Thank you for saying it out loud. Great writing, What the animal welfare community never seems to ask is where will the pets come from if we s/n everything? That’s a blind spot that drives a lot of this behavior and I don’t hear it talked about.
Thank you, MDB, I appreciate that. You’re raising an important question, and I agree it’s one the animal welfare community doesn’t talk about nearly enough. We need more honest conversation about long-term population trends, responsible breeding, and how policy choices shape the future supply of pets.
I think it’s telling how the rescue community talks about “shortages” of adoptable dogs. The idea that rescue is the only morally acceptable place to acquire a dog means there needs to be a supply of dogs to adopt and I’m deeply concerned that litters aren’t being prevented. Dogs deserve better than to be bred only by careless or irresponsible people and be homeless as a prerequisite to getting a home.
Thanks, MDB. I agree there’s a real tension in a system that depends on a steady supply of “adoptable” dogs while also claiming to want fewer unwanted litters and less homelessness. Dogs do deserve better than a model that treats neglect, displacement, or irresponsible breeding as the pipeline to companionship. We should be working toward a future where prevention, responsibility, and humane breeding practices reduce shelter intake rather than quietly relying on it.
Animals, ethical staff, taxpayers, donors and volunteers alike will continue to suffer until these predatory, fraudulent "Nonprofits" are BOOTED OUT of our shelter/animal control systems. #BestFriends #Lifeline #humansociety of _______ fill in the blank - various names to Confuse, Traumatize, monetize and capitalize ...This is a sad state of affairs where elected officials turn a blind eye to corruption because shelter data = money. Animals become statistics that generate pledges and donations. A small cut — called “philanthropy dollars” — goes back to the county, but it’s just a fraction, and the services we’re paying for aren’t being performed.
There’s no transparency. Animals are neglected. Staff and volunteers are at risk. Field services are unreliable — putting public safety in danger.
Worse, we often don’t even know where animals go after being “rescued” or transported. Case after case shows a disturbing pattern of neglect and disappearance.
This system mirrors the industrial incarceration complex — where lives are turned into profit. Except here, the victims are animals who can’t speak for themselves. 💔
Please support the advocates and whistleblowers fighting for statewide reform — in shelters and in Animal Control enforcement.
Come on, are we not going to address the massive shortage of veterinarians in the country or the extreme rate of veterinary burn out? Yes, optics are prioritized far too often but the biggest issue still stems from the lack of veterinarians. More veterinary schools are needed, veterinarians should be required to take animal shelter vouchers in order to operate, and vet techs should be permitted to perform feline neuters.
Context: I established a 501 C3 feline rescue in 2020. I shelter cats in a private building. No contract no donations. I TNR assiduously. I tell people the reality and they sigh. I’d like to take action in a more powerful way. In October I’ll host a San Diego rescue resource meeting of like minded people. Hope to have action items to share. Ccf.the.abbey@gmail.com 858-608-9790 if you have time. Community Cat Foundation
I'm commenting from Tucson. location of municipal Pima Animal Control Center (PACC) and Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) in chronic overcapacity crisis with exploding stray populations and staff/volunteer burnout that BFAS and Maddies have used for multiple pilot programs with BFAS directors.
The pilot programs install statistical gimmicks and diversions from basic population prevention in favor of monetized overpopulation and "the community is the shelter" doctrines with taxpayers and donors expected to continue the structure created by grant when it expires.
At scandal ridden HSSA, involved in sending "318" small animals to reptile food processor and their supervised Cochise County Douglas Shelter dumping hundreds of cats in desert, recently BFAS rolled out the "Fast Track" program temporarily funding a coordinator to immediately transport primarily big and hard-to-adopt dogs (likely bypassing intake documentation) to rural southern Arizona and elsewhere.
For those aware of BFAS/Maddies gimmicks, red flags went up immediately as rural southern Arizona is known for lack of animal welfare resources, almost no vet access, also overpopulated with big, hard-to-adopt dogs as everywhere else. Soon a news broadcast documented large shelter dogs transported via a corrupt 501C3 to a remote outpost in rural Cochise County warehoused in inhumane conditions.
BFAS rolled out their new transport fleet to institutionalize the fantasy that transports are a solution to shelter crisis sending animals to undisclosed outcomes and destinations or "covert disposal". Transports are a great splashy fundraising gimmick. How glamorous to fund animals flying or driven to "their new forever home" with great photo-ops but without tracking and documentation of destinations (sometimes re-transferred) and outcomes.
As Ed’s article promotes, donors should carefully examine where their money is going. Certainly, most the big institutional names are deliberately perpetuating the crisis.
Maddies just funded a 1.9 million grant essentially merging PACC and HSSA with a call center to divert owner surrenders and found strays from intake by offering increased access to medical and behavioral support.
"Increased access" to vet care is not defined and who qualifies for discounts, but sadly THE GRANT DOES NOT FUND MEANINGFUL OUTREACH to outlying areas and zip codes of uncontrolled breeding and source of most parvo, distemper---primary sources of shelter crisis and stray populations.
HSSA clinic currently has 8-12 weeks wait for appt, enough time for unaltered to reproduce and posted prices unaffordable to most with behavioral training @ $150. For 5 classes. Even offering free behavioral classes, if the grant will cover, presumes people surrendering pets have time for training when a top reason for surrender is “I work long hours and I don’t have time-- the pet is neglected”.
This 1.9 million Maddies grant diverts focus from population prevention priority. It dictates policy and requires the taxpayer and donors maintain the structure created by the grant and continue diverting resources from population prevention priority.
Thank you for sharing these on-the-ground insights, Carmen. Your experience exposes the real flaws behind flashy pilot programs and transport “solutions”, especially when they don’t address root causes or resource the communities most in need. Transparent tracking and meaningful investment in population prevention, not just temporary fixes, really is the only way forward. Your perspective is essential for anyone who wants to see genuine, lasting change for animals and the people working so hard to help them.
I have taken part in BFAS webinars and studies. They are a waste of time. We posed the question of how the data points or statistics are helpful. They say “that’s the next study”….. People fawn all over the studies with no direct benefit to animal welfare.
Nothing fancy here, our species suck, we are the face of evil, I seriously wished a superior species would visit us and put our species in our rightful place
Power & Greed / Death & Destruction is the human motto
Hi Troy, I hear your frustration and share your concern about the harm caused by power and greed. It’s tough to witness, but conversations like these matter. They help shine a light on what needs to change and remind us to keep working for a more compassionate world, one step at a time.
GA whistleblowers created an account to expose what is happening not only in Georgia but nationwide. Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones has been contacted.
BFAS, Maddies et al are also missing-in-action with breeding restriction legislation. Best Friends solicits donations for puppy-mill campaign and then does nothing with their enormous lobby power, legal expertise and massive funding.
Typical of their cult origin "Process Church of Final Judgement" they delegate results for unattainable goals "save them all" to "the community" or cult followers with instruction manuals and How-to videos.
And their strategic partners like Lifeline Animal project who have hijacked Georgia animal controls - with Death transports, sending animals to reckless rescue, wind up, tortured and abused, using deceptive marketing to mislead the public targeting whistleblower and advocate who come forward
Agreed, agreed, & agreed this time, Ed. What is particularly pathetic is that both Doug Fakkema, who first used the bailing metaphor, and Ed Duvin, who also spoke out early against the self-perpetuating eternal crisis business model of shelters, pointed all of this out back in the middle 1980s, & the public, the donor base of perpetual suckers, have yet to realize that throwing money at tear-jerking crisis-based appeals is not solving the problem. Effective public education to end "pet overpopulation" requires both a renewed emphasis on spay/neuter at all levels & educating the public to use their brains before sending money to rescue Spike, instead of to spay Fluffy.
Thank you, Merritt and Beth! I appreciate you bringing up the history and voices like Doug Fakkema and Ed Duvin—it's incredible (and a bit disheartening) how long these truths have been out there. Your point about public education is spot-on; it’s not just about more S/N, but also helping donors truly understand where their support can make the biggest difference. Thanks for adding your wisdom to the conversation!
Ed, I don't doubt that we need a big, targeted boost of spay/neuter. Good organizations already emphasize this. But there's another stream of dogs that end up in shelters: Dogs sold by breeders (to mismatched or unqualified buyers). Whether puppy mills (sometimes disguised) or backyard breeders, sellers tempt the public with cute photos of puppies. Put in a setting with zero preparation or follow-up, that cute husky puppy ends up in the shelter a year later.
This, too, involves incentives: Sellers who profit, and want to perpetuate those profits.
No amount of free spay neuter will fix this. Many shelters are filled not with litters of puppies, but large, young, untrained dogs. We need to address this, in addition to providing spay/neuter to stem unwanted litters.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, M! You’re right—addressing the breeder incentive is a crucial piece of the puzzle. S/N alone won’t solve the influx of dogs from mismatched sales or lack of follow-up. Responsible breeding, buyer education, and better regulations and enforcement are needed alongside prevention efforts. Thanks for highlighting this important issue and contributing to a fuller understanding of the crisis!
I'm commenting from Tucson. location of municipal Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) and Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) in chronic overcapacity crisis with exploding stray populations and staff/volunteer burnout.
Maddies and BFAS have used our shelters for pilot programs to install statistical gimmicks and diversions from basic population prevention in favor of monetized overpopulation and "the community is the shelter" doctrines with taxpayers and donors expected to continue the structure created by grant.
At scandal-ridden HSSA, involved in sending "318" small animals to reptile food processor and their supervised Cochise County Douglas Shelter dumping hundreds of cats in desert, recently BFAS rolled out the "Fast Track" program temporarily funding a coordinator to immediately transport primarily big and hard-to-adopt dogs (likely bypassing intake documentation) to rural southern Arizona and other vague, dubious destinations.
For those aware of BFAS/Maddies gimmicks, red flags went up immediately as rural southern Arizona is known for lack of animal welfare resources, almost no vet access, also overpopulated with big hard to adopt dogs. Soon a news broadcast documented large shelter dogs transported via a corrupt 501C3 to a remote outpost in rural Cochise County warehoused in inhumane conditions.
BFAS rolled out their new transport fleet to institutionalize the fantasy that transports are a solution to shelter crisis sending animals to undisclosed outcomes and destinations or "covert disposal". Transports are a great splashy fundraising gimmick. How glamorous to fund animals flying or driven to "their new forever home" with great photo-ops but without tracking and documentation of destinations (sometimes re-transferred) and outcomes.
As Ed’s article promotes, donors should carefully examine where their money is going. Certainly most the big institutional names are deliberately perpetuating the crisis for enormous power and collectively amassing billions.
Maddies just funded a 1.9 million grant essentially merging PACC and HSSA with a call center to divert owner surrenders and found strays from intake by offering increased access to medical and behavioral support.
"Increased access" to vet care is not defined and who qualifies for discounts, but sadly THE GRANT DOES NOT FUND MEANINGFUL OUTREACH to outlying areas and zip codes of uncontrolled breeding and source of most parvo, distemper---primary sources of shelter crisis and stray populations.
HSSA clinic currently has 8-12 weeks wait for appt, enough time for unaltered to breed and reproduce and posted prices unaffordable to many, with behavioral training @ $150. For 5 classes. Even offering free behavioral classes, if the grant will cover that, presumes people surrendering pets have time when a top reason for surrender is “I work long hours and I don’t have time-- the pet is neglected”.
This 1.9 million Maddies grant diverts focus away from population prevention priority, cleverly dictates policy focusing on intake diversion and requires the taxpayer and donors to continue funding the structure that ignores root causes of overpopulation.
We are in the same situation here in George. Best friends Animal Society and their strategic partnership with Lifeline Animal project have hijacked GA Animal Control controls. Death transports hundreds of animals sent to their death and abusers even torture all documented. Silencing whistleblowers targeting staff who come forward.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Carmen. Your account from Tucson highlights just how grant programs and flashy solutions can miss the real issues, especially the lack of meaningful outreach and true population prevention. The problems with transports and limited access to vet care you described show why donors and taxpayers need to dig deeper and demand transparency and accountability. Your insights are invaluable and help remind us what’s truly at stake in this work.
This article is at the very heart of this country and CA animal crisis. I have always sensed that there was a donor/financial/power incentive going on with our larger organizations. In an interview I recently did for Animal Politics I talked about our Foundation's Namaste S/N program and how important it is and how, even with our limited resources, it has made a big impact in the communities we've served. I mentioned a quote from my oldest son that I'd like to repeat here for emphasis. "Spay/neuter is a highly efficient way to allocate your limited resources, because every dollar spent has an exponential effect. Focus on a single community, no matter how small, with really good partners, and find a true solution to the problem—a working model that is scalable.” This year we are taking our Namaste program back to some of the communities we've been to last year and the year before and truly trying to make a measurable impact. We have also been approached by Emma Clifford founder of Animal Balance about a grant for LA to help them do two days of dog surgeries every month and s/n approximately 100 dog surgeries a month. I'd love it if it was even more, especially, as Ed says, in the highest intake areas of LA. We, of course are going give them this grant. S/N has worked throughout Europe and Canada. They still have shelters because there will always be a need but the killing and the unnecessary death is minimal. This article is "spot on" and it is also, heartbreaking, disturbing, and very soul crushing. All this death when there is a proven solution! I also would like to add to Ed's list of questions one should ask before donating to organizations. What are the salaries of the major players in the organizations? How many board/business meetings are held in vacation areas. I don't like being a cynic but there is a reality to how many businesses/organizations work. If they are 501c3's their financials have to be public. Homework like this is a bit of a pain, but it is your dollars and especially your intentions that might be being directed to programs that are in conflict with your goal. This is a very important article Ed and I think you for putting it together. It is the proven solution!
Thank you, and your daughter for all the work you do.
Please look at this whistleblower account. It was made by whistleblowers who have sacrifice their careers and been banned as volunteers to shed light is happening inside our shelters and now on our streets.
Fulton & Dekalb county Animal Services are managed by county provider Lifeline Animal project and our Georgia’s largest Animal Control operations. Georgia is top five in the country for euthanasia. Lifeline animal Project, and Best Friend’s and Society are strategic partners and have been for over a decade. After Lifeline received the Fulton County contract, they became George’s largest animal welfare organization. Best friends and Lifeline influence is virtually in every Georgia Animal Control. Bartow County Georgia isn’t even open for public adoptions.
Great point to put out there about executive salaries. Here in San Diego, the CEO of San Diego Humane makes close to $500K a year, more than the governor, and loves a crisis narrative. The city had a massive budget deficit and San Diego humane threatened to end the contract for a $1.5 million cut when raking in $16+ million just from one city alone, which is not counting the money from 11 other cities. The squandered the Cal Animals for All money, which date wide cost tax payers $50 million! Ed is spot on with this! This needs shares far and wide.
Hi Kelly, thank you for sharing this perspective. You’ve highlighted an important piece of the puzzle. Executive compensation tied to organizations that thrive on crisis narratives absolutely raises questions about accountability and incentives. When leadership benefits from perpetual urgency, it creates real tension with prevention-based strategies that might actually shrink the crisis (and, by extension, the money flow).
This is exactly why transparency matters, both in budgets and outcomes. Communities deserve to know not just how much money is being raised, but whether it’s being directed upstream to prevention, or downstream to maintain the cycle. The San Diego example you mention illustrates how dangerously misaligned incentives can become.
Appreciate you amplifying this. Voices like yours keep the field honest!
Thank you so much, Nancy! I’m truly grateful for your thoughtful response and for sharing the impact of the Namaste S/N program, personally funded by the Heigl family. Your son’s quote is powerful—focusing resources on targeted, scalable solutions is the way forward. I’m thrilled to hear about your upcoming grant for Animal Balance and your dedication to making real change in LA’s highest intake areas. And your suggestion to dig deeper into nonprofit financials is spot-on; donor dollars deserve transparency and true impact. Thanks for all you do and for helping shine a light on proven solutions.
Hit the nail on the head. BFAS doesn't want the problem to be solved. Then they wouldn't be necessary and they wouldn't be raking in the millions of dollars that they are
It’s not only Best Friends - It’s their strategic partners like Lifeline Animal project and all the names they operate under and have influence over: Humane Society of filling the blank. I am in Georgia and the strategic partnership between Lifeline Animal project and BestFriends has influenced all of Georgia shelters and our Animal Control. We are top five in the country now for euthanasia and all of our animal controls Use managed intake and literally expect the public to do the job of Animal Control untrained. We’ve had mauling deaths and rise in rabies. - https://www.facebook.com/share/1B5ePFDLMJ/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Thank you, Carole, for your thoughtful comment and support. You captured the heart of the issue perfectly—when the problem keeps going, so does the funding. It’s up to all of us to keep highlighting this cycle and advocate for genuine solutions. Thanks for lending your voice to the conversation!
I know I am a broken record, but measuring intake for the local municipal shelter in my county is meaningless. They are closed to intake and when you can relinquish a pet, it's pay to play. I am sure many communities have accuarate data, but this county ain't one of them. Again, it's all about optics. BF declared the county no-kill, so now the city admin doesn't have to do anything MORE even remotely lifesaving -- cuz they solved it baby! Just stop intaking animals. Problem solved.
Also, I used to believe in crisis fundraising. I only focused on the rescue part, the sick, the injured. I was convinced you couldn't raise funds for spay/neuter since it's not titilating or sexy, as we say. I got a grant from Community Cats Podcast (super supportive of grassroots TNR orgs) to pilot a direct mail program for raising funds for TNR. And that sealed the deal. It worked! We could raise funds for s/n. Our donors got it! THey really understood it. We focus now on S/N fundraising as our bread and butter and reserve emergency fundraising for those special cases of major medical for either TNR cats or cats in a municipal shelter we think we can help.
Kerryann, this is such a powerful perspective. You’re absolutely right—when intake is throttled or shut down, the data stops reflecting reality and becomes pure optics. Declaring “no-kill” while pushing animals out of sight isn’t progress, it’s avoidance.
And I love your example about fundraising. You’ve proven what so many assume is impossible: that donors do understand prevention when it’s framed honestly. Spay/neuter may not be flashy, but it’s the real game-changer—and your success shows that communities will back it when given the chance. That’s exactly the kind of shift in incentives we need.
Per capita euth rates are also problematic since in some communities municipal shelters perform euthanasia for the pets of community members who cannot afford to have it done at private vets.
Thus for the rate to be meaningful, euths at private vets would need to be included or owner requested euths need to be excluded from the per capita rate.
While I'd love to trust the labels put on the various deaths (like differentiating OREs from behavioral euths from medical euths from space euths), we see how that is manipulated currently. As a result, I don't have the same faith you do that a shift to a per capita reporting system would provide more transparency/better incentives than the current focus on a LRR.
I don't know that a different set of stats is the solution. Instead, I see focusing on a community as whole and asking if it is humane--is there easy access to vet care (including spay/neuter) at a variety of service/price points? Is there somewhere for vulnerable animals to go (whether stray or owned) immediately? Is there support to keep pets with good families even if they don't look like our own notions of ideal pet families? Are there educational opportunities in place so that notions of care get updated as we learn more?--as the way forward even though it's not quantifiable.
Organizations like BestFriends and their strategic partners Lifeline Animal Project are fundraising for profit and they will use community food banks and everything else in their deceptive marketing just like they have taken over our Animal controls facilities / contracts and are pretending to help the animals when they’re really helping themselves…
Shelters have been complaining about being "punished" for doing euthanasias on request for the general public since serious shelter record-keeping began. As one of the very first people to tabulate and evaluate shelter data at the national level, I collected data where available on "euthanasia by request" in the late 1990s and early 2000s, & discovered, #1, that it was the smallest of all categories of euthanasia compared to the whole, & #2, didn't make a dime's worth of difference in comparing any one whole city's data to any other.
I'm less concerned about anyone being "punished" than about having true comparisons that reduce manipulations.
Where euthanasia overall has fallen so dramatically in the 25+ years since you looked at the data you looked at, the effect of a relatively small but consistent number of euths in a community could now show an outsized effect even if formerly statistically insignificant.
(Eg, the difference between 400 or 500 euths a year when 10,000 were dying annually in a given shelter is meaningless but if that 400 or 500 stays constant as the overall deaths fall to 1000, that 100 animal difference becomes a much more meaningful one.)
Moreover, as it became illegal in many places for owners to simply kill their own animals on demand, many that would have formerly shot their senior dog now have them euthd, whether at a vet or a shelter. And which it is likely varies a lot by the accessibility of vet care in the area, again skewing per capita shelter death rates.
Thank you, Lemon, for such a thoughtful comment. You raise an important nuance about end-of-life euthanasia and its potential influence on shelter statistics today versus 25 years ago. You’re right that the landscape has shifted: euthanasia for behavior or “space” has plummeted, and what remains now includes a higher proportion of compassionate, end-of-life decisions.
That said, this is exactly why the per capita rate is so valuable. Because it normalizes shelter data against human population, it allows fairer comparisons across communities and over time. While end-of-life euthanasia makes up a relatively small and fairly stable category, it ultimately “bakes into” the per capita measure consistently. In fact, because all communities wrestle with some volume of end-of-life cases, per capita rates tend to smooth out those differences, offering a truer picture of community-level progress than live release rates ever could.
So while we should remain attentive to changes in euthanasia categories, using per capita intake and outcome measures still provides the most transparent way to track local trends and to compare across regions, without being overly swayed by one subcategory.
I really appreciate you highlighting this because it helps clarify why per capita framing is the most robust, honest measure moving forward.
Lemonade, I really appreciate this thoughtful pushback. You’re absolutely right—per capita measures aren’t perfect. And labels can be—and often are—manipulated, which undermines trust in the data.
That said, I see per capita metrics not as a silver bullet, but as one tool to counter the misleading optics of live-release rates. They help us track whether intakes and outcomes are actually improving at the community level. But I fully agree with you—numbers alone will never capture the whole picture. The deeper test is exactly what you describe: does a community provide access to care, safety nets to keep families together, and humane options for the most vulnerable animals?
In my view, it’s not either/or. We need honest metrics and a humane community lens if we’re serious about ending the crisis dividend.
Thank you for saying it out loud. Great writing, What the animal welfare community never seems to ask is where will the pets come from if we s/n everything? That’s a blind spot that drives a lot of this behavior and I don’t hear it talked about.
Thank you, MDB, I appreciate that. You’re raising an important question, and I agree it’s one the animal welfare community doesn’t talk about nearly enough. We need more honest conversation about long-term population trends, responsible breeding, and how policy choices shape the future supply of pets.
I think it’s telling how the rescue community talks about “shortages” of adoptable dogs. The idea that rescue is the only morally acceptable place to acquire a dog means there needs to be a supply of dogs to adopt and I’m deeply concerned that litters aren’t being prevented. Dogs deserve better than to be bred only by careless or irresponsible people and be homeless as a prerequisite to getting a home.
Thanks, MDB. I agree there’s a real tension in a system that depends on a steady supply of “adoptable” dogs while also claiming to want fewer unwanted litters and less homelessness. Dogs do deserve better than a model that treats neglect, displacement, or irresponsible breeding as the pipeline to companionship. We should be working toward a future where prevention, responsibility, and humane breeding practices reduce shelter intake rather than quietly relying on it.
Animals, ethical staff, taxpayers, donors and volunteers alike will continue to suffer until these predatory, fraudulent "Nonprofits" are BOOTED OUT of our shelter/animal control systems. #BestFriends #Lifeline #humansociety of _______ fill in the blank - various names to Confuse, Traumatize, monetize and capitalize ...This is a sad state of affairs where elected officials turn a blind eye to corruption because shelter data = money. Animals become statistics that generate pledges and donations. A small cut — called “philanthropy dollars” — goes back to the county, but it’s just a fraction, and the services we’re paying for aren’t being performed.
There’s no transparency. Animals are neglected. Staff and volunteers are at risk. Field services are unreliable — putting public safety in danger.
Worse, we often don’t even know where animals go after being “rescued” or transported. Case after case shows a disturbing pattern of neglect and disappearance.
This system mirrors the industrial incarceration complex — where lives are turned into profit. Except here, the victims are animals who can’t speak for themselves. 💔
Please support the advocates and whistleblowers fighting for statewide reform — in shelters and in Animal Control enforcement.
Transparency. Accountability. Compassion. 🐾
#AnimalWelfare #AnimalControlReform #TransparencyMatters #PublicSafety #AdoptDontShop #Accountability #AnimalRights
https://open.substack.com/pub/truthinsheltering/p/the-untouchables-why-no-one-is-holding?r=lw04w&utm_medium=ios
Listen to the whistleblowers:
Lifeline CEO HR meeting audio leaked:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMx9mGbd/
Fulco BOC meeting (OCT 15-2025) public comment:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMx9f6S5/
"Biased" unethical commissioners:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMx99b6Q/
Documented animal Abuse in our shelters!:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMx99rH8/
Shelter management: Lifeline knowingly sending animals to fraudulent Rescue over and over...:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMx9M4TR/
Check out: Independent Media Expose - For the Animals - Truth in Sheltering
Part 5 :
https://open.substack.com/pub/truthinsheltering/p/the-untouchables-why-no-one-is-holding?r=lw04w&utm_medium=ios
Come on, are we not going to address the massive shortage of veterinarians in the country or the extreme rate of veterinary burn out? Yes, optics are prioritized far too often but the biggest issue still stems from the lack of veterinarians. More veterinary schools are needed, veterinarians should be required to take animal shelter vouchers in order to operate, and vet techs should be permitted to perform feline neuters.
We have discussed it:
https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/ask-me-anything-7-the-veterinary
Let me know what you think.
Ed
What can I do day to day to effect change?
Design, probably the greatest way to effect change is to volunteer at you local shelter. Let me know if that's an option for you.
Context: I established a 501 C3 feline rescue in 2020. I shelter cats in a private building. No contract no donations. I TNR assiduously. I tell people the reality and they sigh. I’d like to take action in a more powerful way. In October I’ll host a San Diego rescue resource meeting of like minded people. Hope to have action items to share. Ccf.the.abbey@gmail.com 858-608-9790 if you have time. Community Cat Foundation
Bravo, Design! Please do keep us posted.
I'm commenting from Tucson. location of municipal Pima Animal Control Center (PACC) and Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) in chronic overcapacity crisis with exploding stray populations and staff/volunteer burnout that BFAS and Maddies have used for multiple pilot programs with BFAS directors.
The pilot programs install statistical gimmicks and diversions from basic population prevention in favor of monetized overpopulation and "the community is the shelter" doctrines with taxpayers and donors expected to continue the structure created by grant when it expires.
At scandal ridden HSSA, involved in sending "318" small animals to reptile food processor and their supervised Cochise County Douglas Shelter dumping hundreds of cats in desert, recently BFAS rolled out the "Fast Track" program temporarily funding a coordinator to immediately transport primarily big and hard-to-adopt dogs (likely bypassing intake documentation) to rural southern Arizona and elsewhere.
For those aware of BFAS/Maddies gimmicks, red flags went up immediately as rural southern Arizona is known for lack of animal welfare resources, almost no vet access, also overpopulated with big, hard-to-adopt dogs as everywhere else. Soon a news broadcast documented large shelter dogs transported via a corrupt 501C3 to a remote outpost in rural Cochise County warehoused in inhumane conditions.
BFAS rolled out their new transport fleet to institutionalize the fantasy that transports are a solution to shelter crisis sending animals to undisclosed outcomes and destinations or "covert disposal". Transports are a great splashy fundraising gimmick. How glamorous to fund animals flying or driven to "their new forever home" with great photo-ops but without tracking and documentation of destinations (sometimes re-transferred) and outcomes.
As Ed’s article promotes, donors should carefully examine where their money is going. Certainly, most the big institutional names are deliberately perpetuating the crisis.
Maddies just funded a 1.9 million grant essentially merging PACC and HSSA with a call center to divert owner surrenders and found strays from intake by offering increased access to medical and behavioral support.
"Increased access" to vet care is not defined and who qualifies for discounts, but sadly THE GRANT DOES NOT FUND MEANINGFUL OUTREACH to outlying areas and zip codes of uncontrolled breeding and source of most parvo, distemper---primary sources of shelter crisis and stray populations.
HSSA clinic currently has 8-12 weeks wait for appt, enough time for unaltered to reproduce and posted prices unaffordable to most with behavioral training @ $150. For 5 classes. Even offering free behavioral classes, if the grant will cover, presumes people surrendering pets have time for training when a top reason for surrender is “I work long hours and I don’t have time-- the pet is neglected”.
This 1.9 million Maddies grant diverts focus from population prevention priority. It dictates policy and requires the taxpayer and donors maintain the structure created by the grant and continue diverting resources from population prevention priority.
Thank you for sharing these on-the-ground insights, Carmen. Your experience exposes the real flaws behind flashy pilot programs and transport “solutions”, especially when they don’t address root causes or resource the communities most in need. Transparent tracking and meaningful investment in population prevention, not just temporary fixes, really is the only way forward. Your perspective is essential for anyone who wants to see genuine, lasting change for animals and the people working so hard to help them.
I have taken part in BFAS webinars and studies. They are a waste of time. We posed the question of how the data points or statistics are helpful. They say “that’s the next study”….. People fawn all over the studies with no direct benefit to animal welfare.
Nothing fancy here, our species suck, we are the face of evil, I seriously wished a superior species would visit us and put our species in our rightful place
Power & Greed / Death & Destruction is the human motto
Hi Troy, I hear your frustration and share your concern about the harm caused by power and greed. It’s tough to witness, but conversations like these matter. They help shine a light on what needs to change and remind us to keep working for a more compassionate world, one step at a time.
GA whistleblowers created an account to expose what is happening not only in Georgia but nationwide. Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones has been contacted.
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6Xu5CJP/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuMw8r/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuPywn/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuaX1N/
https://www.facebook.com/share/16qesF7qTj/?mibextid=wwXIfr
BFAS, Maddies et al are also missing-in-action with breeding restriction legislation. Best Friends solicits donations for puppy-mill campaign and then does nothing with their enormous lobby power, legal expertise and massive funding.
Typical of their cult origin "Process Church of Final Judgement" they delegate results for unattainable goals "save them all" to "the community" or cult followers with instruction manuals and How-to videos.
https://bestfriends.org/pet-care-resources/grassroots-advocacy-toolkit-introduction
And their strategic partners like Lifeline Animal project who have hijacked Georgia animal controls - with Death transports, sending animals to reckless rescue, wind up, tortured and abused, using deceptive marketing to mislead the public targeting whistleblower and advocate who come forward
Check out: https://www.facebook.com/share/16qesF7qTj/?mibextid=wwXIfr
&
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6Xu5CJP/
Great conversation.
Agreed, agreed, & agreed this time, Ed. What is particularly pathetic is that both Doug Fakkema, who first used the bailing metaphor, and Ed Duvin, who also spoke out early against the self-perpetuating eternal crisis business model of shelters, pointed all of this out back in the middle 1980s, & the public, the donor base of perpetual suckers, have yet to realize that throwing money at tear-jerking crisis-based appeals is not solving the problem. Effective public education to end "pet overpopulation" requires both a renewed emphasis on spay/neuter at all levels & educating the public to use their brains before sending money to rescue Spike, instead of to spay Fluffy.
Thank you, Merritt and Beth! I appreciate you bringing up the history and voices like Doug Fakkema and Ed Duvin—it's incredible (and a bit disheartening) how long these truths have been out there. Your point about public education is spot-on; it’s not just about more S/N, but also helping donors truly understand where their support can make the biggest difference. Thanks for adding your wisdom to the conversation!
Ed, I don't doubt that we need a big, targeted boost of spay/neuter. Good organizations already emphasize this. But there's another stream of dogs that end up in shelters: Dogs sold by breeders (to mismatched or unqualified buyers). Whether puppy mills (sometimes disguised) or backyard breeders, sellers tempt the public with cute photos of puppies. Put in a setting with zero preparation or follow-up, that cute husky puppy ends up in the shelter a year later.
This, too, involves incentives: Sellers who profit, and want to perpetuate those profits.
No amount of free spay neuter will fix this. Many shelters are filled not with litters of puppies, but large, young, untrained dogs. We need to address this, in addition to providing spay/neuter to stem unwanted litters.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, M! You’re right—addressing the breeder incentive is a crucial piece of the puzzle. S/N alone won’t solve the influx of dogs from mismatched sales or lack of follow-up. Responsible breeding, buyer education, and better regulations and enforcement are needed alongside prevention efforts. Thanks for highlighting this important issue and contributing to a fuller understanding of the crisis!
I'm commenting from Tucson. location of municipal Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) and Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) in chronic overcapacity crisis with exploding stray populations and staff/volunteer burnout.
Maddies and BFAS have used our shelters for pilot programs to install statistical gimmicks and diversions from basic population prevention in favor of monetized overpopulation and "the community is the shelter" doctrines with taxpayers and donors expected to continue the structure created by grant.
At scandal-ridden HSSA, involved in sending "318" small animals to reptile food processor and their supervised Cochise County Douglas Shelter dumping hundreds of cats in desert, recently BFAS rolled out the "Fast Track" program temporarily funding a coordinator to immediately transport primarily big and hard-to-adopt dogs (likely bypassing intake documentation) to rural southern Arizona and other vague, dubious destinations.
For those aware of BFAS/Maddies gimmicks, red flags went up immediately as rural southern Arizona is known for lack of animal welfare resources, almost no vet access, also overpopulated with big hard to adopt dogs. Soon a news broadcast documented large shelter dogs transported via a corrupt 501C3 to a remote outpost in rural Cochise County warehoused in inhumane conditions.
BFAS rolled out their new transport fleet to institutionalize the fantasy that transports are a solution to shelter crisis sending animals to undisclosed outcomes and destinations or "covert disposal". Transports are a great splashy fundraising gimmick. How glamorous to fund animals flying or driven to "their new forever home" with great photo-ops but without tracking and documentation of destinations (sometimes re-transferred) and outcomes.
As Ed’s article promotes, donors should carefully examine where their money is going. Certainly most the big institutional names are deliberately perpetuating the crisis for enormous power and collectively amassing billions.
Maddies just funded a 1.9 million grant essentially merging PACC and HSSA with a call center to divert owner surrenders and found strays from intake by offering increased access to medical and behavioral support.
"Increased access" to vet care is not defined and who qualifies for discounts, but sadly THE GRANT DOES NOT FUND MEANINGFUL OUTREACH to outlying areas and zip codes of uncontrolled breeding and source of most parvo, distemper---primary sources of shelter crisis and stray populations.
HSSA clinic currently has 8-12 weeks wait for appt, enough time for unaltered to breed and reproduce and posted prices unaffordable to many, with behavioral training @ $150. For 5 classes. Even offering free behavioral classes, if the grant will cover that, presumes people surrendering pets have time when a top reason for surrender is “I work long hours and I don’t have time-- the pet is neglected”.
This 1.9 million Maddies grant diverts focus away from population prevention priority, cleverly dictates policy focusing on intake diversion and requires the taxpayer and donors to continue funding the structure that ignores root causes of overpopulation.
We are in the same situation here in George. Best friends Animal Society and their strategic partnership with Lifeline Animal project have hijacked GA Animal Control controls. Death transports hundreds of animals sent to their death and abusers even torture all documented. Silencing whistleblowers targeting staff who come forward.
Whistleblower account:
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuF85g/
Online advocacy forum:
https://www.facebook.com/share/g/1B3PT9JFST/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Expose page:
https://www.facebook.com/share/16qesF7qTj/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Carmen. Your account from Tucson highlights just how grant programs and flashy solutions can miss the real issues, especially the lack of meaningful outreach and true population prevention. The problems with transports and limited access to vet care you described show why donors and taxpayers need to dig deeper and demand transparency and accountability. Your insights are invaluable and help remind us what’s truly at stake in this work.
Thanks again Ed, for keeping the reality visible behind the veil of slick marketing.
This article is at the very heart of this country and CA animal crisis. I have always sensed that there was a donor/financial/power incentive going on with our larger organizations. In an interview I recently did for Animal Politics I talked about our Foundation's Namaste S/N program and how important it is and how, even with our limited resources, it has made a big impact in the communities we've served. I mentioned a quote from my oldest son that I'd like to repeat here for emphasis. "Spay/neuter is a highly efficient way to allocate your limited resources, because every dollar spent has an exponential effect. Focus on a single community, no matter how small, with really good partners, and find a true solution to the problem—a working model that is scalable.” This year we are taking our Namaste program back to some of the communities we've been to last year and the year before and truly trying to make a measurable impact. We have also been approached by Emma Clifford founder of Animal Balance about a grant for LA to help them do two days of dog surgeries every month and s/n approximately 100 dog surgeries a month. I'd love it if it was even more, especially, as Ed says, in the highest intake areas of LA. We, of course are going give them this grant. S/N has worked throughout Europe and Canada. They still have shelters because there will always be a need but the killing and the unnecessary death is minimal. This article is "spot on" and it is also, heartbreaking, disturbing, and very soul crushing. All this death when there is a proven solution! I also would like to add to Ed's list of questions one should ask before donating to organizations. What are the salaries of the major players in the organizations? How many board/business meetings are held in vacation areas. I don't like being a cynic but there is a reality to how many businesses/organizations work. If they are 501c3's their financials have to be public. Homework like this is a bit of a pain, but it is your dollars and especially your intentions that might be being directed to programs that are in conflict with your goal. This is a very important article Ed and I think you for putting it together. It is the proven solution!
Thank you, and your daughter for all the work you do.
Please look at this whistleblower account. It was made by whistleblowers who have sacrifice their careers and been banned as volunteers to shed light is happening inside our shelters and now on our streets.
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuY3k1/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuShMF/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuMc2m/
Fulton & Dekalb county Animal Services are managed by county provider Lifeline Animal project and our Georgia’s largest Animal Control operations. Georgia is top five in the country for euthanasia. Lifeline animal Project, and Best Friend’s and Society are strategic partners and have been for over a decade. After Lifeline received the Fulton County contract, they became George’s largest animal welfare organization. Best friends and Lifeline influence is virtually in every Georgia Animal Control. Bartow County Georgia isn’t even open for public adoptions.
https://www.facebook.com/share/16pxwr85QN/?mibextid=wwXIfr
https://substack.com/@truthinsheltering/note/p-166379395?r=1sxqdi&fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMTyB1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHqezcgwYJTZiCQp8dxsJOYGAvd_68l5_aDdb9IeSoOH3Smrd7Souej9-LW79_aem_t7MKDPVj1mlLGjCkoHZZhw
Great point to put out there about executive salaries. Here in San Diego, the CEO of San Diego Humane makes close to $500K a year, more than the governor, and loves a crisis narrative. The city had a massive budget deficit and San Diego humane threatened to end the contract for a $1.5 million cut when raking in $16+ million just from one city alone, which is not counting the money from 11 other cities. The squandered the Cal Animals for All money, which date wide cost tax payers $50 million! Ed is spot on with this! This needs shares far and wide.
Hi Kelly, thank you for sharing this perspective. You’ve highlighted an important piece of the puzzle. Executive compensation tied to organizations that thrive on crisis narratives absolutely raises questions about accountability and incentives. When leadership benefits from perpetual urgency, it creates real tension with prevention-based strategies that might actually shrink the crisis (and, by extension, the money flow).
This is exactly why transparency matters, both in budgets and outcomes. Communities deserve to know not just how much money is being raised, but whether it’s being directed upstream to prevention, or downstream to maintain the cycle. The San Diego example you mention illustrates how dangerously misaligned incentives can become.
Appreciate you amplifying this. Voices like yours keep the field honest!
Thank you so much, Nancy! I’m truly grateful for your thoughtful response and for sharing the impact of the Namaste S/N program, personally funded by the Heigl family. Your son’s quote is powerful—focusing resources on targeted, scalable solutions is the way forward. I’m thrilled to hear about your upcoming grant for Animal Balance and your dedication to making real change in LA’s highest intake areas. And your suggestion to dig deeper into nonprofit financials is spot-on; donor dollars deserve transparency and true impact. Thanks for all you do and for helping shine a light on proven solutions.
Hit the nail on the head. BFAS doesn't want the problem to be solved. Then they wouldn't be necessary and they wouldn't be raking in the millions of dollars that they are
It’s not only Best Friends - It’s their strategic partners like Lifeline Animal project and all the names they operate under and have influence over: Humane Society of filling the blank. I am in Georgia and the strategic partnership between Lifeline Animal project and BestFriends has influenced all of Georgia shelters and our Animal Control. We are top five in the country now for euthanasia and all of our animal controls Use managed intake and literally expect the public to do the job of Animal Control untrained. We’ve had mauling deaths and rise in rabies. - https://www.facebook.com/share/1B5ePFDLMJ/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Thank you, Carole, for your thoughtful comment and support. You captured the heart of the issue perfectly—when the problem keeps going, so does the funding. It’s up to all of us to keep highlighting this cycle and advocate for genuine solutions. Thanks for lending your voice to the conversation!
I know I am a broken record, but measuring intake for the local municipal shelter in my county is meaningless. They are closed to intake and when you can relinquish a pet, it's pay to play. I am sure many communities have accuarate data, but this county ain't one of them. Again, it's all about optics. BF declared the county no-kill, so now the city admin doesn't have to do anything MORE even remotely lifesaving -- cuz they solved it baby! Just stop intaking animals. Problem solved.
Also, I used to believe in crisis fundraising. I only focused on the rescue part, the sick, the injured. I was convinced you couldn't raise funds for spay/neuter since it's not titilating or sexy, as we say. I got a grant from Community Cats Podcast (super supportive of grassroots TNR orgs) to pilot a direct mail program for raising funds for TNR. And that sealed the deal. It worked! We could raise funds for s/n. Our donors got it! THey really understood it. We focus now on S/N fundraising as our bread and butter and reserve emergency fundraising for those special cases of major medical for either TNR cats or cats in a municipal shelter we think we can help.
Kerryann, this is such a powerful perspective. You’re absolutely right—when intake is throttled or shut down, the data stops reflecting reality and becomes pure optics. Declaring “no-kill” while pushing animals out of sight isn’t progress, it’s avoidance.
And I love your example about fundraising. You’ve proven what so many assume is impossible: that donors do understand prevention when it’s framed honestly. Spay/neuter may not be flashy, but it’s the real game-changer—and your success shows that communities will back it when given the chance. That’s exactly the kind of shift in incentives we need.
Per capita euth rates are also problematic since in some communities municipal shelters perform euthanasia for the pets of community members who cannot afford to have it done at private vets.
Thus for the rate to be meaningful, euths at private vets would need to be included or owner requested euths need to be excluded from the per capita rate.
While I'd love to trust the labels put on the various deaths (like differentiating OREs from behavioral euths from medical euths from space euths), we see how that is manipulated currently. As a result, I don't have the same faith you do that a shift to a per capita reporting system would provide more transparency/better incentives than the current focus on a LRR.
I don't know that a different set of stats is the solution. Instead, I see focusing on a community as whole and asking if it is humane--is there easy access to vet care (including spay/neuter) at a variety of service/price points? Is there somewhere for vulnerable animals to go (whether stray or owned) immediately? Is there support to keep pets with good families even if they don't look like our own notions of ideal pet families? Are there educational opportunities in place so that notions of care get updated as we learn more?--as the way forward even though it's not quantifiable.
Organizations like BestFriends and their strategic partners Lifeline Animal Project are fundraising for profit and they will use community food banks and everything else in their deceptive marketing just like they have taken over our Animal controls facilities / contracts and are pretending to help the animals when they’re really helping themselves…
Here’s a whistleblower account:
https://www.tiktok.com/@lifelineaintit_?_t=ZT-8z3hxATWEnd&_r=1
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6Xuujqa/
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT6XuMc2m/
Staff and volunteers have come forward for years and been silenced & attacked.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-170292442?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMTxjxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtn-Q4GpipK2L_LpOE3ZDcLye_27yW8F3OrHbXWrdFcZrRrlOEQLKjFp3-sQ_aem_x1YWiZ4W_iGaJPD1mV3HwQ
https://www.facebook.com/share/1B5ePFDLMJ/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Shelters have been complaining about being "punished" for doing euthanasias on request for the general public since serious shelter record-keeping began. As one of the very first people to tabulate and evaluate shelter data at the national level, I collected data where available on "euthanasia by request" in the late 1990s and early 2000s, & discovered, #1, that it was the smallest of all categories of euthanasia compared to the whole, & #2, didn't make a dime's worth of difference in comparing any one whole city's data to any other.
I'm less concerned about anyone being "punished" than about having true comparisons that reduce manipulations.
Where euthanasia overall has fallen so dramatically in the 25+ years since you looked at the data you looked at, the effect of a relatively small but consistent number of euths in a community could now show an outsized effect even if formerly statistically insignificant.
(Eg, the difference between 400 or 500 euths a year when 10,000 were dying annually in a given shelter is meaningless but if that 400 or 500 stays constant as the overall deaths fall to 1000, that 100 animal difference becomes a much more meaningful one.)
Moreover, as it became illegal in many places for owners to simply kill their own animals on demand, many that would have formerly shot their senior dog now have them euthd, whether at a vet or a shelter. And which it is likely varies a lot by the accessibility of vet care in the area, again skewing per capita shelter death rates.
Thank you, Lemon, for such a thoughtful comment. You raise an important nuance about end-of-life euthanasia and its potential influence on shelter statistics today versus 25 years ago. You’re right that the landscape has shifted: euthanasia for behavior or “space” has plummeted, and what remains now includes a higher proportion of compassionate, end-of-life decisions.
That said, this is exactly why the per capita rate is so valuable. Because it normalizes shelter data against human population, it allows fairer comparisons across communities and over time. While end-of-life euthanasia makes up a relatively small and fairly stable category, it ultimately “bakes into” the per capita measure consistently. In fact, because all communities wrestle with some volume of end-of-life cases, per capita rates tend to smooth out those differences, offering a truer picture of community-level progress than live release rates ever could.
So while we should remain attentive to changes in euthanasia categories, using per capita intake and outcome measures still provides the most transparent way to track local trends and to compare across regions, without being overly swayed by one subcategory.
I really appreciate you highlighting this because it helps clarify why per capita framing is the most robust, honest measure moving forward.
Ed
Lemonade, I really appreciate this thoughtful pushback. You’re absolutely right—per capita measures aren’t perfect. And labels can be—and often are—manipulated, which undermines trust in the data.
That said, I see per capita metrics not as a silver bullet, but as one tool to counter the misleading optics of live-release rates. They help us track whether intakes and outcomes are actually improving at the community level. But I fully agree with you—numbers alone will never capture the whole picture. The deeper test is exactly what you describe: does a community provide access to care, safety nets to keep families together, and humane options for the most vulnerable animals?
In my view, it’s not either/or. We need honest metrics and a humane community lens if we’re serious about ending the crisis dividend.