Tag: no kill ethic

Posted on

Applying The No-Kill Ethic by Ed Boks

More than a policy and statistical objective, “no-kill” is a principle, an ethic, and once applied the practical consequences begin to fall into place. The principle is that Animal Services should apply the same criteria for deciding an animal’s fate that a loving pet guardian or conscientious veterinarian would apply. That is, healthy and treatable animals are not killed simply because we lack the room or resources to care for them.

Killing animals for lack of space may be the quick, convenient and, at least from afar, the easy thing to do. But I have never, in over 25 years in this field, heard anyone argue that it is the right thing to do. After all, the creatures who fill our shelters can hardly be faulted for bringing trouble upon themselves. People who seek to excuse euthanasia in shelters often say we have to be “realistic.” But ultimately such realism would be better directed at the sources of the problem and, above all, at the element of human responsibility.

There are the heart-breaking cruelty cases that bring so many animals to our doors, and the added wrong of killing animals already victimized by callous or vicious behavior. On top of that, over 30 percent of the 46,000-plus dogs and cats the City takes in each year are actually relinquished – turned in – even after years living with a family, like old furniture donated to charity. And another third of the creatures Animal Services euthanizes each year are orphaned, neonate puppies and kittens. No one bothered to spay or neuter the parents, and so the offspring are born into the world homeless or unwanted. The general attitude is, “Let someone else deal with the problem,” and – thousands of times a year – someone else does with a lethal injection. (In California it’s more than four hundred thousand times a year.)

Along with such failures in personal responsibility is a breakdown in social responsibility in the care of animals. On the budget sheets of government, saving animals can seem to a certain mindset as being a lowly or trivial concern. That’s an easy position to take, just as long as you don’t have to be there when the problem gets “solved” by euthanasia. If the public officials in most locales who brush off animal-welfare as “trivial” had to see the product of their priorities carried out – to witness for themselves how trusting the dogs are even when being led to their death, or how as they drift away they lick the hand or face of the person with the needle – I suspect they would see matters in a very different light, and would enthusiastically vote to support AB 1634, the state mandatory spay/neuter bill currently being fought over in the State Senate.

Here in Los Angeles there are rays of light. Between now and the end of 2007, the City will open several more new animal care centers, a decisive step forward in our commitment to helping lost and homeless animals, and to swearing off euthanasia as a solution to pet overpopulation.

The new Centers will give us four times our current shelter space to accommodate the average of 150 lost, sick, injured, neglected, abused or unwanted animals entrusted to LA Animal Services every day. The Centers will have wide aisles, solar and radiant heating, cooling misters, veterinary and spay/neuter clinics, park benches for visitors, fountains and lush landscaping – a world away from the grim conditions of older shelters, where animals can become so agitated or depressed that they seem ill-tempered and, thus, “unadoptable” by old school animal control reckoning. By transforming our animal shelters into places of hope and life, instead of despair and doom, odds are we can measurably increase adoption rates.

The “no-kill” ethic is a matter of taking responsibility, instead of excusing the problem or hiding its consequences. In LA we are moving steadily in this direction. Over the past six years, our lost and homeless dog euthanasia rate has decreased 67 percent and our cat euthanasia rate has decreased 24 percent. In just the first five months of 2007, we’ve seen another 22 percent decrease in dog and cat euthanasia compared to the same period in 2006. In the past 12 months, 18,108 dogs and cats were euthanized.

That’s the lowest number ever for a one-year period in LA since thorough record-keeping began – and fewer animals than met the same fate in the much smaller city of Bakersfield. But no matter how you do the math, it still comes to over 18,000 creatures who had love and devotion to offer, and never got their chance. And calling the practice euthanasia (as some prefer), instead of killing (as others prefer), doesn’t make it any kinder.

The good news is we are making significant progress, and we have many fine allies in the cause. There are hundreds of groups across greater Los Angeles dedicated to finding homes for needy animals and to helping sterilize those animals who otherwise might contribute to the pet overpopulation problem. These compassionate, idealistic people show us the way forward.

The practice of killing animals for lack of shelter space has never been anyone’s idea of an ideal solution – let alone anyone’s idea of giving “shelter” to creatures in need. And, up close, the willful elimination of healthy animals with good years left is a sight to move the hardest heart. But as LA’s new Animal Care Centers continue to open their doors, Animal Services offers this goal to go with them, and we ask everyone’s help in achieving it: No animal that comes through those doors will be killed out of convenience or a lack of space. For every one of them, there is somewhere a kind and loving person or family, and it is our mission to bring them together.

Posted on

Operation FELIX – Feral Education and Love Instead of X-termination by Ed Boks

Ed Boks and feral catsOne of the biggest challenges to achieving No-Kill in the City of Los Angeles or, for that matter, in any community, is implementing a program to effectively reduce the number of feral cats in our neighborhoods without having to resort to euthanasia or killing. Estimates on the feral cat population in LA are difficult to make, but they range from the tens to the hundreds of thousands.

Feral cats are cats that are born in or have reverted to a wild state. They are born from tame unaltered cats that owners abandon or allow to run loose. These cats mate with other free roaming cats, and their offspring, raised without human compassion, are wild (or feral). These cats then grow up and breed with other feral and free roaming cats and the cat population explodes exponentially.

Communities employ one of three methodologies to deal with feral cats: 1) Do nothing, 2) Eradication, or 3) Trap/Neuter/Return (TNR).

While it is easy to understand why doing nothing has little effect on reducing the population (and, in fact, allows it to grow), it may not be as easy to understand why eradication does not work.

Although many communities employ eradication (“catch and kill”) as a remedy to this vexing problem, decades of “catch and kill” in communities across the United States have irrefutably demonstrated that this methodology does not work. There are two very real biological reasons why “catch and kill” fails.

Wild animals tend to have strong biological survival mechanisms. Feral cats, which are wild animals, typically live in colonies of six to twenty cats. You often never see all the cats in a colony and it is easy to underestimate the size of a feral cat problem in a neighborhood. When individuals or authorities try to catch cats for extermination this heightens the biological stress on the colony.

This stress triggers two survival mechanisms causing the cats to 1) over breed, and 2) over produce. That is, rather than having one litter per year of two to three kittens, a stressed female could have two or three litters per year of six to nine kittens each.

Even if a community was successful in catching and removing all the feral cats from a neighborhood, a phenomenon called “the vacuum effect” would be created.

When some or all the cats in a colony are removed, cats in surrounding neighborhoods gravitate toward the ecological niche left behind. When a colony is removed but the natural conditions (including food sources) remain, the natural deterrents offered by an existing colony of territorial cats evaporate and the neighboring cats quickly enter the newly open territory, bringing with them all the associated annoying behaviors.

As we’ve seen time after time in location after location all over the country, the end result of the “catch and kill” methodology is always the same: The vacated neighborhood quickly finds itself overrun again with feral cats fighting and caterwauling for mates, over breeding, and spraying to mark their territory. Thus, “catch and kill” is not a solution at all.

Albert Einstein defined “insanity” as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. That is why so many communities are abandoning “catch and kill” in favor of trying the newest, and only humane, non-lethal alternative: TNR.

TNR is being practiced in more and more communities across the United States and around the world with amazing results.

While I was in Maricopa County, TNR was so successful that the County Board of Supervisors enacted a resolution declaring TNR the only viable methodology they would approve for addressing the feral cat problem in this community of 24 cities and towns (including Phoenix) spread out across nearly 1,000 square miles.

While in New York City, we observed a 73% reduction in the number of stray cats impounded in a targeted zip code on the Upper West Side of Manhattan over a 42-month period of practicing TNR. TNR, correctly administered, is the only methodology that guarantees a reduction of the feral cat population in a community.

When TNR is employed effectively, all the feral cats in a neighborhood are trapped, sterilized, and returned to the area where they were trapped. They are returned under the care of a Colony Manager. The Colony Manager is a trained volunteer in the neighborhood willing to feed, water, and care for the colony and watch for any new cats. Once the colony cats are all neutered, new cats tend to be recently abandoned domestics that can be captured and placed for adoption.

There are many benefits to TNR. 1) TNR prevents the vacuum effect from occurring. 2) Altered cats display none of the troubling behaviors of intact cats: fighting and caterwauling for mates, and spraying for territory. 3) The cats continue to provide rat abatement, a service many neighborhoods value, and 4) because feral cats tend to only live three to five years the problem literally solves itself through attrition, provided TNR is implemented community wide.

TNR also addresses the concern that feral cats tend to create a public nuisance on campuses and in parks. There is an old adage that claims you can’t herd cats. In fact, you can herd neutered cats because they tend to hang around the food bowl. Because neutered cats no longer have the urge to breed and prey, they tend to follow the food bowl wherever the Colony Manager takes it. Feral cats can be trained to congregate in campus or park areas out of the way of the public or other wildlife.

As we review our 2006 numbers it is clear that free-roaming cats represent our biggest challenge to achieving No-Kill in Los Angeles. With a clear understanding that moving away from “catch and kill” as a way to manage feral cats was necessary, the Board of Animal Services Commissioners adopted TNR as the official policy of the department. We are now working on an implementation program called Operation FELIX (Feral Education and Love Instead of X-termination). Operation FELIX will make it easier for responsible Colony Managers to help us substantially reduce the feral cat population without resorting to euthanasia. Progress on the program has been delayed by local environmental groups concerned for the welfare of bird populations.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a variety of environmental issues – including the potential impact on wildlife – be taken into consideration whenever a jurisdiction approves a project, program or other action. Animal Services is reviewing these issues relative to TNR and is complying with state law by preparing a study covering all relevant issues. When completed, we are confident this study will be the most extensive non-academic review of this subject matter ever done in the United States and will show that TNR can be implemented with minimal negative impact on the environment.

As the aim of local environmental groups is to reduce the feral cat population so song bird and other wild life populations are able to thrive, it is my hope they will support the only effective methodology demonstrated to accomplish their objective, TNR.

In the meantime Animal Services is requesting all cat owners to spay or neuter their cats, and if possible, keep your cats indoors. Indoor cats live three times longer than outdoor cats. And although your kitty may try to convince you that he or she wants to go outside, nothing could be further from the truth. Cats prefer to be with you and will only be stressed by the threats and dangers of the outside world, living a shorter life as a result.

If you love your cat, keep your cat indoors. If you let your cat roam outdoors, please spay or neuter and microchip him or her so you are not contributing to LA’s cat overpopulation problems. Microchipping is the best way to give us a fighting chance of returning your lost cat to you when he or she turns up in one of our six Animal Care Centers.

Posted on

Wile E. Neighbors by Ed Boks

Ed Boks and coyoteWildlife experts commend the city of Los Angeles’ No-kill policies, stating such policies are rare among animal-control agencies in the United States. No-Kill policies typically apply only to dogs and cats. But LA Animal Services is applying its “reverence for life – No-Kill” philosophy to all animals: companion pets, wildlife, farm animals, and exotics. All of which LA Animal Services rescues in large numbers every year.

“Los Angeles is typically one of the more progressive agencies,” said John Hadidian, director of the Humane Society’s urban wildlife program. “I consider… [No-Kill for Wildlife] a welcome sign that others might follow soon.”

Today, the LA Times ran an op-ed piece to explain our wildlife policy, especially as it relates to coyotes:http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boks25jan25,0,786755.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Wile E. neighbors
Killing off coyotes and other L.A. fauna could actually make life worse for humans.
By Ed Boks, ED BOKS is the general manager of Los Angeles Animal Services

January 25, 2007
HUMANS NEARLY exterminated the wolf in the last century, but coyotes have proved to be real survivors. They’re now the principal wild canine in California, despite man’s best efforts — trapping, shooting, poisoning — for 150 years. Harried, dislocated and hunted, coyotes nonetheless flourish. And now, like a couple of L.A. hipsters, a pair of urban coyotes have started prowling the neighborhoods around trendy Melrose Avenue, 3rd Street and the Grove.

The locals are alarmed, dialing up animal control and their city councilman to report the sightings and ask, worriedly, are these animals a threat? Can’t something be done to move them?

In many parts of the city, a coyote sighting doesn’t rate a turned head, let alone a call to the City Council. But they aren’t typically spotted in this densely developed part of town. So how’d they get there? One theory is that a good samaritan found them injured and nursed them back to health before they escaped. Another is that they came in unaware in the back of a truck. It is also possible that they simply walked there looking for water. After all, under all this concrete, L.A. is still a desert that many forms of wildlife call home. Clever coyotes might be able to walk the mile or two from the Hollywood Hills, crossing the boulevards under the cover of darkness.

Some people, who believe we can isolate ourselves from our wild surroundings, find such wildlife a nuisance that should be removed. But it’s not that easy. California regulations say a trapped coyote must be either euthanized or immediately released on site. Remarkably, the rules allow sick or injured coyotes to be taken for rehabilitation, but healthy ones must be killed if not released then and there.

Given the unusual circumstances of our midtown coyotes, Los Angeles Animal Services has asked the California Department of Fish and Game for a special dispensation to allow us to attempt to trap this pair and release them back into the wild.

Animal Services has a unique no-kill policy toward wildlife, including coyotes, and for good reason. Killing coyotes has the unintended consequence of producing more coyotes, not fewer. Mother Nature provided them with a powerful survival mechanism: Smaller social group size increases the food-per-coyote ratio, and this food surplus biologically triggers larger litters and higher litter survival rates.

Even if we wanted to trap or kill all the coyotes in a designated area, history shows the vacancy won’t last. Coyotes, like the rest of nature, abhor a vacuum. Larger litters rebuild the population and, with no rivals to keep them at bay, coyotes from the surrounding areas move right in. The end result of these futile eradication efforts is always the same: The area is quickly overrun with new, and often more, coyotes.

Coyotes — once largely confined to the northwestern corner of the continental U.S. — can now be found in L.A.’s Griffith Park and New York’s Central Park, in snowy Alaska and sultry Florida. Threatened by human expansion, they find new homes wherever it is convenient.

Because our expanding cities keep eating up habitat, we’re destined to live with the urban (or suburban) coyote. But that shouldn’t be too much trouble. Coyotes are afraid of humans and almost never attack them. The most reliable estimates assert that there have been fewer than 300 recorded coyote attacks that resulted in human injuries, most involving small children. There are about 3 million children bitten by dogs every year, so a child is considerably more likely to be hurt by the family pet.

That family pet might also lure coyotes — either as prey or as a mate. Unspayed female dogs in heat will attract male coyotes, and likewise unneutered male dogs can be lured by the scent of a female coyote. There have been cases of such a lothario being killed by males in the coyote pack. Fixing your dog fixes this part of the problem. But small dogs and cats are particularly vulnerable to attacks by hungry coyotes and should be kept indoors whenever feasible.

Coyotes are smart, fast and agile — they can sprint up to 40 mph and have been known to scale chain-link fences. They will take what they can get — pet food, garbage, even fruit that’s fallen off trees — day or night.

If you don’t like your local coyotes, remember this: An area with coyotes is never overrun with rodents — a lesson learned by Klamath County, Ore., in 1947. After attempting to eradicate their coyote population, they soon found themselves infested by rodents, experiencing the poetic truth that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.

Posted on

Preparing For The Big One… by Ed Boks

On Wednesday, January 17th, we all remembered the 13th anniversary of the devastating Northridge 6.7 earthquake.

This anniversary provided a time for reflection of the leadership role LA Animal Services played in rescuing and returning animals to their frantic owners during those frightful days. Over 650 dogs were rescued in the days immediately following the quake and over 400 were safely returned to their owners. For the remaining animals, Animal Services conducted a huge Fees Waived Adoptathon on Feb.12, 2002, to ensure every animal rescued during the disaster was given every opportunity to find a loving home. On that day alone, over 300 animals were adopted.

As we prepare for future emergencies, especially “the big one” (which experts suggest will be like 25 Northridge quakes lined up end to end), it is important to recognize that an estimated 75 to 80% of all Angelinos own pets, and that studies have found that 86% of all pet owners are willing to risk their lives to save their pet’s life.

That was certainly borne out during the Katrina disaster. 50% of the people who refused to evacuate (even at gun point) said it was because they would not leave their pets behind. The over 50,000 pets left behind in New Orleans after Katrina prompted President Bush and the Congress to enact a law late last year requiring states to include pets in disaster relief plans or risk losing federal funding if pets are not included.

During last year’s LA City Emergency Management Workshop I heard someone ask, “How often does something have to happen to you before it occurs to you?”

This question suddenly reminded me of where I was on 9/11 2001. I was at an HSUS Conference in Washington DC, just a block from the Pentagon. I was staying at the Crystal Hotel and was there in my capacity as Executive Director of Maricopa County’s Animal Care & Control Program.

It wasn’t long after the attack that the hotel was filled with all the brass from the Pentagon who had hastily decided to set up their Incident Command Post in the hotel lobby. As you can imagine, everyone was reeling from the images of the World Trade Centers on TV and the smoke from the Pentagon wafting through the building.

I found myself talking to a colonel who understandably appeared to be in shock. Over the next few minutes I felt comfortable enough to ask him this question: “Understanding the fact that the Pentagon is the central location for all strategic military thinking, you must have had a contingency plan for an attack on the Pentagon itself. What was the plan for an attack like this?”

He looked at me for a few moments before saying, “Yes, we did have an emergency plan for an attack like this. Everyone in the building was to meet in the hall where the airplane struck.” There was no plan B. When Plan A was no longer an option, everyone ran to the closest shelter, the Crystal Hotel.

Less than two years later I was the executive director of New York City’s Animal Care & Control. My office was one block from Ground Zero. It was while I was in New York City that I learned of the heroic and largely unrecognized work done by the animal care and control officers of that department, along with the City’s Urban Park Rangers, on 9/11.

In the days following 9/11, Animal Care & Control Officers and Urban Park Rangers rescued over 1200 pets from the surrounding residential buildings over the objections of the Fire and Police Chiefs who felt the buildings were unsafe. These brave officers climbed 30 story buildings in the dark and smoke, without air conditioning or electricity. They went from apartment to apartment not knowing if the buildings they were in would stand or fall. They wore “moon suits” with respirators so they could breath. Within three days they rescued 1200 animals and within two weeks they had returned every animal to its rightful owner.

Los Angeles Animal Services and Animal Care & Control of New York City both serve as models for massive pet evacuations and safely returning animals to their owners, as contrasted with what happened after Katrina. To be sure, Katrina was a disaster of much larger geographic scope than either the Northridge quake or the World Trade Center disaster. However, there is one troubling similarity between 9/11 and Katrina, and that is how so many of the national animal welfare organizations capitalized on the disaster. They raised millions of dollars but, according to independent animal rescuers who aided in efforts to save animals in the aftermath, did much less than they probably could have to actually rescue and return pets to their owners.

I know that New York City Animal Care & Control, the agency that did the lion’s share of saving animals’ lives during the 9/11 tragedy, received nothing from the millions of dollars raised by the organizations who ostensibly raised these monies to alleviate the suffering of the animals in the disaster. In the future, local animal care agencies and private sector animal welfare groups should work together to create more effective public-private partnerships and generate improved outcomes for these animals who find themselves in desperate straits.

Most communities have an animal control agency that is equipped and trained to handle such emergencies (or they are working on a plan to do so). When deciding who should take the lead in rescuing and RETURNING animals in a disaster, local communities should rely on the agency that provides this expertise every day of the year, their local animal control department.

In Los Angeles, every day is a human-made disaster in terms of numbers when it comes to rescuing and returning lost, homeless, and displaced pets: LA Animal Services routinely receives on average 125 animals a day. Animal Services is diligently planning and preparing to respond to a variety of human-made and natural disasters. Our goal is to make LA the safest City for animals in the United States even in times of disasters.

Animal Services is responsible for protecting and promoting the health, safety and welfare of animals and people in the city of Los Angeles. The department’s Emergency Preparedness Division leads and coordinates preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation efforts relating to natural and manmade disasters that affect the health and safety of pets and wildlife in the city.

Animal Services takes seriously its responsibility to educate the public in preparing their pets for disasters, to ensure pets are included in the City’s evacuation plan, to coordinate animal rescue efforts, to establish plans for setting up emergency shelters for homeless pets, and to coordinate the training of shelter and field staff in the incident command system that’s used in disaster response.

LA Animal Services coordinates all interagency animal-related responses in the City’s emergency operations center during a time of disaster. If you belong to an LA City-based organization and you are interested in learning more about this important topic, please contact LA Animal Services at 213.482.9556 to schedule a presentation on disaster planning for pets.

Together we can develop a comprehensive “safety net” for all the members of our family, including our companion animals.

Posted on

If You Meet Buddha On The Road… by Ed Boks

There is a book entitled, “If You Meet Buddha On The Road, Kill Him.” This adage applies to all the gurus in animal welfare. Without question, we need to learn everything we can from every available source. However, real problems begin when we start to blindly follow the gurus and stop thinking for ourselves. Fortunately, and curiously, this tendency seems to be occurring with only a few of the most militant members of the animal rights community in LA.

(And for their sake, I should add that the author does not mean we should actually kill anyone. He means that there comes a time when we have to decide for ourselves how to achieve our goals instead of blindly following someone else’s opinion.)

I receive an email or two each week telling me what guru a, b, or c has to say about running a large municipal animal welfare organization. None of these folks seem troubled by the fact that these gurus have no significant experience running an organization comparable to LA Animal Services in size and scope. The mere fact that these gurus are on the lecture circuit and charge for their advice is enough to allow them to be perceived as experts.

I’ve learned there is no such thing as “guru osmosis.” There is no guarantee of success through anything but thoughtful preparation and hard work. I have been told by the very gurus that some think can easily solve the complicated issues facing LA that they would “never have” my job. Why not? If not them, who? Why do they not publicly offer to help? The door is open! And if they are not going to help (absent a hefty consulting fee), why do they lead people into thinking they are “waiting in the wings”? The animals don’t need experts in the wings; they need them on the front line!

Success in LA will never be determined by who we follow, or by what philosophy we promote, or by anything other than our own personal involvement in saving animals and solving problems both big and small in a systematic way. The reason we have progressed as far as we have in LA is because of the positive involvement of the employees, volunteers, and partners of Animal Services who refuse to get mired in the mud-slinging and focus on achieving the goal. And we are achieving that goal as we focus on one animal at a time, 125 animals a day, week in, week out, month after month!

Imagine what could be done if the entire humane community were pulling together to make good things happen instead of engaging in internecine warfare and doing everything possible to demean and demoralize those of us who are charged with turning the situation around. We’ll keep on pushing with or without their help, but more animals will live and the job will get done sooner WITH their help than without it. They must live with that reality!

I received a call from a volunteer today who was ecstatic over delivering one animal in need of fostering to one of our New Hope partners. To my mind this volunteer did more to help LA take another step toward No-Kill in this one act of selflessness than all of last weekend’s protestors in all their self-serving actions combined.

In the final analysis, we have to solve this problem ourselves: the only expert LA has, and needs, to solve local animal welfare issues is you. What are you doing to help? Pursuing ulterior motives or truly helping animals in need? You are the one who determines success or failure. The buck does not stop with LA Animal Services, the buck stops with each one of us.

We can and we will achieve No-Kill when we stop being led around by the nose and agree to work together. By doing so we can and we will make LA the safest City in the nation for our pets!

Posted on

Fact Vs. Rumor by Ed Boks

What is a rumor? According to the Encarta Dictionary, a rumor is an:

1. unverified report, a generally circulated story, report, or statement without facts to confirm its truth
2. idle speculation, general talk or opinions of uncertain reliability

Synonyms include: story, claim, report, unconfirmed report, belief, allegation, opinion, speculation, gossip, tittle-tattle, chitchat, buzz

Antonym: fact

Rumor Mill: process of spreading rumors; the process by which rumors are started and spread.

The LA animal welfare rumor mill is alive and well. It sows to the wind and often reaps a whirlwind of misunderstanding, confusion, and misguided attacks. It wreaks havoc that ultimately results in unnecessary suffering (or worse) for the very animals everyone wants to help.

Every day generally circulated reports without facts to confirm the reliability of the reports cross my desk. Unsubstantiated charges and allegations require staff time and resources to investigate. More times than not the rumor turns out to be false. But the community has moved on to the next rumor and is no longer interested in the one that excited their passions the day before.

To address this ever changing sea scape, LA Animal Services has developed a page on its website dedicated to providing the facts to rumors involving LA Animal Services. It is hoped this site will prove to be a valuable resource to all of us who are intent on making LA the safest City in the United States for our pets!

You can access this website by clicking here: http://www.laanimalservices.com/rumors.htm

Posted on

Compassion: Our Last Great Hope by Ed Boks

I was recently asked what my last Blog about “compassion” has to do with fulfilling Animal Services’ mission to “promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of animals and people in the City of Los Angeles.”

I was surprised when this seemingly compassionate person stated she was not comfortable with the General Manager of LA Animal Services espousing “religion” to express the idea of enlarging the circle of compassion to include all species, especially our companion animals and local wildlife.

Its interesting that the word “religion” means to “reconnect” as in fixing something that is broken. One does not need to be religious to want to fix a broken system. Clearly our animal welfare community is broken, and as the renowned Veterinarian/Philosopher Leo K. Bustad demonstrated throughout his life and teachings, “Compassion is our last great Hope“.

Finding fault with compassion, however it is expressed, is serious evidence of a broken society for all the reasons cited in my last Blog.

This person’s misguided concern over how or where compassion is discussed reminded me of an excerpt from “The Velveteen Rabbit”, when the Rabbit asked the Skin Horse what it means to be “Real”. The Skin Horse responded:

“Real isn’t how you are made. It’s a thing that happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real… It doesn’t happen all at once. You become. It takes a long time. That’s why it doesn’t often happen to people who break easily, or have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don’t matter at all, because once you are Real you can’t be ugly, except to people who don’t understand.”

To people who don’t understand the importance of Compassion, everything must appear ugly, which probably explains why they can only espouse ugliness and intollerance in all their discourse.

I’m convinced most Angelinos are persuaded by better angels – after all, (forgive the religous reference), we are the City of Angels…

The Good News is, we are not unique, as this recent article in Time Magazine indicates:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1573345,00.html?cnn=yes

According to David Favre, a professor at the Michigan State University College of Law, who has studied animal rights laws for 20 years, what we are experiencing in Los Angeles is a “grass roots movement” of compassion occuring across the United States – from a concern for feral cats, spaying and neutering, and local shelters. “It is not unlike the environmental movement when I was in law school. Animal welfare is a growing social interest”, explains Favre.

Every movement has started with a small group of enlightened individuals calling attention to an injustice. When these people expressed a valid concern, it would touch the hearts and compassion of others and a movement would grow until it reached a tipping point. Once a movement hit a tipping point, and more people were aware of an injustice than those who were not, it was then time to shift gears and focus attention on solving the problem.

We get it. Killing animals is bad. Now lets work together to figure out real solutions to end it. We have passed the “tipping point” in Los Angeles. Unlike so many communities in the United States, we have a Mayor, a City Council, an Animal Services Commission and a General Manager who all champion this noble goal and are calling upon the entire community to rally together until it is finally achieved. There is no going back. No-Kill in LA is inevitable.

Curiously, the most vocal in calling attention to the “catch and kill” injustice practiced by our community, now refuse, when the opportunity for success is greatest, to devote their resources and energy to actually achieving “no-kill”.

With the American Revolution as a rare exception, it seems most revolutionaries find it easier to continue casting stones after winning the day than they do stopping to gather stones together. (Is this a religious reference or a Pete Seeger song popularized by the Byrds?) Why do some only see ugliness and refuse to understand that this is the time they have been waiting for? Why do they argue while animals are still dying, when together we could end it quicker!

The City of Los Angeles has established a challenging goal – to make Los Angeles the first major “no-kill” city in the United States. We know that each year millions of lost and homeless pets are euthanized in the United States for no other reason than there are not enough loving homes for them. Los Angeles Animal Services is committed to ending this barbaric practice once and for all.

This is not a new goal. Los Angeles has made the greatest progress towards achieving No-Kill when compared to any other community in the United States by reducing euthanasia 50% over the past 5 years and another 14.6% in 2006 in the case of our canine friends! Animal Services experienced nearly a 70% live release rate for dogs in 2006! (A 2006 Annual Report is forthcoming and will include data on all species and programs.)

To achieve “no-kill”, Animal Services has and will continue to initiate innovative and progressive programs. Not the least of which is the opening of six new, state of the art Animal Care Centers. These centers look more like botanical gardens than animal shelters and will be the pride of Los Angeles as they set the gold standard for municipal animal shelters. Animal Services is already the largest animal rescue and pet adoption agency in California, and these new shelters will greatly increase the number of pets placed into loving homes.

With the new Centers we are also opening six new state of the art spay/neuter clinics. A year ago, these clinics were not even scheduled to open until 2008 at the earliest. Today, they are on the fast track to completion and will all be open before this summer. Each clinic is designed to surgically alter 20,000 pets annually. With Animal Services altering 120,000 pets each year, Los Angeles will quickly see a reduction in the number of lost and homeless pets coming into our shelters. This decrease in the number of unwanted pets in Los Angeles will allow us to provide even greater care to the animals still finding their way into our new Care Centers.

Animal Services is an all inclusive organization willing to work and partner with any organization or person wanting to make a constructive difference. We currently partner with over 70 animal welfare organizations in the greater LA area in a program called “New Hope“. This program truly offers new hope to nearly 7,000 animals that would have had no hope at all without the help of these great organizations.

Beginning in 2006, Animal Services made thousands of animals available to our New Hope Partners at no cost, including free spay/neuter surgery, free vaccinations and medical care up until the time of release (and sometimes afterwards) and free microchips. Partners are provided 24/7 access to the Centers to evaluate and work with the animals, and even have a “personal shopper” in each Center who alerts them to animals they are interested in helping.

Animal Services’ Big Fix Program provides spay/neuter services to our community’s most needy pet owners to ensure no pet is left unaltered just because the owner can’t afford the pet’s surgery. Feral cats are also provided spay/neuter through Operation FELIX (Feral Education and Love Instead of X-termination).

Our STAR (Special Treatment And Recovery) Program is designed to help the hundreds of animals rescued by Animal Services who are sick, injured, abused, or neglected. These animals would have been euthanized if not for this life saving program!

Animal Services’ Bottle Baby Program is designed to provide bottle feeding to the hundreds of orphaned neonate puppies and kittens who are brought into Animal Services each year. Before this program was established these animals had no chance at survival. We are also in the process of finalizing our Evidence Animal Foster Program which will for the first time permit evidence animals (victims of cruelty crimes) to be placed in the homes and care of compassionate volunteers so they don’t languish in a shelter for months or longer while the case is being adjudicated. Today Animal Services’ volunteers and staff provide Foster Homes to orphaned neonates, sick, injured, abused and neglected animals relieving them of the trauma of long term shelter confinement and thus making room for other animals to have longer periods of time to be adopted.

Animal Services is about more than just pets, we are about people too. In 2007 we will launch our Teach Love and Compassion (TLC) Program. This program is designed to assist “at risk” kids by providing them an opportunity to care for “at risk” animals. Many of our community’s kids are all too aware of the harsh realities of abuse or neglect, and many know what it means to have a loving foster home to go to. TLC will enlarge the circle of compassion by allowing these kids to care for lost and homeless pets that have been abused, neglected, and are in need of foster care.

Later this program will be expanded to include our community’s senior citizens and others making our Animal Care Centers true community centers in every sense of the word, and all rotating around LA’s love for it’s lost and homeless pets!

This is just a sampling of the programs of LA Animal Services, with many more to come. For more information about LA Animal Services and how you can help, visit www.laanimalservices.com

2007 is a golden opportunity for LA to come together as a community to maximize all our efforts and resources to expand the circle of compassion to effectively help our community’s lost and homeless animals and finally achieve No-Kill for all the dogs, cats, rabbits, pocket pets, wildlife, farm animals and exotics who come through the doors of Animal Services. I’m hoping you will decide to be part of the solution by helping Animal Services help the animals in our care.

Compassion is our last great hope!

Posted on

Enlarging The Circle of Compassion by Ed Boks

Albert Schweitzer once said, “It is not always granted to the sower to live to see the harvest. All work that is worth anything is done in —FAITH.”

We are an extremely fortunate people. Unlike Albert Schweitzer, we are seeing the harvest. We are seeing the results of both his and our hard work; a work begun in faith. A Jewish Proverb says, “Despise not the day of small beginnings.”

To be sure, the No-Kill movement started small. But why is Nl-Kill receiving so much attention lately; and why here, in Los Angeles, the City of Angels? Is it a coincidence that No-Kill is so quickly rising to a place of national notice? Is it a coincidence that No-Kill is getting so much recognition just now?

We live in troubled times; a time of war and rumors of war. A time of fear so great that men’s hearts are failing them because of what they see coming upon the earth.

We live in a time when just reading the daily newspaper or listening to the evening news can cause you to question the value of life. I remember growing up as a boy in Detroit and listening to the morning newscaster on my way to school. Each day he would begin the News by asking the question “What’s a life in Detroit worth today?” And then he would give an account of how someone’s life had been snuffed out the night before for $20, or a pair of sneakers, or because someone didn’t like the way a person looked at them.

I find it interesting that No-Kill is suddenly receiving so much national attention during a time of unprecedented violence in the world. I’m reminded of a letter that was written by an itinerant preacher named Paul to a group of Romans 2,000 years ago. In his letter he addressed the violence of that generation by explaining, “that where sin, death and violence abound, grace and truth does much more abound.” The darker the world seems to get, the brighter the light of truth and compassion. In a Country where the literal wholesale slaughter of animals is common practice, No-Kill stands as a brilliant contrast and contradiction to the way we live as a community. In a world where people kill each other while claiming they are doing God’s will, it is fascinating to hear stories of how Palestinians and Israelis will join forces to tend feral cat colonies during a cease-fire.

Today, we live in a time when our national leaders are grappling with defining “good” and “evil”. They tell us that we are good and we are at war with evil.

I think it is true that the war between good and evil is manifesting in our age like no other. What is interesting about Good and Evil is that so many try to define good and evil with words alone. However, there is only one way that good and evil can truly be understood or defined, and it is not by what you believe or by what you think, but by what you do. Good and evil are defined and understood by our actions.

On September 11, 2001, we all saw evil manifested in the desperate and hateful act of 19 religious men killing thousands of innocent men, women and children in New York City. Some questioned, as they should, how can religion bring men to do such evil while they think they are doing good?

Albert Schweitzer answered this question for us when he said, “Any religion that is not based on a respect for life is not a true religion.” Abraham Lincoln said it another way, “I care not for any man’s religion whose dog or cat is not better for it.”

So what is the significance of the No-Kill initiative in Los Angeles as we enter the year 2007, just five years and three months following 9/11?

Before I answer that question, I need to talk about evolution. In the theory of evolution, Charles Darwin explained that a species evolves by adapting to a changing environment. He further explained that only those members of the species “fit” enough to adapt are fortunate enough to survive. Today we live in a changing environment, an environment defined within the context of a war between good and evil. If that is the case, how will nature determine who is fit to adapt and survive?

More to the point, are we fit enough to adapt and survive to our changing environment? Are you fit enough to adapt and survive?

I am confident the answer to that question is a resounding YES. And the reason for my confidence may surprise you. I think the evidence that suggests we are adapting well to our changing environment is found in the fact that we are attempting to achieve No-Kill in Los Angeles, New York City, and more and more communities each year following 9/11.

I agree with our national leaders when they tell us we are at war with evil. But I hasten to caution that we not make the mistake of thinking this is only an external war, a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The outward war is merely a manifestation of an internal war; the real war is in and for our own hearts and minds. This war can’t be won through outrageous acts of violence on the battlefield or in the street, not by dropping bombs on each other or by throwing red paint on each other. This war is won by our becoming what we espouse; by living our beliefs.

Faith and reverence for life is the only antidote for the madness that seems to be engulfing the world today. Our reverence for life is the light of the world. The antidote is so simple that it is easily missed, and millions miss it every day.

Schweitzer warned that, “Anyone who can regard the life of any creature as worthless is in danger of thinking human lives are worthless.”

Are we, as a society, in danger of thinking the life of any creature is worthless? I think that before No-Kill came along we could argue, in our ignorance, that we had little choice but to kill unwanted dogs and cats in our attempt to control over population. But with clear evidence that NO-KILL is achievable, can we not now argue, along with Albert Schweitzer, that if we chose to ignore No-Kill initiatives we are but one step removed from thinking human life has no value?

Over the years psychologists and law enforcement agencies have come to understand the link between animal cruelty and spousal, child, and elder abuse, and other forms of domestic violence. Violence does not discriminate against victims. If that link exists in the life of a person, could it be true of a community? Can a community’s insistence on catch and kill programs, when humane non-lethal alternatives exist, be the link that reveals a community’s lack of respect for human life?

Not all human life perhaps. A community may start with feeling that the lives of its enemies are worthless. Then perhaps those people who don’t agree with its religious or political beliefs. And if Schweitzer is correct, such an unthinking attitude could lead to the abuse of our aged, our young, our infirmed, and impoverished. When we begin to devalue life, where does it end? It ends only when a community decides to value all life.

Consider the biblical story in which two ancient towns are threatened with destruction because their inhabitants are perceived as living violent, self-absorbed lives. A decidely old school intervention is staged whereby the possibility that 50, 40 or even as few as 5 “righteous men” might live there leads to the possibility that the towns might be spared. If Abraham could prevail upon God to make compassionate decisions, then perhaps we can prevail upon our community to do the same.

Now there may be some who may find fault with my comparing the lives of 5 righteous men to the tens of thousands of lost and homeless dogs and cats living in Los Angeles. But if you do, it would be because you’re overlooking the moral of the analogy. The moral of the analogy is not that the lives of feral cats or lost and homeless pets are equal to the lives of men. The moral is that when we, as compassionate human beings, can value the lives of creatures as seemingly insignificant as dogs and cats, we will begin to understand the true capacity of our own souls to make compassionate, life-affirming choices.

Mahatma Gandhi taught us that the only way to determine the true value of a community is to look at how that community treats their animals. Community value is not determined by our political rhetoric, or by our wonderful community and public health programs, or by our art galleries, libraries and parks alone. Our true value according to Mahatma Gandhi is found in the way we treat our animals. So if we as the greatest City in the world can develop a life-affirming program for the lowliest of all creatures, our lost and homeless pets, what does that say about us as a community?

According to Schweitzer, No-Kill is what makes us truly human. His exact words were, “It is a man’s sympathy with all creatures that truly makes him human.”

That is the role of LA Animal Services, to speak on behalf of the voiceless. Schweitzer warned us to never let the voice of humanity within us be silenced because it is our sympathy for all creatures that defines us as truly human and good. There was another holy man who said, “As much as you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto Me.”

Again, it is not my intention to offend anyone’s religious sensibilities, so if you are offended by what might sound like my equating dogs and cats to the lowliest of humans, you have missed my point. I am not talking about the value of lost and homeless pets; I am actually trying to explain the human capacity to love. The capacity to love not only our friends, our neighbors, or even our enemies, but to even love the thousands of pets that find their way into our City Animal Care Centers.

When Albert Schweitzer received the Nobel Peace Prize he gave an acceptance speech titled, “The Problem of Peace in the World Today.” In that speech he said, “The human spirit is not dead. It lives on in secret and it has come to understand that the full breadth and depth of compassion can only be known when it embraces all living creatures and does not limit itself to mankind alone.”

I spoke earlier about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. It may surprise you that as a former Pastor I believe in evolution, but not in the same way Darwin did. I believe compassion is the catalyst for our evolutionary growth. In fact, I believe compassion is the only evolutionary force left to us for our own human development. In earlier ages we had to rely on physical strength to survive, in more recent ages we had to rely on our mental strength to survive. Today I think we rise or fall as a species depending on our capacity to love all creatures, great and small. Our survival as a species depends on our ability to extend the circle of compassion to include all creatures. The world does not belong to those who embrace cruelty; the world belongs to those who can love greatly.

Scientists talk about evolution in terms of biology. I think evolution is not so much a biological force as it is a spiritual force. It is not merely a force that makes men out of monkeys; it is a force that can turn men into angels.

Love can be a pretty ethereal term, but we can all understand the concept of kindness and mercy. Once you begin to think kindly and mercifully about life, you begin to truly appreciate the value of life, and when you truly understand the value of live, you become what Schweitzer calls a “thinking being”, and as a thinking being you find yourself looking for ways to act compassionately and mercifully towards all life.

Schweitzer said, “The man who has become a thinking being feels a compulsion to give every ‘will-to-live’ the same reverence for life that he gives his own life.”

In other words, if you are a thinking being you will love your fellow creature as you love yourself… You will extend the Golden Rule to include other species.

According to Schweitzer, a person is not even a thinking being if he cannot reverence the will-to-live in other creatures.

We live in a day and a world where 19 men can fly airplanes into buildings with the malicious intent of killing thousands of fellow human beings. We also live in a day when hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people will devote their lives and their resources to help Los Angeles achieve No-Kill. These two acts in my view define Good and Evil.

But let me be clear, you don’t have to fly an airplane into a building to manifest evil. All you have to do is understand that thousands of animals are dying in animal shelters every year and do nothing about it. According to Schweitzer that is also an evil act. Schweitzer recognized that it was often in such thoughtlessness that evil most often manifests itself.

He explained, “Very little of the great cruelty shown by men can really be attributed to cruelty. Most of it comes from thoughtlessness or inherited habit. The roots of cruelty are not so much strong as they are widespread.”

Think about that. The roots of cruelty are not so much strong as they are widespread. That explains why an act of kindness is so powerful. It is powerful because it is stronger than cruelty; cruelty is shallow and weak. If all men could live their lives in kindness and mercy towards all creatures, soon the light of compassion would overwhelm the darkness of unthinking and habitual cruelty.

Albert Schweitzer said a day would come when “people will be amazed that the human race existed so long before it recognized that thoughtless injury to life was incompatible with truth, love, and compassion.”

This is the mission of LA Animal Services. We are here to acknowledge that in a time of war and violence, the circle of compassion is not diminished but rather grows larger and larger each day. We are here to affirm the small work we started in faith is growing stronger and stronger every day.

At a time of unprecedented evil, we are making an evolutionary leap, a leap that may go unnoticed by many, but a leap nonetheless of thinking beings consciously expanding the circle of compassion to include all creatures. We are here to assert and demonstrate by our actions that love, life, compassion, kindness and mercy are stronger than hate, violence and death.

According to Albert Schweitzer, the “Affirmation of life is a spiritual act;” performed by thinking beings. As thinking beings we affirm and embrace life saving No-Kill programs like New Hope, Big Fix, FELIX, STAR, TLC, the Bottle Baby and Foster programs, and Safety Net as a compassionate means to finally eliminate the troubling conditions of our lost and homeless pets.

I am asking all thinking Angelinos to help us make Los Angeles the safest City in the United States for our pets in 2007! We can solve the problems of pet overpopulation without sacrificing our compassion or humanity, and we can do this together this year!

(Note: I apologize if any religious referrences within this message offended anybody. The text has been edited to be less offensive. The message is intended only to encourage respect for the lives of our community’s lost and homeless pets. Happy New Year! Ed)

Posted on

Special Report from ANIMAL PEOPLE: U.S. Kill Rates and how L.A. compares by Ed Boks

The official 13th annual ANIMAL PEOPLE analysis of kill rates in communities across the United States goes to press on July 20th. Merritt Clifton, editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE, just forwarded LA Animal Services this year’s projection compiled from the best available data of total U.S. shelter killing. Here is a preview of the soon to be released report:

“The good news is that the national rate of shelter killing per 1,000 human residents in the U.S. has dropped to a record low of 14.7, just slightly lower than it was before the economic collapse in 2001 that knocked funding for spay/neuter programs back, and simultaneously, while the feral cat population continued a steep decrease, and the pit bull terrier population exploded.

“Because the U.S. human population and pet keeping significantly increased since 2001, total U.S. shelter killing is still above the low mark of 4.2 million. However, at 4.36 million projected in 2005, we could achieve a new low in 2006.

“The bad news is that the rates of shelter killing per 1,000 humans went up slightly along the Gulf Coast, in Appalachia, and–most alarmingly–in the Southwest. Since most of the data is from fiscal years ending before Hurricane Katrina, that was not a factor.

“The rates of increase in all three regions were small enough to be within the margin of error for the survey method, but even if there was not an actual increase, I think it can be said that there was no demonstrable decrease. In all three regions, rates of pet sterilization are probably just barely getting to the 70% necessary to stabilize the population.

“Los Angeles city and county combined have cut their shelter killing in half since 2003, and at a combined rate of 3.94 are now killing fewer animals per 1,000 residents than San Francisco killed in 1994, the first year of the Adoption Pact that made San Francisco the first “no-kill city.” end quote

This is good news indeed and further proof that Los Angeles is on the right track and developing momentum. Consider that over the past five years, LA City’s dog euthanasia rate decreased 62 percent and our cat euthanasia rate decreased 19 percent. In just the first six months of 2006, we’ve seen another 12 percent decrease in dog and cat euthanasia compared to the same period in 2005. In the 05/06 Fiscal Year just ending, fewer than 19,500 animals were euthanized. This is the lowest number of animals killed in any one-year period in LA City history! 

We still have a long way to go, but together we are transforming LA into the safest and least lethal city in the US for our pets. Thank you all who are helping in a constructive way!

Posted on

A Time For Gathering Stones Together by Ed Boks

The following speech was given to over 300 animal welfare advocates in the LA area on Thursday, February 9th, 2006. The speech was well received by many and a source of upset to others. A mixed reaction to such a frank discussion concerning the rescue and humane community by an “outsider” was anticipated. The important point of this talk was, and is, that I embrace the local community, I recognize everyone’s importance and value to the effort, and I want to work closely with everyone wanting to help. In order for us to accomplish our shared No-Kill vision we all have to get past our differences and focus on how we can help each other. 

Hello, my name is Ed Boks. I’ve had the good fortune to meet many of you already, and I look forward to meeting the rest of you this evening and in the days and weeks to come.

During my few weeks in Los Angeles I have been exposed to a lot and I think I have learned a lot. I’d like to share tonight a little bit about what I’ve learned. How many agree that sometimes it takes an “outsider” to see what is really happening in a community? Isn’t it true that sometimes you can be so involved in a situation and circumstance that you can’t see the forest through the trees? That’s why so many in business rely on consultants to tell them what is happening in their organizations.

I don’t consider myself a consultant. I’m what you might call a troubleshooter. Where a consultant may be adept at analyzing a problem, making recommendations, and then getting out of Dodge, a troubleshooter, like myself, has to work the problem until he can find and implement workable solutions. He’s accountable until the job is done. He has to produce.

I have some experience in this respect. I have actually worked a couple of problematic animal control programs. I understand there are a couple of you here this evening who have some questions about those situations, and I welcome your questions. There is nothing about my experiences in Maricopa County or NYC that I am afraid to talk about. I will tell you up front that in the final analysis, significantly fewer animals were dying in those communities when I left than then I arrived, and programs and people were put in place to continue those trends.

Unlike a lot of consultants I’ve worked with, I don’t have the luxury to take credit for my successes. I am all too aware that I can’t do anything without the help of others. Now, like it or not, I’m here, in LA. Some of you are pleased that I am here, some are concerned, and some are withholding judgment. Whatever your opinion, I can tell you tonight that I will not be successful without your help. And LA Animal Services will not be successful without your help. And you will never realize your vision for LA’s animals unless you are willing to help in a constructive way.

We are dealing with a huge societal problem; a problem we all feel passionately about. There are just too many animals dying needlessly in our City. This is a problem that will take all of us working together as a community to solve.

But before we can solve that problem, I think we have a little bigger problem we’re going to have to tackle first. I’ve been in LA a little over a month now. Everywhere I go folks I meet for the first time ask me what I think of LA. How many would really like to hear my assessment of the LA animal welfare community? Keep in mind, my perspective will only be good for a short period of time because the longer I’m part of this landscape the more I become just another one of the trees in the forest. So before I am fully assimilated, let me tell you what I see.

I see a condition that I have seen in many other communities. I refer to this condition as the Oscar Wilde Syndrome. This is not a condition unique to LA. In fact, I think it is endemic to the entire animal welfare industry. I call this condition the Oscar Wilde Syndrome because it is best described by something Oscar Wilde once said about himself. He said, “It is not enough that I succeed, my friends must also fail.”

How many would agree with that diagnosis?

As human beings, we tend to be “meaning making machines”. We abhor situations that provide no meaning and situations we don’t understand. That’s why a lack of communication is so dangerous, and I admit LAAS has to do a better job at communicating with the public, because when you aren’t transparent, then people tend to make up their own meanings. And when we find ourselves in situations we don’t understand or don’t have enough information, we begin to assign our own meaning. And it is just human nature, that when we have an opportunity to assign our own meaning, we tend to make ourselves “right” and everyone else “wrong”. Which makes sense, right? After all, we get to assign our own meaning and we’re not likely to make ourselves wrong, are we?

Think about the word “meaning” next time you’re around someone who is just plain mean. What makes people so mean? I’ll tell you what I think makes some people so mean is the meaning they assign to those around them. What makes people mean is the little universe of “meaning” they lock themselves into over time. What is tragic is to watch that universe shrink around them and get smaller and smaller because most of us just don’t want to be around that kind of meaning.

This Syndrome is pernicious. When one is in its clutches it is not enough to dispute ideas, we have to also find fault with the person who holds any idea we don’t agree with, then we have to ridicule and slander. This is how battles of ego develop. How many have been involved in animal welfare for ten years or more? Have you ever noticed during all that time that there are some real colossal egos at work in our field? Mine included.

How many in this room would admit that you have an ego? Thank you for your honesty! Can I share a rather radical thought with you? Did you know that 150 years ago, the ego didn’t even exist? The ego is a meaning that a fellow by the name of Sigmund Freud developed and we all bought into. Why? Because we have to have meaning. We are like Adam and Eve when God told them to name all the animals. We have all been assigning names and meanings to everything that moves in our lives ever since.

Ever since Freud named the beast within us “ego” it has been preying mercilessly on all it disagrees with. Not that people weren’t cruel to one another before the creation of the ego, but with a handy ego, at least now we feel we can understand our aberrant behavior. The more we can understand it, the more we tend to justify it. Its amazing the behavior our ego lets us justify. We feel so righteous. And we are, we’re self-righteous…

There once lived an itinerant preacher about 2000 years ago, and he warned that a time would come when men would kill one another and think they were doing God a favor. That’s pretty extreme justification, no? Do we see that happening anywhere in the world today? We in this room couldn’t get to that point, could we? After all, we’re all “no-kill”, right? It’s interesting; this preacher went on to say that if you hate your fellow man, you are a murderer.

Can I be candid with you all? I’ve been in this community for six weeks. I have spent a lot of time with a lot of folks, and not enough time with a lot more, but I have to tell you, I have not met anyone that I didn’t fall in love with. You are all amazing.

Do we have any original StarTrek fans here? Remember the episode when Kirk encountered these two guys from another dimension that are exact opposites, but they look so much alike that no one can tell them apart? They were mirror images of each other. One was black on the right side and white on the left and the other was white on the right side and black on the left. And these two guys hated each other, beyond all reason. They were so repulsed by each other that at the very sight of their mirror image they were provoked to wanting to kill each other. The crew of the Enterprise couldn’t find any remedy except to lock the two of them into a parallel universe where they were destined to fight and claw at each other for eternity. Anybody here want to be trapped fighting with each other for eternity?

I have some good news for you. There is a cure for the Oscar Wilde Syndrome. The Oscar Wilde Syndrome is a lot like alcoholism. Once you can admit to your self that you have the disease, you are on the road to recovery. But also like alcoholism, when you can’t admit you are in its clutches you remain trapped in it.

I’ve had the opportunity to talk to a lot of the rescuers that went down to New Orleans to save the lost and abandoned animal victims of Katrina. I’ve heard one common concern from all of them, and that was: how much more they could have done if egos had not gotten in the way. Personal and organizational egos, fighting for funding, the spotlight, and recognition. And many of the animals ended up suffering more, not less.

Right here in Los Angeles we live with a Katrina like disaster every day. But because our disaster has so blended into the backdrop of most people’s everyday lives no one outside of this room seems to notice. And we’re so busy fighting among ourselves that no one is likely to notice any time soon. Let me give you just one example of how our collective dysfunction is affecting the animals in LA. The number of animals rescued from LAAS by our rescue partners in January 06 compared to January 05 is down 24%.

The good news is euthanasia was also down 25%. But what could we have done if all the rescue groups had just been able to function at the same capacity as last year? And I’ll tell you right now, last year’s capacity is not good enough. We have got to do better if we expect to achieve no-kill in Los Angeles. We have to work together.

Among our combined efforts well over 100 animals a day are rescued from the streets and allies of LA. Many of these animals end up with Animal Services where they are killed. I’m hoping that tonight we can say together that that is no longer acceptable, and say it without condemning each other, but by helping each other end it.

If the same resources that Los Angeles residents sent to Katrina animal relief were sent to us in this room, what could we have accomplished here? In the same way, if all the resources we expend in attacking each other were spent helping each other help the animals, what could we accomplish here?

Tonight, I’d like to propose a different kind of reality to you. I’d like to enroll you in a different possibility than the one you are living in now. Do I have any takers? Anyone interested? Imagine this: what if we create in Los Angeles an animal welfare community without egos?
Imagine, instead of always trying to figure out who is right and who is wrong, or who are the good guys and who are the bad guys, we determine instead that every one of us is indispensable?

Because each one of us is an indispensable piece of the puzzle and we will never solve this problem unless we solve it together. When we exclude any piece of the puzzle we immediately begin to create the illusion of right and wrong, good and bad that will only keep us fighting among ourselves forever.

Imagine: a community without egos. Some of you who know me are probably tempted to say, “Fat chance, Boks, you have the biggest ego in the room.” I will cop to that. But what I am proposing is so important to me that I am asking you all to call me on it. Whenever you see me do or say anything that puts my ego before the animals, tell me. All I ask is that to whatever degree you hold me responsible for being a part of the solution in LA, you hold yourself equally responsible when someone points out your ego may be getting in the way.

If I fail, you fail. If you fail, I fail. If we succeed, we succeed together, and if we succeed, we will succeed spectacularly.

I was encouraged to come to LA several weeks ago by a friend who lives here. While we were talking he shared a passage with me out from the Book of Ecclesiastes where it says, “there is a time for throwing stones and a time for gathering stones together”.

I submit the time for throwing stones is over and it is time now that we begin to gather stones together because together we can succeed where we have only known failure and frustration in the past. We have a lot of work to do, and I would like to get started tonight!