Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Gerry Glauser
Gerry's posts

Post has attachment
Let's see now, with over 10,000 dogs/year, you have less than a 2% error rate resulting in some unknown cost to public safety? And you know of which large municipal shelter who does much better? Then your question of the validity of the SAFER test (from the ASCPA) shows you have never read even the test description. Nor is there ANY test in existence which would, with certainty, prevent the incident you described. Then you have Ludwick, who knows nothing of behavior and doesn't work with dogs, and Hidalgo who has no behavior credentials. Where the report interview of her showed extreme views with no basis in reality.

Next, you have a cause for concern in the city failing to obtain responses from half of those 100 people. You then go on to speculate on why they might not have responded, such as advice of counsel and fled the jurisdiction. That's beyond speculation to simple fabrication. You might just as well have said those people were so happy with their dogs that they felt no reason to respond. And, were you suggesting that the City of Albuquerque pass a LAW requiring people to respond to their inquiries? Come on now, we're often lucky if even half the people go out to vote! And if we were to REALLY look at this logically, any of those adopters having major issues with the dog would be far MORE LIKELY to respond, yelling at the city. Yet, not a single one did that!

By the way, I happened to have had one of Ludwick's Dangerous Dogs for a time! Where two dozen people at the local dog park just loved her. Her subsequent adoption was tracked and she did well with no issues, playing with her cat, and now has a sister.

So, nobody could tell you why the decision-making matrix used by Animal Humane Society of NM was not used at AWD. Let's just look into that. The matrix there uses SAFER as only a screening test (the way it was designed by the ASPCA) and they have dog trainers and behaviorists to guide the process and evaluations. None of which is available at AWD. So if only Joe has a plane and flies on his vacation, you're wondering why plane-less Fred doesn't also fly...did I get that right?

The panel wrote that a written procedure removes the emotional stress that can arise when deciding which animals are to be euthanized because the decisions are based on a written document rather than a "gut" feeling. Well, if behavior analysis were only an EXACT science, they might have a point. While you do need written procedures for consistency, anybody who thinks that will remove emotional stress from killing animals may well have some sociopathic tendencies there.

And they end by talking about the law not being enforced. Yet the Animal Control Officers are frustrated because the current law doesn't allow them to fully protect people, and the public just yells at them instead of the city councilors who could fix this. This is not speculation or opinion, but simply comparing many of the serious issues against the actual words of the current laws.
Wait while more posts are being loaded