AR-News: [Fwd: Lack of validity of "temperment testing"]

[Sara Whalen]

Please read this - it is Best Friend's statement on  Sue Sternberg's testing
methods!!!!

Penzelda at aol.com wrote:

> Subj:    Re: Please attend Commission meeting Monday the 10th and speak out.
> Date:   8/11/2003 3:57:20 AM Dateline Standard Time
> From:   francis at bestfriends.org (Francis Battista)
> To: mbell529 at aol.com (Michael Bell)
>
> Michael,
> We use temperament testing here with some major qualifications and from what
> I have seen, I would think it is entirely unsuitable for use in the very
> threatening environs of a city shelter except in the context of an in-house
> training program which doesn¹t exist.
>
> We use it after a dog has had a chance to settle in and then it is used to
> determine in which areas a dog needs help, training, behavior modification
> or what type of guideline should be used in re-homing. I believe it can be
> helpful in predicting potential issues related to dominance, etc., but the
> idea you can take a terrified animal and give it a personality reading is
> nonsense.
>
> Killing animals on the basis of a temperament test is such a horrendous
> crime that those who do it have to become hardened in their defense of the
> theory in order to justify their crime. Sue Sternberg is a lousy trainer who
> justifies her inability by labeling her students as dangerous and
> uneducable.
>
> Imagine the uproar if this were suggested as a way of sorting students at
> inner city schools.
>
> Francis
> > From: mbell529 at aol.com
> > Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 02:51:45 EDT
> > To: doggrip at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Please attend Commission meeting Monday the 10th and speak out.
> >
>
> > In a message dated 8/10/03 5:18:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mbell529
> writes:
> >
> >
> >> ET AL
> > The temperament test charade is about to get tons of animals killed just so
> > shelters can pretend they have high adoption rates.  (Here's the scam):  If
> > there are 1,000 animals and you call 900 of them "unadoptable" because they
> > "failed" a  temperament test, you just kill those 900 and adopt out the
> > remaining 100 animals.  Now you can pretend you are a "no-kill" shelter, say
> > you have a 100% adoption rate, and make yourself look good to your city
> > officials or to your donors -- the problem is that you really just killed
> 90%
> > of your animals.  That's the tragedy of temperament tests.  Shelters say
> they
> > are no-kill for adoptable animals, or they say they have a 95% adoption rate
> > of adoptable animals -- but the problem is that no one ever tells you that
> so
> > many of those dead "unadoptable" animals were the victims of a  temperament
> > test and were really quite adoptable.  No one tells you that these
> > temperament-testing shelters are killing a lot of great animals by doing a
> > phony temperament test in scary, chaotic and unreliable conditions using
> > inexperienced people.  Even Sue Sternberg (the so-called "expert"  who the
> > City of L.A.'s new temperament testing methods are based) claims that at
> least
> > 75% of the animals will FAIL her temperament test.  (Fiedl Officer Dave
> > Diliberto admitted this at the Commission hearing a few months ago?)
> Shelters
> > using Sue Sternberg's awful methods suddenly can kill 75% of their animals
> and
> > not even count them in their statistics.  They only tell you how many of the
> > "adoptable" ones they adopted out.  But so many of the dead ones were good
> > animals and totally adoptable. They were killed just so the shelters can
> > manipulate their statistics.
> >
> >      That temperament test thing is just one issue.
> >
> > Greenwalt said about three hearings ago that "the law requires temperament
> > testing".  Commissioner Riordan asked him specifically WHICH law.  He said
> he
> > would send it to her.  He sent her Hayden.  Well, yes, there is one little
> > thing in Hayden that says qualified personnel should determine if a  cat is
> or
> > is not feral.  Nothing about temperament tests, and no reference at all to
> any
> > animal other than cats who might be feral.  Not one word or hint about
> > determining if any animal is "adoptable" and, the feral reference is to
> > determine if the cat will be too miserable in a cage.  (Another good reason
> > for the city to adopt the  Trap Neuter Release program that so many other
> > cities have adopted instead of killing feral cats and kittens as they come
> > into the shelter.)  That is the ONLY behavioral assessment language of any
> > sort in Hayden or anywhere else in the law that I can find, and I have
> looked.
> >
> > NOTHING in the law about temperament or behavior testing.
> > It is important that Helen understand the issue and distinguish between fact
> > and SPIN.
> > Michael
> > MONDAY, AUGUST 11, 2003
> > 10:00 AM
> >
> > BOARD OF ANIMAL SERVICES
> > COMMISSION ROOM
> > 12th Floor
> > 419 S. Spring Street
> > Los Angeles, CA 90013
> >
> >
> > REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING, 10:00 A.M.
> >
> > 1. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
> >
> > 2. COMMISSION BUSINESS
> > A. Approval of Minutes for the meeting of July 29, 2003
> > B. Meetings/Events Attended
> > C. Consideration of Future Agenda Items
> >
> > 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
> > A. Behavioral Assessment Program Update - Capt. Louis Dedeaux
> > B. Enforcement of Unaltered, Owned Animals - Commander David Diliberto
> > C. Follow-Up Discussion:  Spaymobile - Department Staff
> >
> > GENERAL MANAGER RECOMMENDS FOR BOARD ACTION
> >
> > D. Reconsideration of the Participant Shelter Animal Adoption Program
> >
> > 4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
> >
> > 5. ADJOURNMENT
> >
>
> Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?'
>   Expediency asks the question, 'Is it popular?'
>   But conscience asks the question, 'Is it right?'
>                    MLK