patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

EG826

Comments

  • On the article Pace is Slow, But City Promises Animal Shelter Changes

    EG826

    9:05 am on Friday, May 24, 2013

    Hi, I run the RI Pet Network page and was the advocate who met with Mr. Lopez. The meeting with Mr. Lopez was actually on April 5th - almost 2 months ago not a month ago. Also, the story about the pregnant pitbull (which we never publicly posted and which I addressed with Mr. Lopez directly immediately when it was reported to me...only a handful of people who were directly involved even know that story)...that happened the week of April 26th, a month after the open letter not at the same time. Also, the pitbull in question was not adopted - it's Morgan and she is still there and adoptable, though she did not turn out to be pregnant (http://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/25980510). However, she has been there for several months and an offer from a no-kill rescue to take her (on 4/26) so she could have more opportunities was not approved by staff or Mr. Lopez, who I worked with directly on this matter to avoid spreading misinformation. Thanks! - Jordan, RI Pet Network

    Reply

  • On the article Poll: Should Fung Run for Governor?

    EG826

    11:05 am on Tuesday, May 21, 2013

    So far Mayor Fung and his staff have been totally ineffective at bringing about improvements to the Cranston Animal Shelter, although animal advocates were promised it was a priority and yet almost nothing notable has actually been accomplished. If he can't even implement basic improvements here that have already been laid out for him and largely coordinated by advocates who are willing and ready to help, how can he be trusted to run the whole state successfully? Also, pls sign the petition to Mayor Fung urging timely changes for the Cranston Animal Shelter. https://www.change.org/petitions/city-of-cranston-mayor-allan-fung-promptly-make-improvements-to-the-policies-of-the-cranston-animal-shelter

    Reply

  • On the article Pet Shelter under Scrutiny after Animal Advocates Pressure City for Changes

    EG826

    9:09 am on Wednesday, May 8, 2013

    Becca, when you say to get a life and basically to quit complaining and do something, I have been actively presenting them with multiple opportunities that I have done all the outreach on -aside from the volunteer program idea - that I am willing to do all the work in arraigning, as I know the staff is very busy and I am not trying to put any burden on them. All I need is their approval, which I assume has to come from the higher powers. I fully understand a volunteer program may take some time to put in place, but even baby steps towards change continue to be denied or ignored. I have reached out to rescue groups that have agreed to pull animals but they continue to be turned away (despite the city code already addressing that titles of animals can be transferred to rescue groups after the holding period is up), a have two photographers with animal experience volunteering to come in at no cost to take better pictures of the animals for networking, and offers to set up and/or assist with a Facebook page that can be used for networking their animals continue to require further consideration. We're not asking them to reinvent the wheel here, we're simply encouraging them to utilize resources within reason that many other municipal shelters have benefited from for years and I am FULLY willing to help (and have other qualified, experienced people willing to help) arrange and support these activities as allowed so they don't impact the staff's duties.

    Reply

  • On the article Pet Shelter under Scrutiny after Animal Advocates Pressure City for Changes

    Comment_arrow

    EG826

    9:01 am on Wednesday, May 8, 2013

    Kerry, I agree with you! It is totally their decision and many other municipal shelters in RI and around the country have successful volunteer programs. Cranston used to have one and, as Becca pointed out, they HAD good volunteers. It is my understanding from what I've heard that the Colonel got rid of it because they didn't like the volunteers complaining when the opted to euthanize certain animals...it had nothing to do with a liability issue that I'm aware of so they could probably just reinstate or slightly revamp their old volunteer program. Becca's point that they have ONE kennel person only further illustrates WHY we need volunteers. I'm sure the kennel person does a good job (I've almost never heard that the kennels are unclean and I HAVE heard from multiple people that she does love the animals) but that's a huge job for one person and she isn't able to do "extra" things like walk the dogs outside because she has her own work to do - that's no fault of hers but volunteers COULD give the animals more one on one time, exercise and socialization that would be great for them and make the kennel manager's job easier - we want to help her not be her enemy but we're not being allowed to.

  • On the article Pet Shelter under Scrutiny after Animal Advocates Pressure City for Changes

    EG826

    4:53 pm on Saturday, April 27, 2013

    Talking about the possibility of changes is a good first step...but we still need to make sure it actually goes somewhere. Actions speak louder than words and progress speaks for itself - right now mostly all we still have are words. The statements in this article are encouraging and appreciated, but also somewhat vague and non-committal. The quotes in this article are similar to those Chief of Staff Lopez made to me when we met on 4/5, and based on this it seems nothing has been significantly solidified or confirmed in the subsequent weeks. I hope everyone will remain engaged in this situation and to make sure these possibilities become actualities.

    Reply

  • On the article Pet Shelter under Scrutiny after Animal Advocates Pressure City for Changes

    EG826

    12:51 pm on Wednesday, April 24, 2013

    I’m an admin for the RI Pet Network page and just want to thank you for giving well-deserved attention to this issue. I also want to praise the response of Mayor Fung’s office and the Cranston Police Department for their response since the open letter was posted on March 25th. The shelter’s policies – particularly not allowing volunteers while many other similar municipal shelters have thriving and successful volunteer programs – has raised major concerns for local animal lovers for quite some time. The open letter was in no way intended to disrespect the police department or shelter staff, but to bring attention to the many complaints and concerns people have had about the shelter which I feel very passionately about (and clearly many other people had similar feelings, based on the comments and support that we have received ). I can say with certainty that the points raised in the letter have been thoroughly looked in to by the police department and the Mayor’s office and that I am extremely pleased that they are clearly taking this very seriously and putting time and effort in to the matter – on behalf of local animal advocates, I am very appreciative. I am optimistic that there will be positive changes at the shelter soon and look forward to seeing what the extent of those will be. I will continue to post updates on my Facebook page as appropriate. Thank you to everyone for caring about the animals of Cranston! – Jordan, RI Pet Network

    Reply

  • On the article DOG FOUND: Lost Dog Found in Knightsville

  • On the article Driver In Rt. 4 Crash That Killed Pregnant Woman Won't Face Charges

    EG826

    4:45 pm on Tuesday, February 5, 2013

    I see a frightening amount of people doing other things and being totally distracted while driving and they forget - or disregard - that it takes only a split second of their carelessness to take a life. I'm not sure I even believe this man was reaching for his wallet and not a cell phone (why would you suddenly need your wallet when driving on the highway??) but it's certainly not for me to speculate. I feel terrible for this poor young woman, her baby, and her surviving family. I hope this will be reminder to all to take driving more seriously!

    Reply

  • On the article iPads For All EGHS Students Would Cost $550,000

    EG826

    4:17 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013

    My suggestion (although I think iPads in the a public school are generally frivolous): have a few (non-mandatory) classes available in the school where iPads are incorporated in the learning process and either lend iPads to the twenty or so students only for the semester they’re taking the class or allow students to use their own iPads that they purchase independently (not saying parent’s should have to buy them, but many do anyway… or if kids really want them they can save up money from part time jobs or allowances rather than be “gifted” with an iPad from the taxpayer). They can also consider allotting a small part of the budget (i.e. a couple thousand $) to a “scholarship program” to award high achieving, low income students nominated by teachers with an iPad to participate in the program and for permanent use if they feel inclined. Just my thoughts :)

    Reply

  • On the article iPads For All EGHS Students Would Cost $550,000

    EG826

    4:17 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013

    Yes, iPads are cool and I’m sure there are SOME learning advantages to having them, but I certainly do not think they are essential to learning and, frankly, I think kids (and maybe teachers, too) are becoming much too dependent on electronics and need to still be encouraged to learn/teach in traditional ways. I’m not saying that we should avoid embracing new technologies and opportunities, but the amount that they’re asking for seems extremely excessive (especially considering what a mess RI’s economy is and how many educational, social services, and health/special needs programs are being cut statewide) and to keep this program going long-term will be a permanent investment. This money would likely have to come from EG tax increases or cutting even more programs elsewhere in the budget, which just doesn’t seem fair. It would be a waste if they start with this and five years down the road abandon it after hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money has gone in to it because they realize it’s too expensive to keep up with buying for incoming classes, making repairs, ensuring students are putting their ipads to appropriate use, etc. (I see a lot of potential for iPads to be just another distraction for students in an already tech-happy world).

    Reply