Richmond SPCA Blog

Don't be fooled by animal hoaxes

Every day we're reminded of the wonderful things that social media can do for the animal welfare movement. Sharing photos can help reunite lost cats and dogs with their families, can facilitate the transport of orphaned puppies with little prospect of adoption to the safe haven of a no-kill shelter, and can inspire donations to deliver lifesaving medical care to pets in dire need. 

However, April Fool's Day is an appropriate time for a reminder not to trust everything that comes across your news feed. Internet trolls feed on anger and outrage, and sometimes stoking the passions of animal lovers is a fire they start just to watch the world burn. One particular such troll took on the persona of an elderly Richmond woman and created a Facebook account as "Kat Tenna." Public posts from this profile were deliberately inflammatory on a variety of topics, but the ones that began to spread with a viral fever used real photos from news reports of animal cruelty and made blatant, outrageous statements of deliberate acts of cruelty. 

Feeding the voracious appetite of the troll, people from all over the country began to flood animal welfare groups, law enforcement agencies and news stations in Richmond with these reports yesterday evening. The Richmond SPCA's Facebook page was bombarded with hundreds of messages, and we responded to each one to explain the hoax and how to report the fake profile to Facebook for removal, which we were notified just before midnight that Facebook had acted upon. 

The messages, emails, calls to dispatchers and more all came from a good place. Genuine animal lovers, appalled by what they were seeing reached out from as far away as New Zealand to urge authorities to save a dog they believed was in danger. They were acting on what we've all learned: "If you see something, say something." And if you witness neglect or cruelty first hand, that is absolutely the right way to be programmed, to document and report mistreatment immediately. However, on the internet, a dose of skepticism is warranted and can prevent resources that can be devoted to a real animal or person in danger from being diverted in response to a hoax. 

How do you weed out the hoaxes, the cat-fishing and outright scams without ignoring an animal who is potentially in real danger? 

1. Google's reverse image search is an amazing tool. 
   This was the first step in ruling out that the "Kat Tenna" claims were false. Both of the photos she claimed to be of her own dogs could be found online in posts one to five years old that were connected to real news reports. 
   
   You can find many other methods, but Google makes it incredibly simple. At images.google.com, upload the photo or provide a link to the image you want to search. The results will show you matches online. We're opting not to show the images shared by Kat Tenna here, but they were connected to a 2015 case in Oklahoma and a 2011 case in the Philippines. 
   
   
2. Perhaps someone else has already done the research. 
   Just as you would hopefully search snopes.com if something about a "news" story shared by a distant relative doesn't smell right, there are websites and pages dedicated to debunking hoaxes involving animals. One of those is Animal Abuse Known Hoaxes on Facebook (warning: this page does include screen shots of graphic and disturbing images). If you have other favorites that are reliable, share them in the comments.
   
   
3. No results? It could be a valid threat. 
   Do your best to determine the location of the person and find the appropriate law enforcement agency to investigate animal cruelty in that locality. It can be as easy as plugging the search terms "report animal cruelty, Anytown, USA" into your favorite search engine. In most cases, that is not going to be a private organization such as ours, and social media is not the best avenue for serious or urgent communications such as this. 

We are truly grateful to live in a community with so many animal lovers willing to speak up when they suspect an animal has been mistreated. Thanks to all of you for your sincere concern and passion to make the world we live in a better one for animals. 

---

Tabitha Treloar is the director of communications for the Richmond SPCA. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires both your first and last name to be used as your screen name. 

Related articles

Animal Brigade service club gets students involved as young advocates

Guest blog: Animal welfare issues before 2015 General Assembly include protections for puppies and primates

Come home to your best friend: the Richmond SPCA's new adoption campaign

Dear Dr. Fox: True no-kill principles need no “feel good flag” only good, accurate data

Editor's note: Last week syndicated pet advice columnist Dr. Michael W. Fox published a letter from a writer, R.A. in Anne Arundel County, that was highly critical of no-kill principles and shelter operations. Dr. Fox's response contained further disparaging statements about no-kill shelters. Our Chief Executive Officer Robin Robertson Starr wrote and submitted the following letter in response to Dr. Fox. 

Dear Dr. Fox –

Admissions Counselor Alicia Kurz was photographed with a dog being transferred into the care of the Richmond SPCA on March 25, 2016. Petersburg Animal Care and Control shared the photo on Facebook to thank the Richmond SPCA for transferring Darla and other dogs from their facility.

I have read your recent Washington Post column in which a reader criticizes no-kill principles of sheltering and, in so doing, makes many statements that are totally inaccurate and misleading. Then, your reply to that reader is whole-heartedly supportive of what the reader said and even goes further to denigrate no-kill sheltering. Neither of you provided any data whatsoever to support your statements and you even go so far as to say that every local investigative reporter should “look into” the no-kill movement, suggesting that there is something nefarious going on. Nothing could be further from the truth and it is a disservice to animal welfare to spread this misleading information.

The reader said that to be no-kill a facility must “agree” to euthanize less than 10 percent of the animals in its care. Nothing supports this bizarre statement. He or she also says that no-kill shelters are keeping dogs that pose a risk to human safety while well behaved dogs are being killed in “high-kill” shelters. Nothing is offered to back this up and, in fact, it is organizations such as ours that are saving animals from those shelters where their lives are at risk.

It is crucial to understand that “no kill” does not mean “no euthanasia” when “euthanasia” is used accurately in accordance with its true definition instead of inaccurately as it is regularly used with regard to homeless animals. “Euthanasia” is taking the life of an individual who is terminally sick or injured, not susceptible of treatment and suffering such that there is no appreciable quality of life.
Organizations such as the Richmond SPCA which is no-kill must meet the standard of saving the life of every healthy animal in its care and also the life of every sick or injured animal in its care whose condition is treatable. In 2015, we had more than 4,000 animals in our care of which we provided veterinary treatment to about 3,000 and we euthanized fewer than 1% of them, each of those euthanized being untreatably ailing and suffering. In fact, city wide in Richmond in 2015, inclusive of the animals in both our City operated shelter and the Richmond SPCA, the euthanasia rate was only seven percent. Richmond is a city with considerable challenges of poverty and there is no reason why these standards would be any easier to meet here than in any other community in the country. These results are achieved because the Richmond SPCA has provided our community with the essential programs and resources to avoid the use of lethal approaches to issues of homeless animals.

Training specialist Jackie Laubacher uses positive reinforcement and hand signals to communicate with Burt, a dog available for adoption who is deaf.

Both you and your reader lead people to believe that no-kill shelters keep animals in cages for life and deprive them of stimulating, rewarding lives. This is simply not the case. Responsible no-kill organizations, and that is the vast majority of them, ensure that pets are placed in permanent, loving homes within reasonable periods of time and that, while animals are in our care, they have enriched environments either in the shelter or in foster homes where they are loved and given plenty of activity. Our hundreds of volunteers as well as our professional training and animal care staff members ensure that the animals in our care benefit from human attention, play groups with other animals, and numerous walks each day.

Gary Busey is a cat in the care of the Richmond SPCA who recently benefited from time spent in a foster home.

It is a total misrepresentation for your reader to say that trainers, volunteers and staff members are leaving the shelter system owing to the no-kill movement. In reality, all of those groups of people remain committed to no-kill organizations for many years because they can feel good about the morality of what they are a part of and they feel comfortable that the animals in whom they are investing time and love are safe in our care and will go on to a good life.

The most troubling aspect of your column was its utter failure to address the ethical issues regarding killing homeless animals for expediency whose lives are of value and could be saved. Most communities that are killing a high percentage of their homeless animals are doing so because it is easier and cheaper, and that cannot be defended morally. Richmond is one of more than 200 communities in this country that are documented (see maddiesfund.org) as saving the lives of all of their healthy and treatably sick and injured homeless animals. This lifesaving success is achievable with the right combination of leadership, supportive programs, commitment and energy.

I would hope that you would provide your readership with a fuller and more accurate perspective on no-kill sheltering which has been spreading to more and more communities nationwide over the last decade because it is ethical and saves lives. The reason it may cause an increase in donations is simple – people know it is the morally right thing to support.

Sincerely,

Robin Robertson Starr

---

To read the biographies of our regular bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires a first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital a landmark achievement in the history of this 125-year-old organization

On February 25, we celebrated the opening of our amazing new Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital and this week the Times-Dispatch provided great coverage for the community in an article and gallery of photos. This is the culmination of years of work for many people who have believed deeply in this project. I could never thank Stuart Siegel, who chaired the capital campaign, and Allen King, who chaired our Board during the campaign and kept the organization focused and energized, enough. We are immensely grateful to Claiborne Robins who not only was the honorary chair of the campaign but also was enormously generous to it. There is no way to adequately express our gratitude to Tony Markel who gave the lead naming gift in memory of his beloved wife Sue who was a great animal lover. These acts of devotion and generosity have given an asset and resource to the pets and people of our community that is not offered in any other community of which I am aware. It is a landmark achievement in the history of this 125-year-old organization. 

Stuart Siegel and Allen King at the grand opening of the Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital on February 25, 2016.

I can remember when I first started working in animal welfare 18 years ago. The standard refrain at that time was that people of low income should not have pets because they could not provide them with the veterinary care they needed. That heartless and inadvisable viewpoint still prevails in isolated parts of our field of work. This has always seemed so unreasonable and unkind to me. People of modest means can provide a homeless pet with a wonderful, loving home for life and they themselves need the companionship and joy that pets bring to our lives just as anyone else does. And, homeless pets need more possible homes not fewer. We need to find the ways to expand the numbers of possible homes in our community and providing access to low cost veterinary care is one of the most effective and important ways we do that.

I am grateful, proud and rewarded that the Richmond SPCA and all of the wonderful people who support it and lead it have worked so hard to make this veterinary hospital a reality. People of low income and people who adopt from the Richmond SPCA may use this great resource to obtain full service, high quality veterinary care for their beloved pets. This is an absolutely essential piece in achieving a no-kill community. Much data confirms that many pets are relinquished at shelters because they are suffering from a medical condition that oftentimes is totally treatable but their families lack the financial resources to provide the needed care. Sick and injured animals are often those whose conditions worsen and who end up getting euthanized in shelters around the country. In our community, that no longer need be the case. We have made Richmond one of the safest cities in the country for homeless animals. Last year, the Richmond citywide euthanasia rate for homeless animals was 7 percent, a stunning achievement. The euthanasia rate at the Richmond SPCA’s no-kill shelter in 2015 was less than 1 percent of the more than 4,000 animals in our shelter that year. Our community is an example of the fact that no-kill cities and communities are achievable. No longer is this a debatable issue. Richmond is to be emulated nationally for saving animal lives and that is because of the wonderful love we have for our animals. The opening of the Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital at the Richmond SPCA is a great moment for every animal lover in our community.

---

Robin Robertson Starr is the chief executive officer of the Richmond SPCA. To read the biographies of our regular bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires a first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Related articles

Kitten's tiny voice disrupted a walk and a law career: our CEO's Big Break

PBS's "Shelter Me" series promotes same old thinking about euthanasia of homeless pets

Misleading PETA press release manufactures “crisis” to distract from annual filings of animal statistics

PETA released a self-serving and misleading press release over the weekend. The clear rationale for the release was to get out ahead of the required annual filings of animal statistics with an explanation in the form of a distraction intended to mislead.

Every releasing agency in Virginia that takes in and adopts out, or otherwise disposes of, companion animals is required to file its statistics annually. This year, those statistics had to be filed with the State Veterinarians Office by February 29. The headline of PETA’s release in anticipation of that filing, and the Freedom of Information requests it is bound to provoke, wailed about how their figures show that animal neglect and lack of vet care is due to "low income owners" and is at crisis levels. So nice of them to blame it all on low income pet guardians, or “owners” in PETA’s parlance.

The body of the hysterical sounding release talks about how PETA euthanized "1,502 elderly, feral, sick, dying, aggressive, and otherwise unadoptable animals free of charge." (I guess we are supposed to be grateful that they killed all those animals for free.) Thus, PETA by its own admission has killed for another year animals that are elderly, feral and sick. Presumably, none of these animals was dying from conditions that could not be treated, since PETA also refers to other animals as "dying." There is no reason whatsoever to kill a dog or cat simply because he or she is

Oleander is a 14-year-old cat who is currently available for adoption at the Richmond SPCA.

elderly. The Richmond SPCA adopts elderly animals to good homes with great regularity. And, if an animal is sick, but not untreatably terminal, then an organization with the enormous wealth of PETA should be treating and saving that animal not killing him or her. Feral cats should never be taken into a shelter to be killed but should be allowed to live out their normal lives in their natural environment with the benefits of trap, neuter and return programs. This principle is now widely accepted by all progressive organizations in our field including all of the national organizations except PETA. 

Interestingly, the release also touts the 545 adoptable animals that, according to PETA, were placed in permanent homes or transferred to shelters "with high foot traffic for adoption" (whatever that means). Since the actual filing is not yet publicly available, we do not know how many of that number were actually adopted out by PETA and how many went to some other organization where it is unclear if the animal was adopted or killed there. PETA will only transfer animals to organizations that take the lives of healthy and/or treatable companion animals, and so we cannot be sure of the fate of the animals who were transferred by them elsewhere.

PETA is and has long been an organization that has lost its moral and ethical moorings. They clearly are concerned about the public’s growing recognition of their massive record of killing at their Norfolk facility and recognize that the passage of the bill last session of the General Assembly requiring private animal shelters to have a purpose of adoption will necessitate a change in their practices. A year ago, they would have never taken such pains to explain their numbers and claim to have saved even a handful of lives through adoption and/or transfer. It is obvious that those of us who have brought this unethical pattern of killing behavior to light have had an effect. But, as of yet, there is no indication that PETA has changed its underlying philosophies. In fact, their release reveals what we have long suspected – PETA believes that people of low income are responsible for animal neglect and abuse and should not have pets. We beg to differ. People of low income, like every other group of people, can provide wonderful and loving homes.

Elvis, a 2014 Richmond SPCA alumnus, returns for a low-cost vet visit at the Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital.

There are individuals in every socio-economic group that are not responsible pet guardians, but they are a minority, and there is no basis for believing that there is a greater preponderance of them among people of low income. We need to find the way to help those of modest means with the expenses of veterinary care for their pets, which the Richmond SPCA does through its Susan M. Markel Veterinary Hospital.

Moreover, there is no truth to PETA’s hysterical statements that there is a crisis with regard to the care of companion animals, in Tidewater Virginia or anywhere else in this state. PETA’s release offers no statistics because the real numbers do not support their claims. In fact, over the last decade, an increasing number of animals are being cared for and saved by no-kill private animal shelters and fewer by public (city and county) shelters. And, the euthanasia rates across the state, for both private shelters and for all types of shelters, have declined dramatically. No one should be satisfied until we are saving every healthy and treatable animal state wide, but we can say with confidence that progressive philosophies have us on the right course and the loss of life is getting less each year. If you would like to see the real statistics reflecting the changes over the last decade, they are attached. Download Statewide animal statistics.

PETA needs to do one of two things – either join the modern world and focus on lifesaving rather than killing or get out of the business of sheltering companion animals. Either way, stop manufacturing a crisis and blaming people who do not deserve it.

---

11-Year Comparison of Statewide Animal Statistics
Create your own infographics

---

Robin Robertson Starr is the chief executive officer of the Richmond SPCA. To read the biographies of our regular bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires a first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Urge your delegate to the General Assembly to oppose HB 340

HB 340 is headed to the floor of the House of Delegates and could be voted on as early as Monday. UPDATE: The bill was passed by for the day on Friday, meaning that the second reading and debate is likely to take place Monday, Feb. 8, and delaying the House vote to Tuesday, Feb. 9 at the earliest. 

Now is the time that delegates need to hear from their constituents on this issue. When contacting your delegate, please note that you live in his or her district and provide your address. You can find out who your Delegate is here http://whosmy.virginiageneralassembly.gov/

When HB 340 was introduced, it would have allowed private shelters to be operated solely for the purpose of killing animals, effectively reversing last year's passage of SB 1381, which has been law since July 1, 2015. There is no political will to repeal SB 1381. Our legislators' memories are not so short to have forgotten that PETA is the one entity in Virginia that euthanizes 88 percent of the animals it is entrusted to "shelter." 

The newest version of HB 340 is a substitute amendment that its proponents will tell you directs the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) to adopt regulations "for evaluating whether a private shelter is meeting its required purpose of finding adoptive homes for animals." However, what the bill says has a very different meaning: 

The Board of Agriculture and Consumer Services shall adopt regulations that establish the purposes of private animal shelters.

The purpose of private animal shelters has already been established by the General Assembly: the purpose of private animal shelters is to find permanent adoptive homes for animals in the shelter's care. We would support a directive for VDACS to create reasonable regulations to determine whether private animal shelters are operated in a way that is consistent with the purpose to adopt. But the proposed legislation aims instead to delay and complicate enforcement of the private shelter adoption purpose with respect to PETA. What HB 340 will do is create an expensive, time-consuming process for the state, all to benefit a single organization, giving PETA license to kill thousands of animals unnecessarily every year. 

---

Below is a sample email for contacting your delegates. Please borrow from any of this message that is useful in expressing your opposition in your own words. Encourage your delegate's staff to open your message with a subject line that identifies you as a constituent of his or her district. 

Dear Delegate [NAME],

I am writing as a resident of your district, living at [address] to ask that you oppose HB 340 as amended. 

The Commonwealth’s definition of a private animal shelter now matches the common-sense expectation that animal shelters would operate with the purpose of finding permanent adoptive homes for animals. However, HB 340 asks VDACS to "adopt regulations that establish the purposes of private animal shelters." Purpose is not established via regulation; the General Assembly has already defined the purpose of private shelters through legislation. HB 340 goes further to micromanage the process it calls for by forcing criteria unrelated to the adoption purpose into the regulations that VDACS must consider. 

I respectfully ask that you oppose HB 340. 

Related articles

Why the passage of Senate Bill 1381 matters

SB1381: Governor's signature establishes private animal shelters must have purpose of finding adoptive homes

General Assembly 2016 update: urge House Agriculture Committee to oppose HB 340

Over several weeks, we have attempted compromise with proponents of HB 340 and its patron. Although the amended version of HB 340 that was reported out of the House Agriculture Subcommittee this evening bears no resemblance to the bill that was originally introduced and that we wrote about on Jan. 13, our position remains the same. Oppose HB 340. 

The substitute calls for the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) to "adopt regulations that establish the purposes of private animal shelters." That purpose – of finding permanent adoptive homes for animals – has already been established through the law created by SB 1381. We maintain that VDACS has always possessed the authority to initiate regulations, and the stipulations HB 340 places on the VDACS rule-making process are unacceptable. 

HB 340 will next go before the House Agriculture Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 3 at 8:30 a.m. Please contact the members of this committee and urge them to oppose HB 340 as amended. 

---

The sample message below can be used as a template for contacting the delegates on the committee, but please modify the message in your own words. If you reside in the delegate's district, please tell him or her that you are a constituent and include the address at which you are registered to vote. 

Dear Delegate:

I respectfully ask you to oppose HB 340 as amended.

 

HB 340 as originally drafted aimed to reverse the current private shelter definition which makes clear that a private shelter must have as its purpose to find permanent, adoptive homes for animals. As amended, HB340 aims to micromanage enforcement by VDACS of the current law and specifies benchmarks which have no relevance to the adoption purpose.  VDACS should be respected to enforce the current definition and given broad latitude to do so.

 

Citizens and donors trust private shelters to be a safe haven for the animals in their care and the current law upholds that promise. Please do not forward legislation that would in any way complicate VDACS’ regulatory ability to enforce the law.

 

Please vote no to HB 340 as amended.

 

---

 

2016 House Agriculture Committee contact information:

Danny Marshall (Chair) [email protected] 804-698-1014
Counties of Henry (part) and Pittsylvania (part); City of Danville

Charles Poindexter (Vice Chair) [email protected] 804-698-1009
Counties of Franklin (part), Henry (part), and Patrick

David Bulova [email protected] 804-698-1037
County of Fairfax (part); City of Fairfax

James Edmunds [email protected] 804-698-1060
Counties of Campbell (part), Charlotte, Halifax, and Prince Edward

Matthew Farris [email protected] 804-698-1059
Counties of Albemarle (part), Appomattox, Buckingham, Campbell (part), and Nelson (part)

Matthew James [email protected] 804-698-1080
Cities of Chesapeake (part), Norfolk (part), Portsmouth (part), and Suffolk (part)

Mark Keam [email protected] 804-698-1035
County of Fairfax (part)

Barry Knight [email protected] 804-698-1081
Cities of Chesapeake (part) and Virginia Beach (part)

Alfonso Lopez [email protected] 804-698-1049
Counties of Arlington (part) and Fairfax (part)

James Morefield [email protected] 804-698-1003
Counties of Bland, Buchanan, Russell (part), and Tazewell

Bobby Orrock [email protected] 804-698-1054
Counties of Caroline (part) and Spotsylvania (part)

Kenneth Plum [email protected] 804-698-1036
County of Fairfax (part)

Margaret Ransone [email protected] 804-698-1099
Counties of Caroline (part), King George, Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond, and Westmoreland

Luke Torian [email protected] 804-698-1052
County of Prince William (part)

Lee Ware [email protected] 804-698-1065
Counties of Chesterfield (part), Fluvanna (part), Goochland (part), and Powhatan

Thomas Wright [email protected] 804-698-1061
Counties of Amelia, Cumberland, Lunenburg (part), Mecklenburg, and Nottoway

Tony Wilt [email protected] 804-698-1026
County of Rockingham (part); City of Harrisonburg

Jackson Miller [email protected] 804-698-1050
County of Prince William (part); City of Manassas

Robert Bloxom [email protected] 804-698-1000
Counties of Accomack and Northampton; Cities of Norfolk (part) and Virginia Beach (part)

Richard "Rip" Sullivan [email protected] 804-698-1048
Counties of Arlington (part) and Fairfax (part)

Michael Webert [email protected] 804-698-1018
Counties of Culpeper (part), Fauquier (part), Rappahannock, and Warren (part)

Brenda Pogge [email protected] 804-698-1096
Counties of James City (part) and York (part)

---

Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires both your first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Related articles

SB1381: Sheltering homeless animals should include saving lives and finding lasting homes

You can make all the difference for pets at government shelters

Why the passage of Senate Bill 1381 matters

Trio of bills seek to protect PETA's operations, undermine definition of "private animal shelter" in Virginia statute

The 2016 session of the General Assembly promises an explosion of bills and focus on animal welfare issues in our state. This is a reflection of the struggle that has been going on in recent years over progress. The struggle is between the worn out, brutal, old style approach of massive intake and massive killing of homeless animals, with little effort put into proactive programs to help keep pets in homes, and the progressive organizations whose groundbreaking work in recent years has produced remarkable strides statewide in reducing the killing of innocent healthy and treatable animals. The side of the traditionalists who cannot stop clinging to the tragic ways of the past is lead by PETA and their mouthpiece Virginia Alliance of Animal Shelters (“VAAS”), a loose association whose membership is undisclosed. Many people are surprised that PETA is the linchpin of the effort to retard progress in the life-saving of companion animals and an aggressive advocate of euthanasia of dogs and cats. The reasons for that betrayal of their mission must be saved for another post but the fact remains that they are spending massive amounts of time, money and effort this year seeking to reverse the successes that have been achieved in our state for companion animals.

PETA is an extreme outlier among Virginia private shelters. While PETA’s killing rate of dogs and cats is nearly 90 percent year after year, the combined rate of loss of companion animal life for all other private shelters in Virginia is 2 percent. Even when you combine the rate for all shelters and rescue groups of every sort in Virginia, it is still only 23 percent. This reflects the enormous progress that has been made in recent year in reducing loss of life of dogs and cats through progressive approaches and programming of which PETA and VAAS have not been a part. They continue to fight the progress and mislead the public into thinking that progress is not possible.

Delegate Bobby Orrock has introduced three bills seeking to protect PETA’s way of operating and reversing the transparency that last year’s passage of SB 1381 would achieve for the state’s neediest animals were it allowed to be enforced.

HB 156 and HB 340 would eviscerate SB 1381 by allowing private shelters to be operated solely for the purpose of killing animals with no requirement that they have even a partial purpose of finding adoptive homes. HB 156 goes even further by also removing any requirement that a private shelter even house or contain companion animals. Yep, you might want to read that last sentence again it is so shocking.

Orrock’s bills benefit no private organization in our state but PETA since it is the only private organization in the state that is not already fully in compliance with the adoption purpose standard of SB 1381 and because nearly all the others have made clear their strong support for SB 1381. The way HB 156 and 340 benefit PETA is that, if it can meet this revised and very loose definition of a private animal shelter, then it can have non-veterinarians use controlled drugs to kill animals.  These bills are a cynical attempt to grant PETA the right to continue killing thousands of animals every year without any brake that the required involvement of a professional veterinarian would provide.  

HB 157 is an effort to prevent the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs from being able to enforce the law that has resulted from the passage last year of SB 1381 through the creation and use of a guidance document for enforcement. It would again benefit a sole organization, PETA, which is the only one previously called a private animal shelter that does not have the purpose to adopt, and the fact that they have no such purpose is confirmed by their extreme efforts to fight enforcement of this law.  HB 157 would have grave unintended consequences impacting the 3,204 guidance documents in various state agencies just to keep PETA happy.

PETA’s power, wealth and influence at work are frightening to watch, and we will be seeing them displayed in the General Assembly this session. They are pulling out all the stops to ensure that they continue to be able to take the lives of innocent animals without any restraint. We need your help to keep them from doing this and to retain and move forward our immense strides in life saving we have achieved together. Please call or email your delegate to the General Assembly now and let him or her know that you want him or her to oppose HB 156, 157 and 340 and ask that he or she convey this opposition to Delegate Orrock. The animals’ lives depend on it.

---

Taking Action

It is best that you write to your delegate in your own words, and you can find his or her email and phone number at http://whosmy.virginiageneralassembly.gov/ by entering your home address. Should you wish to use the message below as a template, please personalize it and include the address at which you are registered to vote.

Dear Delegate [NAME],

I am writing as a resident of your district to ask that you oppose three pieces of legislation that will be detrimental to the welfare of homeless animals in the Commonwealth. House bills 156, 157 and 340 would undo the progress made in the 2015 session when SB 1381 became law. Now the Commonwealth’s definition matches the common-sense expectation that animal shelters would operate with the purpose of finding permanent adoptive homes for animals.

Only one private animal shelter in the state does not operate with that purpose, and undermining SB 1381 is solely of benefit to PETA. While the law was created last year with overwhelming bipartisan support, HB 157 aims to stop VDACS from using a guidance document to enforce it. HB 156 and HB 340 would allow a private shelter to operate only for the purpose of killing animals, which defies the very concept of a shelter as a safe place for the homeless.

I respectfully ask that you oppose HB 156, 157, and 340 and that you convey to Del. Orrock your opposition to the bills he has patroned.

Sincerely,

[Your name and home address]

---

Robin Robertson Starr is the chief executive officer of the Richmond SPCA. To read her biography or that of our other bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires both your first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Related articles

PETA sounds crazier all the time; latest letter deceptive, irresponsible and paranoid

SB1381: Governor's signature establishes private animal shelters must have purpose of finding adoptive homes

PETA sounds crazier all the time; latest letter deceptive, irresponsible and paranoid

PETA recently distributed a breathtakingly dishonest and irresponsible letter over the signature of its Senior Vice President Daphna Nachminovich.  Not only is the letter deceptive and mean, it is also bizarrely paranoid. 

The letter speaks of their “opponents,” by which PETA appears to mean their opponents with respect to legislation before the Virginia General Assembly, since their call to action is for recipients of the letter to contact their state delegates and senators to proclaim their support for PETA. While the letter never calls the “opponents” by name, we all know what is really meant: the Virginia Federation of Humane Societies, the Richmond SPCA, Alley Cat Allies, the Norfolk SPCA and others who have dared to stand up to PETA with regard to their killing of about 90% of the thousands of dogs and cats that come into their Norfolk facility and who supported Senate Bill 1381 which became law in 2015. That law simply says that private animal shelters in Virginia must have as their purpose the adoption of companion animals to permanent homes. PETA has fought its passage, and more recently its enforcement, tooth and nail.

In this despicable mass mailing, PETA tells people that we, their “opponents,” want to see dogs “suffer at the end of a heavy chain” and that we prefer that cats “die in agony.” Yes, that we WANT to see these things happen to animals. It also says that we do not want PETA to provide free and low-cost spay and neuter services for pets. And, that we want PETA to “do nothing to help animals even when they suffer from chronic pain and horrific injuries.” What on earth are they talking about? These ravings are insane and paranoid. 

When the Richmond SPCA rescued Peanut his condition might have appeared hopeless, but we have treated his cancer and restored him to health.

The Richmond SPCA and the other organizations to which these hateful words are directed have been committed to saving animal lives for decades and have saved the lives of, as well as have spayed and neutered, many more dogs and cats than has PETA. 

So, let me right here and now provide PETA with the correct information to help them to stop lying to their donors and spewing crazy and venomous paranoia:

1. The Richmond SPCA was the motivating force behind the City of Richmond’s adoption of the earliest, toughest anti-chaining ordinance in the state, so stop saying that we want dogs to suffer on chains. That is absurd and everyone knows it.
2. We most certainly do not want PETA to do nothing to help animals who are suffering from painful injuries as it claims. Why would we ever want that? We want PETA to do what we do – treat the injuries of the homeless dogs and cats in its care and save their lives rather than ending their lives. PETA has an annual budget of more than $40 million and takes in about half the number of animals we do.  It should be treating and saving every single treatably sick or injured animal that comes into its care. Its steadfast unwillingness to answer any questions about how it determines whether and when an animal should be euthanized causes all of us to understandably question whether PETA is treating the treatable ones. Given PETA’s enormous financial resources, it is absolutely shameful for PETA to not provide full medical treatment for all animals it receives that have treatable medical conditions.
3. We are not “ignoring” a “homeless animal crisis” in Virginia. There is no such thing. There are certainly still many homeless animals who need our help but, due to the hard and committed work of private Virginia humane organizations, other than PETA, there are fewer such animals each year and more of them are living.  Let’s share with the public the actual statistics: In 2004, private agencies took in 91,915 dogs and cats and euthanized 33% of them, and public agencies took in 143,324 dogs and cats and euthanized 51% of them. A decade later, in 2014, the most recent year for which there are statistics, private agencies took in 102,708 dogs and cats and euthanized 10% of them while, that same year, public agencies took in 120,932 dogs and cats and euthanized 34% of them. This means that statewide over the past decade, private agencies are performing a larger part of the sheltering and their rate of euthanasia has declined by 66% while the public shelters are being required to do less and their euthanasia rate has declined by 43%.  Clearly, animal homelessness is declining and related life saving statewide is improving. While these outcomes are still not where we want them to be, it is dishonest to call it a crisis. We are clearly doing the right things and we need to do more of it in order for Virginia to become a no-kill state.
4. As stated above, the rate of euthanasia statewide for private agencies is 10% (even for public shelters statewide, it is 34%) but for the dogs and cats entering PETA’s Norfolk facility in 2014 it was 88.5%. Why on earth are PETA’s outcomes so wildly out of step with the rest of the state? They love to claim, with no support, that they take the worst of the worst.  One must wonder why there would be so many homeless animals in Norfolk that are in so much worse condition than those in the rest of the state. 
5. While we are on the subject of revealing statistics, over the last five years, the Richmond SPCA has taken into its care 17,770 dogs and cats and has euthanized less than 1% of them while PETA has taken in 10,944 dogs and cats and has euthanized 90% of them. So we don’t need or wish to “misrepresent” PETA’s “work” as it claims in its letter, since the truth is so very appalling all on its own.
6. Far from opposing its providing spaying and neutering services on a low and no cost basis, we applaud PETA for providing those services. We have provided those same services to our community too. We have done so for more than 13 years. Spaying and neutering is a crucial component of ensuring that Virginia becomes a no-kill state. 

PETA has hired a bunch of very expensive lobbyists to help them to get their way before the General Assembly in the coming session. They want to be sure that they can keep on killing an enormous number of animals with no questions asked. Clearly, the questions that we are asking about the numbers of animals they kill and the specter of having to actually operate their shelter with the purpose of adopting animals to homes is very upsetting to them. That is why they are throwing their vast resources at it in order to get their way.

Anastasia had been severely neglected before being taken in by the Richmond SPCA. Now she has a loving home and a new name, Coco.

PETA’s sending out that letter was a big mistake. No one is going to believe this stuff, least of all people who really care about animals. When you say that organizations such as ours WANT to see animals suffer and die and WANT to prevent spaying and neutering services from being provided, it makes you look desperate and crazy. It makes you look like a bunch of liars. It makes you look like what you are.

---

Robin Robertson Starr is the chief executive officer of the Richmond SPCA. To read her biography or that of our other bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires both your first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Related articles

SB1381: Sheltering homeless animals should include saving lives and finding lasting homes

SB1381: Governor's signature establishes private animal shelters must have purpose of finding adoptive homes

SB1381: David and Goliath scenario to protect Virginia's dogs and cats

Communication is key in feral cat care

Since 2004, the Richmond SPCA has operated a Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) program with the purpose of humanely and effectively controlling the region’s feral cat population through spay/neuter and vaccination against rabies. The Richmond SPCA is happy to provide over 1,000 no-cost sterilization surgeries and rabies vaccinations every year for our community’s outdoor cats. In doing so, this program relies heavily on dedicated volunteers to feed, transport and monitor colonies. The Richmond SPCA is committed to supporting feral caretakers in their charitable endeavors associated with TNR and recognizes that communication is key to coordinating care.

With so many members of the community working on the cats’ behalf, the need for a centralized location for caretakers to connect became apparent, and the Richmond VA Feral Cat Network was created. This free group, hosted on Yahoo, has continued to grow both in its membership and effectiveness. The volunteer group administrator, who anonymously donates her time to this cause, proudly describes the online forum as, “more than just an online group consisting of those with a common interest. We share a mission (CATS - compassion/action/teaching/sharing) as well as values in promoting the humane treatment and non-lethal control of feral and free-roaming cats.”  This group allows feral cat caregivers to sign up for veterinary appointments at the Richmond SPCA and to share unused appointments among themselves, as well as coordinate community efforts.

This unique online group is more than just for those interested in helping feral cats. It also acts as a platform for education about community cats. The Richmond VA Feral Cat Network is a resource for those that are elderly, disabled and/or with limited resources. The group administrator says that helping those populations is the most rewarding part of her volunteer role. When asked to describe her most memorable experience, she recalled an individual helping a senior citizen about four years ago. She says, “He had been feeding for about a decade at a local business. These cats had no veterinary care and over the years, untold numbers of young kittens disappeared into the dense wooded area adjacent to the business parking lot. A Richmond VA Feral Cats volunteer determined that the location was within two blocks of her managed feral colony and volunteered to assist. More than a dozen cats were trapped and provided with no-cost spay and neuter, de-worming, and rabies vaccinations at the Richmond SPCA Clinic for Compassionate Care. Additionally, the volunteer purchased low-cost distemper vaccinations for each of the cats and offered to assist the caretaker with twice weekly feedings which she performed for three years.”

Stories like this one, as well as countless others, are why we celebrate National Feral Cat Day at the Richmond SPCA. The motto “every life is precious” is upheld through the daily actions of volunteer trappers and community members who dedicate themselves to this cause. We want to show our appreciation for them and the countless hours they spend educating the public, helping both people and cats in need, managing colonies and transporting cats for TNR. From the bottom of our hearts, we say thank you!

---

Tori Williams is the senior hospital manager at the Richmond SPCA's Clinic for Compassionate Care. To read the biographies of our regular bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. 

Related articles

We Were Adopted! (July 20-26, 2015)

You can make all the difference for pets at government shelters

We Were Adopted! (July 13-19, 2015)

In a giving world, animals need our generosity

In recent months, the Internet has exploded with people’s well-deserved outrage over the plight of animals – from the killing of Cecil the Lion to Caitlyn the South Carolina dog whose mouth was taped shut. That outpouring of emotion suggests that people care deeply about the suffering and deaths of innocent animals, and I believe they really do. However, not a lot of that caring is channeled into actual generosity by giving financial support to the organizations, like the Richmond SPCA, that defend and save the lives of the many animals in crisis in our own community.

Yoda was rescued by the Richmond SPCA in April of 2015. Thanks to generous donations, she received months of treatment including addressing chronic skin issues. Yoda is now part of a loving home and was renamed Sophia.

You are among the people who do generously support the animals who need us, and I am deeply grateful to you. Because of your devotion to them, I hope you will help us to enlarge that support further because animals need our help so desperately.

We live in a generous nation. In 2014, a total of $358.38 billion was given to charities. The substantial majority of that amount, 60% collectively, went to religious, educational and human services organizations. In 2014, only 3% of charitable giving went to the “environment and animals” category and there was no calculation we could find that isolated the amount given to animal welfare separately from the environment. My guess is that giving to animals accounts for a lot less of that 3% than does the environment. The percentage of foundation funding going to environment and animals (again, it is not split out between them) was less than 6% of the total charitable dollars given by foundations in 2014.

So, when some people say that animals get too large a piece of the giving pie and that more money should go to human causes, their perception is really not supported by the facts. In truth, animals get only a minuscule portion of the charitable dollars given in our country.

Perceptions matter greatly, and it is important to have the real facts not only about where the dollars go but also about where they come from. In 2014, 72% of the $358.38 billion given to charity was given by individuals. Many people think that corporations and foundations are responsible for a lot of the charitable giving, but in truth, it mostly comes from regular people. Corporations actually give a very small part of the total charitable dollars – only 5% – and their giving focuses almost exclusively on the arts, human services and education. Foundation giving is responsible for just 15% of the total. (The remaining 8% comes from death bequests which really are another type of giving by individuals.) Foundations are responsible for even less of the support received by the Richmond SPCA (12%) while just 17% of our support is from corporations.

So, what do these statistics reveal? While people are very generous to meritorious charitable causes, more than 97% of donations go to causes other than ones that save animals. People like you, not institutions, provide the backbone of financial support to charitable causes. I know that you love and are concerned about animals because of your kindness to us in the past. When you make your future giving choices, please consider that animals receive only a tiny fraction of the support most people, and institutional donors, give to other charitable causes. Please help animals by speaking with your friends and family to urge them to join you in supporting the Richmond SPCA and give them the true facts about how little charitable support actually goes to animals.

Animals face so many threats and need us so much. We can save their lives and protect them only if we have the resources to do so. Please give generously to the Richmond SPCA and help us to increase the amount of financial support that goes to the animals we love.

 

Give now at www.richmondspca.org.

---

Robin Robertson Starr is the chief executive officer of the Richmond SPCA. To read her biography or that of our other bloggers, please click here. Before posting a comment, please review our comment guidelines. Please note that our comment policy requires both your first and last name to be used as your screen name.

Related articles

We Were Adopted! (July 20-26, 2015)

You can make all the difference for pets at government shelters

We Were Adopted! (July 13-19, 2015)