A blog by spcaLA president, Madeline Bernstein

Mar 5, 2015

Ringling Bros. Failed to Train the Public to Come to the Show

Courtesy Google Images
Ringling Bros. announced that they are phasing out elephant acts by 2018, Their parent company Feld Entertainment cited public concern for the welfare of elephants and this;

"...  certain cities and counties have passed "anti-circus" and "anti-elephant" ordinances. The company's three shows visit 115 cities throughout the year, and Feld said it's expensive to fight legislation in each jurisdiction. It's also difficult to plan tours amid constantly changing regulations.." (President Kenneth Feld)


We should take note that constant vigilance, intelligent opposition and local legislation can yield powerful results. We must keep this up for the benefit of the tigers, dogs and camels and other animals still asked to perform extreme acts for our entertainment. I would also urge close monitoring of their Center for Elephant Conservation in Florida where their elephants are housed.

Until all the animals are unshackled and released from the forced travel, training and dystopian existence we must watch, speak and legislate their freedom.

The public won't be “bull hooked” into buying tickets.





Jan 28, 2015

Animal People Are Not Humorless

Courtesy Google Images
There was a great rage and fuss raised over a GoDaddy Super Bowl ad involving the selling of a puppy on line. GoDaddy responded by pulling the ad and assuring the public that the dog was adopted by a member of the GoDaddy team.

What disturbed me was the other reaction by the public that animal people are humorless.

I can say that is not true of me and most of my colleagues. It is my undying belief that, unless there is actual harm or criminal activity, everyone has a right to be offensive, write stupid copy and voice their opinions. We have the power to not watch, not buy and not vote for the proponents of those ideas and things we don't like.

Most of us are not humorless ideologues. To those who are or who can't separate the make believe from the real I say this: Beware of advocating content based censorship in regard to things you don't like, as someone else will censor the things you do like.

So, laugh, enjoy, and be glad you are not person responsible for that ad!



Jan 21, 2015

The City of Los Angeles considering Increasing Cat Pet Limits and Permitting Clowders


The City of Los Angeles is thinking of raising its cat limit law from 3 to 20+ cats per household. The proposal suggests that if a person owns 1 to 3 cats, the cats may be indoor or outdoor, but outdoor only if altered. Additional cats, or the cats in a registered private “clowder”, must be kept indoors with no requirement for sterilization. It is possible for even more cats to be kept, if those cats are foster cats rather than owned. What could possibly go wrong here?

The proposal in its current form is poorly constructed. It allows owned cats to roam at their peril or potentially end up back in the shelter using valuable space and resources. It allows breeding at a time when the overpopulation of cats is at crisis levels. It potentially allows the suffering of cats in ill equipped “clowders” who may not get help but for an annual inspection or cruelty complaint. Its analysis of the hoarding and foster care components is deficient.

spcaLA's position is that one abused pet in a home is one too many, and fifty well cared for pets in a home is fine. It is however, traditional for government animal control agencies to arbitrarily limit the number of pets in a household in the name of public safety, health, welfare, and nuisance control. Such limits also aid in the prevention, management and prosecution of animal hoarders.

The pet limit number varies from community to community, with, neither a nexus between the existence of a limit and a stated result, nor, a nexus between particular numbers to the same. In other words, the presence of this restriction does not deter animal neglect, unsanitary conditions, bites and bugs, and there is no magic limit number that has been found to effectuate a positive outcome. One noisy dog can wake up neighbors, and one stinky cat can smell up an apartment floor while eight well behaved dogs and five clean cats present no problem, notwithstanding a potential violation of a limit law.

The reality is that limit laws do not produce more capable pet owners and do not deter irresponsible pet owners. There are those who should not be allowed to have even one pet, yet they can have three, five or, soon in Los Angeles 20+. Conversely, such laws can prevent law abiding citizens from offering a good home to a needy pet, can penalize a person who properly cares for pets and is mindful of neighbors, and can leave more animals in shelters and pounds.

Therefore, if Los Angeles wants to try this increase they should do so in a way that is easy to enforce and does not contribute to the breeding of more cats. Accordingly, the following must occur:

1.     All cats must be sterilized.
2.     All cats must have identification.
3.     All cats must remain inside or in supervised/protected outdoor areas.
4.     Foster cats are not owned pets and need not be counted and treated as such, but must be documented and efficiently tracked by the City. Foster cats should and would not be housed with owned cats in a proper foster setting.

5.      The risk of hoarding need not be minimized. The City cites the “number of busts” as minimal and therefore not a factor. The truth is that the hoarding problem is epidemic. We try to work with the person to alleviate the situation and reserve the “bust” as a measure of last resort. Accordingly, the number of arrests is significantly fewer than the number of hoarding situations and is not illustrative of the problem.

6.     The idea that the “clowder” fees will cover inspections without factoring in the increased calls resulting from mismanagement or nuisance complaints, is and will be a costly mistake. (A full blown hoarder investigation and prosecution will surely use up all the fees.)  


I have respectfully requested that the City Council consider this decision carefully and that they keep the best interests of our cats and community in mind. 




Dec 17, 2014

Donate Smart-Donate Locally

As we again come upon the busiest fund-raising season of the year I, urge you to know your charities and to donate locally. 

It is not a coincidence that amid a frenzy of holiday solicitations, predators claiming to be victims and fake organizations, try to capitalize on the “season of giving”. Additionally, real organizations can also mislead donors, omit material facts, and/or create a deliberate misimpression regarding the tax-deductibility and use of your gifts. So – fake charities, real charities asserting fake claims, and pretend victims with fake needs, though operating all year round, step up their efforts during the holidays. You can end up trying to claim a nondeductible gift, (an unincorporated self-proclaimed rescue group soliciting funds) or giving to an east coast organization like aspca with nearly 200 million dollars instead of to a charity that desperately needs funds for local pets,

How many of you reading this did not know that the aspca and hsus are not national umbrella organizations that funnel contributions back to communities by zip code as actual national charities do? spcas throughout the country are individual legal entities and not chapters of any mother organization. Yet aspca spends tens of millions of dollars annually on television and other fundraising outlets which omit that significant fact. That is fine if you knew that and meant to give there – but – what if you didn't.

Donors everywhere often feel duped and upset to learn that they donated to the wrong organization and that their precious hard earned funds neither contributed to programs nor helped needy pets in their communities. What could happen to your spcaLA and to our vulnerable populations here if a lot of generous people make that mistake?

It is essential for you, your lawyers and estate planners to research reputable existing charities and locate those that serve the constituency and community that you wish to help. Determine if that charity provides the specific service that you wish to fund in the place you wish to fund it. Only then should you donate. Frequently, your local charity may be providing international relief as well or is affiliated with one who is. 

Giving locally also helps to strengthen the community in which you live by creating jobs, bolstering the economy and enabling the community to thrive. Stronger communities result in stronger cities, states and countries. Our ability to help others improves with our own increased strength and solvency.

The Center on Philanthropy & Public Policy produced a report that sounded the alarm on the implications of Los Angeles exporting charitable dollars out of the city and state stating “…the inflow of philanthropic dollars is less than the outflow, resulting in Los Angeles being a net exporter of philanthropic dollars based on the grant making of the foundations included in the grant sample. …They highlight the opportunities that exist to strengthen the future of foundation philanthropy and nonprofit capacity in Los Angeles County and in so doing to improve the lives of Angelinos and their communities."

Please - give to your spcaLA and other local charities.  If you can afford to donate to multiple organizations - please do. If not - please choose your home charity first.

Please also accept my best wishes for a healthy and happy holiday season.




Dec 3, 2014

stop calling rape victims "accusers"

Courtesy Google Images
The media needs to stop calling victims of rape and sexual assault "accusers''. It implies that there is no victim, but rather a shrill, angry, mean accuser who is victimizing the rapist. It is not done with any other crime. If you are robbed, killed, kidnapped or pick pocketed - you are a victim. Why is a rape victim an accuser? Why is the universally accepted legal language changed? In fact, it is the people of a state that accuses the defendant on behalf of the victim.

This perversion of language and inversion of sympathy began with the allegation that Kobe Bryant raped a woman. Somehow, either the media on its own or in response to pressure from his legal and/or public relations team, began to refer to the woman as the "accuser" to soften the charge and to subliminally suggest that Bryant was the real victim. (That case was settled,) Now again, the 13 or so women alleging rape and sexual misconduct against another celebrity, Bill Cosby, are being referred to as "accusers".

It is the way of our world that when dealing with bullies, batterers and big shots there is an effort to blame the injured party for somehow causing the violence.  I am used to and expect abusers of all sorts to deflect blame, ascribe unscrupulous motives for the charges and exercise their right to defend themselves. I am also used to dealing with those who cannot or are afraid to report a crime. (By the way, should the allegations be false or part of an attempt to extort, the original victim and perpetrator change places!)

It is always difficult for those with less power or those in the minority to be treated fairly by those trying to retain their power and majority status. Trying to equalize the playing field so victims of domestic violence, animals and other vulnerable classes have the ability to fight back is part of what we do here at spcaLA. We try to be the secret weapon that forces a fair fight between unequal players.

I absolutely find it appalling that when it involves sexual abuse crimes, the terminology used by the media  magically transforms the victim into the aggressor, thereby putting a thumb on the scale in favor of the criminal,  making it that much harder for a victim to come forward and for those of us trying to force the fair fight.

Is this terminology shift by the media a result of bowing to exogenous pressures? Is it a manifestation of a culture of woman hating, celebrity loving, misguided political correctness, or a conspiratorial inchoate attempt to sway the jury pool and the arbiters of public opinion?

Is the media naive or complicit? 

Just stop it!









Nov 25, 2014

MUSEUMS and SKINNY DOGS WITH PINK LEGS

courtesy spcaLA
I am not an art expert, but I must ask why we need a live skinny dog with a pink leg, bees, ants, and hermitage crabs put into an exhibit at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA)? Is it art? Is it to attract customers? Is it entertainment? Is is ethical? I need not spell out the stress factors involved for a dog, roaming an exhibit, surrounded by crowds taking photos, making noise and trying to reach for him.

For now, the exhibit is closed as the matter is under investigation by spcaLA and the Los Angeles City Department of Animal Services. It may very well reopen once in compliance with local requirements, which again raises the question - just because we can use animals this way - should we?

I think not. The power to exploit members of a vulnerable class must include the courage to not do so, and a refusal to encourage those who do. 


Nov 10, 2014

On November 8th and 9th  spcaLA again partnered with Animals for Armed Forces® to give pets to members of the military and their families at no charge.

Photo courtesy of spcaLA
Many veterans can benefit from a bona fide service dog to assist with head injury issues, and all can be helped by the therapeutic healing powers of a family pet. Unfortunately, the difficulties encountered by veterans in getting treatment for, or even recognition of their injuries, such as PTSD, have become insurmountable as we learn more each day about the ineptness of the Veterans Administration.

As the daughter of a World War II veteran, I grew up hearing of the indignities and injustices delivered to our troops instead of  the support they deserve. My father served in the Air Force on a bomber crew. His plane was shot down and they landed behind enemy lines. They miraculously reached the allied forces wounded, hungry, scared and happy to be alive. While waiting for medical attention, they were greeted by the Red Cross who offered the boys coffee and doughnuts for a charge. Yes - for money. Of course, they refused the refreshments and continue to hold a grudge against the Red Cross to this day. Upon his return stateside, my father was hailed as a hero and labeled a member of the great generation but immediately encountered the difficulties and dangers of being "helped" by the VA. One could survive getting shot out of a plane but die waiting for a doctor. Suffice it to say that whenever my father needs medical care -he says - "if I am unconscious, don't take me to the VA."

Why is this important today? spcaLA opened 135 years ago protecting the vulnerable in our society. Women, children and pets - were all considered property, and were all bullied by those in power. Our veterans, some who are as young as 18, are over-driven  (3 tours of duty), exploited and discarded and are returning home injured, traumatized, suicidal and vulnerable. They are not treated as employable or useful but rather left to be homeless, exploited by lending companies and ignored at epidemic proportions.

This must not stand. I have spoken against military dogs being treated like equipment, being denied veterinary care and being left behind when their service is over. Today, I am imploring those with the doughnuts and the power to not do the same with our veterans. It is cruel and inhumane.

spcaLA will continue to do what we can to provide solace and comfort to our veterans with our dogs. We will continue our work with other military groups to pair veterans in need with service dogs. And we will continue to speak out on behalf of the vulnerable.