Letter to Amy Paulin
New York State Assembly, 88th District
700 White Plains Rd.
Scarsdale, NY 10583
I don't know much about how legislation works in Albany but I suspect you may not know what it's like down in the 'trenches' of animal rescue. While you may think bill A05449A
will help animals, it actually does them a severe disservice. I ask you please to reconsider your support of this bill.This bill makes it more difficult for rescue groups (who already have working relationships with city shelters) to pull animals out for adoption. Why would anyone want to stand in the way when there are groups ready and willing to take on any adoptable animal brought into the shelter? Why give the shelter the right of refusal when there are no other options but death? It seems so simple: any adoptable animal the shelter has no room for should be offered to a participating rescue. This bill disrupts this obvious flow and allows the shelter to spitefully kill any animal it chooses. I asked myself why legislation would allow something so seemingly cruel. Then I remembered the old adage: "Follow the money."Shelters like NYC's Animal Care & Control receive a large amount of funding from Maddie's Fund, a foundation whose express purpose is to create a 'no-kill nation.' ACC receives this funding as part of a gradual transition into 100% no-kill, or so that's the intent. But ACC is a high-kill shelter, so how can they continue to receive this funding? Do they find ways to better work with no-kill groups and eliminate the need for the euthanasia room? No, they falsify records to classify the killing of healthy animals. It has been reported
numerous times that the ACC has altered medical records of healthy animals to make it appear they were ill, and were thus killed. Killing a sick animal is allowable by Maddie's Fund, so suddenly there are a lot more terminally sick animals in the shelter.This revelation brings the 'psychological pain' language issue into focus. As you are aware, this bill allows the shelter to immediately kill any animal it believes to be in 'psychological pain.' There is no waiting period suggested; an understandably terrified cat can be put down within moments of intake. All the shelter must do is claim the animal would never recover from his condition, the animal is irredeemably ill, so it must be put down. And with that, no-kill funding is secured (at least until Maddie's Fund gets wise to the deception).
This bill does nothing but help high-kill shelters cover their tracks. It makes them less approachable, less accountable. How is that good government? I know most people don't really care about these animals; after all, if people cared more, how would they allow this to continue? The municipal shelter system works best below public scrutiny so it's up to a dedicated few to try to bring these issues to light. I don't blame you for not being aware of what's really going on here, nor am I confident this letter will change your mind. Everybody knows the city pound doesn't have enough money, so here's a way to ensure a funding source that doesn't rely on tax dollars, what's the harm? The harm is that these actions will mean a return to the dark ages of animal welfare for NY state. Do you really want your name associated with that?
Please do not vote yes on this bill. Our shelter animals need these rescues to help them! Please reconsider your thoughts on this bill.
Please do the right thing and don't allow the quick kill bill to pass. This is a complete disservice to these animals. The rescue community spend countless hours, and endless efforts in attempting to save these animals. Why revert back to old ways an make it nearly impossible to provide assistance to these animals. It may seem like a good idea to you from a budgeting standpoint but it will be detrimental the thousands of lives! I sure wouldn't want my name associated with that. Do you?
let's talk about the definition of the word "adoptable," shall we…?
Hey: Thank you for posting this. I've struggled a little to understand why the NY AC&C receives funding despite the high volume of animals they kill, despite that horrible nightly euthanasia list, despite the god-forbid-they-pick-up-the-phone situation when you're trying desperately to save a dog. Moreover, it can be difficult to understand why on earth the Paulin Quick Kill bill doesn't just alter the language to assuage the objections of rescue workers/animal advocacy groups. This pulls it all into focus. Thanks.
Thank~You Jimmy Legs for writing this well spoken letter!
At this time I have 3 furry felines in our home.
A Sweet Big Orange Tabby .
A Calico that's owner died ~ she's beautiful to look at .
But , though we love her she has a moments of being very aggressive .
I knew this ahead of time & I'm so thankful that we took her home.
And a very shy but sweet little Black & White Cow Cat .
The law that Assembly Woman Amy Paulin supports is heartless & shows she is uneducated as far as animal welfare .
Well , we knew that already because it was written by the hands of the ASPCA !
My shy & aggressive cat wouldn't last at the NYC ACC for even a second !
Much appreciation for taking the time & effort in writing this letter .
Paulin knows only too well this bill will KILL animals that can & should be saved. She is being bought off by Ed Sayres of the ASPCA who most likely has promised to "buy" her re-election. As a "man with connections, power & money" he has her convinced she can survive this. THEY ARE BOTH WRONG! The ONLY way she can save her career is to vote for CAARA! She's too ignorant, arrogant & vain to do this.
HER CAREER IS OVER, DESPITE ED SAYRES PROMISES! GOODBYE PAULIN! YOU ARE DONE!
This Bill is going back in time , The founder of the ASPCA Henry Berg's mission and legacy is to make a difference in the world for animals with all aspect's of being compassionate and a voice for the welfare of animals.. This New Ceo has his own agenda and couldnt care less about animals ..Karma is a B_____!!!!