|
| Heard at the meeting | An audience of more than 50 people turned out for Wednesday's Montcalm County Animal Shelter ad hoc committee meeting. Many of them had colorful comments for committee members against the county's controversial contract with R&R Research in Howard City.
• "I have my checkbook right here. I have no problem writing a check for $5,000 right now. Do you want it or not? There's no reason to have him step into your shelter again." - Carol Manus of Grand Rapids, offering to pay the cost of animal disposal so the county wouldn't need its contract with R&R Research.
• "It's not going to give you a shiny star to give this man a contract. We hired you and we can fire you." - Larry Barthel of Greenville to District 7 Commissioner Patrick Q. Carr, who is leading the committee.
• "Why do you allow your shelter to be used as a warehouse for this man to house animals to sell to research? You have a lot of other responsibilities. Why do you want to be involved in the shelter business? You're here to take care of the interests of the taxpayers. They want their shelter back. These animals belong to the people of Montcalm County. They deserve to know where they go and what happens to them." - Cheryl McCloud of Newaygo.
• "That opens up the county to a huge liability. You guys need to look at that. You're exposing yourself to a huge liability. Please, just be careful." - Kevin Neibor of Cedar Springs on the county allegedly allowing Woudenberg to help euthanize animals at the shelter.
• "I don't see why any animal control officer who cares anything about animals can use that barrel more than once and stomach it. I don't hold that animal control officer in high esteem. That animal control officer should be fighting tooth and nail to get that barrel out of there." - Sandra Carlton of Greenville on the county's former process of euthanasia in a carbon dioxide barrel. The county recently received certification to begin euthanizing animals with drugs instead.
|
|
3/11/2009 7:24:00 PM
Animal committee preparing final package for commissioners
Ryan Jeltema
News Editor
STANTON - The Montcalm County Animal Shelter ad hoc committee soon may complete its work.
At the urging of Greenville veterinarian Dr. Randy Carpenter, the committee divided into subcommittees to study a five-point package of recommendations for the Montcalm County Board of Commissioners to consider with proposals to overhaul the shelter's operations.
The subcommittees will:
• Determine the role and membership of a citizens advisory board to consult on Animal Control operations.
• Determine the role and membership of a veterinary advisory board to consult on medical issues with Animal Control.
• Work on an action plan for improving policies and procedures at the Animal Shelter, including implementing a new computerized animal tracking system in the facility.
• Develop alternatives to the current animal carcass disposal procedure, possibly including a new incineration system.
• Develop a policy that allows pet owners to direct their animals to medical research through the shelter.
"I think that would be the package the commissioners would be looking for," Carpenter said of the package before an audience of more than 50 people. "It's going to take some time and effort but it's something that's got to be done so we can move on."
Committee members plan to discuss the proposals and any information they glean to implement them at their next meeting on March 25, when they may vote on each of the five proposals individually as a recommendation to commissioners. Carpenter hopes the proposals are a big step toward ending the committee's work.
"I would like to see this committee get its work done and move on," he said. "I don't think anyone relishes coming to these meetings. Hopefully when it's done we'll be able to give the commissioners a good palate of recommendations for them to consider."
District 7 Commissioner Patrick Q. Carr, who is leading the committee, appreciated Carpenter's proposals.
"I like all the ideas we've got," he said. "It'll help get this thing off the center."
Other than implementing a new computer system, Carpenter said the proposals likely can be adopted by commissioners with little to no added cost for the county.
Committee member S. Michael Scott of Howard City pressed Carpenter for more details on the long-term cost of each proposal. Scott was skeptical that they can be carried out without significant labor costs or direct funding from the county.
"Everything can start cheap but I'm concerned about the long-term financing of it," he said. "If we're recommending something we need to know how much it's going to cost. When we present this to the Board of Commissioners we need a firm plan for how this is going to be financed. Otherwise, the taxpayers aren't going to be able to sink more money into this."
Carpenter pledged to research cost issues more before the March 25 meeting.
|
Posted: Thursday, March 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Carol Manos
Wanna see the USDA violations against R&R Research?
Look no further:
http://www.lakehavenrescue.org/R_RViolations.pdf
Posted: Friday, March 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Dawn Bechtold U.S. Animal Protection
The Montcalm MI commissioners should be held accountable for animal cruelty. Gassing by a make shift chamber is not acceptable. The MI Dept. of Agriculture has also approved this inhumane method of kill. The animals shoved into this gas chamber are not sedated. This constitutes animal cruelty. We at U.S. Animal Protection oppose the methods of kill at the Montcalm MI. and are opposed to shelter animals released to class B dealers. This contradicts the antithesis of a shelter purpose. 37 Animals are now missing and I hold the director responsible. We at U.S.A. P. believe animals are being sold under the table and will continue to disappear until a new staff is put into place. We understand the shelter now has a DEA licenses in place however the commissioners should still be arrested on animal cruelty charges as well as anyone else that has shoved animal in to this make shift gas chamber.
Dawn Bechtold
www.USAnimalProtection.org
www.AnimalShelterReform@yahoogroups.com
Posted: Friday, March 13, 2009
Article comment by:
gjo
Carol,
Thank you for having the courage to speak up and the funds to back your request. All eyes will be on the commissioners to see if they have the good sense, foresight, and grace to accept your generous offer.
Posted: Friday, March 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Eileen Burr
The excuse that this R&R contract is vital to life saving research is not valid [the contract does not specify life saving research]. Under the present contract there is no way to track what kind of research the animals are being used for other than calling the client that purchased them [and this client information is not available to the general public], only who they were sold to, once they leave the R&R Reasearch facility. This is a statement made at a public meeting by Jim Woudenberg, owner of R&R Research. Even if you wanted to donate your animal to legitimate research would you feel your wishes were carried out under this system? Go to Stanton and ask to read the present contract. It is only 2 paragraphs long. Check it out for yourself. And when you make a comment, sign your name to it to show you are serious not just complaining. Stand up and be counted
Posted: Friday, March 13, 2009
Article comment by:
ER Morrow
I don't care if the people wanting to help us improve our shelter live here or not. The County Commissioner's have had their heads buried in the sand for so long that it's going to take a village to clean up the shelter.
The ad hoc committee has been a waste of time thus far and while Dr. Carpenter's five- point plan has merit, the burning issue (the elephant in the room) is the contract with the class B dealer.
The ad hoc committee can proposed all the improvements it wants but as long as there is a contract with the class B dealer in any form, there will be no significant improvement and no trust and confidence. In fact, it was evident at the last meeting the little bit of hope that the new director and her staff might be able to create more confidence in the shelter was dwindling.
Get rid of the contract or get rid of the shelter!
Posted: Thursday, March 12, 2009
Article comment by:
To Jim Imhoff
There were plenty of folks from Montcalm County. Were you there? If so, you had an opportunity to support your pals.
Posted: Thursday, March 12, 2009
Article comment by:
Who Cares Where We Are From?
The point is, people are watching this RIDICULOUS small town politics ALL OVER THE COUNTRY and it will not stop until this foolishness stops. I don't understand why so many people keep going off on tangents about where people are from and anti-vivisection arguments when that is not what this issue is about...it is about Mr. Woudenburgs ties to Mr. Carr being a conflict of interest, the lies and filth at the shelter being covered up as if it is no big deal. THAT SHOULD BE OF CONCERN TO ANYONE IN THAT TOWN!
Posted: Thursday, March 12, 2009
Article comment by:
Linda from Montcalm County
There were plenty county residents there, maybe the others are former that have relocated or has friends or family here Jim. Lets just say your family had a business and subcontracted work out but had questions pertaining to their work, would you not want answers? What would you do when that party told you they plead the "5th", now you see what the county is dealing with! It's not ethical, it appears maybe your friend on the panel may not be telling you all of the info you need to hear! Do your homework Jim and you will change your opinion. Loyalty is good but don't be a fool, he's misguiding alot of people.
Posted: Thursday, March 12, 2009
Article comment by:
Really?
were you checking addresses? Because from where I was sitting I saw ALOT of Montcalm County Residents. Oh if we arent listening to anyone outside of Montcalm County then we cant hear Woudenburg.. Oh wait He isnt talking anyway!!
Posted: Thursday, March 12, 2009
Article comment by:
Beth Kieffer - Former Resident
I also noticed some of the comments listed are of people who are not currently living the county. I would like to know if there are more comments that were offered by people, and are not listed here? I am no longer a resident but my parents still live in Montcalm County. I also volunteer at my local humane society socializing dogs to prepare them for adoption, and the stench from the goings on in Montcalm Co. makes its way all the way down here in NW Indiana. I want to have some pride regarding the county I grew up in. Maybe we will get there.
As it sits now, Montcalm Co. looks like a barren land full of unethical, uncompassionate hicks. Your true character is judged by how you treat the weakest members - children and animals come to mind. Millages never pass for the kids and it's been ok to euthanize by lethal gas in a tipped over burn barrell. Those that aren't killed, give them to medical research. REALLY? That's acceptable? Finally, it appears it is not acceptable - Montcalm County is entering the new age of empathy, compassion, caring. Companion animals will finally be treated at least as humanely as livestock if this contract if vacated. About time!
Per the prior comment, I am not a member of PETA nor would I ever be. I doubt those comments that are listed are from members of PETA either. They are not nearly radical enough. They seem to be from people with a heart. I am going to do everything I can to be at the next meeting. Anyone who cares will also try.
|
|
Article Comment Submission Form
|
|
