organizations after Hurricane Helene. Unfortunately BFAS was one of them.
I hear you! It’s frustrating to realize after the fact that donations may not have gone where they were most needed. The best we can do is stay informed and support organizations that prioritize true animal welfare over optics.
Same arguments can be made without bringing a persons full name into it. That’s why that other post went “viral” which is also the wrong term. It actually got ratio’d, which is an internet term you probably don’t know at your age, but it means there are more comments than likes. It means the post got more backlash than support. You need a better understanding of how large organizations work as well as the internet as a whole.
I hear your concerns, Nick, and I want to be clear—this isn’t about criticizing any one person. It’s about examining the influence a national organization like Best Friends can have when it funds key positions within a shelter. That level of influence can shape major policies, which is why transparency matters. My goal has always been to advocate for the animals and open up honest conversations about how we can do better. Thank you for participating.
If it was not about criticizing one person, then you wouldn’t need to personally bring one of their workers into it. The hssa doesn’t act as a monolithic society.
Thank you for participating.
Nick, the article is not about an employee, it is about a program and the outsized influence of a national organization on the local outcomes of the animals in your community. This influence is not unique to Tucson, it is happening in many communities across the US with the same dire consequences. The name of the employee was all over the internet long before I wrote the article, and the criticism was not personal, it was procedural. For more insight on this influence, you might find this article helpful: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/white-paper-response-comprehensive
What happened to poor Peaches?
Duffs, Peaches is in the care of a foster caregiver and doing well.
Thank you!
This is absolutely heartbreaking! I had no idea this was happening. Thank you for shedding light on this, Ed!
I appreciate you reading and caring, Julie! It is heartbreaking, but awareness is the first step toward change. Thank you for being a voice for the animals!
Clarifying the Real Issue
Some recent feedback has focused narrowly on the mention of individual staff, such as HSSA's Lifesaving Outcomes Manager. I want to be clear: the purpose of my reporting has never been to target individuals, but rather to examine how national organizations—particularly Best Friends Animal Society (BFAS)—exert disproportionate influence on local shelter policy.
This story isn’t about one person. It’s about a system. HSSA’s leadership team is largely BFAS-trained and/or grant-supported, which makes the shelter’s response to the recent outbreak a powerful case study in how national priorities can sometimes override local needs.
For those seeking a deeper understanding of how this influence operates nationwide, I encourage you to read my white paper response to HSSA's CEO's dissertation on no-kill: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/white-paper-response-comprehensive It outlines the BFAS model and how its well-meaning policies can—if unchecked—lead to outcomes very different from the ones our communities deserve.
Let’s stay focused on the bigger picture: protecting the animals and restoring public trust.
You seemingly have no knowledge of the complexities of medical cases at a humane society. First and foremost, the majority of people coming to a mainstream animal welfare organizations are looking for healthy pets to adopt. Why do specific rescues and sanctuaries exist if not to find people who KNOW and WANT this kind of case. Second, HSSA is a nonprofit with no government ties. It relies on grants and donations from the public and other organizations. Third, where is that 9 million dollar number from? Not from a recent audit that can be easily found on the HSSAZ website. Where the fund allocations are also found. Doxing people and publicly shaming people who are not in charge of any major decisions is disgusting and downright awful. You're no investigative journalist; you are a coward and grossing uninformed. Take a look at PACC, a gov funded animal welfare organization and see where their med cases go with their fully staffed clinic. If you feel the need to call out specific actors, call out the bosses. Call out the hierarchy that anyone under a chief officer has to maintain. Stop doxing underpaid, undervalued staff with no authority whatsoever. It's likely that this person was following marching orders from a chief officer.
Erin, thank you for sharing your perspective. I agree that shelter medical care is complex and that every role has its challenges. Drawing on nearly 30 years of experience managing large shelter medical programs and developing protocols (as detailed here: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/innovative-approaches-to-medical ), my perspective comes from real-world experience.
My concern isn’t directed at individual staff members but at systemic practices that seem to offload complex medical cases from well-funded organizations, raising questions about transparency and accountability. I used the $9 million figure from publicly available profiles.
While tomorrow’s article will directly address the accountability of the managers overseeing these programs, my focus remains on the systemic practices that contribute to these issues. Ultimately, my goal is to shine a light on practices that may prioritize numbers over genuine animal welfare, and I appreciate the dialogue about how we can improve care for every pet.
Ed, you're disgustingly misinformed. Spreading misinformation faster than trump can say transgender rats.
You doxed a minimum wage employee. You can't (and I know you can't because I read every single available audit from 2018 to 2024) site your source on the numbers you used and I know they're wrong. You can claim you worked for animal welfare organizations for 30 years, only siting your own self inflated ego piece, but you would know how these organizations and rescues work if you did. Rescues and sanctuaries exist to get special needs animals adopted. They do not get adopted at mainstream organizations and you would know that if you legitimately had any experience. I've read your other pieces where you use AI images of blood and pitbulls to incite a reaction and get clicks. What are you? Fox news?
I can tell an anecdote about how I adopted a dog in college and he had seizures. I brought it back and the humane society in my city didn't keep him, they gave him to a rescue that specialized in special needs animals. Otherwise, he wouldn't have gotten adopted.
Just cause an organization has a relatively small amount of money, doesn't mean that the animal will be adopted and that's the goal. Even if any of the audits readily available online on the IRS website said HSSA had 9 million in donations from the public, not the government, that's not a lot of money. The people reading this think it's a lot of money, but keeping AC on in facilities like that costs 10k a day. You and the people reading have no actual frame of reference for what anything costs. HSSA, per actual sited references on the IRS website, their website, and ProPublica, got 7 million in donations last year and spent 8.5 million. All of the allocations are there and none are wasted.
Rescues are contacted about medical cases like this to get animals adopted and out of stressful environments. Stop doxing people and atop trying to dunk on a nonprofit. You're not Lebron. You're choosing to incite hatred and violence and hindering an organization from receiving the help it needs to help animals. You are not only directing violence towards a person(that you doxed), but you are contributing to a future where HSSA might not exist. Lotus doesn't seem to have the money or empathy to take all the Peaches HSSA probably takes. Shame on both of you.
Thank you again, Erin, for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns. I appreciate passionate dialogue on these important topics, but I’d like to address a few points in a constructive and respectful way.
First, I believe we can all agree that name-calling and personal attacks don’t contribute to meaningful discussion. It’s important to engage with differing perspectives in a way that fosters understanding rather than division. While I welcome critiques of my work, I hope we can keep the conversation focused on the issues rather than resorting to insults.
Regarding your concerns about misinformation, I strive to base my articles on verifiable facts and data. If there are specific inaccuracies you’ve identified, I’d be happy to review them and make corrections if necessary. Constructive feedback is always welcome, as it helps ensure accuracy and accountability.
As for the broader discussion about rescues, sanctuaries, and nonprofit funding, I respect the hard work these organizations do under challenging circumstances. My goal has always been to advocate for transparency and effectiveness in animal welfare—not to hinder or harm any organization. If my article gave a different impression, that was not my intent.
Finally, I want to clarify that I do not condone or engage in doxxing or inciting hostility toward individuals or organizations. My focus is on fostering solutions that benefit animals and the people who care for them.
Thank you again for your feedback. Let’s continue this conversation in a way that prioritizes mutual respect and our shared commitment to animal welfare.
HSSA had an annual budget of approximately $10.2 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. This figure includes total revenues of $10,157,949 and expenses of $9,250,000 during the same period.
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/860112798
https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/humane-society-of-southern-arizona,860112798/
https://hssaz.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/HSSA-6.30.23-Audited-Financial-Statements.pdf
Hey Erin, Pet overpopulation and shelter crisis is Maddies Fund and Best Friends Animal Society business model. They are firmly in control of HSSA for their new "fast track" agenda transporting animals to rural southern Arizona for "quiet disposal". Transporting animals to undisclosed destinations and outcomes is another BFAS/Maddies contrivance to boost 90% No Kill statistic as the animal left the shelter alive even if it was euthanized transported to a high kill shelter or warehoused and deteriorated to death.
It's basic math: it is unrealistic to achieve 90% No Kill without volume accessible spay neuter and population prevention (the original No Kill) which BFAS dosn't fund so they promote agendas like "community animals" (neighborhood stray dogs and cats), managed intake, TRANSPORTS and statistics manipulation.
I've literally read thousands of pages of their agenda and seminars.....not one word funding or promoting spay neuter ----the only solution to pet overpopulation and the original basis for no kill.
BFAS, worth several hundred million dollars, controlling HSSA, would be credible if they funded volume spay/neuter outreach instead of monetizing shelter crisis and pet overpopulation with merchandise--services, proprietary databases.
So don't finger point at the messengers. Ask why major animal welfare CEO's and top execs are making 500K--1 million ++annual compensation, the orgs rake in hundreds of million fundraising on distressed homeless pets when the average persona can't find affordable spay/neuter or basic medical for their pet.
The major orgs with BFAS and Maddies at the ideological center are exploiting animals and those who care for them.
Apparently BFAS is using HSSA (and by extension Pima Animal Care Center) as a launch for their "fast tracking" program. Shrouded in euphemisms but admitted in various news broadcasts, BFAS funded "fast track" program is primarily about transporting big and behavioral dogs (needing decompression cited), the difficult- to-adopt out of the shelter to unknown destinations/outcomes. Unloading medical animals is a new low. As the Little Lotus Rescue in rural southern Arizona depicts, the sprawling county is extremely resource challenged with almost no shelter facilities even for highly adoptable pets and very little access to vet care, especially affordable.
A friend forwarded Kristen Hassen Outcomes Consulting (of Riverside County Shelter 2.5 million contract controversy who espouses BFAS doctrines) newsletter touting the upcoming Humane World Expo where attendees can learn more about the "big dog superhighway".....an acknowledgment shelters/rescues nationwide are in critical overcapacity of large dogs that can't be adopted/fostered suggesting a magic formula will be offered at seminar.
https://humanepro.org/expo/about-animal-care-expo
Researcher friend forwards lots of BFAS and Hassen newsletters, conference and seminar material that she has registered to obtain. Anyone can go thru thousands of pages and not find one word about volume spay neuter programs. It's all about building out a big infrastructure to be monetized including propriety databases. Overpopulation and shelter overcapacity is a business model.
Publishing this harms the staff, volunteers and lower-level management who work TIRELESSLY to put animal welfare first and overcome the damage caused by previous mismanagement at HSSA. Articles like this (written by someone who has never worked or volunteered at HSSA) are detrimental to the healing/rebuilding process, especially for the resources and donations needed for homeless animals in our community. Out of curiosity, Ed, how long has it been since you last worked inside of a shelter? I wonder this because you have not considered the rapidly rising costs faced by modern-day shelters and the animal welfare industry as a whole. You have 30 years of experience managing shelter medical programs, therefore, you should have general knowledge of how expensive it is to maintain proper comprehensive care for animals in ANY shelter today. These are critical factors you should consider in your biased “case studies” moving forward.
Thank you for your comment, Tucson. I respect the dedication of HSSA’s staff and volunteers and understand the challenges shelters face today. My article was not intended to undermine their efforts but to highlight systemic issues that demand greater transparency and accountability.
The case of Peaches raises important questions about resource allocation and ethical responsibility. Despite HSSA’s significant resources, shifting a medically complex case to a small rescue highlights a troubling reliance on underfunded organizations. Transparency is essential to ensure that decisions prioritize animal welfare over optics.
Additionally, the influence of BFAS on HSSA’s programs deserves scrutiny. While BFAS may provide support, their focus on live-release rates can pressure shelters into decisions that prioritize statistics over meaningful outcomes.
My goal is to foster constructive dialogue that strengthens organizations like HSSA while ensuring their practices align with their mission. Transparency, accountability, and ethical decision-making are critical for building trust and achieving better outcomes for animals. Thank you again for engaging in this important discussion.
Taylor, as you may know, rural southern Arizona, expansive Cochise County consists mostly of economically challenged population, mostly inadequate antiquated (inhumane) shelter facilities, almost no affordable veterinary access.
So where was Best Friends funded HSSA "fast tracking" big dogs and those needing decompression in partnership with rural southern Arizona? Best Friends is promoting transports as a solution to shelter overcapacity. What shelter or rescue has a shortage of big dogs and behavior dogs ?? No one has capacity to take them, most everywhere is overcapacity.
The new BFAS funded "fast tracking" position was tasked with finding new rescues to take overcapacity animals (primarily big and behavior dogs) including medical animals as the tiny under-resourced rescue had been approached to take a dog with broken leg also.
Memo to Best Friends and Maddies: Fund volume accessible spay and neuter. Dr. Jeff Rocky Mountain Vet would medically service an entire community's animals for free. One guy and his team made a difference for whole communities while Maddies/Best Friends bang on about more adopters, fosters, transports, seminars and conference attendance collecting hundreds of millions to keep the scam going.
There was an article in the San Diego Union Tribune stating that the city municipal shelter in Bonita will be shut down. They are building a new shelter in Santee to replace it. At the end of the article, it stated the shelters are no-kill and defined that as having a 90% live release rate. They've never done that before. A tiny bit of transparency.
When I first posted on my FB questioning HSSA, many of my friends came at me telling me it was an amazing organization. I found out that at one time it used to be great (pre Steve Farley). It seems when he came in, he just wanted to advance his salary and had no idea what he was doing. It is curious that he raised him and Christian’s salary while decreasing others the year before the transport. They can the both of them and then install Best Friends associates, cat dumping commences, Farley gets a huge settlement which appears to be to keep him quiet (no other explanation because he failed his fiduciary duties so no wrongful termination there) and then it turns just as shady and lacking in transparency as San Diego Humane Society and these other large orgs. I told Christian Gonzalez on 9/1/23 he would be the fall guy. Called that one right.