Ironic that you’re involved in three major cities that have hugely suffered from overpopulation of outdoor cats that lack the resources to actually make a dent in preventing the suffering of millions of outdoor cats. Maricopa county makes it insanely difficult for folks to even practice TNR, making communities pay for the surgeries, long wait times to even get a surgery spot, and lack of accessibility for folks to even borrow traps. For a county with a much larger population than Pima County, it’s embarrassing that it hasn’t been a priority with how much larger Maricopa county grows every year.
This lawsuit completely disregarded that not all cats deemed friendly do well in the shelter environment. The more cats in the shelter, the more STRESSED cats in the shelter, put all of the shelter cats more at risk for disease and decline. Not to mention, not returning friendly cats to the low income communities that love them is detrimental to these communities. Have you ever personally done TNR? Have you met the caretakers that care for these cats? Mandating that the shelter has to intake EVERY FRIENDLY outdoor cat (do you even know how many of them there are?) will divert resources from important spay neuter efforts in the community that prevents further overpopulation in the first place. This makes it seem like the shelter created this problem and they’re burdening the community but returning these cats when it’s the systemic problems within each local and federal governments that have allowed the outdoor population to get this out of hand in the first place. People need to stop thinking so black and white about this, it’s more complicated than that.
Also, there are simply not enough suitable homes to house all of the friendly cats currently being intaked at shelters across the nation and it is naive to think otherwise. Shelters are constantly full, where do you expect these friendly cats to go? Are there enough dedicated fosters?
I want to know what the plan is going to be when this fails. And what’s next? Are y’all gonna euthanize all of the feral and semi feral cats to “save” the bird population? I hope every person that is advocating for this and celebrating this ruling is donating their time, money, and energy in the field to follow every friendly cat that is going to negatively affected by this unrealistic plan.
Shannon, thank you for sharing your thoughtful perspective! You’re right that the issue of outdoor cat overpopulation is complex, and systemic problems at local and federal levels have contributed to this crisis. The recent ruling doesn’t dismiss these challenges but instead reinforces that shelters must take responsibility for ensuring the welfare of vulnerable animals rather than shifting the burden entirely onto communities.
While TNR can be an important tool in managing feral cat populations, it’s vital to distinguish between feral cats and friendly, adoptable cats who depend on human care. The ruling emphasizes that shelters cannot abandon these socialized cats without confirmed caretakers, as doing so violates animal welfare laws. This doesn’t mean shelters should ignore the stress and overcrowding issues you’ve highlighted—it means they need to balance intake with proactive solutions like expanding spay/neuter programs, fostering, and adoption efforts.
Your point about the need for realistic planning is well-taken. Moving forward, it’s essential for shelters and advocates to work together on sustainable strategies that address overpopulation while protecting both animals and communities. Thank you for raising these critical concerns—your voice helps keep this conversation grounded in the practical realities we all face.
This is a great win for voiceless animals who deserve a chance at a real life and not one on the streets. What is most shocking is that SDHS claims they have no room for cats yet just last week they took ten cats with ringworm from LAAS south shelter, along with 10 rabbits and 3 hamsters. So, they are too overcrowded to take in San Diego County cats they get paid $20 million to do yet they take in LA cats? What is even more curious is that Kristin Hassen is using LAAS south shelter as her pilot program. All shelters in the LAAS have an abundance of rabbits and cats so why are the animals being transferred specifically from LAAS south shelter? Could it be to increase the live release rate and get them to 90% no kill more quickly so she can claim success? SDHS formed a partnership with LAAS and several other orgs in October to transfer animals. SDHS whines daily they need donations because of the declared emergency overcrowding yet they join a partnership to take animals from out of county? Something seems off.
Hi Kelly, thank you for bringing up these critical points. It is a great win for the animals, as this ruling reinforces the importance of shelters prioritizing the welfare of local, adoptable cats. The situation you described with SDHS taking in animals from LAAS while claiming overcrowding in San Diego certainly raises questions about their priorities and transparency.
Your observation about Kristin Hassen’s involvement and the potential connection to live release rate metrics is insightful. It’s concerning if these transfers are being used to manipulate statistics rather than addressing the root causes of overcrowding and abandonment. Partnerships between shelters should ideally focus on mutual support and improving outcomes for all animals, not just achieving numerical goals.
Thank you for shedding light on these issues—it’s voices like yours that help hold organizations accountable and ensure the focus remains on the animals’ best interests. Let’s hope this ruling prompts more shelters to operate with integrity and transparency moving forward.
Shannon - For over 25 years I have volunteered locally in a myriad of ways from animal control shelter volunteer; member of several animal control/care advisory boards; foster home of 1500+ animals; president of two very active grassroots, volunteer nonprofits; co-founder of Spay Neuter Action Project (SNAP) as well as developed and formerly ran the Neuter Scooter that has now fixed around 90,000 in low income areas. I have done TNR and had many, many cats in my home - mostly friendlies but also about 10 semi and totally feral. I know the difference and that ferals typically live up to 2 years if they make it past 6 months, but can live as long as up to 10 years if they are in a managed colony with dedicated oversight. It doesn't take any "scientific" research to establish that cats have a rough life in the wild and friendly, house cats who are lost or abandoned are least able to survive. They have little to know survival skills because they have been dependent on humans. Besides coyotes, cars, disease, injury and starvation, friendly cats are easy prey for animal abusers. It has been documented that animal cruelty reports increase in communities that have been dumping grounds for shelters more interested in metrics than animal welfare. And, yet, I have not heard of any "community cat" programs that track outcomes of the felines they abandon. Feral cat TNR programs DO provide oversight and support for the cats they fix and do track outcomes as best they can.
SDHS's large contingent of 6 lawyers from SF and 3 from LA stated that one of the "reasons" SDHS established their "community cat" program was because of overcrowding. After the hearing yesterday, I went on a self-guided tour of the elaborate, multi million dollar SDHS shelter. I estimated 75-100 veterinary size kennels, 5 or 6 quite large condos, 3 larger rooms and one very large display cattery. I saw 1 cat and 1 kitten labeled adopted. A staffer told me that there were about 20 cats in adoption. Possibly I missed them because many of the areas had covered boxes. I asked the staffer why SDHS has abandoned 18,000 cats since establishing their "community cat" program when they had so much empty space available. She said that she didn't know anything about that. I was also assured that there would be many cats/kittens after March when "kitten season" started. On all the empty cages in the "display" rooms for cats and small critters were posted "Coming Soon" signs - like new sweaters or bakery items. Disgusting. Speaking this afternoon with a new friend who is adopting 2 of my foster cats, I was told that she went to the Gaines St. Shelter numerous times over the summer and she saw only 3 or 4 cats. How can that be when all the rescues are inundated? Today I went to the SDHS website to document that they were bereft of cats. The website stated that there were 4 cats in adoption IN the shelter and when I searched further I found that there were 17 cats offsite in foster homes. Mind you, I am "retired" but still have 5 foster cats in my home. This is nothing new. Once, when SDHS was on Sherman St., I had up to 40 cats and kittens in my home and SDHS had about 9 cats but was telling people who were trying to rehome cats that they were full.
You are correct to state that not all cats do well in a shelter - neither do dogs. Plus, some of these poor hapless guys aren't necessarily on most people's most wanted adoption list.
And, indeed, with the lack of targeted, free and truly low-cost spay neuter clinics and programs, the supply is once again far surpassing the demand. With decades of on the ground experience, I also know that warehousing is bad and so is having all the discounts and give- aways being employed to exit "guests". Exactly who responds to these discounts and give aways? Often, these are compulsive adopters and/or people who are least likely to be able to afford the costs of having a pet. I cringe every time I read or see on TV SDHS's publicity crew cheering about their pet give aways. It's quite clear that the motivation is to exit the poor creatures to anyone - I sure don't observe screening.
It didn't take me long to conclude that we can't adopt our way out of pet overpopulation in any way that actually serves the best interests of the dogs, puppies, cats, kittens and small companion animals that are "surplus". That's why myself and others created a grassroots organization dedicated to responsible pet care and provision of spay/neuter services with an emphasis on outreach to indigent communities. We did this in cooperation with local municipalities, the county, numerous animal controls, the Veterinary Association and any stakeholders who could further the cause. Once SDHS started empire building and took over the local animal control/care contracts, progress stopped. SDHS has invested very little of their millions of donor and taxpayer dollars in solutions and prevention. It's all optics. Scratch the surface of the marketing campaigns and you find very little that can possibly have credible impact.
SDHS complains that they don't have the resources. Somehow they have the resources to enrich the CEO with over $450,000 per year along with close to another half million with the next 2 in "leadership". They have VPs and Senior directors of philanthropy, communication TEAMS along with many other administrative positions. They send out several fundraising emails per week and for the holiday season, I've been receiving daily requests for money, estate planning, crypto, etc. Where are the low cost spay/neuter clinics and programs? Unfortunately for the animals, prevention is in conflict with their (and many other well funded non-profits) business model. Overcrowding, neglect, abuse, sad stories are the goose that lays their golden eggs. Many of us in the trenches have been aware of this for many years. Thankfully, Ed Boks' "Animal Politics" newsletters are chronicling what is really happening in the world of companion animal welfare. Read what he has written and hopefully will continue to write. He and others are pulling back the curtain and exposing the not so nice reality of Big Money Humane.
Although I am not sure of Attorneys Bryan Pease and Parisa Ijadi-Maghsoodi's rescue and shelter experience, I can attest that everyone else in the photo taken in front of the San Diego Hall of Justice has dedicated years and some many decades to volunteering in shelters and rescuing thousands of cats, dogs and small companions. We are teachers, social workers, counselors walking the walk not just talking the talk.
To everyone reading Ed's newsletters, I know we must all be concerned about companion animal well being. Don't be gaslit. Don't take at face value all of the marketing and PR from these super well funded animal welfare organizations. Please educate yourself. And, once equipped with knowledge, advocate and actualize positive change in your community. The animals need us to be their voice Currently, in too many ways they are helpless pawns.
Candy, thank you for sharing your incredible story and decades of dedication to animal welfare. Your extensive experience—from fostering and TNR to founding impactful programs like SNAP and the Neuter Scooter—demonstrates the kind of commitment and grassroots action that truly makes a difference for animals in need.
You’ve raised so many important points about the challenges facing shelters today, particularly the lack of transparency, misplaced priorities, and overreliance on marketing optics rather than meaningful solutions like spay/neuter programs. The firsthand observations you shared about SDHS’s empty kennels and their refusal to take in cats while claiming overcrowding are deeply troubling. It’s clear that their practices are falling short of the mission they claim to uphold.
Your insights into the dangers faced by friendly cats abandoned outdoors are especially powerful. As you pointed out, these cats are ill-equipped to survive on their own and are vulnerable to predators, abuse, and starvation. This is why Judge Bacal’s ruling is so critical—it reinforces the need for shelters to take responsibility for friendly cats rather than abandoning them under the guise of community cat programs.
Thank you for being such a strong voice for animals and for encouraging others to educate themselves and advocate for change. Your work is an inspiration, and I’m honored to be part of this ongoing effort to expose the truth and push for accountability in animal welfare. Together, we can continue working toward a future where every animal receives the care and protection they deserve.
Thank you for your comment letting me know that you’re actually involved in the field. Many people talk a big game about these types of things and have zero experience actually doing it. That was my biggest concern reading about this lawsuit was that the people bringing the lawsuit haven’t actually done TNR, interacted with the caretakers, offered them food assistance and mental health resources, etc. as I said before, it is MUCH BIGGER than people realize. I see a lot of focus on how much money the humane society has access to and while I appreciate that many large non profits and corporations are corrupt and 100% need to be held accountable with how they spend their big bucks, that is not the case for a lot of other organizations doing the good work throughout the nation whose programs will be negatively affected. You said it yourself, we can’t adopt our way out of this problem, which is directly in conflict of what this lawsuit aims to do…mandate that all friendly cats (18k as you say) should be in the shelter system so they can be adopted. You see where I take issue with this? You mention all the empty kennels and such, but 18k cats won’t fit in those. You should also be very familiar with the compassion fatigue that runs rampant within these organizations and how understaffed many of them are despite their ability to pay said staff. It’s a tough job.
Ed did clarify that only the friendly cats that didn’t have known caretakers would have to be intakes but that is also a concern of mine too. As someone who has personally helped coordinate and trap 150 cats in my own neighborhood in the last year, many of those cats do in fact have owners, I just don’t know who they are. There are several times I have helped neuter a cat and the next time I see them they have a collar. So I’d like to know what perimeters will be in place to ensure that theses cats are in fact “abandoned.” Are they knocking on all doors in close range to confirm the cat has no access to resources? Many times if you find a cat colony, they’re there BECAUSE they have resources. Are they going to offer free microchips and low cost vet resources to those folks that own the friendly cats? These are wall things that need to be considered.
Also, is there a plan in place to crack down on those who are doing the abandoning? These chronic adopters you speak of, are they going on a list to make sure they’re not allowed to adopt again? Are we also mandating that big businesses that own millions of rental properties are legally bound to surrender an abandoned cat or dog left behind by a tenant to a reputable shelter? Is there going to be a cap on how much they can charge in pet deposits and pet rent? If you’re going to go after a large organization with seemingly endless monetary resources, you also have to go after the corporations making their job harder in the first place.
In my city, community cats are any cats you find outside - feral cats, semi feral cats, stray cats, etc. my city has made amazing strides in reducing the overpopulation of community cats, and because they all have a problem with one entity In your city, I don’t want it to affect mine. I’ve been a paralegal for 10 years, and a community cat advocate for the last 7. I have been in the trenches. I know what I’m talking about and I know how these things work. I want to make sure BOTH sides are held accountable, and the one sidedness of this article is what I took issue with.
Not to mention that the other entity who brought this lawsuit is run by a woman who literally has a website documenting her fraudulent monetary history. I suspect the only reason they dropped off the lawsuit later on was for optics. Catch my drift?
No, I don't catch your drift. I don't know anything about a woman with a fraudulent monetary history. Please explain.
I appreciate your longer comment addressing my comment. It points to the fact that a dialogue outlining real life issues and potential means to address them is much needed. That did happen in the past with the advisory committees I was on when County Animal Services held the contract. It made a huge difference in establishing San Diego as an animal (and people) friendly region. It's a well worn saying but it DOES take a village to establish a culture, policies and practices that result in better animal care and public safety.
SDHS has no transparency and currently rebuffs requests for credible information - even requests from the municipalities that are funding them with over $24 million in taxpayer dollars. Plus, SDHS has established road blocks for information exchange and "outside" input. This has always been the case during the 30 years I have interfaced with the organization.
The last SDHS CEO was finally fired after grassroots encouragement of media exposes. The one before him, also was forced to resigned or was fired after public outcry. Two County Animal Control directors were also shown the door after public outcry and media exposure. It's really too bad that energies have to be directed toward leadership replacement when those energies could be harnessed to create solutions. However, the culture and policies of an organization are set by leadership and, most unfortunately, local as well as national past and current history has documented that animal welfare seems to draw a certain element.
You make some important points in your comment - practical and moral considerations that must be sorted out in order to do our best for the animals.
I can assure you that real life decision and their consequences are being discussed among the people in support of the lawsuit.
If you’re going to try to “expose” these types of entities that are meant to basically pick up the burden that local governments and the public have collectively left on them, you also need to be equally invested in taking down other multi million dollar corporations such as property management companies and real estate moguls making it insanely difficult for people to even afford pets.
People really, truly need to understand that there are NOT ENOUGH HOMES for all of the friendly pets currently outside for the following reasons:
a lot of people that would have cats can’t afford them due to inflation causing outrageous prices for rent, basic necessities, and vet care
a lot of people don’t even have homes to house cats
some people have allergies and cannot live with cats
some people travel too often and aren’t home enough to justify having a cat
some people don’t even like cats
a lot of people still buy cats from breeders and those cats take homes away from shelter cats
some cats refuse to be kept indoors and escape outside every chance they get
some people have cats that don’t like other cats and therefore have to be an only one cat household
some landlords don’t allow cats in their properties, and if they do they charge outrageous pet rents and deposits PER CAT (ex: when I lived in an apartment, my cat deposit was $300/cat and $25/cat/month)
a lot of people don’t have enough SPACE in their homes to accommodate ANOTHER cat because they either own or foster a lot of cats or both
A lot of people have physical and/or mental disabilities that prevent them from caring for a cat
These all seem like common sense but people honestly don’t think that far beyond “every friendly, “adoptable” cat needs to be intaked.” So when you say 18k friendly cats were “abandoned” by the shelter (which let’s be honest, they didn’t abandon them in the first place), ALL of these points need to be considered and addressed with action plans in place to make your vision actually feasible.
Thank you for covering this case! I managed a community cats program in Austin. When I started, the SNR (shelter- neuter-return) program was similar to SD. I didn't agree with it and started changing it. When my boss got wind of my ways, I was told to return to the SNR guidelines. I didn't listen and changed the guidelines. I'm proud of that as hundreds of cats now have different lives. And this case reconfirms my decision.
Thanks for reporting the facts, Ed. As one who works with animals and has helped to "shine a light" on corruption, I know it is tough and important work.
Just when we had begun to give up hope. Thank God the judge saw what the general public did not figure out - the difference between re-releasing feral cats with a reliable caregiver and turning away friendly, loving, sometimes de-clawed cats to live in the streets. There is a huge difference which the public did not understand -- and the shelters embraced. We can only hope that shelters across the country will take note (thank you Ed, for raising our awareness promptly), will use common sense and focus on the future of each individual animal as the decision is made. Guidelines used by human social services would serve as a model. Social services would not place children in homes which cannot take care of them. Our animal charges deserve as much.
Thank you, Elaine, for your thoughtful comment! You’ve perfectly captured the heart of this issue—the critical distinction between re-releasing feral cats with reliable caretakers and abandoning friendly, adoptable cats to fend for themselves on the streets. Judge Bacal’s ruling finally acknowledges what so many advocates have been fighting to highlight: shelters must not abdicate their responsibility to care for these vulnerable animals.
This decision is a monumental step forward, not just for San Diego but for shelters nationwide. It sets a precedent that humane treatment and accountability cannot be sacrificed under the guise of convenience or cost-cutting. Thank you for your kind words, and let’s hope this ruling inspires meaningful change across the country!
Some of us are primarily visual learners. A visual graph/diagram is helpful to boost our understanding of complex concepts.
A flow chart like this may be helpful.
Cat>evaluation/assessment >
determination of best services for cat > adoption or "community cat" or . . .
I apologize if I am being pedantic, it's just that I believe the clearer the message the better it can be received. And once received, those of us who love animals will have a clearer way to shift our love into manifest action.
The meeting on the Tuli Elk on Thursday was a great opportunity to see others manifesting their concern.
Very poignant question, David. The "community cat" strategy embraced by so many shelters was a shell game to manipulate the so called "live release rate", despite the fact friendly adoptable cats were released to a highly hazardous environment - which also contributed to your concern of putting more song birds at risk. The best solution to protecting song birds is to adopt friendly cats and neuter feral cats and return them to their colonies cared for by a colony manager. This practice alone will safely reduce the feral cat population over time. If you go to the Archive on Animal Politics and type in "feral cats" a plethora of informative articles will appear. Here is one to get you started: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/the-case-for-high-intensity-tnr-a
Ironic that you’re involved in three major cities that have hugely suffered from overpopulation of outdoor cats that lack the resources to actually make a dent in preventing the suffering of millions of outdoor cats. Maricopa county makes it insanely difficult for folks to even practice TNR, making communities pay for the surgeries, long wait times to even get a surgery spot, and lack of accessibility for folks to even borrow traps. For a county with a much larger population than Pima County, it’s embarrassing that it hasn’t been a priority with how much larger Maricopa county grows every year.
This lawsuit completely disregarded that not all cats deemed friendly do well in the shelter environment. The more cats in the shelter, the more STRESSED cats in the shelter, put all of the shelter cats more at risk for disease and decline. Not to mention, not returning friendly cats to the low income communities that love them is detrimental to these communities. Have you ever personally done TNR? Have you met the caretakers that care for these cats? Mandating that the shelter has to intake EVERY FRIENDLY outdoor cat (do you even know how many of them there are?) will divert resources from important spay neuter efforts in the community that prevents further overpopulation in the first place. This makes it seem like the shelter created this problem and they’re burdening the community but returning these cats when it’s the systemic problems within each local and federal governments that have allowed the outdoor population to get this out of hand in the first place. People need to stop thinking so black and white about this, it’s more complicated than that.
Also, there are simply not enough suitable homes to house all of the friendly cats currently being intaked at shelters across the nation and it is naive to think otherwise. Shelters are constantly full, where do you expect these friendly cats to go? Are there enough dedicated fosters?
I want to know what the plan is going to be when this fails. And what’s next? Are y’all gonna euthanize all of the feral and semi feral cats to “save” the bird population? I hope every person that is advocating for this and celebrating this ruling is donating their time, money, and energy in the field to follow every friendly cat that is going to negatively affected by this unrealistic plan.
Shannon, thank you for sharing your thoughtful perspective! You’re right that the issue of outdoor cat overpopulation is complex, and systemic problems at local and federal levels have contributed to this crisis. The recent ruling doesn’t dismiss these challenges but instead reinforces that shelters must take responsibility for ensuring the welfare of vulnerable animals rather than shifting the burden entirely onto communities.
While TNR can be an important tool in managing feral cat populations, it’s vital to distinguish between feral cats and friendly, adoptable cats who depend on human care. The ruling emphasizes that shelters cannot abandon these socialized cats without confirmed caretakers, as doing so violates animal welfare laws. This doesn’t mean shelters should ignore the stress and overcrowding issues you’ve highlighted—it means they need to balance intake with proactive solutions like expanding spay/neuter programs, fostering, and adoption efforts.
Your point about the need for realistic planning is well-taken. Moving forward, it’s essential for shelters and advocates to work together on sustainable strategies that address overpopulation while protecting both animals and communities. Thank you for raising these critical concerns—your voice helps keep this conversation grounded in the practical realities we all face.
Thanks for covering this Ed. Just one of many examples of how shelter metrics can be manipulated.
Exactly the intention of this program, to manipulate the live release rate at the cost of animal welfare. Thanks for all you and your team do in NYC!
This is a great win for voiceless animals who deserve a chance at a real life and not one on the streets. What is most shocking is that SDHS claims they have no room for cats yet just last week they took ten cats with ringworm from LAAS south shelter, along with 10 rabbits and 3 hamsters. So, they are too overcrowded to take in San Diego County cats they get paid $20 million to do yet they take in LA cats? What is even more curious is that Kristin Hassen is using LAAS south shelter as her pilot program. All shelters in the LAAS have an abundance of rabbits and cats so why are the animals being transferred specifically from LAAS south shelter? Could it be to increase the live release rate and get them to 90% no kill more quickly so she can claim success? SDHS formed a partnership with LAAS and several other orgs in October to transfer animals. SDHS whines daily they need donations because of the declared emergency overcrowding yet they join a partnership to take animals from out of county? Something seems off.
Hi Kelly, thank you for bringing up these critical points. It is a great win for the animals, as this ruling reinforces the importance of shelters prioritizing the welfare of local, adoptable cats. The situation you described with SDHS taking in animals from LAAS while claiming overcrowding in San Diego certainly raises questions about their priorities and transparency.
Your observation about Kristin Hassen’s involvement and the potential connection to live release rate metrics is insightful. It’s concerning if these transfers are being used to manipulate statistics rather than addressing the root causes of overcrowding and abandonment. Partnerships between shelters should ideally focus on mutual support and improving outcomes for all animals, not just achieving numerical goals.
Thank you for shedding light on these issues—it’s voices like yours that help hold organizations accountable and ensure the focus remains on the animals’ best interests. Let’s hope this ruling prompts more shelters to operate with integrity and transparency moving forward.
Shannon - For over 25 years I have volunteered locally in a myriad of ways from animal control shelter volunteer; member of several animal control/care advisory boards; foster home of 1500+ animals; president of two very active grassroots, volunteer nonprofits; co-founder of Spay Neuter Action Project (SNAP) as well as developed and formerly ran the Neuter Scooter that has now fixed around 90,000 in low income areas. I have done TNR and had many, many cats in my home - mostly friendlies but also about 10 semi and totally feral. I know the difference and that ferals typically live up to 2 years if they make it past 6 months, but can live as long as up to 10 years if they are in a managed colony with dedicated oversight. It doesn't take any "scientific" research to establish that cats have a rough life in the wild and friendly, house cats who are lost or abandoned are least able to survive. They have little to know survival skills because they have been dependent on humans. Besides coyotes, cars, disease, injury and starvation, friendly cats are easy prey for animal abusers. It has been documented that animal cruelty reports increase in communities that have been dumping grounds for shelters more interested in metrics than animal welfare. And, yet, I have not heard of any "community cat" programs that track outcomes of the felines they abandon. Feral cat TNR programs DO provide oversight and support for the cats they fix and do track outcomes as best they can.
SDHS's large contingent of 6 lawyers from SF and 3 from LA stated that one of the "reasons" SDHS established their "community cat" program was because of overcrowding. After the hearing yesterday, I went on a self-guided tour of the elaborate, multi million dollar SDHS shelter. I estimated 75-100 veterinary size kennels, 5 or 6 quite large condos, 3 larger rooms and one very large display cattery. I saw 1 cat and 1 kitten labeled adopted. A staffer told me that there were about 20 cats in adoption. Possibly I missed them because many of the areas had covered boxes. I asked the staffer why SDHS has abandoned 18,000 cats since establishing their "community cat" program when they had so much empty space available. She said that she didn't know anything about that. I was also assured that there would be many cats/kittens after March when "kitten season" started. On all the empty cages in the "display" rooms for cats and small critters were posted "Coming Soon" signs - like new sweaters or bakery items. Disgusting. Speaking this afternoon with a new friend who is adopting 2 of my foster cats, I was told that she went to the Gaines St. Shelter numerous times over the summer and she saw only 3 or 4 cats. How can that be when all the rescues are inundated? Today I went to the SDHS website to document that they were bereft of cats. The website stated that there were 4 cats in adoption IN the shelter and when I searched further I found that there were 17 cats offsite in foster homes. Mind you, I am "retired" but still have 5 foster cats in my home. This is nothing new. Once, when SDHS was on Sherman St., I had up to 40 cats and kittens in my home and SDHS had about 9 cats but was telling people who were trying to rehome cats that they were full.
You are correct to state that not all cats do well in a shelter - neither do dogs. Plus, some of these poor hapless guys aren't necessarily on most people's most wanted adoption list.
And, indeed, with the lack of targeted, free and truly low-cost spay neuter clinics and programs, the supply is once again far surpassing the demand. With decades of on the ground experience, I also know that warehousing is bad and so is having all the discounts and give- aways being employed to exit "guests". Exactly who responds to these discounts and give aways? Often, these are compulsive adopters and/or people who are least likely to be able to afford the costs of having a pet. I cringe every time I read or see on TV SDHS's publicity crew cheering about their pet give aways. It's quite clear that the motivation is to exit the poor creatures to anyone - I sure don't observe screening.
It didn't take me long to conclude that we can't adopt our way out of pet overpopulation in any way that actually serves the best interests of the dogs, puppies, cats, kittens and small companion animals that are "surplus". That's why myself and others created a grassroots organization dedicated to responsible pet care and provision of spay/neuter services with an emphasis on outreach to indigent communities. We did this in cooperation with local municipalities, the county, numerous animal controls, the Veterinary Association and any stakeholders who could further the cause. Once SDHS started empire building and took over the local animal control/care contracts, progress stopped. SDHS has invested very little of their millions of donor and taxpayer dollars in solutions and prevention. It's all optics. Scratch the surface of the marketing campaigns and you find very little that can possibly have credible impact.
SDHS complains that they don't have the resources. Somehow they have the resources to enrich the CEO with over $450,000 per year along with close to another half million with the next 2 in "leadership". They have VPs and Senior directors of philanthropy, communication TEAMS along with many other administrative positions. They send out several fundraising emails per week and for the holiday season, I've been receiving daily requests for money, estate planning, crypto, etc. Where are the low cost spay/neuter clinics and programs? Unfortunately for the animals, prevention is in conflict with their (and many other well funded non-profits) business model. Overcrowding, neglect, abuse, sad stories are the goose that lays their golden eggs. Many of us in the trenches have been aware of this for many years. Thankfully, Ed Boks' "Animal Politics" newsletters are chronicling what is really happening in the world of companion animal welfare. Read what he has written and hopefully will continue to write. He and others are pulling back the curtain and exposing the not so nice reality of Big Money Humane.
Although I am not sure of Attorneys Bryan Pease and Parisa Ijadi-Maghsoodi's rescue and shelter experience, I can attest that everyone else in the photo taken in front of the San Diego Hall of Justice has dedicated years and some many decades to volunteering in shelters and rescuing thousands of cats, dogs and small companions. We are teachers, social workers, counselors walking the walk not just talking the talk.
To everyone reading Ed's newsletters, I know we must all be concerned about companion animal well being. Don't be gaslit. Don't take at face value all of the marketing and PR from these super well funded animal welfare organizations. Please educate yourself. And, once equipped with knowledge, advocate and actualize positive change in your community. The animals need us to be their voice Currently, in too many ways they are helpless pawns.
Candy, thank you for sharing your incredible story and decades of dedication to animal welfare. Your extensive experience—from fostering and TNR to founding impactful programs like SNAP and the Neuter Scooter—demonstrates the kind of commitment and grassroots action that truly makes a difference for animals in need.
You’ve raised so many important points about the challenges facing shelters today, particularly the lack of transparency, misplaced priorities, and overreliance on marketing optics rather than meaningful solutions like spay/neuter programs. The firsthand observations you shared about SDHS’s empty kennels and their refusal to take in cats while claiming overcrowding are deeply troubling. It’s clear that their practices are falling short of the mission they claim to uphold.
Your insights into the dangers faced by friendly cats abandoned outdoors are especially powerful. As you pointed out, these cats are ill-equipped to survive on their own and are vulnerable to predators, abuse, and starvation. This is why Judge Bacal’s ruling is so critical—it reinforces the need for shelters to take responsibility for friendly cats rather than abandoning them under the guise of community cat programs.
Thank you for being such a strong voice for animals and for encouraging others to educate themselves and advocate for change. Your work is an inspiration, and I’m honored to be part of this ongoing effort to expose the truth and push for accountability in animal welfare. Together, we can continue working toward a future where every animal receives the care and protection they deserve.
Thank you for your comment letting me know that you’re actually involved in the field. Many people talk a big game about these types of things and have zero experience actually doing it. That was my biggest concern reading about this lawsuit was that the people bringing the lawsuit haven’t actually done TNR, interacted with the caretakers, offered them food assistance and mental health resources, etc. as I said before, it is MUCH BIGGER than people realize. I see a lot of focus on how much money the humane society has access to and while I appreciate that many large non profits and corporations are corrupt and 100% need to be held accountable with how they spend their big bucks, that is not the case for a lot of other organizations doing the good work throughout the nation whose programs will be negatively affected. You said it yourself, we can’t adopt our way out of this problem, which is directly in conflict of what this lawsuit aims to do…mandate that all friendly cats (18k as you say) should be in the shelter system so they can be adopted. You see where I take issue with this? You mention all the empty kennels and such, but 18k cats won’t fit in those. You should also be very familiar with the compassion fatigue that runs rampant within these organizations and how understaffed many of them are despite their ability to pay said staff. It’s a tough job.
Ed did clarify that only the friendly cats that didn’t have known caretakers would have to be intakes but that is also a concern of mine too. As someone who has personally helped coordinate and trap 150 cats in my own neighborhood in the last year, many of those cats do in fact have owners, I just don’t know who they are. There are several times I have helped neuter a cat and the next time I see them they have a collar. So I’d like to know what perimeters will be in place to ensure that theses cats are in fact “abandoned.” Are they knocking on all doors in close range to confirm the cat has no access to resources? Many times if you find a cat colony, they’re there BECAUSE they have resources. Are they going to offer free microchips and low cost vet resources to those folks that own the friendly cats? These are wall things that need to be considered.
Also, is there a plan in place to crack down on those who are doing the abandoning? These chronic adopters you speak of, are they going on a list to make sure they’re not allowed to adopt again? Are we also mandating that big businesses that own millions of rental properties are legally bound to surrender an abandoned cat or dog left behind by a tenant to a reputable shelter? Is there going to be a cap on how much they can charge in pet deposits and pet rent? If you’re going to go after a large organization with seemingly endless monetary resources, you also have to go after the corporations making their job harder in the first place.
In my city, community cats are any cats you find outside - feral cats, semi feral cats, stray cats, etc. my city has made amazing strides in reducing the overpopulation of community cats, and because they all have a problem with one entity In your city, I don’t want it to affect mine. I’ve been a paralegal for 10 years, and a community cat advocate for the last 7. I have been in the trenches. I know what I’m talking about and I know how these things work. I want to make sure BOTH sides are held accountable, and the one sidedness of this article is what I took issue with.
Not to mention that the other entity who brought this lawsuit is run by a woman who literally has a website documenting her fraudulent monetary history. I suspect the only reason they dropped off the lawsuit later on was for optics. Catch my drift?
No, I don't catch your drift. I don't know anything about a woman with a fraudulent monetary history. Please explain.
I appreciate your longer comment addressing my comment. It points to the fact that a dialogue outlining real life issues and potential means to address them is much needed. That did happen in the past with the advisory committees I was on when County Animal Services held the contract. It made a huge difference in establishing San Diego as an animal (and people) friendly region. It's a well worn saying but it DOES take a village to establish a culture, policies and practices that result in better animal care and public safety.
SDHS has no transparency and currently rebuffs requests for credible information - even requests from the municipalities that are funding them with over $24 million in taxpayer dollars. Plus, SDHS has established road blocks for information exchange and "outside" input. This has always been the case during the 30 years I have interfaced with the organization.
The last SDHS CEO was finally fired after grassroots encouragement of media exposes. The one before him, also was forced to resigned or was fired after public outcry. Two County Animal Control directors were also shown the door after public outcry and media exposure. It's really too bad that energies have to be directed toward leadership replacement when those energies could be harnessed to create solutions. However, the culture and policies of an organization are set by leadership and, most unfortunately, local as well as national past and current history has documented that animal welfare seems to draw a certain element.
You make some important points in your comment - practical and moral considerations that must be sorted out in order to do our best for the animals.
I can assure you that real life decision and their consequences are being discussed among the people in support of the lawsuit.
If you’re going to try to “expose” these types of entities that are meant to basically pick up the burden that local governments and the public have collectively left on them, you also need to be equally invested in taking down other multi million dollar corporations such as property management companies and real estate moguls making it insanely difficult for people to even afford pets.
People really, truly need to understand that there are NOT ENOUGH HOMES for all of the friendly pets currently outside for the following reasons:
a lot of people that would have cats can’t afford them due to inflation causing outrageous prices for rent, basic necessities, and vet care
a lot of people don’t even have homes to house cats
some people have allergies and cannot live with cats
some people travel too often and aren’t home enough to justify having a cat
some people don’t even like cats
a lot of people still buy cats from breeders and those cats take homes away from shelter cats
some cats refuse to be kept indoors and escape outside every chance they get
some people have cats that don’t like other cats and therefore have to be an only one cat household
some landlords don’t allow cats in their properties, and if they do they charge outrageous pet rents and deposits PER CAT (ex: when I lived in an apartment, my cat deposit was $300/cat and $25/cat/month)
a lot of people don’t have enough SPACE in their homes to accommodate ANOTHER cat because they either own or foster a lot of cats or both
A lot of people have physical and/or mental disabilities that prevent them from caring for a cat
These all seem like common sense but people honestly don’t think that far beyond “every friendly, “adoptable” cat needs to be intaked.” So when you say 18k friendly cats were “abandoned” by the shelter (which let’s be honest, they didn’t abandon them in the first place), ALL of these points need to be considered and addressed with action plans in place to make your vision actually feasible.
https://fivetimefinancialfelon.com/2023/05/05/paw-protectors-dumped-from-lawsuit-against-san-diego-humane-society/
Thank you for covering this case! I managed a community cats program in Austin. When I started, the SNR (shelter- neuter-return) program was similar to SD. I didn't agree with it and started changing it. When my boss got wind of my ways, I was told to return to the SNR guidelines. I didn't listen and changed the guidelines. I'm proud of that as hundreds of cats now have different lives. And this case reconfirms my decision.
Jenn, you are my new hero! I have a book you may be interested in. I have used it as a text book to train many successful shelter supervisors and managers: https://www.amazon.com/First-Break-All-Rules-Differently/dp/0684852861/ref=asc_df_0684852861
Thank you! I've added it to my list of books to read! What's that saying? People don't leave bad jobs, they leave bad bosses...
Thanks for reporting the facts, Ed. As one who works with animals and has helped to "shine a light" on corruption, I know it is tough and important work.
Just when we had begun to give up hope. Thank God the judge saw what the general public did not figure out - the difference between re-releasing feral cats with a reliable caregiver and turning away friendly, loving, sometimes de-clawed cats to live in the streets. There is a huge difference which the public did not understand -- and the shelters embraced. We can only hope that shelters across the country will take note (thank you Ed, for raising our awareness promptly), will use common sense and focus on the future of each individual animal as the decision is made. Guidelines used by human social services would serve as a model. Social services would not place children in homes which cannot take care of them. Our animal charges deserve as much.
Thank you, Elaine, for your thoughtful comment! You’ve perfectly captured the heart of this issue—the critical distinction between re-releasing feral cats with reliable caretakers and abandoning friendly, adoptable cats to fend for themselves on the streets. Judge Bacal’s ruling finally acknowledges what so many advocates have been fighting to highlight: shelters must not abdicate their responsibility to care for these vulnerable animals.
This decision is a monumental step forward, not just for San Diego but for shelters nationwide. It sets a precedent that humane treatment and accountability cannot be sacrificed under the guise of convenience or cost-cutting. Thank you for your kind words, and let’s hope this ruling inspires meaningful change across the country!
Thank you Ed,
Great article!
I have a suggestion:
Some of us are primarily visual learners. A visual graph/diagram is helpful to boost our understanding of complex concepts.
A flow chart like this may be helpful.
Cat>evaluation/assessment >
determination of best services for cat > adoption or "community cat" or . . .
I apologize if I am being pedantic, it's just that I believe the clearer the message the better it can be received. And once received, those of us who love animals will have a clearer way to shift our love into manifest action.
The meeting on the Tuli Elk on Thursday was a great opportunity to see others manifesting their concern.
Great idea, Susan. I love decision trees. See the one I developed for assessing animal health at intake. Its at the bottom of this post: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/innovative-approaches-to-medical
Great "flow chart".
Thank you, and I prefer your term "decision tree".
So if cats are not adopted then what?
Would they be euthanized?
I don’t like and release as it impacts song bird populations
Very poignant question, David. The "community cat" strategy embraced by so many shelters was a shell game to manipulate the so called "live release rate", despite the fact friendly adoptable cats were released to a highly hazardous environment - which also contributed to your concern of putting more song birds at risk. The best solution to protecting song birds is to adopt friendly cats and neuter feral cats and return them to their colonies cared for by a colony manager. This practice alone will safely reduce the feral cat population over time. If you go to the Archive on Animal Politics and type in "feral cats" a plethora of informative articles will appear. Here is one to get you started: https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/the-case-for-high-intensity-tnr-a
Greatly appreciate this
We adopted a feral cat from a shelter
She was neutered and chipped
We love her but as grew up feral is not nearly as friendly as our domestic Cat who lived with us from when adopted
If we had not adopted her she would have been released back to the wild
She is neutered and is a deadly hunter and would have slaughtered song birds
Catches flies out of the air and eats them
I greatly love the shelter workers as they are volunteers and have great concern for the cats