Overfield Kennel Blog

Susan Overfield - New website & blog

2010-01-25T05:29:00.000-08:00

aahhtt.com

Susan Overfield has moved www.overfieldkennel.com to aahhtt.com - Bark Outloud a new dog information blog, products, free online & subscription newsletter Psych-O Analysis. Follow Overfield on Twitter and Facebook

Come visit, learn, participate, read book reviews, dog behavior tips and more...

Saturday Dogs for Christmas

2008-11-12T05:36:00.000-08:00

What If ONE Saturday Could Change Your Dog's Life Forever?

Discover how to have an amazing relationship with your dog through

the true and heart-warming stories in "Saturday Dogs...and the Owners They Trained"

Imagine, changing the way you think and making your relationship with your dog richer and more rewarding. Here's your opportunity to get the book that has owners laughing out loud and dogs happily wagging their tails, and for only $16.95.

You can give your dog the Christmas gift that will last a lifetime.

Just go to www.overfieldkennel.com and click on the picture of Saturday Dogs

(available in book & download format)

or call 1-800-658-4889

and we'll happily take your order

* Due to temporary limitations in the shopping cart, all multiple book orders by a customer will be shipped to a single address. If you wish to send books as gifts to an address other than your own please call or email us to place your order *

If you have ever wanted the best life for your dog, then this 266 page book for $16.95

will help you achieve that dream.

Here's what reviewers have to say about this absolutely wonderful book:

FUN, INFORMATIVE, FUNNY AND A DELIGHT TO READ. Saturday Dogs and the Owners They Trained, by Susan Overfield is a wonderful read for any dog owner or dog lover...a delightful book which is not only fun and an absolute hoot to read, it is also packed with good sound information and advice as to how to train, and indeed, live with your dog...absolutely hilarious at times. There is no doubt after reading just a few pages that this lady knows what she is doing. Her keen sense of humor shines through on almost ever page. I found myself chuckling often and indeed laughing out loud several times...She has the skill and knowledge of animal behavior and the developed, workable techniques to help the dog, and just as importantly, the owner, which I found to be most helpful and educational...Even on the off chance that you learn absolutely nothing, it is still a great read! Highly recommend this one." D. Blankenship, Amazon Reviewer

A person and his loving and trusting companion "Saturday Dogs" recommends how owners and dogs can reshape their relationship into what it should be - that of a person and his loving and trusting companion. "Saturday Dogs... and the Owners They Trained" is a top pick for community library pet collections and for dog lovers in general. Midwest Book Review

You don’t have to be a dog-owner (let alone, be trying to ride herd on a three-month-old Weimaraner puppy) to appreciate the humor and acuity of Susan Overfield’s book...Saturday Dogs, named after participants in the author’s many Saturday obedience classes, offers engaging, funny and often poignant anecdotes about our canine companions and our often misguided and sometimes damaging attempts to manage them...I closed the last page, growled a firm “aaahtt” to Minnie as she was joyfully unraveling the rattan from my chair, and vowed to be a better communicator, for my dogs’ sake. Kristi Niemeyer, Lively Times

Susan Overfield makes a distinction between dog trainers and dog handlers, people who understand dogs, dog behavior and dog pack dynamics, and can work with dogs in a way that the dogsunderstand intimately and immediately. Overfield is the latter, and it is that knowledge and understanding she brings to training...Saturday Dogs isn't a classic dog-training manual. Rather, it's a book about the method Overfield uses to help owners understand and work with their dogs. Each chapter tells the story of one dog (or pack of dogs) and owner, and how Overfield helped them become a well-adjusted team...While many training manuals are dust-dry and boring, Overfield's writing is engaging and funny; she has a knack for story-telling. Her behavioral analyses and explanations are presented in a clear, straightforward manner... I would absolutely recommend her book to dog owners... Mark Oxbrow, Rambles

We all know book reviews are great...but what do real dog owners think of "Saturday Dogs"?

They all LOVE it...

"This is an awesome book. Susan has helped myself and my dog beyond what you can imagine!!" T.L.

"Great book! I opened it to glance through when it was delivered and didn’t put it down until I had read the whole thing." L.H.

"A most excellent book--not only entertaining, but worthwhile information for any dog owner." A. K.

"A wonderful book and insightful about the mind of a dog and how people often misread their own pet’s behavior. Can’t wait for the next book!" T. G.

"I loved Susan Overfield’s book, Saturday Dogs. I would highly recommend this book (and I have) to anyone, whether or not you own dogs. The first two dogs in the book described my dogs exactly. Great book." N. Z.

"Saturday Dogs...are the stories that everyone of us has experienced with our pets. Each story is a real life, different behavior problem that shows what great changes the dog can achieve when humans understand dogs and adjust their communication and actions. It's a joy to read, full of common sense, fun and funny, and since I changed how I am with my dog, he is so much happier. I can see it in his eyes and behavior. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart." E.M.

I’ve read your book, my daughter borrowed it and read it as well. I think EVERY dog owner should read it. I wish EVERY dog owner could meet you, learn your methods and help EVERY dog out there. Maybe then we would no longer need rescues. I look forward to such a day. A WONDERFUL book. C.S

Reader Rating (Barnes & Noble) ~~

All you dog lovers out there pour yourselves a glass of wine, settle in by the fireplace and enjoy this delightful book. Overfield's vignettes from her years of dog training are irresistibly hilarious, witty and poignant. Her love of dogs and shrewd understanding of the canine and human psyches is evident in every page...Can't wait for a sequel...

Listen to Susan - She knows Dogs. The anecdotes in 'Saturday Dogs' recreate, in a most helpful way, problems others have had and how she helped correct 'the dogs and their people!' Susan entertains, instructs, counsels, and encourages dog owners as she shares her expertise.

I learned to have greater respect for animal intelligence after reading Susan Overfield's book. Clarity, consistency, immediate response and effective use of the voice is the key to your dog's good behavior and contentment (it works on children too!) Not only will you learn something, but it's a great read. The stories that precede each chapter are touching, hilariously funny,and sometimes filled with empathy and pathos. If you loved 'All Creatures Great and Small', you will also love 'Saturday Dogs'!

There is hope for even the most unruly K-9. Susan has saved more relationships between owners and pets, the proof is in the reading! Sit down and enjoy,you will laugh as you realize you are not alone with your 'problem child'. There is hope--there is Susan Overfield!

Susan Overfield has an amazing insight into the behavior of our canine companions. She doesn't care a bit about our excuses for why we allow problem behavior to continue, her only concern is the health and well-being of our relationships with our pets--and she is not afraid to let us know about it. This book is not a 'how-to' so much as a dog expert sharing her knowledge of canine psychology, which ultimately gives the reader his or her own starting point for building a great relationship with that special furry someone.

Susan Overfield has done a great job on this book. It taught me a lot about about dogs and how they think. I laughed so hard throughout this book that I had to have my tissue box next to me while I read. I have SEEN dogs do these funny things she talks about. I have also been doing a lot of the things she says to do, and IT WORKS!! I can't wait for my parents to finish reading it so I can loan it to another friend I have with a dog. I will definitely tell more people about the book.

Susan Overfield does an outstanding job of relaying her stories of both dog and owner in this hard-to-put down, laugh-out-loud book. Every time I picked up the book, I got so absorbed, I felt like I was out there with them on a Saturday morning in Montana. Highly Recommended.

Here's your opportunity to get the book that has owners laughing out loud and dogs happily wagging their tails, and for only $16.95.

Also available for Great Falls residents at

Hastings Books

Barnes & Noble Books

BOSS Dog Clinic, American Brittany Rescue Fund-raiser

2008-04-28T05:36:00.000-07:00

ABR is sponsoring a fund-raiser

BOSS Dog Clinic
(Behavioral-Obedience Skills Seminar)

Instructor: Susan Overfield
Nationally known for her BOSS Dog Clinics and her method of behavioral-obedience training and author of "Saturday Dogs...and the owners they trained" www.overfieldkennel.com

*Note: Susan's clinics fill up quickly, so please register early if you want to guarantee a spot. My
contact information is below. Thank you, Dave Powers, MT Co-Ordinator, ABR

Morning Session: Dog psychology seminar,
This is a 2-hour seminar discussing the emotional, physical, social and mental development of dogs and their behavioral and psychological responses to stimuli within their immediate environment. How humans create misbehavior, phobias and unintentional problems through their miscommunication and actions with their dogs. For humans ONLY. Cost $50 per person

Full-Day: Psychology seminar & Behavioral-Obedience
Dog Psychology Seminar in the morning and the afternoon devoted to applied-behavioral
obedience for a maximum of 25 dogs and owners who must have attended the morning session.
The afternoon concentrates on communication and basic behavioral-obedience. Owners and
their dogs work with Susan Overfield in order to learn how to implement the psychological and
behavioral skills discussed in the morning session. This is NOT a theory/lecture class,
this is a hands-on class for owners and dogs. Cost $100 per dog/handler

SATURDAY 14, JUNE 2008

9 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Gallatin County Fairgrounds
901 North Black
Bozeman MT

For more information, or to register for Morning or Full-Day Clinic, please contact:
Dave Powers bowhunter1955@msn.com or call: (406) 222-6847
Susan Overfield stockdog@3riversdbs.net or call (406) 868-5121

Dog Gone Walk 2008

2008-04-28T05:32:00.000-07:00

Dog Gone Walk 2008

Dog Gone Walk 2008 will be a walk benefitting Cut Bank Animal Shelter on Sunday, May 4th, 2008. Dogs and their owners made our last walk an event to remember. We look forward to the Dog Gone Walk 2008.

Dog Gone Walk 2008 is a walk benefitting Cut Bank Animal Shelter. Sunday, May 4, 2008. The walk is a 1.5 mile flat walk.

2:00 p.m. Registration on the south side of A.J. Park, next to the tennis courts on the northwest side of Cut Bank.

3:00 p.m. Start on the south side of A.J. Park, next to the tennis courts on the northwest side of Cut Bank.

Humans and canines are welcome. Pets receive bandanas. Pet owners are responsible for cleaning up after & maintaining control of their pets. All dogs must be leashed. Aggressive dogs & dogs in heat should not participate.

Entry fee=$5.00 per dog/walker; $10.00 per family

We will be selling various items ranging from $2.50 to $50.00. Various sizes of Furminator-dog grooming comb; Magnetic Rescue Ribbons; Clickers; Stuffed Squeaky Toys; Cat/Dog Beds and carriers; Spay/Neuter Tote Bags and Beanie Babies. Bring your wallet or checkbook and support a worthy cause - your Animal Shelter and the animals that pass through on a daily basis. In the last four years, Cut Bank Animal Shelter has had 560 animals pass through our doors. All funds are donated to the Cut Bank Animal Shelter Medical Fund and are a tax free donation, you will receive a tax receipt.

Come join the celebration of another Dog Obedience Class graduation and our 1st Dog Walk of the year. We'll see you there.

Saturday Dogs...and the owners they trained

2008-03-20T12:02:00.000-07:00

Ditching Treats, Choke Chains, and Shock Collars

New book gives remarkable insight
to dog behavior and the mistakes owners make

Though the recent history of dog training suggests otherwise, treats, choke chains, and shock collars ignore what makes a dog a dog.

In fact, the overuse of such stimuli in combination with owner ignorance has created generations of hyperactive, disobedient dogs, some of whom are put to death.

In her critically acclaimed book, Saturday Dogs...and the owners they trained, Susan Overfield outlines her proven training approach, focusing on behavior and social identity in a relationship-oriented way.

Written in the spirit of James Herriott, Overfield's book is an anecdotal manual that examines common mistakes owners make in the realm of dog behavior.

Overfield's unique insight to both man and dog focuses on the stress and misery caused by insecure owners. Her stories focus on clients with common behavioral problems that cause their animals to jump, pull, lick, and bite.

Her method trains the owner to see their dog for what it is (a dog) and analyzes how the behavior and response of both parties results in either joy or abject misery.

Written for any owner who has ever been trained by a dog, Saturday Dogs opens the door to a relationship with long-term stability within the behavioral, psychological, emotional and social parameters of man's best friend.

Praise for Saturday Dogs

"...Susan Overfield's work is noteworthy...she focuses our attention on the dog's behavioral properties, on its social identity...her contribution is to remind us that...successfully living with a dog is not a process of rewards and punishments, it is a relationship..."

Stewart Hilliard, PhD, one of the world's leading authorities on canine psychology, behavior and training, co-author of Schutzhund: Theory and Training Methods

"The wonderful stories are the stories my rescue dogs have experienced...because of the wealth of common-sense information, the dogs and I now communicate easily...this knowledge has literally saved dogs' lives."
David Powers, Montana coordinator, American Brittany Rescue

Softcover
$16.95

ISBN: 0-980-2199-5-7

Available immediately from
Overfield Kennel.com
MuddyCreekPublishing.com

Available May 2008 through Barnes and Noble, Amazon and other fine book dealers

Great Falls develops parameters for Baker

2008-02-01T05:47:00.001-08:00

I understand that the City sat down and developed parameters for Ms. Baker, the investigator.
How can one investigate if there are parameters? I would like to address Ms. Baker in the following letter:

Ms. Baker:

We, the citizens, would ask that you investigate everything. Speak to everyone involved. We would ask that you realize that the City Commission and Mr. Lawton ARE the Board of the Animal Shelter, and as such, will, in all probability, develop "parameters" that shy away from certain of their behaviors.

Here are some issues we would like investigated, please:

1) Cashing of HSCC checks without their authorization
2) Hiring of an unqualified individual as Director of the Animal Shelter
3) Acts of cruelty by Shelter staff
4) Negligence and lack of oversight by the Board of the Animal Shelter, which is comprised of City Commissioners and Mr. Lawton, which resulted in this investigation
5) Involvement by that same board with the Animal Foundation of Great Falls and the intended purpose of the original take-over and future "hand-off" of the shelter to the AFGF or its sub-group which resulted in this investigation
6) The amount of money spent by the City on the Shelter to date
7) The purported claim by the City that over 70% of the Staton Report requirements for Shelter improvement has been met by the City since taking over the facility.
8) The shut-down of the foster-home program
9) The number of animals killed to date within the Shelter
10) The lack of records kept for public inspection (violation of MCA)
11) The exact amount and types, i.e., fines, licenses, etc., of monies collected by the Shelter and City to date, and to whom they were funneled i.e., the Animal Foundation, Spay of the Falls, back into the Shelter or into other City accounts
12) The qualifications of the personnel currently writing policies and procedures for the Shelter
13) The intent by the current Shelter director to eliminate specific animal-related duties, such as temporarily caring for certain wild animals until such time as they can be handed off to another authority.
14) The lack by shelter personnel & board to ensure performance of their duties, i.e., collection of licensing fees, inspection of commercial kennels/pet stores and subsequent reissuing of annual licenses, education programs for the public, adoption fees, etc.

Thank you and we await your report,

The Concerned Citizens

Great Falls HAS a dog park

2008-01-29T05:05:00.000-08:00

Interesting the information one finds that isn't public knowledge. Once found, one asks why ISN'T this public knowledge?

Great Falls HAS a dog park. It's Wadsworth Park, though it's not termed a "dog park".

It's owned by the City of Great Falls, and it is just outside the City limits. You may run your dog there off-leash. John Thompson, City Forester, run HIS dog there. The City even has a development plan for Wadsworth.

Here's what I find interesting. It's free. Tax dollars are already paying for it. So why did the City keep the information quiet?

Perhaps it's so the Animal Foundation could PR their way into a dog park which would make them look good, especially in light of the fact they've done nothing else with the money we've donated.

I can see another reason why Dona Stebbins and the Foundation haven't told people about the park. The people MOST interested in a Animal Foundation dog park have the LEAST control over the behavior of their dogs. (Lattes, cell phones and poorly behaved dogs, yep- really makes me want to take my dog there.) By creating a FENCED dog park, the Animal Foundation has simply created a big backyard for the owners that can't keep their dogs off-leash behavior in line in the real world.

A very good example of the type of dog and owner which one will find utilizing the Animal Foundation dog park is here. (Since many won't purchase this archived blog, let me quote it as I used it in my newsletter as a perfect example of WHY DOG PARKS ARE A BAD IDEA.)

"The first time we took Bailey to the dog park, we kept him on leash for awhile. Much like parents sending their kids off to kindergarten, we weren't sure if Bailey would make friends (or if he'd return when called)...Bailey can be aggressively playful, ready to wrestle whether other dogs like it or not. He seems to get along with dogs that either let him run the show or that like to wrestle as much as he does. Samba was neither...Within seconds of the initial sniff test she had Bailey pinned to the ground and her teeth were inches from Bailey's neck...After that, my husband wouldn't let Bailey play with other dogs--unless they were pocket pooches or labs (sic). I guess his logic is that all labs (sic) are nice and Bailey could squash even a really mean mini dog." (Kim Skornogoski, Aug 7, 2007, Dog Blog, Great Falls Tribune)

Let's recap:

The Animal Foundation, because they don't have enough money to erect their Taj Mahal of shelters and has pushed a dog park because it wants to have good PR.

Dona Stebbins, (Spay of the Falls, Mayor of Great Falls, and part of the Animal Foundation,) doesn't inform the public of this City park. Why? In order to continue funneling money to her personal projects? Because she's noted for not telling the citizens much? Because she & her dog can't correctly utilize this park's off-leash abilities?

City Parks & Rec isn't announcing this park, either. Could this be because they follow the orders of the Commission and the Commission has created a closed-door deal with the Animal Foundation?

Not the Mayor, the Commissioners, nor the Animal Foundation have done a single thing for the animals in the shelter, but they certainly have supported the idea of a dog park under the auspices of the Foundation, with the help of development by Melanie Lattin (city employee and Foundation board member).

If we have an off-leash park where dogs may run and play, why do we need the Animal Foundation's dog park? Why do we need them to waste ANY money on another playground for dogs while what is truly needed is a realistic, workable shelter?

Why are they trying to us sell political swill as bouillabaisse?

Animal Foundation Quotes of the Week

2008-01-23T05:27:00.001-08:00

In a meeting between HSCC and the Animal Foundation on July 9, 2007, after the takeover of the shelter Bob James and John Gilbert suggested the HSCC merge with the Animal Foundation and the following quotes were taken down verbatim in that meeting:

"The Animal Foundation has worked for years to build equity with the City, County, police department and media, and would share some of their equity with the City to smooth things over for the HSCC and can make the MOU* go away, and the HSCC Board members would not have to resign" B. James

(Ed. - *MOU - memorandum of understanding proposed by John Lawton, which included the requirement that all current HSCC Board members resign, with new members to be appointed and overseen by the City.)

"We have a lot of equity with the Tribune, and if we merge, we could meet with the Tribune editorial board about a story on the new situation." B. James

"Negative PR has hurt fund raising so we are focusing on the dog park because it is good PR."
both B. James and J. Gilbert

Ed - My, my...Kind of makes one stop and consider all the statements from the Foundation about NOT knowing what's going on, what's happening, not being involved with the City, and reading the recent Tribune articles about the Foundation with a healthy bit of skepticism, doesn't it?

HSCC Steps Up

2008-01-22T16:57:00.001-08:00

Since so much goes astray within the City halls, so many meetings go unreported, so many "dual purpose" employees seem unable to keep track of specific items and lead the public into the idea that "it never happened", I have taken the liberty of posting this (I have added a page I missed):

Animal Foundation Funding Stats

2008-01-21T06:56:00.000-08:00

I read it. Yes, thank you for all the e-mails which started at zero-dark-thirty.

Let's dissect what seems to be a great PR job for the Animal Foundation in the Trib, yet doesn't seem to add up.

BASIC MATH
(see article side bar)

If you add the Contributions = $1,145,995
plus, Fur Ball proceeds = 161,863
TOTAL =$1,307,858

Foundation says in the article that it has: $1,308,907
Minus TOTAL from above 1,307,858
MISSING =$ 1,049

Investments total = $97,352
Expenses total = 96,349
PROFIT = $ 1,003

Let's call the missing and the profit money shown above as an equal amount or a "wash", nothing lost, nothing gained.

Sheltering Skies
(pg 4) states Foundation has contributions in the amount of: $1, 426, 207
Subtract today's TOTAL (above from Trib) - 1, 308,858
Please account for the difference of = $ 117,349

Humane Society Checks Cashed by City of Great Falls

2008-01-19T05:53:00.000-08:00

The City of Great Falls and the Police Department which operates the Animal Shelter admitted in their report (for download) that they accepted checks made out to the Humane Society of Cascade County and cashed them. The HSCC did NOT authorize this and it is unlike when Albertson's took over from Buttrey's, and there WAS authorization to accept checks and cash them, regardless of the name. In this case it is outright THEFT.

Ask yourselves...How could both entities, the City and Police, NOT know that was an illegal act? Yet, they did it. They didn't make the person alter the check. They didn't bother to hold the check and give it to the HSCC. They didn't contact the person who wrote the check and correct the endorsement.

I can only surmise that they did this deliberately, with malice and intent. They are the POLICE DEPARTMENT. The Fiscal Services Asst. Director HAD to know that the HSCC is NOT a City entity. Is incompetence so rampant within our City? Is corruption so ingrained that not an eye is batted? Looks like it to me.

Then, to top it off, I was looking for something else and came across this:

It seems in July 2006 at the Commission Work Session (minutes) in which they were discussing the Animal Control Ordinance, a citizen, Mr. Olson, was allowed to express concern for dogs off-leash. He was followed by Mr. "Bob James, citizen member, suggested that fines could be reduced for an unaltered animal if they had the animals altered within 30 days. He also requested that the Commission consider forwarding a percentage of the fines to the Animal Foundation to help pay for the new shelter."

I spent quite a bit of time running through EVERY meeting from Jan 2006 to Dec 2007. Mr. James was the ONLY citizen member to make ANY REQUEST OF THAT NATURE. In fact, there were very few incidents of "citizen members" speaking. Many consultants. Many reports.
Many updates. But, only 3 citizens, one of whom asked a question, one of whom made a statement about preparing a firework safety brochure, AND MR JAMES' REQUEST FOR MONEY FROM THE CITY COFFERS.

I would be interested to know if this request was honored. Particularly in light of the fact that in 2006 the HSCC was STILL operating the shelter. I don't know who was the designated recipient of fines collected on such things as unaltered animals. But, I intend to find out.

I then intend to find out if the City, did indeed, allocate a percentage to the Animal Foundation.

I expect the books of both the City and the Animal Foundation to be opened for public review. This kind of theft, from the HSCC and taxpayers should NOT be tolerated.

In light of all of this, I suggest the Animal Foundation reconsider putting in a bid to run the Animal Shelter until such time as they can produce proof that they are NOT connected to the City in any manner (which looks pretty difficult) and their books have been reviewed publicly by an independent audit/review chosen by a citizen's committee and pronounced clean.

Unless the Feds beat everyone to it.

Animal Foundation and Shelter Postings

2008-01-18T11:18:00.000-08:00

Greg, over at Electric City Weblog sent me this e-mail the other day:

Susan,

I went after you pretty hard. Do you care to comment?

http://electriccityweblog.com/?p=200

Hey, Greg:

No, you didn't go after me hard. You did what you thought best and asked

for what you felt was the best confirmation or documentation of what I've

been saying. That's fair. That's all I've been doing with the Foundation,

City and Spay of the Falls issue.

Where possible, I've cited/linked. If it's handwritten, I've quoted. If it's

from individuals who have worked closely, I've indicated that. I can lead

people to the information, but I cannot make them think.

I must ask though, if you are requesting of me to furnish verification, why

not Mr. James, the City, or others? I suggest where people may go to read

what I'm stating. Lowe/Dern produced papers. The HSCC has produced letters

about the bid process back in June 2007. Today's blog was linked more than

a golf course. But, what have those who are being questioned about their

behavior, connectivity and business practices produced to refute any of

this?

As an indication of the interconnectedness I have attached a copy of a

letter (with portions omitted as they are personal to Ms. Lowe) from the law

firm of Ugrin, Alexander, Zadick & Higgins. And WHO is a partner/lawyer in

the firm? Mr. Bob James. And WHO have we been discussing these many months

as pertains to the City and its close ties with the Animal Foundation?

You will note the line which reads, "I find nothing...". I have a problem

with that in two areas.

First, there is City Employee Handbook, Section 15; 15.4.2b. (in this case I

will save everyone the trouble of finding it for themselves) which states

that immediate suspensions are used in situations where it is necessary to

remove the employee immediately from the work environment and/or when time

to conduct an investigation of the situation to determine the appropriate

course of action."

I take that to mean that A) the lawyer who wrote the letter did NOT know his

job, B) said what the city wanted to hear, C) Could care less about this

issue, or D) is working on a predetermined outcome. In any case, I find it

interesting the City hired this law firm (in which Mr. James works and he is

the President of Animal Foundation) to review the Animal Shelter Cruelty

allegations, especially when the City has admitted that the Foundation, Spay

of the Falls (see second attachment) "is involved in the reorganization of

the Animal Shelter."

This brings us to my second problem: The Animal Foundation (plus the other

two groups which supports my statements of their very cozy intertwined

relationship) is headed by Bob James. If the Foundation is involved in the

reorganization then A) how is it they don't know what's happening at the

Shelter, B) how is it they went from ONLY fund raising, per Mr. James'

statements about involvement, to reorganization of a "City operated facility

(note the quotes as I don't believe it to be City oriented at all), C) be

so unaware of the conditions (and this can't be true as we have documented

statements by Mr. James going back to 2002) for the animals that they can

continue to promote how they care while letting animals be killed in

inhumane fashion and, D) did NOT have the Staton Report in hand.

"C" brings up another issue. If they ARE that unaware, then the Foundation

has NO business running anything to do with animals.

This leaves us with Occam's razor (the maxim that assumptions introduced to

explain a thing must not be multiplied beyond necessity) does it not?

As for innuendo, I see nothing wrong with posing a question. You do it all

the time. Are you told that you're promoting innuendo when you question

things about the coal plant? I believe you to be merely questioning and

letting the reader follow that as they wish.

Mr. James, the city representatives, the Police representatives, the Spay of

the Falls representatives chose not to attend the town hall meeting. Much

of this came out and documents were there for review. Why did they not come

and address these questions? What is it they fear? Why are they not

opening books? Why? Why? Why?

Hearsay? It isn't hearsay when the Trib prints it and I refer to it (anyone

may look it up, anyone may purchase the article). It isn't hearsay when the

City has posted rules for bids and they were categorically ignored. It isn't
hearsay when YOU tell me that these groups want me/others marginalized so

they can continue on their merry way. Nor when Cindy James makes statements

to volunteers that if a person can only donate less than $50 "we don't want

that type of person." (Especially if it's heard by more than two people).

It's not hearsay when the people involved make their comments public in the

hearing of more than one person.

Speculation. IRS. Laws. Call them, ask your question. I asked mine. IF

a non-profit promotes their fund raising for a specific entity, then what,

if any, laws have been broken should that non-profit suddenly chose to

ignore their intended recipient in favor of someone/something else? What

about all the money they raised in the name of the original recipient? To

whom does that money belong?

Negotiation and compromise? Look at it this way - your daughter has been

sexually abused by your once-trusted, but now revealed as a pedophile,

babysitter. Will you negotiate and compromise? I wouldn't. I'd get rid of

the babysitter, get help for my daughter and then find a new babysitter, but

be much more careful in my review of that person before letting them near my

child.

I, and many others, will no longer negotiate or compromise with a

group/groups which allow animals to die for no reason while sitting on vast

amounts of money. We once supported these groups. They failed to do as

they promised. WE didn't destroy their credibility. WE didn't sell a bill

of goods to the public. WE didn't make their choices, they did. WE don't

trust them.

This is NOT my way. I'm not getting a job, or money, or retirement, or an

ego, or a paving stone, or anything else out of this. Neither is anyone

else who is fighting this fight against exclusivity and corruption and

disregard for the animals that wait for help. The PEOPLE of this community

are incensed. The PEOPLE, who have stepped forward because they see what is

happening and will not tolerate any more, are making consensus decisions.

Some people are going in the opposite direction. That's fine. They may.

That is one of things we are addressing here - the right to have choices

made by oneself. NOT handed-down decisions that are expected to be accepted

without murmur.

It is the PEOPLE you are hearing. It is THEIR will you are hearing. It's

their decision to fight, run, negotiate or compromise. Within the people's

group there IS common ground.

Susan

The Animal Foundation - A Group that keeps on Taking

2008-01-16T05:34:00.000-08:00

People get weary of being treated poorly. Insiders, normal people who are not in the self-determined upper echelons of groups, are often dismissed or treated as inconsequential and they become very tired of it. Once they reach that point, they speak or they act.

Tired of ill treatment, being "marginalized" (a VERY popular term used by this group for those whom they have no regard and wish to dismiss, put out of business, or nullify) these aggrieved people engage in a private boycott and may even offer up information they have been privy to while inside the organization. Such is the case with the following information from HSCC meeting minutes.

Interesting time line and note how the Animal Foundation repeatedly has taken money from the HSCC - but we don't see that acknowledged, do we?

10/22/02 - Melanie Lattin, City of Great Falls employee, voted liaison between the HSCC & Humane Society Foundation of Cascade County (now Animal Foundation of Great Falls)

02/03/2003 - Melanie Lattin, City of Great Falls employee, President of HSCC. At this point $125,000 of HSCC money was given to the Humane Society Foundation of Cascade County (later HSCC Board would demand this money returned, which it was)

05/19/2003 - Melanie Lattin, City of Great Falls employee, resigns from HSCC, its Board accepts resignation and enters it into minutes

07/02/2003 - Melanie Lattin, City of Great Falls employee, becomes listed on Humane Society Foundation Board (now Animal Foundation of GF)

04/10/04 - Power Point presentation by Animal Foundation (new name) to HSCC Board. HSCC gave the Animal Foundation $8,000 towards their total (as yet undetermined) pledge to help with architect costs. Foundation said that they would be providing and ESTIMATE OF DOG PARK FENCING, drawing and other proposals to the City & are asking City to donate land.

Then you can throw in Gloria LaMott and Dona Stebbins and the circle remains unbroken.

What do we have here in the way of donations by the HSCC to the Animal Foundation?

$125,000 HSCC (returned by demand of HSCC Board)
$8,000 HSCC
$20,000 HSCC

What do we have here in the way of real progress or actual achievement by the Animal Foundation?

Nov 13, 2002 - "Humane Society of Cascade County has formed a foundation to raise money for a new, bigger animal shelter...Foundation President Bob James described the current facility as a territiorial prison. "It's time we provide adequate housing for the animals," James said...The dream shelter could cost as much as $1 million, but a feasibility study is in the works to determine how big they can build...To donate to the foundation, send checks to the Humane Society." (Great Falls Tribune, section: Montana, page: 1M)

Dec 02, 2004 - "The Animal Foundation is currently working with the HSCC to determine the size, services, and fund raising budget for the new animal shelter. Once this decision is made, Mark will provide a preliminary design and revised cost estimates prior to the project being handed off to a local architectural firm." (Sheltering Skies Newsletter, Animal Foundation of Great Falls, Dec 2004/Winter 04, page 2)

April 2005 - Great Falls Neighborhood Council Meeting @ Meadowlark School - "Sally Cerny (Volunteer for the Animal foundation of Great Falls and Chuck Tourtillot Director of the Humane Society of Cascade County provided a Power Point presentation about the Capital Campaign and future plans...The purpose of the Foundation is to provide good care to all pets/animals within the county. Their plans are to build state of the art Animal Shelter and a dog Park. Also they will do on-going fund raising for the Humane Society...they have...identified potential sites for both the shelter and the dog park; consulted with an Architect who designs animal shelters. The are hoping to build a 12,000 sq ft shelter @ a cost of $160/sq ft. The total cost will be about, $2,000,000.00" (see Neighborhood reports online at City site as almost, if not all Councils were visited by Cerny promoting this information during this period.)

June 2005 - Foundation "Speakers Bureau - BOB JAMES, SALLY CERNY AND CHUCK TOURTILLOTT are serving as the Animal Foundation Speakers Bureau. Armed with an informative PowerPoint presentation, either Bob or Sally will accompany Chuck, as theHumane Society representative, to speak to any group that would like to hear more about the Foundation, the plans for the new animal shelter and dog park, and the fundraising campaign. They have already met with the numerous groups in town such as the Electric CityKennel Club, the Lion’s Club, the Realtors Group, the Uptown Optimists, and all the Neighborhood Councils.
If you belong to or are aware of a group that would like
to know more about the Animal Foundation and the animal shelter, call Executive Director Mary Willmarth at 727-6826 to schedule a presentation." (June 3, 2005, Sheltering Skies pg 7)

April 04, 2006 - Let's make this easy, just go to Sheltering Skies and read the same old, same old...We're raising funds. We're working with the architect. We're planning.....

Nov 05, 2006 - "Although the floor plan is not 100% finalized, it is close." Just go to Sheltering Skies - again (pg 1 & 2). Just HOW LONG does it take to PLAN the schematics for a building???

Dec 06, 2007 - "The Animal Foundation has continued to seek assistance from Mark Hafen,
the architect from Animal Arts/Gates Hafen Cochrane in Colorado, who we’ve been working with since we first began this project. Mr. Hafen will be coming to Great Falls in December 2007 to meet with a variety of people to obtain the necessary information to begin designing the actual construction drawings. L’Heureux Page Werner will be the local architect/engineering firm that will design the exterior of the new animal shelter." Ah, hell, here we go again...Sheltering Skies pg 2.... They NOW want 3 MILLION DOLLARS, up from 2.2, for the new shelter.

5 years and still planning. 5 years and animals are still housed in a sub-standard facility. 5 years so that an elitist group can party while our animals die.

I wonder if it's ego for a building that's all twisted steel and sex appeal?

I wonder how they can claim to be FOR animals when they've known for 5 years that we have a problem?

I wonder how they can demand the HSCC donate money to them when the HSCC was grossly underfunded and supposed to be the entity the Foundation was in business to help?

I wonder if the money is there. Is THAT why we experience all the delays?

Animal Foundation Money

2008-01-15T06:43:00.000-08:00

Carefully worded statements are the hallmark of any lawyer. What wasn't stated yesterday seems interesting and the fact that original intent on the part of certain parties is ignored interests me.

The original name of the Foundation was the Humane Foundation of Cascade County and their purpose was to get the McLean money in order to build the shelter for the HSCC (see here)

You will note in the side bar of that publication was Melanie Lattin, ex-President of the HSCC, grant writer for the City of Great Falls. That would be a handy skill if one wanted to present a group and their intent in order to get that money.

In yesterday's letter is the statement, "outlined in its very thorough proposal and elaborated upon by certain of its trustees." I would think this would be Mr. Bob James. Could it be that yesterday's letter is an example of lawyers calling in favors? (Just a personal question.)

From all documents I've been able to read, neighbors of McLean I have spoken to, and information from various individuals active during this period of which we are speaking, the currently named Foundation stepped up to the plate to ensure that McLean's money went to building the new shelter for the Humane Society of Cascade County.

We are back to square one. That money has been promoted from the beginning as funds for a shelter for the Humane Society of Cascade County. It's printed, it's been taken down in the form of statements by Mr James (and other representatives of the Foundation) at various times and places. The community was clearly led to believe that the donations they made were for a shelter for the HSCC.

The time line, the interconnectedness of the people and groups, and the FACT remains that the Animal Foundation publicly solicited funds for the HUMANE SOCIETY OF CASCADE COUNTY and its shelter.

The "trumped up" charges which were brought to the Tribune and NEVER substantiated last summer, between the questioned bid scenario and hostile take-over of the shelter, seems to be the final act of the combined groups to make a public, but not legal, split from the HSCC in order to keep the money for their exclusive use and control of all facets of companion animal affairs.

A non-profit which raises funds in the name of a specific purpose BUT then uses those funds for something else is engaged in duplicity and the IRS laws are very specific about this form of behavior. Common sense would lead us to believe that the IRS would be interested in investigating.

I wonder if Margaret would have allowed her legal representative to give that money to the Foundation had she known that the shelter was going to be ripped from beneath the HSCC. That the new shelter would be a monument to the exclusivity of the private club (as I call it) which would be the sole determiner in the future who, what, where, and when of our animals, while not responding to immediate needs of the shelter animals during the past 5+ years.

Ric Valois Recall Requests at GF Commission Meeting

2008-01-11T06:21:00.000-08:00

Here, in their entirety, are the requests for recall or resignation as presented the evening of Tuesday 8, January 2008.

Ric Valois:

"Before I begin I'd like to preface my statements concerning resignation or recall, that the new commissioners, Mary Jolley and Bill Bronson, are not enjoined.

"I am here for the voiceless and uncared for animals in our community. I am here for those among us who give voice to their urgent cry for help.

"The remedies I put on the table tonight are purely of my own opinion and may, or may not, reflect, the remedies of others concerning this animal shelter crisis.

"We in this community who pay the bills through our taxes to our local government, and donate our time, our hearts, and our financial resources to the various charities of our choices, are the employers, not the subjects or employees, of those we entrust to carry out the order of civic responsibility or charitable cause.

"When those who are charged with this responsibility or cause refuse to do so, whether by incompetence or deliberate design, it falls to us, the employers, to remove said people charged from their neglected duties.

"1) I call for the resignations of Mayor Dona Stebbins, Commissioners Bill Beecher and John Rosenbaum, Chief of Police Corky Grove, City Manager John Lawton, and shelter director, Jamie Bennett. The correct and officials documents to be on the desks of Commissioners Mary Jolley and Bill Bronson no later than Wednesday morning, Jan 8, 2008.

"In the event this call for resignation by same mentioned parties is ignored, I will call for a legal public recall of same mentioned parties, signature gathering to commence this week.

"2) I am calling for the immediate transfer of care and responsibility of the existing shelter to be placed back in the domain of the Humane Society of Cascade County, with a full team of citizens oversight on board at the moment of transfer. All funding and financial resources approved by the City and County, at the level stated in the Staton report, to revert back to the HSCC as well.

"3) I am calling for the HSCC to install people of proven capability and integrity, Amy Lowe and Jason Dern, to positions of authority in the care and function of the reacquired shelter.

"4) I am calling for the return of all funds, donations, and financial resources raised by the City of Great Falls, Spay of the Falls, and the Animal Foundation of Great Falls, returned to the HSCC in full, effective immediately.

"5) I am calling for an immediate opening of the financial books of the City of Great Falls, Spay of the Falls, Animal Foundation of Great Falls, and the City Police Department. To be conducted and supervised by an independent specialist and citizens' oversight committee, approved by the HSCC and all affected parties, in an open public forum.

"In the event of procrastination or prolonged duplicity on the part of the City of Great Falls, the Animal Foundation of Great Falls, the City of Great Falls Police Department, and/or Spay of the Falls to meet this criteria of an open public audit, then a demand to investigate and audit the personal financial books of the individuals within these entities, and those named in the public recall, will be enjoined.

"6) I call for the creation of a permanent, independent citizens' oversight group to oversee local government as needs arise to ensure promises made will be promises kept.

"In closing, Mayor Stebbins, Commissioners Rosenbaum and Beecher, Chief Grove and City Manager Lawton, the contempt, arrogance, and belligerence you've displayed concerning this animal shelter crisis, and lack of compassion or empathy towards the animals in that shelter, have betrayed your false intentions to do good, to your true intentions to do otherwise, making your official positions untenable - entering the realm of villainous. It is time for you to go! The only choice before you now is the speed in which you do it."

Pam Hendrickson:

"I ask for the resignations of Mayor Dona Stebbins, commissioner Biil Beecher, commissioner John Rosenbaum, chief of police Corky Grove, city manager John Lawton, and shelter director Jamie Bennett, to be effective Wednesday, January 9, 2008. In the event this request is ignored, I call for a legal recall of same mentioned parties, with signature gathering to commence immediately.

"Once again I am here to say shame on you to our city managers. Not only for the excruciatingly poor treatment of the helpless animals in your care, but for the prodigous waste of tax payer funds and community resources.

"Mayor Stebbins was quick to point out that the City purchased a brand new, heavy duty washer and dryer set. Thanks to staff members who overstuffed the washer with soiled blankets, still full of feces, and who used an ultra concentrated bleach that is not to be used in that manner, the washer did not work for at least 2 months. So they did not wash soiled bedding, but threw it out after one use. Do you have any idea how many blankets they must have gone through if they were not re-using any of them? Did they have to buy bedding, or just abuse the generosity of the individuals and businesses who donated?

"Dr. Rick Scherr was going to donate a bank of approximately 12 cat kennels, but that never happened.

"Private food donations are not being used, but in fact are stacked in a back room and left to rot. Why? The Humane Society had a program that provided emergency pet food to those in need, and to the shelter foster homes, but that program has been eliminated. Please tell us why you have turned your back on pet owners in need. Why you can't even give what you have no use for.

"Fourteen foster homes were told their services would no longer be utilized because they do not live within city limits.

"The shelter does not want volunteers or dog walkers and is turning away offers of FREE help. Why in God's name would you prefer to let animals suffer? Why would you deprive a dog a short walk, instead condemning him to days or weeks confined to a kennel with no exercise? Why do you think it is better to pay for what people will gladly give?

"Ric Valois, who owns The Tree Man business, has rescued cats from trees for years, at absolutely no charge to the shelter or the pet owner. The Fire Department does not provide this service. NO ONE ELSE provides this service. But shelter management is so petty they will not call him for help, nor will they tell the public that his help is available. You would rather let a trapped cat sit for days in all kinds of weather.

"If this is your idea of improving animal care in our community, I certainly don't want you to take over the ambulance service as well. It seems that this administration is bent on taking over businesses that are already being managed in a competent and professional manner. How can it possibly be in the City of Great Falls' best interests to have rank amateurs such as yourselves take over?

"And where is the Animal Foundation in all of this? As usual these past several months, conspicuously absent. Focusing their efforts on a ridiculous dog park. Dog Parks are for animals that already have good homes and caring owners. Dogs that are not in dire need of assistance. That money should be going to the animals NOW. The money that has been collected to date should be used to build a shelter NOW.

"Once again shame on you. Reinstate the Humane Society, or we will do it for you. "

Christian Cornelius:

"I ask for the resignations of Mayor Dona Stebbins, Commissioner Bill Beecher, Commissioner John Rosenbaum, Chief of Police Corky Grove, City Manager John Lawton, and shelter director Jamie Bennett, to be effective Wednesday, January 9, 2008. In the event this request is ignored, I call for alegal recall of same mentioned parties with signature gathering to commence immediately.

"After the allegations of abuse and cruelty were made public, Pam Hendrickson and myself decided to visit the shelter.

"On December 21st we visited at approximately 1:15 p.m. and immediately noted several dogs' cages with feces and urine in them. We also noted the absence of any identifying kennel cards which would contain the animals' sex, available adoption date and other pertinent information.

"In the cat room we saw at least five (5) cats that were obviously sick. They were coughing, sneezing, and had runny eyes - all of which are indicators of an upper respiratory infection. There were also at least ten (10) dogs wearing collars - a potentially serious hazard as the dogs might become entangled by the collar in their cages and literally hand themselves to death.

"When we approached shelter director Jamie Bennett with our concerns, she told us that the kennel cards were absent due to lack of time and staff. When we attemtped to question her regarding the sick cats, whether they had received veterinary attentions and why they were in the general population and not in isolation, the collared dogs and messy cages, she promptly turned to leave to attend a "meeting" and told us to refer all further questions to Captain Tim Shanks at the GF Police Department. Pam left Capt. Shanks a message that afternoon and is still, to this day, awaiting a response.

"Why can't the shelter director, supposedly the person in charge, answer a few basic questions regarding the animals in her care? Why refer us to someone who does not even work in the shelter on a daily basis? Capt. Shanks could not possibly answer our questions and, in fact, did not. So much for accountability to the citizens of Great Falls.

"The following week on December 29th, we returned to the shelter at approximately 5:45 p.m. Our arrival did not go unnoticed and within three (3) minutes we were approached by an ACO. He asked our intended business and when we told him we were going to look around and film what we saw, he asked us to quit filming. He then told us that unless we were interested in adopting a animal, that we would have to leave. We politely refused and he then told us to quit filming and leave and that if we did not, that the police would be called to escort us from the shelter.

"Why? What are they hiding? What didn't they want us to see? Given the recent allegations, I would say there's plenty they don't want the public to see and know.

"I will continue to be a voice and an advocate for the animals, regardless of this type of harassment. These animals deserve nothing less.

"I am certainly glad that the Humane Society's name is no longer attached to the shelter. There is certainly nothing humane about what is happening there now."

Mine was short and sweet, I asked that Mr. Valois' statement stand as my own. I also stated that the City was hemorrhaging money, as well as the fact they needed to place someone who truly cared in charge of the shelter.

Another woman spoke, I'm attempting to contact her for her statement.

I also wish to thank those of you who are helping in this issue, both on the inside and outside.

Great Falls Mayor Donna Stebbins Offered Choice to Resign or Face Recall

2008-01-09T05:53:00.000-08:00

Last night I sat through what had to be one of the poorest examples of representing citizens at a city meeting it has ever been my misfortune to encounter.

I also observed a stellar example of why Mayor Donna Stebbins, two commissioners (Beecher and Rosenbaum), the City Manager, John Lawton, Police Chief Grove and shelter director, Jamie Bennett, were asked to tender their resignations by this morning or face a recall by the citizens of Great Falls which would commence at the end of this week.

Montana allows for a recall for a limited number of reasons. Two being pertinent to this discussion: violation of the oath of office and official misconduct. Ladies and gentlemen, they were apparent in spades last night.

The room was packed with local firemen, a Missoula fire chief, paramedics, local ambulance company representatives, a gentleman straight from a corporation in South Africa, boy scouts, animal shelter crisis people, airport authority issue people, a Cable 7 supporter, and at least one television camera (other than cable 7) and Richard Ecke of the GF Tribune.

Correct me please, as I only have the on-line Trib version, but I saw no coverage of 5 people's request for resignation or recall reported in the newspaper this morning.

Two new commissioners were seated last night, Bill Bronson, who gave every indication he's a party-line man with his unwavering support of whatever the old regime required, and Mary Jolley, the only Commissioner who questioned anything and whose questions showed just how out of skew this entire shell-game has become.

And let me tell you, it IS a shell-game.

Today's Tribune, in Opinion, had this statement, "What is not needed or justified is a campaign for recall of city commissioners or, worse, a boycott of an unrelated foundation's fundraising efforts. "

The Tribune is sorely remiss in the one job they exist to do - to report news. This shows where the paper is aligned. This shows where they receive their bread and butter. This shows they present ONLY the news that is "approved by committee." They censor. They filter. They decide what you hear.

The Tribune did NOT report a request by 5 citizens for resignations of the above entities and failing that, the inception of a recall by citizens.

By saying there will always be problems with the animal issue they have given it tacit approval.
They are saying, in short, "There's always been an animal problem. There will always be an animal problem. Why address it? Learn to live with it because it won't change. And keep giving your money to entities which WE endorse, that won't do anything to change it."

Do it our way. The way we approve, through the Animal Foundation, Spay of the Falls, etc., just not YOUR way. YOUR way is not to be borne. YOU are not legitimate. YOU are not US.

This is the exact ideology and intent which demonstrates the penchant to take anyone's money, but decides that the animal activists who voice concern over actual care and life and death of animals are of no consequence, not worthy of acknowledgement and that the concern they voice for the animals is of no importance.

We actually find ourselves in the exact position that the animals we care about are in...the animals are of no importance to them. WE are of no importance to them.

The Trib cries, "It's not that animal suffering is less important than human suffering; it's that people seem to get more worked up about pain among animals than about pain among fellow humans."

This is because the animals cannot file the paperwork for recall or blog to protect themselves. They have no recourse to fight back. WE can on their behalf.

Animal Foundation Seed Money

2008-01-03T05:44:00.000-08:00

A valid confusion came to light in a post at ECW by Mjefferson01. If one goes back to my post of Nov 14, 2007 one can see where this issue was already posted. Below is a relative excerpt:

McLean in her will donates $400k, I believe to be allocated by the lawyer, in 2002 I believe.
It's offered to the HSCC, they state they cannot with the limited manpower do the fund-raising, and to issue it to their fund-raising arm, the Foundation, as seed money.
The Foundation promotes & maintains it's their mission to raise funds for a new HSCC shelter. They printed it on EVERYTHING.

This is NOT, regardless of how anyone would like to spin it, a fight between disaffected groups.
This is an issue which is ONLY about the animals, their welfare, their safety and being taken care of correctly.

Bob James' (of the Animal Foundation) response

2008-01-02T12:43:00.000-08:00

I am not a great fan of coincidence. I discovered long ago that "coincidence" is often a cloak for acts that need to become apparent, but which cannot stand transparency. I'm not saying that coincidence is non-existent in our universe. After all, it's a big place and I'm sure that almost anything is possible.

I'm looking at just a FEW events that have taken place and am attempting to decide if they are coincidence, or something else. You be the judge.

1) On June 19th, at a City Commission meeting, I state that the Animal Control bid procedure and award process looks fixed and ask that the Mayor be removed from the award committee. I stated that "the City has never allocated an increase in funds in order to keep up with general rising costs which would negatively affect the running of the shelter. Coincidence? (see Staton report )

2) I further state that the bid may "already be predetermined by an unseen committee which is interested in assuring the Foundation complete control and the City the ability to circumvent or ignore actual bid and awarding procedures". That the City and Foundation want control of the shelter, which at that time was run by the HSCC (See here) Lo and behold! Who are the 3 entities now running the shelter? Coincidence?

3) After the ACO's press conference it was pointed out to me by various people that the one of the television stations had run an OLD pro-Animal Foundation piece from a couple of years back. Coincidence?

4) I blog this piece (Saturday 29, Dec. 2007) and invite almost every entity in Great Falls to the Town Hall meeting, Jan 5, 2008 @ 7 p.m. University of Great Falls Theater Building - not a peep is heard from any of representatives of those groups invited. But I know they read the blog. Coincidence?

5) This morning I e-mail key individuals within those groups from the link above and other than the "receipt" to show that they received the e-mail, there is no response until this pops up (a couple of hours after sending the invitation) on ECW. Coincidence?

I blog this list. Coincidence?

Abuse At Animal Shelter

2007-12-31T04:53:00.000-08:00

Here are the BIG questions:

What is the City doing about it?
Staying quiet. Except for Mayor Stebbins who says to anyone listening that I, and a few others, are "quacks", and that the two ACOs are disgruntled.

What is the City Attorney doing about it?
Staying quiet and doing nothing.

What is the Police Department doing?
It says it's investigating the matter. That would be investigating itself.

What is the Animal Foundation doing?
Trying to rustle up a new group to step in and take over the shelter. This would be a "splinter group" of the Foundation. Same old game, just new players. Nope, won't work.

What is the State doing about requests for help and outside investigation?
The Attorney General's Office says that they only take on investigations requested by law enforcement. (Great to know that's where our tax dollars go)
One of the Asst. AGs is Johnstone, with ties to the Foundation. (Maybe this is the REAL reason this fiasco is not being investigated)
The Governor and Sen. Tester have not deigned to respond to e-mails, faxes, and phone calls.
There is at least one reader of this blog from the Dept. of Administration and one from Helena,
but nothing moves at the State level. (To quote a citizen, "Montana, the last best place for criminals")

What are the people doing?
Quite a bit.

The Town Hall meeting has been arranged.
More Press Releases about this citizens' meeting have been sent to the media around the country.
Animal Advocacy/Rescue/Welfare groups have been alerted about the lack of response by local and state officials, as well as by the Animal Foundation.
A group of citizens have already begun to tour the Shelter with video cameras and notebooks and are documenting everything.
Citizens are gathering evidence and documents, people are talking, and the news is spreading.

Apology to Animal Foundation

2007-12-29T12:50:00.000-08:00

This is an open, sincere and profound apology to the Animal Foundation of Great Falls and Mr. Bob James.

I apologize for blogging and stating publicly that all monies collected after the first two years of fund raising by the Animal Foundation of Great Falls be retained by that same entity. (See here) I was wrong. I apologize. What I should have said is all monies collected by the Animal Foundation AFTER June 2005 is the Foundation's to keep and do with as they wish.

For you see, it has been brought to my attention, and supported by documentation and witnesses, that at the April 12, 2005, Neighborhood Council No. 1 meeting the Foundation representative, "Sally Cerny (Volunteer for the Animal foundation of Great Falls and Chuck Tourtillott Director of the Humane Society of Cascade County provided a Power Point presentation about their Capital Campaign and future plans. The foundation is a 501(c) (3) organization meaning it is a non-profit and all donations are tax deductible. The purpose of the Foundation is to provide good care to all pets/animals within the county. Their plans are to build a state of the art Animal Shelter and a dog park. Also they will do on-going fund raising for the Humane Society." Then on 12 May, 2005 the Foundation was still selling the following line to our community - "Animal Foundation - Sally Cerny, Trustee The Animal Foundation provides support for the Humane Society Animal Shelter."

Now, according to individuals who very recently questioned you about this matter, you stated that it was a "printing error". However, the fact remains that is what was said and I, for one, will hold you to that public pronouncement.

I will also be sure to prominently post this, in toto, at the January 5, 2008, Town Hall meeting as a way of admitting my error as regards dates.

At this juncture I wish to take the opportunity to extend a public invitation for any and/or all of the following -Animal Foundation Board members, elected officials of the City of Great Falls, City of Great Falls Police Department, City of Great Falls Animal Shelter, Spay of the Falls, and/or employees of the City of Great Falls or Cascade County to attend the Town Hall meeting on January 5, 2008 at University of Great Falls, Theater Building, 1301 20th St S., to commence at 7 p.m. so that you may have an opportunity to address the concerns of the citizens of Great Falls.

GF Animal Shelter Report

2007-12-27T07:52:00.000-08:00

Kim Staton, issued a report developed July 23-27, 2007. The City had it. The Animal Foundation had it (though it only recently popped up on their site under links), but both refused to relinquish a copy to the Humane Society of Cascade County, despite numerous requests over several months, until just a few days ago. This time frame would have been just prior to Christmas, but post the Press Conference by Amy Lowe & Jason Dern. This might be a case of too little, too late if both City and Foundation are trying to make themselves look good.

There has been quite a bit of complaining against HSCC, by the City, the Foundation and by some of the public. But, both City and Foundation did nothing to help HSCC and everything to obliterate it. Both the City and Foundation had money, neither helped the animals. The City wanted everything on the cheap, the hell with what the animals required, then AND now. The Foundation wanted a dog park first, the shelter second and the hell with the animals that were/are in need and living now.

Here are some financial and building items from the report, we will cover other areas included in the report at a different time:

The HSCC received $115,000.00 annually since 2002 to run the shelter AND perform Animal Control duties for the City and County. (Ed. - This amount, as discussed below, is woefully inadequate and the HSCC could NEVER perform, nor be expected to perform, their duties on this amount. All complaints about animals under HSCC care must be evaluated in light of this truth and the information below.)

The Foundation has been raising money for a new shelter for almost 5 years. NOT ONCE in all that time, did the Foundation allocate a percentage of raised monies to go to the HSCC for the interim daily needs of the animals as we waited for the new shelter to become reality. Where is their concern for animal care in all of this???? Where is the new shelter? The Dog Park money could have been given to the HSCC for immediate needs in all areas.

The Staton Report states, "The 2006 total operational budget for the Great Falls Animal Shelter inclusive of the Animal Control program was just over $300,000.00. This included monies received from the City of Great Falls in the amount of $115,000.00. The remainder of the budget was generated through various fees such as pet licensing, owner reclamations, adoptions, etc."

"Based on recommendations by the Humane Society of the United States, funding levels for animal shelter/control programs should be $4.00-$7.00 per capita per year and even though recent funding levels fell within this range, it was clearly insufficient (see discussion {discussion was about age and decrepitude of current building..."the existing shelter is outdated and in desperate need of replacement...even with extensive renovation...is not salvageable as an animal shelter"}) It is important to note this is for a basic program and may not include community outreach, education, volunteer, foster, pet owner assistance, community spay/neuter programs, etc....

"...current estimated population of Great Falls is 60,000, this would mean that a level of funding of $240,ooo-$420,000 would be appropriate for these basic services...however, it is my opinion that funding should be closer to the $7.00 per capita range or $420,000.00."

"However, the level of funding offered by the City has not met even the minimal recommendation for funding of $240,000.00 per year. Since animal control, from a public safety standpoint, is truly a government responsibility, it stands to reason that this minimal level of funding should be provided by the government.

"...it is also appropriate to expect that City and Country government entities would each provide funding based on a per capita rate."

"...County population, exclusive of Great Falls, to be approximately 20,000. Consequently the minimal level of funding provided by the County towards the cost of the Animal Control/Shelter programs should be...$50,000 per year. This combined government totals at a minimal level of funding...would be $290,00.00. Assuming a total operational budget of $420,000, this would leave $130,000 left to be generated through adoptions, reclamations, licensing, fundraising, and donor development and would become the responsibility of the oversight organization."

"Recommendations:
1. Regardless of who is operating the shelter/animal control program in the future, an absolute minimal level of funding should be $420,000.
2.The City and County provide funding at the $4.00 per capita rate if a non-profit group assume operation responsibilities. If the City assumes long term responsibility for the operation of the shelter and Animal Control program, the entire $420,000 amount would become their responsibility."

Ed. - The building in which the shelter is housed is owned by the City of Great Falls. It is not adequate, in many areas, as a shelter. BUT, as a city-owned building, it then becomes the City's responsibility, does it not, to maintain as much of it's physical integrity as possible in order to adequately care for the animals? They have failed to do this.

The Staton report recommendations cite the following shelter building inadequacies, which the City has YET to take care of to my knowledge, though they should have:

Have concrete floors in existing shelter repaired and resealed.
Light fixtures should be inspected, repaired as needed, and covers installed to protect them from moisture.
Purchase at least one bank, 12 cages, of larger stainless steel cat cages even if it means removing and not using some of the existing smaller cages.
Have the ductwork throughout the building professionally cleaned and also determine whether repairs or improvements can be made to a/c system to increase air exchange/flow into animal housing areas.

Quick Recap:

The HSCC was grossly underfunded, in an inadequate facility that the City failed to make repairs on in order to be able to meet and maintain the barest minimum of animal care.

The Animal Foundation of Great Falls failed to allocate funds to off-set the HSCC annual shortfall OR help with the interim, daily requirements to ease the burden of both animals and humans within the Shelter environment.

Did the County contribute anything in the way of operational funds, over and above their salary payment of an ACO, to the HSCC for providing a service to the county residents? (I don't have an answer to that as of yet...)

The City of Great Falls, The Animal Foundation of Great Falls, and Spay of the Falls would have you believe the fault all lies with the HSCC, when in truth it was a resource problem. All three of these entities, IN TANDEM AS WELL AS TOGETHER, took and controlled the financial resources of the community for their personal goals and gain, but NONE of these entities actually SHARED THOSE RESOURCES with the HSCC in order to truly help the animals in the shelter. These three groups are now running the Great Falls animal shelter - and things are considerably worse.

City Shelter Donations

2007-12-26T04:00:00.001-08:00

If you wrote a check as a donation to the Humane Society of Cascade County and handed it over to the City Shelter between July 4, 2007 and Dec. 25, 2007, would you please make a copy of both the front and the back and email, mail it (Susan Overfield, 251 Gordon Rd, Vaughn MT 59487) or bring it to the Town Hall Meeting.

TOWN HALL MEETING - JANUARY 5, 2008 - University of Great Falls Auditorium, 7 pm. All citizens are invited. It's free. It will be ONLY about The Animals of Great Falls.
Tell your friends and please plan to show up. (This is being paid for by a private citizen)

Shelter Information

2007-12-22T07:25:00.000-08:00

What isn't being said:

Amy Lowe & Jason Dern, at the Sept. training they were sent to by the CITY in WA, were CERTIFIED in Animal Cruelty Investigation (lg animal, however, the investigative procedures remain the same as for small animals).

The City Budget has been released and the City is has still budgeted $115,000.00 for the Humane Society of Cascade County (I suggest that this money be handed over to the HSCC on January 2, 2008. If not, I think an investigation into fraudulent practices or malfeasance by the City take place.) Was that money going to be handed over to the police instead of the identified recipient? {See Electric City Weblog for more lengthy piece on the money}

The vet which administered the heart-stick is Keller (sources have confirmed this).

The newspaper has failed to reveal the general type and number of documents distributed to ALL press members at the press conference. The packet included, but was not limited to, 14 photo copies of animal shelter intake records which included impound date, adoption available date and actual kill date. As well as copies of e-mails (dates sent and responses received) to various entities requesting help in this issue.

This Journal of Commission Work Sessions, Oct. 2, 2007 is very enlightening, particularly in view of the emphasis on HOW THE SHELTER LOOKS. Also, there is a statement regarding the fact that "there is no systematic euthanization being done at the shelter". (No truer words may ever have been spoken.)

Response for Contact Information

2007-12-21T08:35:00.000-08:00

Here are some of the contacts you all e-mailed me and requested:

Donna Stebbins dstebbins@ci.great-falls.mt.us donastebbins@bresnan.net
Gloria LaMott findapetnow@yahoo.com
Jamie Bennett jbennett@gfanimalshelter.org
Bob James rfj@uazh.com
Bryan Lockerby blockerby@ci.great-falls.mt.us

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

2007-12-21T04:27:00.000-08:00

(D'Israeli)

The face of truth, as it applies to those individuals and groups involved with running the shelter, has been exposed. It is now up to the people to see it for what it is and decide what to do.

First...there will be a TOWN HALL MEETING - JANUARY 5, 2008 - University of Great Falls Auditorium, 7 pm. All citizens are invited. It's free. It will be ONLY about The Animals of Great Falls.
Tell your friends and please plan to show up. (This is being paid for by a private citizen)

The first response for the majority of people has been compassion for the animals, followed by horror and shock, sadness and heartbreak. Some people have been shocked and taken a cautious stance. Yet, still they voice concern and worry for the animals.

For the remaining few, the response is Arrogance, Lies, Attacks, Silence and Deflection. These are the people most involved in the shelter, its operation, and the treatment of the animals.

Who are they?

Donna Stebbins - Arrogance...that is the manner in which she first handled this entire disclosure. She displays how she truly feels. The spin she's putting on this morning is just that, a save-her-ass response. We are not speaking of what may be talked about in the way of legal investigation and what may be disclosed. We are talking about her real feelings. A normal, concerned, caring person's initial response would be along the lines of 'my first concern is for the animals. I have gone to the shelter/told the shelter that they will have an outside agency monitoring them as of this moment until such time as we discover the truth'. That she did not respond with this kind of feeling, care and responsibility as a person and elected official indicates that she does NOT CARE ABOUT THE ANIMALS, ONLY HER OWN REAR END. Couple that with her arrogance and you have a disaster. Lies...first thing she tried to lie about was the two Animal Control Officers. She tried to make you all think that Jason Dern had been in trouble for smoking pot. REALLY? You don't think THAT would have made the papers? If it were true, why isn't there documentation to back it up? Why was he allowed to continue working? Attacks...first response was to attack Amy Lowe publicly. To spin the entire horrible mess as a disgruntled employee issue. Get a grip! How many disgruntled employees go public like this ?- AND OFFER DOCUMENTS TO BACK UP WHAT THEY ARE SAYING. Silence...after her first, I don't-give-a-care, arrogant reaction she shut up. The first response was real. The silence was because she was running around the City Halls trying to figure a plan of damage control. She was down at the shelter with Bennett within 2 hours of the press conference holding a closed-door meeting - wow! she does that a LOT. Deflection...this morning she began this. It's the Humane Society, they were horrible. They did this. They did that. It sounds like a 2-year old trying to pin the broken window on the sibling. The murderer/thief/rapist trying to lay the blame for their actions on their parents and how they were raised.

Holy Hal - Gloria LaMott - that's right. Holy Hal is Gloria LaMott, close friend of Donna Stebbins. Arrogance...Holy Hal is Gloria LaMott - in charge of Spay of the Falls where so many cats died because she wouldn't follow health and safety procedure. Lies...Holy Hal is Gloria LaMott - whom rumor has it has had ALL postings pulled from the Tribune blog about the Shelter articles as she libeled Nora Norum and the HSCC and the Trib received a complaint, which was backed by documentation, showing that Holy Hall/Gloria LaMott lied and was openly breaking the part of the blog contract which states one agrees to not use the forum for libel. All I can say about this is; yesterday her posts were there, then they weren't. Attacks...Holy Hal is Gloria LaMott - who whenever anything is said that she doesn't like she attacks the person via a blog (Electric City Weblog is a perfect case in point), bad-mouthing, personal denigration and public promises of destruction (HSCC, and according to sources, me). Silence...I can't truly say I've ever heard Holy Hal/Gloria LaMott stay silent. Deflection...her posting at the Trib was all about the HSCC and Nora Norum and how bad they were - NOT ONE WORD OF COMPASSION OR CARE ABOUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO THE ANIMALS NOW. Just how bad others were.

Animal Foundation of Great Falls - Arrogance...the arrogance which accompanies a group which begin by raising funds for a shelter for the Humane Society of Cascade County and then establishes it's own little dynasty, at the expense of the very group it used to get started, offends me. I suggest that all the McLean seed money (400k) and all funds for the first two years of the Foundation's fund raising, be turned over to the HSCC for whom it was raised. Anything after the first two years is the Foundation's to keep and do with as they wish. But, I gave my in-kind services for auction at the Fur Ball for the Humane Society of Cascade County, NOT for the Foundation to have their own little closed corporation, but for the HSCC for ALL of the county. Lies...when a group tells you they are raising money for the HSCC's new shelter, but plans to do things differently, that's a lie. When a group tells you that they do not intend to "run" the new shelter, but are working with their own sub-groups within the City to insure that ONLY whom THEY want take over operations, then that's a lie. When a group tells you that they care for animals, but stand by and do nothing when the animals are in trouble, then that's a lie. Silence...my, my, my...The Foundation says so much when it comes to articles in the Trib that are negative against the HSCC, when fund raising time rolls round, when they want a DOG PARK. But, on the REAL life-and-death issues faced by our animals they are SILENT. Deflection...Keep selling the Dog Park so that the people of GF will believe you care about animal welfare. Do we really need a Dog Park for the dogs which have loving homes and owners while dogs are dying? Which is the MORE IMPORTANT? Doing "good" at the expense of innocent animals' lives IS NOT DOING GOOD, I don't care how pretty you make the building they will die in or how big the dog park is.

City of Great Falls...this includes the Police Department, the City Attorney and anyone else involved. Arrogance...That the elected officials and a small group within the employment of the City feel they can pass anything, spend any amount, move money anytime, for any reason and ignore our concerns, questions and expectations is hubris and arrogance. This group has it in spades. Lies...there is not enough room to enumerate the lies told by these people. The Animal Shelter, SME, the budget, THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE DOCUMENTED CRUELTIES OF THE ANIMALS...lies, lies, lies. How can the police investigate their own honestly???? Shades of Chicago, New York and LA. History buffs know how corrupt those towns were. Silence...these problems have been addressed publicly, at City Commission meetings, by individuals, by phone complaints and on blogs. The City has stayed silent. Maybe they're taking a page from their own book...You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Deflection...we are looking into it. The allegations are being investigated. Funny, these issues have been publicly talked about by citizens since July 2007, HOW LONG WILL THEY INVESTIGATE BEFORE THEY REACH A DECISION...they will investigate until WE demand an outside source do the investigating and WE demand the truth and WE demand this mess be cleaned up by ridding GF of the corruption and special-interests.

What WASN'T Heard

2007-12-20T03:56:00.001-08:00

By this time I'm certain the majority of you have read about, or seen on television, the press conference called by Animal Control Officers, Amy Lowe and Jason Dern.

It went on for quite a while, most of it will not be seen or heard. There was a packet which included copies of documents corroborating statements made. Citizens in attendance have already begun to make and distribute to others, the entire, 1" thick dossier of horror. I've included just a few pertinent pages. (see below) They are also spreading the call for a Town Hall Meeting on the animal issue to be held in January, date and time to be announced. (Wow, guys, it wasn't even me that called for it! Way to go!)

Mr Ecke, of the Great Falls Tribune, after the conference approached a person said he felt "this was a personal vendetta." The individual to whom he spoke was under the distinct impression that he was referring to me and this conference as a vendetta against the mayor and the Animal Foundation.

Let me make this clear and on record. I am not the person who called the press conference. I am not the person who disclosed these specific facts revealing this ugly, nasty group for what they are. I am not the person, though I have said this for many months, who stated that the Animal Foundation, the City, the mayor, specific individuals, the Spay of the Falls, the Police Dept. are ALL manipulating this shelter issue to their personal desires and advantage, and KNEW AND WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE.

Mr. Ecke, your are right, however, it IS personal. The animal that died in terror took it VERY personally at that moment. I take it personally that the above groups sell their caring attitude toward animals, as well as their exalted (non) knowledge, all the while allowing, even condoning this atrocity and barbarous (YES, that's what it is and I am LIVID) behavior to happen. As a citizen I am taking it personally that all of this amoral, illegal, and criminal activity occurred in
this town, stealing and using my tax dollars, that these people believe themselves to be above the law, that the newspaper is VERY selective in what it reports, that all of these entities have no respect for us. I take it VERY personally that these people committed what I view as MURDER and theft in MY town. I am outraged.

What WASN'T heard, and will probably NOT be read about is the following:

Eye-witness account of Mayor Donna Stebbins standing in the "cat room" of the Shelter while the dogs screamed during the heart-sticking procedure and doing NOTHING. "She couldn't fail to hear or know what was happening. You couldn't miss the screams of the dogs." Quote by witness. (I would call that Felony Abuse under the law).

That the Great Falls Animal Foundation, the City of Great Falls officials, the Police Dept., were and are all aware of what was happening in the shelter as they are ALL involved in running and/or making decisions regarding the shelter. A letter included in the documents is on Shelter stationary and begins -"The Great Falls Animal Shelter is one of three entities involved in the reorganization of the Animal Shelter." When queried as to the other two entities they were confirmed as the Animal Foundation and Spay of the Falls.

That many people of GF still believed the Shelter to be under the Humane Society of Cascade County, made donation checks out to the HSCC, gave it to Shelter employees and those checks NEVER reached the HSCC. One was from Smith's Grocery store and was witnessed as being made out to the HSCC, with the police officer's name on the "notation" line, and handed over. (Correct me, please, all of you lawyers, but isn't that a criminal offense?????)

That Dave Pauli, Regional HSUS, known both for his position with the HSUSA and his openly chummy relationship with Foundation board members, was contacted on Dec 3, 2007 regarding this issue and counseled patience and not to go public. "That your issues need to be addressed by...the police chief and maybe the Animal Foundation of Great Falls...rather than go to the media."(e-mail copies are available)

That Melanie Lattin, has been told numerous times by ACOs about many of the health and safety hazards as regards the Dog Park, and in direct disregard of these serious concerns and warnings, stated in the presence of witnesses, "I don't care. We're going to have this Dog Park."

The two witnesses, both with extensive and diverse animal career backgrounds, have made the comment that Ms. Lattin knows nothing about dogs, their related health and behavior issues and, therefore, should not be in charge of the Dog Park. Yet, because the City, the mayor, Ms. LaMott and the Animal Foundation are all working closely together behind the scenes and hand-picking who gets what in all of this, she'll be allowed to continue, even to the detriment of animals.

The following were notified about the Press Conference and sent information about the shelter and the abuses, cruelties and deaths:

LA Times
Seattle Times
Denver Post
Rocky Mountain News
CBS National News
48 Hours
U.S. Animal Protection Organization
Humane Society U.S. National Office
Animal Legal Defense Fund
MT. Governor's Office
Attorney Gen. of MT

ALERT - Do Not Adopt to these People

2007-11-18T10:54:00.000-08:00

This is an alert which came to me via various shelters & rescues that contact me.

Please notify all people/groups that you might know. These individuals WILL attempt out-of-area adoption.

* * DO NOT ADOPT TO REBECCA OR TONY WILLIAMS * * *

Tony & Rebecca Williams (e-mail: JaRuleW@aol.com ) claim to have a rescue
in Rocky Mount, NC and are trying to get dogs from all over the Eastern
Seaboard. (She offered to take 14 dogs since Monday) She continues to take dogs,
most are pit bulls, with some offers to adopt Presa Canarios, Rottwiellers,
Dobermans, and Wolf hybrids.
In addition, she had previously posted that her roommate was looking for a
Great Dane or Great Dane mix.
She also posted that she was "desperate" for a Chihuahua and she
really wanted a Mini Pin and a Jack Russell.

She claims her rescue is a pit bull rescue, but another pit rescuer
called the local Animal Control. Animal Control's comments:
"She's been barred from taking any dogs from the shelters in her area. He
also said she has a long criminal history, has been selling Pit Bulls on
street corners for 15 or 20 dollars and has been under investigation for dog
fighting."

Atlantic Rescue has now banned her, after finding out this information.
These are the breeds she has asked for:
a.. Pit Bulls
b.. Rottwiellers
c.. Dobermans
d.. Presa Canarios
e.. Tea Cup Chihuahuas
f.. Jack Russell Terriers
g.. Shar Peis
h.. Min Pin
i.. Great Dane (Pure Breed or Mix)

She uses the little dogs as bait! Please cross post
Please check for your breed above and notify all rescues.
They are going out of their area looking for dogs to adopt.

Crockett's Statement Still Appropriate in our Time

2007-11-17T11:54:00.000-08:00

Ongoing to the post on GGuy's site, here, was a referral response, here

A few appropriate portions from Crockett's discourse are below and very germane to the current donation, the Animal Foundation, Stebbins and the City.

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle...If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose."

"There are...many very wealthy men--men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it...Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

CSP - City Spending Network

2007-11-15T14:17:00.000-08:00

Greg Smith's post at ECW had an interesting letter from Bob James to the City. See it here

Now look closely at the first paragraph, folks, because it's is so-o-o intriguing - and illuminating - if you know what you're looking at.

You'll notice that Bob James said 'thank you' for the donation of $5,000 for the Spay Neuter Task Force.

That would be the SAME task force that Donna Stebbins and her good friend, Gloria LaMott, are seriously involved in.

Gloria LaMott would be the SAME person who departed the Humane Society of Cascade County issuing public statements about her intent to destroy the HSCC.

The HSCC would be the SAME group that submitted a bid for Animal Control Contract with the City along with the Police Department.

The Police Dept. would be the SAME group whose Police Chief, Corky Grove, reviewed the bids, as well as submitted a Police Dept. bid, which was decided upon by the Bid Award Committee.

This would be the SAME Bid Award Committee that he and Donna Stebbins were on (and Donna was publicly heard to say she "would do everything in my power to make sure the shelter's not awarded the contract" (Animal Control) on June 17 or 18, 2000) and who sent their decision about the bid award/extension to the Commissioners.

The Commissioners are the SAME group who had one member, Jovik-Kunz, who is related by marriage to Corky Grove, and unanimously voted to extend the bid award date and allow the police to take over the shelter.

This would be the SAME shelter, once run by the HSCC, which is deemed inadequate and that the Animal Foundation of Great Falls seeks donations, which they originally claimed were intended for the HSCC's new shelter, in order to replace

The Animal Foundation would be the SAME group which recently merged/absorbed the Spay of the Falls/Spay Neuter Task Force.

That would be the SAME Spay task force which just received a $5,000 "donation" from the City of Great Falls.

That would be the SAME city of which Donna Stebbins is Mayor.

The mayor would be the SAME person who received election donations from Robert James and Cindy James.

Robert James would be the SAME person as the President, Board of Trustees of the Animal Foundation of Great Falls.

That would be the SAME Foundation which just wrote a thank you letter for the City donating $5,000 for the Spay Neuter Task Force.

I suggest we all learn this song...

Round, like a circle in spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel.....

Greg Smith's Post & Discuss

2007-11-14T14:01:00.000-08:00

Greg Smith, of Electric City Weblog, has an interesting blog up here

My response to his last post is here below.

Greg, Wolfpack wrote, "Why was the money that went to the HSCC any different as far as an appropriate city expenditure?"

My response, "The HSCC had an Animal Control contract and received payment for services rendered in that capacity. The Animal Foundation has what contract? Their original sales pitch and printed statement was 'to raise funds to build a new shelter for THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF CASCADE COUNTY.'" I don't believe there was a red herring, but that perhaps you were confused as I didn't refer my answer. Sorry.

Your statement, "Support for the Foundation is a stated goal of the Commission. Agree or not, it’s one of their goals. My question is how we got from a goal to a stated dollar amount", must be looked on in the broad perspective as to how the Commission got the goal in the first place. It must be followed closely by how legitimate are the means by which the City & Foundation achieve that/those goals.

Basing skepticism on the current City Officials' behavior as applies to other goals they've set, it is reasonable to expect questioning by the citizens due to the City's less than stellar openness, honesty and civility, as pertains to its various activities and at taxpayers' expense, all of which have clearly been documented to benefit a named few. This entire takeover of the animal shelter and $5,000 donation, then, stands as an extension of another shining example of that same shell game. Dare I name it? OK.

It looks to me as if the Foundation was not raising funds fast enough, for whatever reason, and this merging or interplay of City & Foundation was a means to accelerate the fund-raising process via passing it off to become the taxpayers' burden. There might even have been some bad personal blood on the part of ex-patriot HSCC Board members which helped make this City/Foundation connection viable. This might have been totally acceptable, but for the closed-door and irregular practices exhibited by the City, the Commission and Donna Stebbins and documented by others.

Here is an abbreviated time line that is interesting.

McLean in her will donates $400k, I believe to be allocated by the lawyer, in 2002 I believe.
It's offered to the HSCC, they state they cannot with the limited manpower do the fund-raising, and to issue it to their fund-raising arm, the Foundation, as seed money.
The Foundation promotes & maintains it's their mission to raise funds for a new HSCC shelter. They printed it on EVERYTHING.
About a year later, the Foundation shuts up about an HSCC shelter. HSCC gets the Animal Control bid from the city to expire in 2007.
Two+ years ago, Gloria LaMott, in direct conflict with HSCC Board mandates, makes a public statement to the Trib. She subsequently is off the Board. She is heard to publicly claim she'll "take the HSCC down and destroy it." She is friends with Donna Stebbins who becomes mayor. They then become highly active in the Spay of the Falls.
Land is granted last year to the Foundation for the shelter.
Early this year, Melanie Lattin, a city employee becomes a certified trainer. Certification will be claimed to be needed at the future Foundation shelter. (Will this job be opened for public application or, because the Foundation will claim it's a private non-profit, will they simply hire Melanie? Which, by the way, is their right to hire without public application as they aren't part and parcel of the City and don't fall under their hiring practices. But, the Foundation and City are certainly running both sides of the coin here. Private non-profit with what seems to be open access to city coffers and perks).
This year, the bid is opened for Animal Control, only two entities bid - HSCC & Police. $330k+ separate their bids w/the Police the high bid & no infrastructure to implement their bid. (The Police Dept. will subsequently use the HSCC property as they are unprepared to take over the Animal Control. I find it interesting that they are the higher bid, are unable to produce infrastructure and the taxpayers are asked for donations to the shelter, YET they are awarded the bid.)
Corky Grove, along w/Stebbins, sit on the bid review committee and award committee. His dept./he submits the Police bid. (I believe there are laws about conflict of interest as apply to bid procedures)
At a Commission Work meeting, documented by Jolley, Stebbins requests the removal of the HSCC board. It is stated 'Stebbins' people are not ready to take over' and run the shelter.
The Bid Award date is extended by 30 days on June 19th. I speak about all this on June 19th.
The Trib prints 'allegations' against the HSCC which it states are NOT substantiated. (Now the local paper is in on this on the side of the City & Foundation. I thought that journalism was to promote the truth, not unsubstantiated accusations, particularly NOT to slant support toward an action taken by the City. Oh, well, so much for truth in reporting.)
A private power-point meeting takes place between Bob James, the HSCC Board and a few others. James states he will extend "the considerable equity accrued with the Trib and City to halt the negative coverage of the HSCC if it will merge, in its entirety, with us, the Foundation" (that is very close to a direct quote, though paraphrased). HSCC declines. (Entirety. I take this to mean the money that the HSCC has in its acct. which is a fair sized amount & would bring the Foundation much closer to achieving its monetary goal - and please remember that the Foundation was NOT happy with the fact the HSCC did NOT donate to them. My question is: Why would the HSCC donate to its own shelter? Isn't their financial needs issue one of the primary reasons the Foundation began to raise the money FOR the new shelter?)
The Foundation makes a public statement in the Trib that 'another entity' will run the new shelter. (If it won't be the Humane Society of Cascade Cnty for whom they raised the funds for the new shelter, then whom will it be? And please don't try to tell me they don't already know who that will be)
Spay of the Falls merges with the Foundation. (This would be Donna Stebbins and Gloria LaMott. I predict that the Foundation will state that since Gloria has run Spay of the Falls that it gives her the background to run the future shelter & she'll be named Shelter Mgr/Director - of course, this was openly read by me at the June 19th City Commission meeting, so it's nothing new.)
Considerable complaints against the way the City Animal Shelter is handling animals and their treatment of the public takes place from July 4th to present and NOTHING IS DONE ABOUT IT. However, these SAME kinds of complaints were the basis for Donna Stebbins insisting that the HSCC was NOT doing a good job and needed to be removed.
Bob & Cindy James each make a donation to Stebbins' election fund (Yes, I know they have every right under the sun to do so, and they may exercise that right with impunity. But, in this case, it is interesting. Coincidences usually are.)
The day AFTER the election the $5,000 donation to the Foundation takes place. (Now why is it if this were on the up-and-up, Stebbins, the Commissioners and the City didn't make this donation public and/or give this to the Foundation BEFORE the election? Why wasn't this discussed in a City Commission meeting? Are there not laws to be followed for this type donation/expenditure? Could it be they needed to insure they were in office again? And, why would they need to insure that? If it's a valid City action and a valid donation, who cares who's in office?)

I have a hard time believing it as truth that a person or group claiming they care about animals, does nothing when there are complaints on the animals' behalf - especially by the entity, in this case the Foundation, which promotes how much it cares.

Come to your own conclusions, but I don't think it takes a Mensa member to see what's happening here.

Hartz Recalls Vitamins due to Salmonella

2007-11-05T16:33:00.000-08:00

The Hartz Mountain Corporation is recalling one specific lot of Hartz
Vitamin Care for pets due to concerns that one or more bottles within
the lot may have been potentially contaminated with Salmonella. Hartz
is fully cooperating with the US Food and Drug Administration in this
voluntary recall.

For more specific info on this recall please visit:
http://www.nationalpetfoundation.com/foods/hartz.html

Feed A Rescued Animal

2007-10-23T16:33:00.000-07:00

This is pretty simple... Please tell ten friends to tell ten today! The Animal Rescue Site is having trouble getting enough people to click on it daily to meet their quota of getting free food donated every day to abused and neglected animals.

It takes less than a minute (How about 20 seconds) to go to their site and click on the purple box "fund food for animals" for free. This doesn't cost you a thing.

Their corporate sponsors/advertisers use the number of daily visits to donate food to abandoned/neglected animals in exchange for advertising.

Here's the web site! Pass it along to people you know.
The Animal Rescue Site

Bullsh** U - Our Great Fall Courses

2007-10-21T15:11:00.001-07:00

The following great fall courses will be offered:

JOURNALISM
There will be no journalism offered. However, if you have passed Building Your Ego 101, Big Fish-Little Pond Politics, Small Town Theanthropic Theorum (4) or can clep either Advanced Material & Social Palm Greasing or Co-opting the Fourth Estate AND be willing to offer either monetary or in-kind remuneration, the Dean of Journalism will be certain to print ONLY what you want in the school paper.

ADVANCED MANAGEMENT SKILLS
This course will cover how to convince the people to do whatever you wish. The classroom doors for this course will be closed at all times and note taking is strictly prohibited. All course work, including mock meetings, networking sessions with the Political Communication, Journalism and Public Oratory Skills students, as well as the final test, will be oral ONLY.

POLITICAL STUDIES
You will learn to fluently curse constituents, how to effectively slam phones down on callers, master the regal art of hand waving for a variety of political uses such as calling the school security to your aid and removal of unwanted individuals from your presence, master blank stares for use in public meetings, learn the fine art of public temper tantrums, and how to quickly issue orders for such necessary political communiques such as deleting of files, disappearance of paperwork, stonewalling requested information, revision of public meeting reports and total recreation of paper trails. Prerequisite courses: Public Oratory Skills, History of the One Man Dynasty OR Women of Poor Self-esteem and their Role in Politics and Fund Raising and at least one agricultural lecture course, i.e., 'How to Get Funding for Your Own Personal Shelter', 'The Expected Number of Animal Deaths Acceptable Ratio for Development of a Dog Park' or 'How to Convince the Neighbors You're Doing Something Good For the Animals When You Have No Animal Skills or Knowledge'.

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
Learn how to stage hostile take-overs of non-profit organizations and what it takes to successfully insert your family, friends or business associates, to whom you owe or promise favors, into jobs that were held by others. Master the art of working with those who have ulterior motives, questionable ethics, hidden connections and a degree in Self-Serving Hubris.

SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY
The first half of this course covers the small, but interesting, tribe of the Wannabe. Learn their social mores and taboos such as, how wealth DOES make a difference in the Wannabe culture, their back scratching ritual, the annual suck-up festival and their convoluted and incestuous relationships with their nearest neighbor, the Iknowiam, a hostile tribe with a fanatic religion that emphasizes self-Godlike delusion, shunning, repression of those not of their group, denial and falsehood. The final for this course will involve a paper comparing the two societies and their interrelatedness and how it adversely affects/effects the other populace in the region, both human and animal.

COMMUNICATION
This course will cover how to build a solid relationship with any of the media, how to suppress information by networking, how to create disinformation that really works, as well as how many times one must repeat a lie to make it truth.

Our Theater Department wishes to announce that try-outs for the part of the Asp in 'Cleopatra' will be held after the holidays (this is a woman's part).
Also, that they are in need of an ass for their holiday tableau.

PLEASE REMEMBER THE SCHOOL WILL BE CLOSED DURING STUDENT ELECTIONS

"Shut the fuck up, you creepy asshole"

2007-10-19T11:38:00.000-07:00

This verbatim quote was made by Mayor Donna Stebbins yesterday in response to a citizen who called her.

The Great Falls Animal Shelter staff arrived at work to find a cat in a crate upon the front doorstep. How long it had been there is anyone's guess. Attached to the crate was a note which read, "Please take care of Mishka, I can not do it any longer" (paraphrase).

A local individual involved in a private cat rescue group intent on keeping cats out of the shelter due to the high number of kills was given the cat by shelter personnel. The cat was sitting in a crate filled with feces, covered by it and no one at the shelter had taken it out of the crate to aid it, despite the fact no one was certain how long it had been IN the crate to begin with. The Shelter personnel had no idea how long it had been without water or food, either.

The individual called the mayor to complain about the Shelter's inhumane treatment of the cat. A witness heard the complaint voiced, then heard Mayor Donna Stebbins say, "Shut the fuck up, you creepy asshole"and hang up on the individual.

The mayor's caring and concerned reply as regards the cat and its treatment at the Great Falls Animal Shelter is indicative of the quality of response by our city administrators. The fact that Stebbins is an official of Spay of the Falls, which is now a subgroup of the Animal Foundation of Great Falls, and ALL claim to care for the welfare of the animals leaves me very worried indeed and many, who now know of this incident, extremely angry.

Donna Stebbins and the City pushed hard and fast to get control of that animal shelter. The Foundation seemed to be all for the city running the shelter as evidenced by witnesses of private meetings and "quotes" given to the Tribune. This is what these two entities consider to be better animal care than the HSCC?

Let me get this straight...

This is what animal welfare in Great Falls has come to under the umbrella of the Foundation, the official of the city AND Spay of the Falls, and the Great Falls Animal Shelter?

"At least now we're down to two" animal welfare groups in the city, she (Cerny) said. "...the foundation's goal is for the shelter to try to find homes for all adoptable animals."

The mayor's behavior and response then, must be the "high standards" Cerny spoke about in the Trib article.

TOWN HALL MEETING

2007-10-16T04:56:00.000-07:00

TOWN HALL MEETING

October 20th, Saturday
6 p.m.
University of Great Falls Theater Building
1301 20th St South

FREE TO THE PUBLIC

The Citizens' Meeting Where You Can Ask Any Question of the Candidates

Candidates/Incumbents Confirmed to Attend:

Susan Kahn
Ed McKnight
Stuart Lewin
Mary Jolley
Larry H. Steele

Declined participation due to previous commitment:

Bill Bronson
Diane Kuntz
Elna Hensley

No response as of this date:

Donna Stebbins

Raining Cats & Dogs - Can the Umbrella Take It?

2007-10-12T06:23:00.000-07:00

The Foundation has taken Spay of the Falls under its umbrella. What will they do? Will they make Gloria LaMott ala Spay clean up its act?

Gloria LaMott and Donna Stebbins are two of the officials for Spay of the Falls. This group was originally under the auspices of Montana Spay Neuter Task Force.

However, Gloria threw out the MSTF book of procedures and decided to wing it. She does this frequently. Consider that time she decided to publicly announce that the vast majority of Polejewski's dog would need to be put down as they were vicious. Two trainers did temperament testing and she was so wrong. But, it didn't stop her from making her pronouncement from on high.

In May, she opted NOT to follow the mandate in the book that ALL animals must be vaccinated prior to the Spay Clinic. A vaccination clinic should be offered a few weeks prior to spaying.

Because of her unwillingness to follow safety procedures for all animals, 90 cats died as a result of a fast spreading disease. LaMott tries hard to foist that little killing spree off on an HSCC shelter cat and claims this is why no more shelter cats will be taken into her spay clinics.

REALLY? And just how did she determine it was an HSCC cat? Autopsies?

The only thing which can be shown, clearly, is Ms LaMott chose NOT to follow the procedure set up for the health, safety and care of all animals. Her hubris resulted in 90 cats' deaths.

"The foundation wants to be sure that whatever group is picked to run the new shelter will be fiscally responsible and will meet high standards, Cerny said." (Trib article Tues. 9, 2007)

Well, I guess the Foundation is hoping to pull in more money by taking Spay of the Falls under its wing. And, I guess that killing off 90 cats due to inability to follow health & safety procedures constitutes a high standard. Is it the killing standard attempting to be reached by the current shelter and/or the future one?

Hmmm......Let me try to recall what it is I said at the City Commission meeting, June 19th...Oh, yeah! "It is my personal opinion that what is transpiring here this evening is a sub-rosa or behind-the-scenes agenda in which specific people are manipulating the bid and awarding process for personal gain, closed corporation tactics and ignoring fiscal responsibility and animal welfare...All this put together leads me to one conclusion. The bid award is co-opted and possibly already predetermined by an unseen committee which is interested in assuring the Foundation complete control and the city the ability to circumvent or ignore actual bid and awarding procedures. The Directorship of the new shelter seems to be a foregone conclusion if Ms. LaMott’s statements are to be taken as truth. "

Gloria LaMott, Donna Stebbins, The Foundation. Now they are all together as predicted. Can that umbrella withstand the hail storm?

13 Dogs Killed for Mayor & Commissioners' Tour

2007-10-10T20:02:00.000-07:00

13

In ONE day.

13 dogs killed the day before the Mayor and Commissioners' tour of the shelter.

Great Falls Animal SHELTER.

The Tribune didn't report THAT.

The Mayor says all looks GREAT.

"Lockerby said the city has been working to improve the shelter's records and better statistics will be available shortly." (Tribune, Tuesday 9, 2007)

The Foundation certainly isn't saying or doing anything about it.

So much for care of the the animals.

Liars & Traitors Beware - Oh, My!

2007-10-10T06:57:00.000-07:00

Interesting Trib Article yesterday ("Alignment unites two animal welfare groups" Richard Ecke). I was inundated with discussion about it and I thought I'd quote a few observations here for you:
"Saw the article about the animal shelter in today’s paper and Ric’s comments. Think some people are trying to save their asses before the election?"

"Does the Foundation believe we don’t remember that they began so that the HUMANE SOCIETY could have a new shelter?"

“If I ever doubted that the City and the GF Animal Foundation had an agenda, this article put it to rest. Talk about a white-wash job.”

“When a group or person stays silent, like the Foundation has, it means only ONE thing – guilt. "At least now we're down to two animal welfare groups in the city, she (Cerny) said.” That says it all about what the Foundation wants. Control.”

In the Trib article today, Grove claims, “The takeover was supposed to last three to six months, but at the three-month point, Police Chief Corky Grove said it may last longer.” What’s with THAT? At the meeting in June the City said it was a one month extension. Boy, did YOU ever call it right!!!”

“I want to know about the bid and how it was handled. You maintained back in June that Stebbins and LaMott, along with the City & Foundation, had a plan to take over the Humane Society for their own gain. Here’s the proof in black-and-white.”

"Eventually we hope to turn animal control over to another entity," Grove said last week.” There it is, as clear as day. The city got rid of the HSCC and now the ONLY entity left is, TA-DAH, The Animal Foundation. Talk about corrupt.”

“I hope the Spay people know what they are doing. I don’t think this is a smart move to join with the AF. It’s pretty easy to see that they’ll be painted with the same dirt if they’re not separate and careful.”

"I think that they are all in collusion together, and the truth will come to light."

“What is this? ‘Cerny said the foundation has not promised to build a no-kill shelter because that's not practical. She added that the foundation's goal is for the shelter to try to find homes for all adoptable animals. Some animals are too sick or don't have the right temperament to be placed in homes, police officials said.’ Not practical? Nothing that’s worth anything is easy. How not practical is a life? People are NOT idiots, contrary to this group’s opinion. We know a “No Kill” shelter means the really sick or vicious animal will NOT be able to continue. But, it DOES NOT MEAN that we will allow animals to die so that these people can clean runs or open a dog park.”

Cerny says that it’s not their “mission to run the shelter.” No, that’s right. It was their MISSION to raise funds for the HSCC. They stopped doing that to raise funds for their own publicity. What else will they stop doing? I bet they won’t stop conniving with the City, Stebbins and LaMott.

“Is Cerny nuts? Does she not know that everyone in this town talks and within a couple of days most of us had heard about James, the Foundation, the HSCC and the presentation that practically was a threat of future problems if the HSCC didn’t merge? Of course the Foundation doesn’t want to merge with the current HSCC board, it looks like they can’t be manipulated, threatened and we are all watching them now. And the Foundation better go look at other cities where part of the money collected for new shelters is used to help the old shelter. Otherwise, WHY EVEN RAISE MONEY? If the old shelter doesn’t need physical and financial help, why replace it? Ask yourself that about this situation. I have to agree with you, what IS the Foundation doing with our money if they’re not helping the animals NOW?"

"I like to be logical in reviewing the current situation in order to come to conclusions. Here is what I perceive;
The Foundation was begun to raise funds for the HSCC new animal shelter
The Foundation stopped doing that about 2 years after they began and started to raise funds for themselves.
They split off from the HSCC
Gloria LaMott made a public statement about the dog problem out in Ulm and said something about most of them should be put down which HSCC didn't authorize to be said.
Gloria LaMott was subsequently released/removed/or departed from the HSCC Board of Directors
Donna Stebbins and Gloria LaMott are friends.
You read a prepared statement in June, show how many people who work for the city have connections to the Animal Foundation. You surmise the possible intent is to give the management of the shelter to another group, either the Foundation or a group approved by them.
You state the bid was “shady” because of the way it was handled.
You read about LaMott’s statements in public, saying she was waiting for an animal job with the city. (I heard her, too, say things like this.)
You are removed from the meeting.
No one will touch your allegations that the bid was inappropriately managed and might have been illegal.
The City takes over the shelter, extends the bid for 30 days.
The Trib reports unsubstantiated allegations (I think that's the term they used in the paper) to support the reason for the City taking over the shelter.
City has money to improve the shelter, but refused to help the HSCC to improve the shelter.
The City acts as if it’s a permanent management situation of the shelter.
The Foundation AND HSCC have a meeting.
All online city records about this bid before June 19 disappear.
The Foundation now "merges" with the Spay group.
No mention of the HSCC, the bid or the fact that the original people, (the Foundation, City, and others) remain working behind the scenes in this and your initial questions about their interrelatedness and the possible impropriety of the bid is unanswered.
My conclusion:
Something is being hidden. There’s a lot of private deals being cut. (As an aside, I've personally heard individuals aligned with the Foundation make statements against you. If that isn't some kind of proof that you've made a dangerous statement of truth about what is happening and they're all trying to shut you up, I don't know what is. It shows just how far these people will go to keep safe their dirty deals.)"

"The Foundation tried to do it all without a paper trail, but too many people talked and nothing can be kept secret. It was all done with the intent to get rid of the HSCC. I think an investigation of the Foundation, the City and the Police is in order. "

"It all comes back to the bid, doesn't it? Was it legal or not? If not, then everything these groups have done should be undone. I'll bet a lot of us each have an original of something from the Foundation or city about all of this, so if paperwork has been 'cooked' they'll be in bigger trouble when it comes out."

"You never included the Tribune in all of this. Things don't get reported. You don't think someone in the Trib offices isn't in league with the Foundation and City? Think again."

"Butter wouldn't melt in the Foundation's mouth."

"The Foundation, the City and the Police all get something out of this. Money, power, control and more. What do you get? Nothing. So who should I believe? The groups that gain from all of this? Or the person who has nothing to gain, but is only revealing the truth? I've always been partial to the truth."

Oh, Puh-leeze!

2007-10-06T04:34:00.000-07:00

Get ready for more prevarication from the City, the mayor, the works.

It seems the current spin given to GF on the Animal Control Bid is that it wasn't illegal for the Chief of Police to see and compare the bids because of the KIND of bids they were.

Interesting. Then please explain the following which was an eyewitness account transcribed at the City Agenda Meeting on Wednesday 13, June 2007, a copy sent to a TV station and The Trib reporter, neither of which reported this discussion about the HSCC;

Mayor Stebbins: "The city may require the resignation of the whole Board."
She was told they could not do that, they were not allowed it is independent.

Mayor Stebbins: "I know a non-profit group, but they are not yet up to running the new shelter." "The Humane Society Board is 'half-ass. We have a tremendous problem."

Com. Diane Jovic-Kuntz: "But the Request for Proposals was not answered by 'Donna's people'."

Com Sandy: "I would hate to see the city get into another semi-private function."

Mayor Stebbins (with anger): "It is a city function."

Com. Jovic-Kuntz: "Why don't we appoint 5 new people?"
Told she could not, it was an independent non-profit.

The room was full of city people as well as two current candidates running for Commission seats.

There is also the following quote by the mayor, recounted by eyewitnesses during her tour of the HSCC shelter on June 18, 2007:

Mayor Stebbins: "I'll do everything in my power to make sure the shelter's not awarded the contract."

Do NOT tell me that there were no irregularities or illegalities happening here and that the bid was not co-opted or predetermined from the beginning.

44%, But It Sure Looks Good

2007-10-05T11:48:00.001-07:00

44% of all animals that enter the Great Falls Animal Shelter are killed.

44% - that's almost HALF of all animals.

It means your dog or cat stands about a 50-50 chance of NOT making it out alive.

But the mayor and her commissioners took a tour and declared the shelter 'so much better' than when it was under the Humane Society of Cascade County.

Rwanda, Auschwitz...I'm certain there were individuals that thought THOSE places looked better too after getting rid of a goodly number of bodies.

Where IS the Animal Foundation of Great Falls in all of this? Try to remember, that they are selling the line..."Fostering a Caring Community" in their "Sheltering Skies" newsletter.

See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil

2007-10-05T04:57:00.000-07:00

Let's cut to the chase. Let's call a spade a spade. It's whispered. It's known. Here's what's said behind closed doors by you, the people: "There are a few people in town that think they run things." "They like it their way." "If you cross them, they'll make it hard for you." "They'll try to put you out of business." "They'll do whatever they can to get you." "You won't get any help to stop them because lots of people don't want to upset the apple cart." "The politics are dirty in this little town, they have their own group and if you upset their agenda, they'll take you down."

Whoa!!! If THAT'S the belief of the people of GF, then we REALLY need to do something. And it's not even said just in reference to me, it's used when discussing many areas of the city and business in this town.

A big issue, in this case wrapped around animals many care about, is the fact that the City, (and the impression is the administration is in cahoots with others in this town,) opened a bidding procedure that seems to be highly irregular or, possibly, illegal. That the City has numerous areas in which its dealings, and the people it deals WITH, are participating in shady practices at best, down-and-dirty at worst. That the City continues to run business as usual as if the publics' outcry and concerns over perceived criminality or irregular behavior is simply background chatter to be ignored.

Do we truly need to list all the areas of citizen concern? Oh, fine. Here are a few in question being followed and publicized by various concerned people; SME, HGS, GE, services no longer available to citizens, "loans" to select non-profit organizations (some get it, some get kicked out, go figure THAT one), solicitation of donations to the City for shelter without benefit of a 501C-3 (I believe there's a law against that,) an unbroken string of unanimous votes on diverse issues by the City Commissioners, unwillingness to speak to the public and address their questions, ad naseum.

The people of Great Falls are NOT STUPID. Neither are they lacking compassion. They don't like animals killed in order that the few people who consider themselves "players" in this town achieve their personal agendas.

While many may not want to touch the irregularities or possible illegalities of the Animal Control Bid and its outcome, it doesn't mean there aren't LOTS more that are sick to death of seeing what's happening and want to stop it.

Mayor Stebbins, according to the groundswell statements, is on her way out. We'll see come November.

Here is an interesting timeline on this issue only, interpret it as you will:

2001/2002 - A small portion of the mission statement of the Humane Society Foundation of Cascade County (now known as the Animal Foundation of Great Falls) "To help the Humane Society of Cascade County raise funds for its programs." " To assist the Humane Society of Cascade County realize its dream of building a state-of-the-art animal shelter"
2003 HSCC awarded a 5-year Animal Control contract
2007 - Animal Control bid opened
Police Chief Corky Grove sits on Animal Control Bid Review Committee
GF Police Dept. submits Animal Control Bid
HSCC submits $186k bid, GF Police Dept submits $500+k bid
City Commission meeting - interrelationship between City Officials, Animal Foundation Board & members, Police Dept publically noted
HSCC removed from running the shelter
30-day extension of Animal Control Bid - unanimous vote June 2007
Private power-point meeting between the Animal Foundation of GF board and the HSCC board, plus others, in which the Animal Foundation states "if the HSCC will merge with the Foundation, we will use our influence with the City, County and media to stop the negative coverage." (paraphrase, but VERY close to actual statement made in meeting as reported by individuals in attendance)
All documents prior to June 19th about the Animal Control bid are pulled from the city web site, they are unavailable upon verbal request
City continues to run shelter without public vote or continued extension of Animal Control Bid
New "director" of shelter assigned (note: a person asked yesterday if Jaimie Bennett, newly appointed, was in some manner related to Bennett Motors, which is/was a big supporter of SME/HGS and the mayor and if there is a personal connection to the mayor via close friendship, political support, etc. I don't know. Can anyone answer this?)

To my knowledge no Animal Control Bid has been awarded to date and the City continues to run the shelter on an EXPIRED 30-DAY bid extension.

Tribune asks candidates in paper, 'should the shelter be run by another entity?"
Just WHO might that be? Do the Commissioners have a group waiting? It's not the Humane Society. Is it the Animal Foundation of GF? A sub-group of the AFGF? WHO ARE THEY REFERRING TO WHEN THEY ASK THIS?

Don't muddy the waters - the Animal Control Bid has been shown to have gross irregularities, if not illegalities in its process. Because it's representative of the overall questionable behavior and dealings of the current administration, et al., and it has effected both city and county residents, citizens have begun to publically call for an investigation into this matter.

Dogs Killed To Keep Kennels Empty

2007-09-19T06:23:00.000-07:00

The city and police are killing dogs as they enter the shelter in order to keep a specific number of kennels empty so that they can clean the facility.

It was pointed out in June that the Animal Control bid was, at least, suffering a conflict of interest what with the Police Chief reviewing the bids as well as submitting a police bid for the handling of AC. Not to mention he was sitting on the bid award committee. At worst case, what with seven city employees having ties to the Foundation via spouses, it was rigged in the true fashion of back door politics. (Please go here, and here, for a little additional background coverage. You'll have to excuse the fact that the actual city paperwork showing the interconnectedness of the groups has been pulled from online records. Convenient. I have been told that a few people made copies of these records before their disappearance and am trying to get copies to post.)

Where's the Foundation in all of this? It cries at the top of its lungs that the HSCC was awful, but the Foundation is NOT doing a thing about this. Smacks of insider practices when the Foundation will go after the Humane Society for the very things it's turning a blind eye to when it's the city. I have to ask myself, what kind of group is it that sits idly by knowing what is happening and does nothing? Why would a group, which touts itself the supporters of animals and collects great amounts of funds in its purported efforts to help them, has not stepped forward and actually made a difference when it's truly needed? I have to ask myself how I could have been so naive as to not see this in them when I was donating time and money to help build the new shelter.

Oh, yes, the regional Humane Society came and looked at the shelter. That's the same regional group that attends every Fur Ball and was emailed to support the shut-down of the HSCC by the mayor and Foundation individuals. (Though the city received a non-committal answer in response stating that the regional HSUSA position must be that of consulting.)

Nobody seems to be able to answer whether or not the Animal Control bid was awarded. If so, then the city should have at least $230k over and above the old operating budget of the Humane Society and it would be interesting to know what they're doing with it, other than kill animals to keep open kennels.

Some private citizens and vets are aware of the empty kennel requirement and are paying for boarding out-of-pocket in order to keep cats and dogs out of the shelter in order to re-home them, knowing they'll be killed if sent to the shelter.

If the bid hasn't been awarded, then why? On July 3rd, at the City Commission meeting, an extension of 30 days was granted. That's long past. What's the deal?

The Pound

2007-09-18T05:43:00.000-07:00

Over at Electric City Weblog an interesting post was put up a while ago by GeeGuy. You can find it here

It garnered a response with a question about the Pound which you can find here

So, what IS going on over at the Pound?

Let's talk cats first. The city's response when they receive a call about a cat rescue is "we can't do anything," OR, "leave it, it'll come down out of the tree by itself." The fire department says they don't have the equipment to rescue cats (though, I must say, at least they went out to try on ONE occasion I'm aware of.) The last two rescues I observed were of cats in trees for over 3 days. They were rescued by The Tree Man.

For many years now, The Tree Man has voluntarily taken out his equipment, day or night, rain or snow, and rescued any cat. He does this without charge. He was acknowledge for this civic service by the Humane Society of Cascade County (HSCC). He is still doing it.

Only ONE Animal Control Officer calls him for rescue help. This ACO can only do that when HE knows about the need. So, many cats are simply left stuck for days on end, sometimes in bad weather, up the tree. The city does NOT call him.

The city is also handing out baited traps to people in order to catch cats on the loose. Problem is, many cats are being destroyed at the pound as they are unable to hold them. The claim is that these cats are considered feral. Many may be, many may not be. And, yes, we do have a cat problem in GF, no getting around that.

Dogs. Three separate reports came to me that the individual currently physically running the pound took a blue heeler out of its kennel, off leash, and outside, where it was hit by a car. Luckily, there were no injuries. However, the dog was then taken to the person's home as a foster. Being a heeler, it nipped and or bit a person (report came from this individual). They had the dog put down. This happened, even though I'd given the name of a rescue group for the dog. What fool puts a Heeler in a house with kids? What fool thinks that the name "heeler" means nothing?

Great to know that the person running the pound doesn't know diddly about dogs.

There is a 72 hour hold when animals first come in. After that, no guarantees on how long an animal has until put down. Funny, other pounds have specific time limits that are posted. You can actually go in and ask to adopt an animal that's nearing its time. Here, it must depend on the direction of the wind, I guess.

When the city took over the building, the only two state certified euthanasia techs didn't get hired. This meant that the local vets were called upon to put down animals. It's my understanding they did this on a sort of round-robin call system. One of the vets (and I wish, so as not to cause problems for the many honorable, moral, and caring vets in the town, I could offer a name, but I won't,) chose not to use an anesthesia shot prior to the death shot. The outcome was ugly. This vet is no longer called to the pound.

I know that the HSCC was required to submit a monthly report on animals picked up, held, adopted and euthanized. To date no one has been able to get their hands on any such report from the pound. Are the police not filing? Is it because the pound doesn't want the number of kills out and about? Is it because tough questions asked seem to make paperwork disappear, regardless of the subject?

I do know that the regional Humane Society has done a walk-through and given suggestions as to improvements. Funny, some of the same problems that the Animal Foundation and city cited against the HSCC were brought up at this walk-through.

Any money a person donates to the current pound goes into the city coffers. It may never reach the pound.

Being as I work all over town, as do a couple of other people, we compared notes and found that the majority consensus by citizens in GF is, The Animal Foundation of Great Falls has been raising funds (which I and these others have contributed to) for about 5 years. Why, in the past 2 years, when the need by the animals was so great, according to them, under the HSCC and now the city, has the Foundation NOT scaled back on its building plans and actually gotten an improved building up? Statement made by one individual who has donated quite a bit - There is NO evidence that they are actually worried about the welfare of the animals as much as they seem to be worried about the design and impact of their building.

Question posed at a City Commission meeting in July: Will the current shelter be no-kill? Will the Animal Foundation's shelter be a no-kill?

No answer was given. No response made. Not at the meeting, not in a public forum such as the Trib. Not by the city officials or the Foundation board members.

This is all ugly. People feel duped. And rightfully so. Here is what I see as a private citizen who has donated money, damned be the politics - I donated for a new, much needed shelter for the animals of Great Falls. I have done this since the beginning. There is over 1 million dollars sitting in an account which could be helping animals in need. It's not. Build a smaller shelter and plan for future expansion. Forget the dog park. Those animals have homes. Deal with the overcrowding, the kills, the sub-standard facility that can't handle what is happening now. Underwrite some of the costs of fostering animals. HELP the animals. That's what I gave my money and donated services for auction at fund raisers for, not to sit idle in an account when the need is clear and present.

I know this is a VERY hot topic. However, I measure everyone's care, concern and truthfulness by their actions, not their lip service. I see individuals paying for the health care and on-going maintenance of animals they personally rescue and re-home. I see individuals personally donating time, effort, income and materials to rescue, foster, rehabilitate and re-home animals. I see individuals stepping in and taking the responsibility for animals which they know will be put down in order to give them another chance. I see individuals within the HSCC still finding foster homes for dogs and cats, personally paying for rehabilitation or obedience classes, even though they don't have a building any longer.

Meanwhile, I've heard NOTHING about the award of the Animal Control bid which was extended by the City Commissioners on July 3rd. Anyone know the status?

Busy, Busy

2007-09-13T08:21:00.000-07:00

I'm posting this short and sweet to let you know that I'm more out-of-town working dogs, than in, at the moment. It's not that I don't have anything to post, it's merely that I'm traveling.

I apologize and want to let you all know that I'll be in and out until near the first of the month. I'll try to free-up time when I'm in an internet access location to post about IG-lF

Will get back to you all soon...

Unhappy Dogs

2007-09-04T16:19:00.000-07:00

Just had a good talk with some old friends, C. and A., who are real dog handlers. They are compassionate, intelligent, caring, good breeders, great dog handlers and steely-eyed when it comes to what dogs need to be good dogs and maintain good breeding lines. They stand with a handful of other people, a couple of whom are here in GF and others around and out of the country, that I count as friends who really KNOW dogs. And they have good dogs to prove it. And I'm not speaking of mere obedience when I say good dogs.

We got to talking about why dogs have problems. Why so many are in shelters, euthanized, given away, abandoned, ignored, spoiled or taken to trainer after trainer.

The answer is simple - people. And in the dog's life people come in three important forms, breeders, owners and trainers.

The majority of individuals in all of the three forms do everything they do only from a human perspective, for self-gratification, for money and for their own egos. Some even go so far as to combine and manage to indulge in all of these. The dog is expected to do all the adapting.

Possibly when people really learn to KNOW dogs, how they think, what they need, when they need it, what they do when they get it or don't get it, how they communicate, what makes them mentally, socially, physically and psychologically secure and healthy - maybe then the majority of dogs won't be considered problems. Maybe then the majority of dogs won't HAVE problems. Maybe then people will see the majority dogs behaving as truly happy dogs.

My best to missed friends...Jill, Annie, Jack, Belle and Roz, to name a few

The Cavalier - GF's Newest Assistance Dog

2007-09-02T17:41:00.000-07:00

Discussing the Cavalier, which is Great Falls' newest Assistance Animal, had people calling and emailing me with questions. Many people are curious as to exactly what this dog does as an Assistance Animal. The Cavalier's handler has written a piece, which I have added below, about the dog's responsibilities, duties and skills.

I'm the owner of the Cavalier that Susan has posted about in the last few blogs, and I believe that I need to clarify the Cavalier's role. She is my co-therapist. I utilize her with children that have been diagnosed with severe emotional disturbances.

Her primary place of work is at an office; however, a child may be exhibiting behaviors that are interfering with their ability to cope in the public (school, childcare center, stores, etc.) When discussing what the Cavalier's responsibilities would be, Susan thought it would be best to certify her as a 'Psychiatric Service Dog', because a child may be experiencing distress within the public arena and the dog would be needed to assist the child in processing what is occurring so that they may continue with their life. This would be in the format of being a crisis response dog,
and with all of these differing responsibilities the Cavalier needs to occasionally have public access rights. Because a therapy dog only works within specific arenas and does not have rights to enter the public, this would prohibit the amazing and unique work that this Cavalier does.

The Cavalier has been trained to have specific responses to a myriad of DSM IV-TR diagnoses that a client may have. She is trained to patiently and quietly maintain a down position in order to allow a child, who has experienced severe physical, sexual and emotional abuse, pet her and tell her their secrets. This is therapeutic in that the child can get the help they need to change their situation; they learn to trust someone through trusting the dog first. I have witnessed children disclosing this type of response within minutes of meeting the Cavalier that may otherwise have taken several sessions. In continuing to work with the dog, the children learn what is good and what is bad touch and how to use their words to establish these boundaries. She also works with children with low self-esteem, and she has learned how to be cued by these children and respond to their requests which enhances their self-esteem and self-confidence. She has accompanied children to school and other new situations that have, in the past, had such severe anxious symptoms that they would become physically ill and avoid the situation. When working with children that are oppositional and defiant she has learned to encourage them to comply with adults and authority figures through her behaviors and responses when they are exhibiting these behaviors.

It is important that I know that the Cavalier can respond in any situation and any public place that we may be in; therefore, you may occasionally see me working with her by myself within the public. These training sessions provide learning opportunities for the dog and are a part of her life, so if we need to respond in a crisis situation she is not concerned with everything happening around her - she is only concerned with the client, their needs and doing her job.

There are therapy dogs and Therapy Dogs

2007-09-01T12:31:00.000-07:00

My last post discussed Service Dogs. This is an area of many subcategories and, after receiving a few phone calls yesterday, it seems I need to clear up some confusion. I will try to break this down so that it may be understood easily by the layman.

The Difference between Service Animals, Therapy Animals, Companion Animals and "Social/therapy" Animals

Service animals are legally defined (Americans With Disabilities Act, 1990)

28 CFR 36.104 - Definition of Service Animal Revised February 18, 2001, to read:

Assistance animal means an assistance dog, and may include other animals specifically trained to perform physical tasks to mitigate an individual's disability. Assistance dogs include: guide dogs that guide individuals who are legally blind; hearing dogs that alert individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to specific sounds; and, service dogs for individuals with disabilities other than blindness or deafness. Service dogs are trained to perform a variety of physical tasks including but not limited to pulling a wheelchair, lending balance support, picking up dropped objects or providing assistance in a medical crisis. The presence of an animal for comfort, protection or personal defense does not qualify an animal as being trained to mitigate an individual's disability and therefore does not qualify said animal as an assistance animal.

A service dog is a type of assistance dog specifically trained to help people who have disabilities other than visual or hearing impairment. Examples of these include psychiatric service dogs, mobility assistance dogs, and seizure response dogs.

In the case of the Cavalier I mentioned yesterday, this dog has passed an Assistance Dog Test and qualifies, due to appropriate responses to specific clinically diagnosed disorders in patients, in both the office and public setting as a (psychiatric) service dog. This dog also is clearly identified by her Service Dog vest and patch.

Service dogs and their handlers enjoy special protection under the U.S. Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, which gives them equal access to anywhere the general public is allowed, such as restaurants, public schools, parks, taxis, and aircraft.

Therapy animals are not legally defined by federal law, but some states have laws defining therapy animals. They provide people with contact to animals, but are not limited to working with people who have disabilities. They are usually the personal pets of their handlers, and work with their handlers to provide services to others. Federal laws have no provisions for people to be accompanied by therapy animals in places of public accommodation that have "no pets" policies. Therapy animals usually are not service animals.

There has been some confusion and some heated debate about psychiatric service dogs (PSDs). First let's clarify the difference between a therapy dog and a psychiatric service dog. A therapy dog is an individual's pet which has been trained, tested, certified and insured to work in hospital, nursing home, school, and other institutional settings. The therapy dog and his partner visit to cheer patients, to educate the community, to counter grief and stress, and generally be good canine ambassadors within the community. Most therapy dog partners are volunteers, but some states recognize professional therapy dogs partnered with therapists and other mental health professionals. Therapy dogs are not service dogs.

Under U.S. law, persons with therapy dogs are NOT granted the right to enter businesses with their dogs which do not permit pets. They do not get to fly in the cabins of aircraft because they are therapy dogs, nor do they get to live in "no pets" housing because they are therapy dogs.

Companion animal is not legally defined, but is accepted as another term for pet.

"Social/therapy" animals likewise have no legal definition. They often are animals that did not complete service animal or service dog training due to health, disposition, trainability, or other factors, and are made available as pets for people who have disabilities. These animals might or might not meet the definition of service animals.

I had a nice chat with Billie Smith of Therapy Dogs, Inc., the group which tests, utilizing a local trainer, and registers the dogs in Great Falls for use in our hospital, school and nursing home settings. She said:

"It is a goal of Therapy Dogs Inc. to provide registration, support, and insurance for members who are involved in volunteer animal assisted activities. These activities include, but are not limited to, visits to hospitals, special needs centers, schools, and nursing homes. Our objective is to form a network of caring individuals who are willing to share their special animals in order to bring happiness and cheer to people, young and old alike. Our dogs and their handlers are not trained to be Assistance Dogs. They are nowhere near that level of training. Neither the dog or their owner/handler is covered by our insurance to enter public places other than those with whom we've made arrangements. They do not have public access rights under the ADA law. If one - or any - of these dogs is being promoted as being able to have public access this is wrong and it shouldn't be happening. "

So, for those of you who own businesses which have the "no pets" sign, you must allow service dogs and service dogs in training into your establishments and they will be clearly and easily identified by their equipment, vest & patch, identification tag or a combination of these. You may require any other dog to leave.

I hope this makes it easier for those of you with businesses that have "no pets" posted. Any other business may make the personal choice of admitting any dog, at any time.

Service Animals At Risk

2007-08-31T04:21:00.000-07:00

There is a woman in Great Falls who takes her personal pet into various stores and when challenged, claims it's a service animal.

During the Fair a service dog was told to leave one of the big barns and the handler was belligerently questioned about the dog's legitimacy. The handler departed and returned with the dog in vest, which was then allowed access.

Are the two related? I believe so. If a personal pet, being passed off as a service dog, has behavior which calls into question the competency of the legitimate working service dog, then it makes it difficult for the actual service animals to learn and/or perform their duties and gives a bad rep to these wonderful dogs.

Just because a dog plays well with children doesn't mean it will be a good therapy dog. Just because a dog is nice in public, doesn't mean it will be a good service animal. I receive many calls from people throughout the state who want their dogs to become service animals, but they don't want to go the distance to insure that their dog is the real thing.

So, here's some information.

A service animal is any animal which is individually trained to perform tasks for a person with a disability (PWD) such as a guide dog for the blind, alert a person who is deaf, pull a wheelchair or retrieve dropped items, alert or protect a person with seizures or provide balance and mobility assistance, among other tasks. A service animal is NOT a pet.

Assistance Dogs, Guide Dogs, Service Dogs, Hearing Dogs, Therapy Dogs, Dog Partners - we have a few of these animals in Great Falls. There is at least one dog for the blind and it is easily recognized by its harness. I know, though there may be more, of at least two legitimate therapy dogs, also. An Assistance Animal, depending on it's job, may be harder to recognize and so a vest was developed in order to more easily identify them. The vest can be any color, but it should carry a patch on it stating "Service Dog in Training" or "Service Dog at Work".

To become a service animal is a rigorous and long road. First the dog (let's use that term for ease as there are other animals now that qualify) must pass a temperament test, then, usually, it must be fostered, then it must pass with high scores obedience training, then a Canine Good Citizen Test (CGC), then a skills/task test, then the Delta Society's, TDI's therapy dog test or the Assistance Dog's Skills Test plus a Public Access Test, only the AD's test is acceptable in order to become certified a Service Animals.

On the average, only one in ten dogs makes the temperament test cut. Of those, only about one in ten makes the obedience cut. From that group, only about one in ten makes the grade at the final Public Access Test. If a non-profit group fosters and trains the dogs the average cost to produce one of these service animals, from acceptance into the program until presentation to an owner, is well over $100,000

The purpose for all the testing is to ensure that dogs that have public access have had the highest level of training and are stable, well-behaved and unobtrusive to the public. Also, to ensure the handler has control over the dog and the team isn't a public hazard. The handler is legally responsible for the actions of the animal.

There is a severe shortage and a high need for the dogs. This has led to private training by the PWD, individual trainers and therapists. Still, because of the fact that any single service animal is an ambassador for the all that follow, the quality of training is expected to be held to the highest standards.

The newest addition in GF is a young Cavalier King Charles Spaniel which is an Assistance Dog. This dog went through my obedience class when it was about 10 weeks old and the owner/handler spent a long year maintaining the behavioral-obedience expectations taught in class. When the service animal test was given, the owner who had been very nervous about what would be expected, was relieved to find that everything required of the dog had been taught in the obedience class and was normal behavior for both of them. She passed all the tests with flying colors both ON and OFF leash, something which is very rare, including the Public Access portion.

For business owners:

A PWD may be asked what TASKS the service animals performs by may not be asked for special certification or ID cards for the animal and may not be asked about his disability.*
A PWD may not be charged additional fees to be accompanied by a service animal
A PWD accompanied by a service animal must be admitted and may not be isolated, segregated or treated less favorably than other persons.

The other side for business owners:

You are in a tight spot and I sympathize. If you're told you can't ask about the dog without legal problems then how will you know if it's the legitimate thing or the the dog being passed off as a service animal?

*State and federal laws have no specific provisions for people to be accompanied by therapy and companions animals in places of public accommodation that have "no pets" policy. Therefore, you may ask for proof from the therapist/handler that the animal in question is, in fact, a registered therapy dog and if you have aren't displaying the "no pets" sign it is your decision to allow them, or any dog, entry.

I trust the business owners of this city as you all strive to be intelligent and fair and are polite to those with these valuable dogs. By allowing assistance dogs in training or identified service dogs into your establishments you are doing a great service. The business owner or employee that approaches a legitimate service dog handler will have their questions answered promptly and politely and proof offered as it is the community and dogs which will benefit.

THESE DOGS NEED HELP

2007-08-29T17:01:00.000-07:00

I have been asked to place this on this blog in hopes it will be seen. Since I'm getting hits from all over, I hope this will help.

Kelly Hanson must move and will not submit her two dogs to the GF Animal Shelter as they have informed her that because her two dogs are Pit Bulls no attempt will be made to find them homes and if surrendered to the shelter they will be put down immediately.

She has 3 days to find a home(s) for her two Pit Bulls. They were both raised with her kids, trained to pull a wagon using a harness, will pull the wagon with the children in it, are very playful, great with other people, go on hikes with the family and like other dogs.

1 1/2 yr old brown & white male - neutered, obedience trained by Hodges, current on all shots

2 yr old brindle fawn female - spayed, obedience trained by Hodges, current on all shots

Should you know anyone who can rescue, foster, adopt, transport or in any other way help re-home these two dogs, please contact; Kelly Hanson 590-1678

To all of you out there who contacted me, are working with us on this problem and making attempts to re-home these two dogs - THANK YOU - I'm hoping we can achieve a positive result in a short time.

Animal Shelter Donations

2007-08-29T05:31:00.000-07:00

I was in town yesterday to work and was introduced to the neighbor of my client. I was questioned about the GF Animal Shelter by the neighbor who had visited this site.

I was told that the old shelter building had a brand new sign and everything was now being sent out under the title "GF Animal Shelter". The neighbor was concerned about a post on this site that read:
Eva said...

Pet Portrait Tidbit-
I just had my 2 dogs and cat "pose" for their pictures with Nancy and Jack Logozzo - They are wonderful to work with and the entire proceeds from their pet portraits are donated to the Animal Shelter to spay and neuter pets. Really --- They asked me to make my check out to the Animal Shelter- Nothing went to them- Wow!

August 27, 2007 7:39 PM

The neighbor, who had donated to the Humane Society Shelter & GFAF (Animal Foundation) in the past, said that money donated to the current animal shelter would, to the best of their knowledge, just go into the general funds of the city and not, specifically, for spay/neuter.

This person went on to say that they were extremely upset for the following reasons:
1) The city had not set up, and voted on creating, a specific fund to accept donations for the shelter & so the money was not guaranteed to get to the animals and they wondered if the Logozzos were aware of this as they solicited funds in good faith and if the couple were truly raising funds for spay/neuter then the checks should be made out to the Spay/Neuter Task Force - NOT the city shelter.

I must say I couldn't find anything in the online city records to disprove the statement and guaranteeing the funds for spay/neuter use. I did, however, find the following: Under Montana Law (Legal Opinion 2001-09) the city is allowed to "(7) solicit and accept bequests, donations, or grants of money, property, services, or other advantages and comply with any condition that is not contrary to the public interest; (emphasis added)" However, it is usual in these circumstances of land, water rights, etc., to vote at a public meeting to accept these "gifts".
So, unless this specific non-profit entity is/has been established & voted on to accept such donations, i.e., GF Animal Shelter Fund, we have no such thing. - Ed.

2) That they didn't feel as if the animals were truly the main concern for either the City or the GFAF as the Foundation had never given one penny to the Humane Society or the current shelter and they were angry about that.
Again, I couldn't find any records to refute this statement. - Ed

At this point we were joined by three other neighbors who had been phoned with the invitation to come and join the discussion. Once again, these people had been long-time supporters of both the GFAF & HSCC and they openly voiced their concerns:
3) With all the money the Foundation had at hand, this individual was VERY angry that none was going for the current care of needy animals. If this was due to the way the Foundation had set-up their trust, then shame on them for not taking into consideration the need for care of animals which would fall under the care of HSCC, an entity that the Foundation was quick to denigrate, while the people waited for a new
shelter to be erected. If this was merely an oversight on the part of the Foundation, then WHY hadn't its
board rewritten its statement and/or bylaws to allow for allocation of a percentage of current funds to go for the care of animals presently in need. (This person went on to say) The Foundation had been very quick to take the publics' money on behalf of helping the animals and very slow to actually HELP THE ANIMALS. (emphasis by speaker)
4) Another neighbor was incensed that the Foundation would use funds for a dog park for dogs that were already in secure, loving homes while animals at the current shelter were being killed for lack of adoption and space. It showed to her that the Foundation was trying to make itself look good to get more money,
not really care for animals that needed help. She hadn't given donations over the past few years for Fido down the street to go play, while a lost or abandoned cat or dog was euthanized in the shelter.
5) The fact that the current and future shelter is, and will not be, a "No Kill" angered these people.
6) All felt that the majority of citizens here were caring, worried people who wanted the best for animals in need and they felt duped by both the Foundation and City.

Ed note - Two of these people had taken on the personal responsibility to pay for a complete vet check and spay/neuter for a total of 3 animals in the past two months and to work with other caring people to find good homes for them. One had also personally payed for the transportation costs of an animal to reach a rescue group out-of-state as they were not going to risk the dog's life by placing it in the current shelter.

Many of these concerns I also have. Since its inception I have supported the Foundation and, until its demise, the HSCC. I continue to work with individuals in the GF community and neighboring counties that are caring for, rehabilitating, finding adoptive and rescue homes for needy animals. I can only say thank you to those of you out there that put the time, money and personal effort into protecting the animals you take under your wing. There is no future for an animal that's euthanized. Animals live in the "now" and it's the now we need to concern ourselves with.

I know this is an emotional topic, but the people I spoke with yesterday feel they reflect the feelings of many. They want to know just why this is happening to the animals and what these groups (city and Foundation) are actually doing to truly help animals. They're not, to quote one of them, "going to give one more red cent to any group that's going to kill an animal or put it in a bank account where it'll sit and do nothing while we have animals that need help. I want to know, be really sure, that my dollars help an animal to live a good life."

New Pet Food Recalls

2007-08-28T03:43:00.000-07:00

Three new recalls have been recently issued on pet foods. This includes

Wal-Mart sold Jerky Treats, Red Flannel Dog Food, and Krasdale Gravy.

For more information please visit:

http://www.nationalpetfoundation.com/foods/various.html

RATTLESNAKE VACCINATION

2007-08-27T14:33:00.000-07:00

I have received so many e-mails and calls from all of you that I've pulled this from next month's newsletter and am posting it here.

Many of you may be receiving a note from your vet stating that your dog is due for vaccinations. It may also state that it’s time for a “rattlesnake vaccination.” If you’re like most owners, you’re scratching your head because you’ve never heard of this one before. Here is what I’ve come up with, in its simplest form, after numerous phone calls and review of scientific articles regarding this vaccine.

This vaccine (Crotalus Atrox Toxoid) was developed by a company called Red Rock Biologics in about 2000. It is specifically developed for the Western diamondback rattlesnake. This company prior to and since this vaccine has developed no other vaccinations of any type. (Take that as you will).

The Western diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalidae atrox/ C. atrox) is a viper and one of 15 viper varieties in the United States. Because of its size and aggressiveness it is the most dangerous of the vipers. Its range is Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Southern California, Southern Nevada and the Hidalgo area of Mexico. For those of us living outside these states this snake is of no, or very little, concern.

Each year in the United States about 300,000 domestic animals are bitten by venomous snakes and 99% of the bites are from the pit viper species (Crotalidae) which include rattlesnakes, cottonmouths and copperheads.

Rattlesnake venom is NOT all the same as it is made of various proteins containing toxins to nerves (neurotoxins) or blood cells (hemotoxins.) While quantity of toxin is related to the size of the snake (larger snakes/larger volume), the potency varies depending on species, age, area, time of year and nutritional status. A younger snake may inject less volume, but it may contain more neurotoxin elements. Also, a snake may miss the target and have premature venom release. Between 20-30% of all human and animal bites are “dry bites”, meaning no venom is released. Most animals receive their bites on the face or front leg(s). (I can attest to this as a cat of mine was bitten on the leg by a viper and lived.)

Rattlesnake antivenins used for many years has been an equine-based whole antibody preparation sold under the name of Antivenom (Crotalidae) Polyvalent (Wyeth) which often resulted in a high risk (56%) of hypersensitivity reactions and delayed serum sickness reactions. The Wyeth (human) and Fort Dodge (animal) products are both available, but both may create an immune reaction in dogs and, therefore, skin testing before administering is strongly suggested and may be helpful, but not always accurate.

Recently CroFab (Protheris), a sheep-derived preparation, has become widely used in place of the equine-based product for humans as it has been shown to have less immune reaction. But, Fort Dodge, remains the only product labeled for use in dogs and is much cheaper ($100-$200 per vial) as compared to Ovine FAB ($600-$700 per vial).

The rattlesnake vaccine calls for 2 to 3 doses depending on the size of the dog, each 3 to 6 weeks apart with an annual booster in spring. Additional doses may be needed at 4 to 6 months in high-risk dogs, such as those that field trial, work livestock in the desert areas, etc.

The vaccine, with a 1% injection site reaction, seems to be safe. However, site reaction numbers seem to fall into the 1 in 150 dog range and the reactions range from mild irritation at injection site to severe abscess the size of softballs with deep-tissue pus. Because dogs’ response to this vaccine is varied, a bitten animal MUST be considered a veterinary emergency due to the fact that the amount of venom may overwhelm the titers in the vaccine, not all species of snakes are well covered by this vaccination and it doesn’t address any secondary tissue necrosis or infection. Your dog will, in all probability, still require antitoxin treatment and the vaccine has shown no significant difference in the course of treatment if your dog is bitten.

University of California/Davis will not, at this time, advocate the vaccine’s use because of its “questionable efficacy, cost, and no substantial difference in acute therapy if bitten…” They do, however, note that in high-risk dogs from areas where treatment may be “substantially delayed, the rattlesnake vaccine may buy time for the owner to get their animal to a veterinarian and may potentially decrease the overall severity of envenomation.” The UCD Veterinary Medicine Teaching Hospital official stance: “Based on existing evidence, the UC Davis VMTH does not currently recommend routine vaccination of dogs for rattlesnake envenomation, and the vaccine is not stocked by our pharmacy.”

Each of you must make the decision as to vaccinating or not. I, personally, from all I’ve read, the fact we are not in the diamondback range and my discussions with friends in the lab at UCD VMTH will not have my dogs vaccinated for this particular problem.

Thank You, Dave

2007-08-27T13:47:00.000-07:00

I have wanted to respond to the many client requests for a blog area for quite a while. Having no computer skills in this area, it hasn't been something I've considered a possibility. This has meant that information, alerts and discussions have been managed in the antiquated format of e-mail.

However, I ran across a generous offer from Dave to help the computer challenged, such as myself, make blogging a reality.

He has my admiration for his skills, professionalism, kindness and patience in creating this spot for me.

With this blog site I hope to be able to address, and open for discussion, a myriad of topics, such as dog myths, behavioral issues, laws, owner responsibilities and much, much more.

Thank you, Dave.

Welcome to the Overfield Kennel Blog!

2007-08-16T15:45:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the first post on the new Overfield Kennel blog! This blog is designed to complement our website (Overfield Kennel) and provide you with up-to-the-minute news, tips, and fun stuff! So, where to begin? How about a quick look at Overfield Kennel:

We offer a unique method of owner training in dog pyschology and behavioral-based obedience training for dog and puppy applied behavioral obedience. It is based on dog psychology and communication and dog behavioral modification for both the owner and dog and relies upon the animal's natural responses in order to achieve the greatest consistency of desired response. This is NOT a fear-based method.

Both dogs and puppies, including "bad dogs", "problem dogs" and some forms of "aggressive dogs", understand this form of psychological behavioral-based obedience training inherently and master it almost immediately. Owners may take a while longer to learn this dog psychological behavior training method and how best to put it into consistent practice in order to achieve the highest quality of dog or puppy obedience and improve their relationship with canine companions.

We offer dog and puppy psychological and behavioral-based obedience training classes, as well as on-site dog camps and clinics. Because of the great success in this dog training method, we also travel to all 50 states to offer dog psychology-obedience clinics for private individuals and/or groups and as fund-raisers.

This dog obedience training method is guaranteed for the life of the dog when followed consistently. It is humane and does not utilize choke collars, pinch collars or shock collars and is successful-even for puppies as young as 8-weeks old. It is psychologically-based and does not depend upon treats. Call us for more information should you wish a Dog Pyschology/Obedience Clinic to be held in your area, or wish to attend one of our Dog Psychology or Psychology-Behavioral Obedience Clinics, Camps, or Behavioral Training Class.

Don't forget - blogs are designed to be interactive - you can leave comments on any entry and ask questions about how to make YOUR dog the best ever!

Stay tuned to the Overfield Kennel blog for news, tips, and information about good dogs and great owners!