Greatly to be welcomed.

That answers those $ questions,very detailed .
Wouldn't it be great to have 2 Veterinarian's on island. Wow, Over 30 thousand from FOTHS ,this report speaks volumes .

Are some apologies in order?

Boy I tell ya--the Facebook crowd are organizing a lynch mob. If I was Pedro I would climb under a rock for a year or two.

Great to see its been posted and completely exonerates them in any post accusing them of not having open books Good Job Saga.

Gaz

i do hope that clears one issue up. however, i glanced it quickly...

...from a bookkeeping perspective, i see what will happen when the "revenue" line item of 'vet services' (now 46K income) becomes an "expense" line item of 'vet services'(46K expense WITH 46K decrease in income, in essence doubling the deficit to 92K, since there is both a loss of income AND an increase in expense)...ouch.

Can any one tell me please, how many paid staff work for Saga?

Well I see some people are already trying to pull the accounting apart.

Quick reminder it is a INDEPENDENT AUDIT

Gaz

I am not a trained Accountant, but I did my own books for over 3 years in San Pedro for are restaurant and when you have to make cuts it is staff that normally goes out of the door.

All I ask was how many staff?

My comment was not directed at you Inplub I was reffering to multiple other avenues/websites where the issue is being debated.

Gaz

Thank you to SAGA for publishing on its website yesterday an independently audited financial report for the first time in 10 years. Hopefully a step in the right direction toward a more transparently operated non-profit.

Who gives a [#%!] about staff and all your nonsense blablabla... When I have donated to Saga I've done it because I know it has been put to good use for the benefit of animals, not people!!!

So what's next? Should I insist on financial statements because I donate to Baby Daniel?

If you don't think that the money are handled correctly, ask directly or don't donate. It's not complicated...

Some of you are just promoting your own ego and (what you believe to be) your intelligence. A bunch of mesage board diarrhea, if you ask me...

It's about animal welfare suffering because of idiots who have nothing better to do than to boost their egos and do politics, which life is too short for anyway.
Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves.
This is just more bad advertising for A.C.

There is nothing political or egotistical about inquiring as to financials of a nonprofit, or asking how many people SAGA employs at nearly $100K annually. This is the first time in 10 years SAGA has published its financials in any sort of proper form. I have thanked them for this.

I will continue to donate non-monetary items to SAGA for its shelter operations. I have stated repeatedly that I signed the petition to the Vet Board supporting SAGA's request. I have questioned SAGA's and some of its supporters' assertions as to fact and I guess that makes me a meanie.

Just because we don't drink the SAGA kool-aid and have questions does not mean we don't love animals and want animal welfare to suffer. Get a grip.

$100,000 Belize thats $50,000 US for a whole year

Hmmm thats not too much really is it might be decent for one person.

Hopefully no more than 2 people otherwise they are working for charity

Gaz

I didn't say it was too much - it is no chump change however, and inplub should be able to ask how many employees among whom it is apportioned, no? It's just weird how any question is perceived as threatening, when it is simply a question for clarification. Why get all riled up? WE SUPPORT SAGA!!! and have for 10 years.

I went to there site and it shows 2 members of staff full time and a Vet (obviously they don't have a vet right now)

As people have said before why not call them and Ask they seem to be very forthcoming.

Gaz

Shame on who ever is taking part in the Saga bashing - is all I say.
You are not helping the island. Call, E-mail or post on their facebook site if you have questions for Saga...

Gaz, I have unfortunately an entire collection of emails between SAGA and others and myself asking politely for information about projects and open books and being told maybe, no, later, etc. anything but yes. This is the first I've seen of any financials, other than some very confusing and questionable numbers on the build out of the shelter building and iso units. Whatever the case may be at this point, I wish them well to carry on providing shelter services - if they get the vet license that will be fine by me too. Whatever it takes - I want to see SAGA open and doing its good work of sheltering, providing supplies to those in need and caring kindly for the animals.

I don't think I've seen any SAGA bashing; however, there have been questions posed, facts disputed, differing opinions, etc. This is not hurting the island. What is hurting the island and the whole country is corruption, on nearly every level. Nuff said on that.

"The greatness of a nation and it's moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."

Mohandas Ghandi

AMEN!

I only ask how many staff as my concern was how many people would loose their jobs if Saga closed. If you can not ask question's without VERAL ABUSE in return GOD HELP YOU ALL.

Gaz - I'm not going to make any comment on SAGA's accounts or SAGA itself, but what you have just said is absurd. Accounts are intended to be read and interpreted - whole degree courses are run on this - and unless you do so you get absolutely no information from them. The "audit" aspect is restricted in its conclusions - it always is - and it is only based on whatever the accounts themselves say.

The fact that some accounts have been produced (only for the most recent two years of a total of ten that SAGA has been operating) is a major first step, but what the accounts actually say is crucial.

If anyone is interested, I did a quick analysis of aspects of these accounts and have posted that elsewhere. I'll post it here if people want me to.

I don't see anything I have said as being Absurd

1) I said people are already trying to pull the accounting apart

Its a true statement which can be seen on other sites accusations of money missing etc

2.) Its an Independent Audit meaning it was done by an independent accountant in this case M Fox

Thats a true statement too

What is absurd about those 2 points

Gaz

You implied by your wording that there was something wrong or inappropriate in people "pulling the accounting apart", whereas this is an essential and normal part of reading a set of accounts. You get very little information from them if you don't.

And you imply that because the audit was "independent" (all audits are, by definition) nothing could be untoward and nothing requires interpretation. This implication is false. How many people I wonder took the statement about the failure to comply with US tax laws to imply that there could possibly be an outstanding tax credit that SAGA needs to do something about?

There are some oddities about these accounts (not unusual - there are with most published accounts). I wonder how many people have spotted them?

Well Peter its the SAME people pulling the accounting apart they hassle SAGA saying there are no public accounts so SAGA goes ahead and publishes them, and then they start getting a whole new set of accusations thrown at them.

SAGA cant win and its all a bit ridiculous.

Any company accounts can be scrutinized and pulled apart and most have small errors however that should be down to the auditor to identify and correct those after getting the correct information.


Gaz

What accusations have been made concerning the accounts? I haven't seen any, other than Pedro's rather silly and deliberately provocative "these accounts are worthless".

Any errors in the accounts should be identified before the audit certificate is signed and the accounts published. Otherwise what is the point of the audit?

I'm not concerned with errors though. I have just tried to go behind the figures and tease out significant information. What a real accountant is trained to do. Other than one or two minor points I have no criticism of these accounts. Why are you trying to imply that I and others have a "down" on SAGA?

As an accountant and Treasurer of various not-for-profit organizations in Connecticut, the audited figures are better than good.

When you have a charitable organization that ONLY spends 2.4% for promotion and 3.3% for management, you have an exceptionally well run organization. Spending under 10% for those items is almost unheard of...

Obviously there were reporting problems years ago but they seem to have been taken care of with respect to US reporting.

Can you tell me please what happens when a Non Profit Organization makes a profit?

I'm curious as to how you've derived that information from the accounts. I think you've misunderstood what "administrative and general expenses" represent.

I am more interested in items such as:-

(1) the total income for 2009 at $221,774 rose by 79% from the 2008 figure of $123,801 (all Belize dollars). This coincides with Laurie's tenure there as vet. It will be interesting to see the comparable figure for 2010 in due course.

(2) if we exclude a one-off donation received from the UK in 2008, "donations, grants, fundraisers and product sales" rose by 72% in 2009. These "product sales" exclude drugs and medications (which are accounted for elsewhere) so presumably make up a tiny proportion of the heading. This was a massive increase in revenue, which we can but hope was continued after Laurie's departure (as no figures have yet been published for the year-to-date).

(3) even though there was no vet for half of 2008, and when there was she was paid less than Laurie in 2009, "personnel" costs were only 1/3 less for the earlier year. And "facility costs", which are the costs of occupying the main building so include rent, electricity, water etc, rose by almost 50% between the two years to $46,905 in 2009 - a remarkable increase. Though as "administrative and general expenses" dropped by around the same number of $, perhaps there is an error in the accounts?

(4) the cost of "drugs and medications" used in the practice remained virtually unchanged between the two years and the recorded inventory (stocks) remained unchanged, but the associated sales receipts rose by almost 63% between the two years. Strange.

(5) the main building occupied by SAGA is rented month-on-month, with no security of tenure and only a two month notice period. It can be terminated for no reason. That isn't particularly good, and acquiring their own premises or at least longer-term security of tenure is likely to be high on the priority list of the Trustees.

(6) it is hard (impossible) from these accounts to tell what the financial implications of having their own vet or not are, but for 2009 I would estimate that the net costs of employing a vet were around $15,000. That saving in 2010 can be employed in buying veterinary services for shelter animals and needy cases of pet ownership. Vet treatment for other patients would be at full commercial rates and would be revenue-neutral to SAGA as they would be paid directly to the commercial vet.

(7) it is stated in the audit report that appropriate registrations for charitable status in the USA were neglected and lapsed but were later renewed, but it is not stated whether tax relief for the lapsed period was ever recovered.

I guess it never makes a profit as its a NON Profit organization.

If they have positive funds they just increase the charitable work and spend the dosh on whatever the subject of there charity is.

Gaz

In the US, Non Profit Organizations are permitted to make money. The difference between a Profit and Non-Profit is who gets the money they make.

This is actually a tricky one. Given their legal status they are not allowed to make a profit from any commercial activities, so it is a moot point whether they are permitted to run a "for profit" clinic. Yet this is what they are demanding to subsidise their charitable work.

If they are permitted to run a "for profit" arm to their activities, that arm cannot use donated drugs and money without being charged appropriate commercial rates (and possibly not at all, depending on the terms of the gift). And it has to pay a share of the general costs of the "business". As a business centre it is subject to all the normal taxation provisions so it has to be accounted for separately, which given the scale of the operation is an administrative nightmare. I suspect that in practice it would just be swept under the carpet, which is fine until someone from the tax authorities spots it.

Something I forgot to say - a "for profit" clinic run by SAGA will be subject to all the legal and professional constraints put on commercial vets. They will not be allowed to use out-of-date drugs, they must use appropriate drugs and anaesthetics, they must have appropriate equipment, they must operate in all ways according to veterinary "best practice". Procedures that "got by" in the past will not be permitted in the future, now that there is a "proper" vet available. In demanding to have their own vet permitted to operate commercially I don't think they know what they're asking for.

Thank you, does a non profit org have to pay tax on the profit if they make one?

In general and strictly, yes. In Britain and quite possibly here, exceptions can be made by the Charity Commissioners (or whatever they're called here) - the government body that controls charities.

We aren't told that. Just that for the years in question the situation has been put right. We don't know if there are any residual issues from the years when they were in dereliction.

So if my Drugs cost BZ$40,000.00 and I sold them for BZ$123,000.00 I have made over 200% profit or is there some thing wrong with my maths? Would I then be TAXED on my profit of BZ$83,000.00.

LOL

Gaz

I'm not sure John, but that is certainly a possibility. I think a lot would depend on the overall financial results of operating the clinic of which the "for profit" services were a part. This needs to be researched properly and I haven't done that - I'm just aware of the general principles that apply here.

Note that I amended my post of half an hour ago.

Is that an informed comment, Gaz?

Yep

Says it all, really.

Who wins with the closing of Saga and their services ? NOT the community. Please don't beat up one of our community built (successful) non-profit organizations.
Sometimes in life you fight so hard to win , and when the dust settles you found out you really lost

I just don't see anyone here beating up or trying to close SAGA. That kool-aid some of you are drinking is potent. I don't know anyone who wants SAGA to close!

Tim - I ABSOLUTELY do not want SAGA to close, and I don't know anyone who does. But that doesn't mean that I can't comment on aspects of it that maybe could be improved.

Your not helping the cause Peter ! You can help by signing the online petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/savesagahumanesociety/. At this point you can only be for or against , they are on their last leg ! Please reconsider ,and sign and support for the sake of our community . Peace

SAGA will either be granted the full commercial vet license, or not. We've signed the petition requesting for the board to grant the license; however, it may not happen. Does SAGA really have to close its shelter if it doesn't employ a vet? Can it restructure a bit and focus on sheltering, round ups and working with private vets on island and from other parts of Belize to do pro bono spay/neuters? Yes, Belize needs choices - absolutely! But having even one licensed vet on the island with top notch equipment, facilities and skills is light years ahead of even last year. Until such time as SAGA is able to employ a vet, or some other licensed vet opens a second practice on the island, I hope SAGA will consider a Plan B - No licensed Vet but fully functional Shelter contingency plan. Many have suggested how this might work to deaf ears and screams of 'you want to kill SAGA'. No, really, just would like to see all the good work and progress SAGA has accomplished toward managing the stray population and helping shelter needy animals continue no matter what.

Its a shame. Two vets are always better than one, especially since both are foreigners, not tied to Belize and as happened in the past, leave and then you are stuck with no vet. I think there is a need for humane societies that can offer meds and treatment at little or no cost for those people who can not afford it and private vets for those who prefer it. I've watched vet care for domestic animals change drastically over two odd decades here and know the human societies have contributed a great deal to animal care awareness. Private vets opened offices in San Ignacio, Belmopan, Belize City and Corozal; possibly other places I'm not aware of. I wish we had a vet in Placencia and keeping my fingers crossed one who just graduated from vet school in MX decides to open an office in this area. Some cases require a second opinion, like us humans do. My wonderful vets are Mike deShield and Jane Crawford at Animal Medical Centre in Belize City, but I carried the dogs up to Sheila Schmeling in Corozal for a second opinion. Why does it have to be either/or when two vets are better than one? Give your pets the edge. The vets will figure out what the market can sustain and adjust to it.

Looking at the accounts, if I am reading them correctly and I am sure Peter will step in and correct me but I see SAGA's income decreasing by close to $130,000 odd thousand dollars should they not be issued a vets license and if that is the case they probably could not survive,

Drug Income $123,000 bze $83,000 clear

Vetinary income $46,000 bze

All lost if they don't get a license. that's a chunk of cash.

Gaz

If we have only one vet (regardless of where s/he works and who s/he is), there will be times when that vet sleeps, rests, gets sick or goes on vacation. When that happens we have NO vet. That is not good.
TWO vets, PLEASE.

Here Here! And the 2nd one could help Caye Caulker as well if they need. This is the ideal scenario for sure!

yes, 2 vets! Wouldn't that be grand? Heck yes it would be great! Mike DeShield was our vet - we had to fly him over from the main land and thankfully he was always willing to come to care for our then 12 year old girl who got liver disease - and with his treatment and skill she fully recovered to live to be 21 years old! Vets our hugely important to all of us - and I would love to see access to vets for everyone - cost wise and geographically.

As far as the income dropping at SAGA without vet employment that is an issue but with some regrouping and restructuring it could continue to stay open, fund raise to cover basic operating expenses and staff salaries, as a shelter facility and conduit for the community for spay/neuter coordination with vets, education outreach, and provide safe caring shelter for adoptees and other animals in need. I don't know if it could do anything like distribute prescription meds, but it could do flea treatments. The private vet could be referred to clients by SAGA for discounted or free meds and treatment if the SPAF and FOSP donations come in to cover that. May be easier said than done, but I am just suggesting an alternative plan in the instance the vet license is not granted, on this go round with the Vet Board. A gap will exist and we humans can surely cooperate and figure out how to cover that gap. The alternative is just close SAGA's doors? If that happens, perhaps another charity will be able to meet the community's vet needs in cooperation with vets on and off island. There are many possibilities and I don't think shutting down discussion is a good idea - anything could happen, a license granted, or not. Hopefully this will be a moot point and the license granted. But if not, then what?

Iluvbelize, when you are relentlessly droaning on, shutting down discussion always sounds like a good idea.

This is where we disagree, Tim. I don't think they are on their last legs. There has been an awful lot of hype and unsupported alarmism, but I think the truth is different. And the attitude "you're for them or you're against them" is certainly what has been promulgated but I don't think is warranted or helpful.

On a quick check (I am open to correction on this) I have been unable to discover any humane society anywhere in Belize that has its own commercially-capable vet when there is a private vet nearby. It seems that all or certainly most other humane societies have found a way of working with a commercial vet and surviving. How is SAGA so different?

But as I said I am actually pro-SAGA, just not pro-hysteria. Although I am not sure it's the best solution (and in fact I don't think it'll work long-term) I agree that SAGA should have its own vet if it believes it needs one, and I did sign the petition some time ago. So far as I'm concerned it's in the hands of the Vet Board now. I doubt if they'll approve a "full" vet (one that can do commercial work) but more likely they'll approve one licensed to do just charitable work.

Has anyone spotted that our commercial vet Laurie has gone on record as saying she would like SAGA to have its own vet? And that she denies ever asking the Vet Board not to approve a licence for one?

Marty - your extreme bias is very obvious. I had thought you were bright enough to see that there is a middle way between two extreme positions.

i have been dealing with ms brannon (iluvbelize) for a long time. i'm sick of it. i am close to deleting her from the board and removing all her posts. now she is burning up facebook with her crap. it just gets old. she's beyond relentless. must be a taurus. guess what. i'm a taurus too.

yes i am biased, because I am bright enough to see that one side is correct.

Peter, you consider Saga's position as extreme because it wants to have a vet? Are you looking for a middle ground between evil and good? maybe you would be happy with medium evil? I am holding out for good.

I don't read the figures that way, Gaz. I don't know what the split of "drugs and medications" is between those that can only be administered by the vet and those that are sold over the counter, but I believe that most fall into the latter category. I accept that income for "veterinary services" would (mostly) stop, though I believe that some of those services are actually provided by persons other than the vet and would continue. But with no vet there would be no vet's remuneration, and I estimated that at around $60k of the total "personnel costs".

There are several vague areas as the information provided isn't detailed enough (not a criticism, just a statement). I estimated the net cost of employing the vet for 2009 was around $15k - the vet's remuneration less the income directly attributable to the vet. In other words, employing a vet was a small net cost to the enterprise, so dispensing with the vet actually saves money (viewed on this narrow base). But we are both working with very incomplete data, and I would like to be able to go behind those numbers.

I am an Aquarian.

Marty - I am sure that your position supporting SAGA's claim that they must have their own vet to survive is honestly held, and I am equally sure that many other people are equally convinced of their positions. I don't know - the accounts that have just been published go nowhere close to that issue - only people working within SAGA can know that for certain as only they have access to the relevant information.

But even if they do get their own commercially-enabled vet, they are now in a new world. Like it or not there is now a well-equipped commercial vet clinic 100 yards away, and that changes the game. My quick analysis of the published accounts suggests that employing a vet has not been the cash cow SAGA would have us believe, though that conclusion is admittedly shaky as the necessary figures are not in the public arena. Whatever, the existence of the commercial vet is undoubtedly going to have a negative impact on SAGA's income, possibly a large one.

I guess only time will tell.

Or vice versa if Saga get a Vet. Isn't that as, or even more, poignant.

There'd be an effect on both, Phil. But SPAH is far better equipped than SAGA is for veterinary procedures and care, and I know where I'd rather take my animal if there was something wrong with it.

.

Let's remember that for 10+ years SAGA has always had their own licensed vet, and should therefore not now be in the ridiculous position of having to fight to retain that position. Why should any existing business have to change its mode of operation to suit a new business?

That is largely true, except for the lengthy periods of inter-regnum. But things change. As far as I've been able to tell, throughout Belize humane societies are not permitted a vet when there is a commercial one nearby. It's just that in San Pedro there has never been one until now.

Yes things do change - and thankfully they in general change for the better. In this case it would mean having two vets rather than one and it would mean having vet services that everyone can afford. Things I fully support and which clearly would be of benefit to the island.

Maybe when Saga was setup and first offered vet services to the island, it was done with the foresight that having a vet as part of that service was the best way to operate. They should not now be taking a backward step because others around Belize have chosen not to follow their model. Nor should they be forced to change that model when clearly it would continue to benefit the island.

This is copied from the SAGA Petition everyone is asking everyone to sign.

My name and comment to the petition is listed as "Number 28", indicating that I signed the petition earlier than most of you here who are insisting I am on 'the wrong side'. My comments to the petition are clear and concise. I hope SAGA gets the license.

But if it does not, other plans could be made to keep helping the animals.

Name: Beth Brannon on Jun 10, 2010 No. 28
Comments: SAGA is needed for round ups of strays, vet-performed spays/neuters and providing medical treatment to strays and low income pet owners. SAGA must have a fully licensed proper vet to operate and continue providing these much needed services.

Here is a link to the petition and signtures page. You can see who has signed with their full names, who made comments, how many 'anonymous' signatories, etc.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/savesagahumanesociety/signatures

Gaz,
Michael Fox is currently having severe heath issues,,,he has been out of Country may be back now I dont know. We took alot of advice from SAGA when we started..always on the agenda was proper books. The books have to be kept if you are a non profit...you have to turn in reports yearly prepared by authorized preparers. Private Veterinarians have no clue, nor do they usually participate in the 24 hr a day on call...emergencies..stray round ups..education..poisonings..dealing with the poor..I work at running my business about 12 hrs a day..add in the animal care another few ..as do our few other volunteers,,,
I have to say most other Vets in the country are willing to help out, they are out to make an income but will always try their best to give free advice and help when they can.
The private Vet on San Pedro, well mabe its because shes a non Belizean..but my God its all about the money...we were approached to use her services and it was all about the money and dumping on SAGA...so sad....hard to listen to when you are talking to someone that dosnt get paid for anything for caring for the animals....fostering, our plight here on Caye Caulker is minuscule compered to San Pedro....
However it rewarding..we make a huge difference here..we help..we take the time to listen and care..All the Humane Societys and their Vets are a Family..as are most the private Vets in the Country...San Pedro is a fast town..it also has the only Vindictive Vet..go figure????

Sorry to hear about Michael - hope he's better soon.

It's interesting that you should say that SAGA emphasised the need for proper books, as I believe the reason accounts haven't been published for years prior to 2008 is for lack of adequate records.

I don't know about here (Belize), but all the vets I know in UK and US are periodically on 24-hour call and are fastidious with their accounting - they have to be to survive these days. They have to make returns to their professional overseers, and of course they have the ultimate auditor - the bank.

I can't comment on the SP vet, but "vindictive" is a strong word.

Thats exactly the point Peter and thats why i dont understand why Ms Droke has gone to extreme measures to try to cause trouble for SAGA and damage them.

Now before I get called on the use of extreme measures I have read her words admitting to constant letter writing (I think 3 or 4 so far) to the licensing board reporting illegal activity etc etc, that takes a lot of effort and is obviously done to cause problems for SAGA which would ultimately benefit her financially and damage SAGA when the board takes action.

What she should of done marketing wise instead of focusing that negative effort on SAGA is ignore SAGA business wise and to grow her business slowly, gradually building good will and focusing on marketing that she has a state of the art vet clinic offering FIRST CLASS animal care, with a state of the art Animal hospital the only one on the island.

With her specialized equipment (that no other company has) and vetinary care, superior drugs etc etc I am sure a large amount of custom would cross over for perceived better care for the beloved Pet. just as you stated Peter (you know which vet you would use).

I would probably do so too as we can afford it.

By marketing her new business that way she would slowly gain her market share and over time things would of evened out between the 2 business's while staying positive and proffesional.

I am sure SAGA was not happy initially that she decided to open her own hospital as its competition where there has been none prior, so its understandable they were scared it was going to affect them and it will, but nobody can deny having a top knotch 1st class Animal Hospital on the island that offers many things that SAGA does not, that can only be a positive for the island.

I personally don't know Ms Droke and I am sure she is a very nice person based on other peoples comments however to try to take on a charitable organization that has done such good over the past 10 years and that has HUGE local support is well, suicidal irrelevant of the fact that they may of been cutting corners.

I am sure this will sort itself out and Ambergris Caye will have a choice for the Pet owner.

Gaz

I have noticed that the number you are refering to does not indicate in which order a person signed the petition. It seems to have everyone all mixed up and no particular number represents the actual order in which that person signed the petition.

Gaz

Peter
Yes that may be so in other countries..but if its after hours here in Belize and you try to phone the after hours emergency numbers in the phone book under Veterinarians...well I have tried perhaps a hundred times and NO ANSWER..this is Belize..not the U.K. not the U.S..etc etc..that needs to be recognized..

This is in reply to Gaz's second-to-last post.

A good and moderate post, Gaz. Would that all here were like that! But I think the thrust of her letters to the Board has concerned legality and professional matters and I know she feels strongly about maintaining sound professional standards. She is concerned amongst other things that SAGA is portraying itself as a fully equipped vet clinic and is actually attempting procedures and treatments that it is not capable of doing. Given that it doesn't seem to want to stop this practice voluntarily she feels that using law is the only remedy left.

Personally I hope that SAGA does get permission for its own unrestricted vet, and I hope that the arrangement works financially. I just feel that this outcome is unlikely and people are going to have to work together. The highly polarised positions that people have adopted will serve only to make this more difficult.

Really Gaz? How did you determine this? The petition list is in chronological order by date - June 10, 11, 12, 13, 14...with chronological numbers in the same order as the dates progress. Are you actually suggesting that this is all coincidental and that the numbers are mixed up even though the signatures are organized by chron. date order? Please tell us how you determined this. That would be unusual but anything is possible.

Well from what I can see adn the thing that caught my attention was Chris Berlin who signed it before me and i signed at I think 190 ish Chris is now listed as being the 316th person to sign where as he was 100 and something before.

My number is now 212

So something is not right on those numbers

Gaz

I only know that several people to my knowledge have called the vet here (Laurie) out at night and she has always gone. And I have seen her working in her clinic past midnight. Her phone number is for a mobile phone that she apparently always has on her.

Hmmm, curious. I am still at number 28, on June 10th. Do you think the dates are also skewed in this regard? There are dates June 10 through June 14 so far. I have an email going to ipetitions.com customer service dept. to ask what their procedure is for dating and numbering signatures. I am curious because if they are just randomly numbering dates and order of signatures on petitions they really can't be used for official purposes, but the randomly dated/numbered petitions could still be used to take a pulse on issues and I doubt it will negatively impact this SAGA petition - the Vet Board will see the huge support in SAGA's favor for the vet license and that is what matters.

I really dont know but I have been keeping an eye on the list and was trying to see who signed up after me but it just was not working and did not make sense.

Now I have not been drinking today so that cant be the excuse so it must be something else

Gaz

all well said.

I don't want to raise the temperature here - I really don't - but SAGA has actually gone to extreme measures to cause trouble for Dr. Droke. There has been ill will ever since they held a rigged board meeting to exclude her from the board not long after they had appointed her (to the board). They wanted her to work like a junior employee and do what she was told and not ask questions. They particularly seemed not to want questions on financial matters, probably not because they had anything to hide but because they saw it as none of her business. This was all going on while she was still at SAGA, and was in fact the reason for her leaving. They want to employ a professional vet but don't want them to use their professionalism. Read the story of Thomas à Beckett - this approach doesn't work. SAGA has had low success in recruiting and retaining quality vets, and inability to pay a high salary is only a part of the reason - their management style has been key.

I have seen the text of Dr. Droke's letters to the Vet Board, as have many others, and they are all directed at specific breaches of law that she has become aware of. SAGA has undeniably been operating illegally and that will do them no good in their present application to have their own vet. In fact, I suspect it may incline the Vet Board quite strongly against their application. They might be prepared to "turn a blind eye" in certain cases of technical breach where SAGA had no option in order to get the job done, but with a qualified vet close by the Board will probably be quite intolerant of law breaking, especially where it has led to unnecessary animal suffering.

I am assuming in this that people understand what "breaking the law" in this context actually means. It means using out-of-date drugs which not only may have lost their effectiveness but can become poisonous, and in-expert people attempting to make diagnoses and formulate treatments when they simply don't have the knowledge base to do it. If being a vet were so easy that anyone could do it, why is there such a long period of study, exams and experience required, in all countries? It doesn't mean technicalities like not charging GST or maybe fiddling the books - we are talking about serious matters concerning animal welfare. Only recently a dog was mis-diagnosed, given inappropriate and seriously out-of-date drugs, and sent home. The owner took the animal to the real vet a couple of days later but by then it was too late. Had SAGA not pretended that they could treat the dog it may well still have been alive today. THIS is what Dr. Laurie as the only representative of the veterinary profession around here is determined to stop.

I too noticed an uncertain order of the numbered signatures. I once said that I was #58 and as of yesterday I was #107. I just assumed it takes a while for them to be recorded or uploaded then people bump down...? At any rate, a lot of the people who signed before me still remain there, just spaced out a bit.

this is a question that has to be asked based on what you have posted Peter.

Are we to presume that out of date drugs have only been given since Ms Drokes departure ??

What drugs were given when she was there ? Why would they give out of date drugs if they had in date drugs the same when Ms Droke was working there.

Its not an attack on Ms Droke just asking as it seems strange that all of a sudden SAGA is treating with out of date drugs since Ms Droke has left there.

Also how does anyone know they are using out of date drugs unless there was inside info ? that it is a common practice ?

Gaz

I just checked, and my signature still has the same number attached to it. Perhaps the on-line petition numbers sequentially, and paper ones then affect the numbering? I don't know whether the two data streams are integrated like that.

I don't know for sure, Gaz. I do know that Dr. Droke donates appropriate drugs to SAGA when they go out of date, and it is safe to use those for a limited period. Discretion has to be used based on the condition of the drug and its packaging.

But I wasn't meaning to imply that SAGA only uses out-of-date drugs, just that in the case in question (and specific others) they did. But more to the point, other than pretty normal "over-the-counter" medicines, a vet is normally needed to determine what drugs should be given in any particular case, and in what dosage. And as Dr. Droke has posted on Facebook, to watch for adverse reactions to those drugs and deal quickly with that situation.

Peter

Not trying to cause an issue here but how do you know they used out of date drugs considering they are administered in the clinic ? who checked the packaging who is saying they were out of date ??

Does someone have the packaging showing it out of date ?

Just seems without proof it is just heresay

Gaz

I was told that they use out of date drugs on the animals that are strays. They did not elaborate. I do not know if this was common practice when the licenced vet was there but why would they keep the outdated drugs on hand?

I just checked out Facebook and Ms Droke admits to knowing out of date drugs were being administered when she worked there and I dont think this is wrong as if we are all honest with each other the expiration date on many items allows for months if not years before they become really become out of dat.

Supermarkets on the island are notorious for selling out of date food products are they wrong ? YES will an out of date pack of cookies kill you ? NO

Yes drugs are another issue but I would assume a month out of date pack of doxycycline would not be that dangerous to use and lets face it many donations are going to be close to out of date drugs. Did Ms droke do anything wrong I dont think so she followed the direction of SAGA board, but it is wrong to hold someone to account when that person has done the exact same thing when required to do so.

Gaz

From a human perspective, I can tell you that the expiration date on medications can be extended if the drugs can be refrigerated or even frozen. Many medications (never mind disposable supplies like syringes, bandages, etc) are safe to use after these dates especially if they are properly stored (temperature and humidity is a big factor). In other words, many meds can be "bad / old" way before the expiration date in this climate, so it is best to keep everything "climate controlled".

I would imagine that you would find many supplies / meds used at the Polyclinic to be past expiration dates (especially if they were donated by hospitals from the states as the FDA does not regulate here). Just a guess....

Not as concerned with using past date meds with the exception of some which are altogether ineffective if not stored properly; however, dispensing controlled substances must be done properly as well - clearly labeled as to what the name of the drug is, detailed instruction for administering either orally or topically, etc. This is extremely important no matter what your socioeconomic status - no one human or animals should be treated otherwise when it comes to pharmaceuticals.

As others have said, it was/is common practice in SAGA and probably most humane societies here, and carefully managed is no great problem. But that has to be tempered by informed discretion - someone able to judge must look at the medications and decide whether they are fit for use.

In the specific case of the dog that died, the owner was given the drugs to take away with the dog, and took them with him/her when visiting the vet a couple of days later. She said they were visibly mouldy.

Well, that's interesting. Dr. Droke donates out of date drugs to SAGA and then complains to the Vet Board that out of date drugs are being used?

No, and you well understand what I said. Out of date drugs can be used if they are still good, but if they have obviously deteriorated they can't.

Yes, I understood that. I also understood that this sad story has been growing and becoming more fleshed out as these threads have gone on. But wasn't Dr. Droke complaining about the out of date drugs in general, and perhaps even before the latest incident that resulted in a beloved pet's passing, knowing all along that she was providing SAGA with out of date drugs? And further in that particular regard, how can anyone including Dr. Droke even be sure that she could have saved the dog had it been brought to her sooner? That is a strawman argument.

Dr. Droke is of the opinion that the dog might have died anyway, but of course she isn't sure as two days had passed.

No, I don't believe Dr. Droke is particularly complaining about use of out-of-date drugs, used sensibly. Her principal complaint in that regard (there are other more important issues) is that it is inappropriate and unfair for a humane society to use donated drugs for commercial activities, whilst an independent vet has to pay the going rate. It is also possibly a breach of trust to the benefactor, when the drugs were donated for the treatment of animals which otherwise could not have been treated. She also believes it is wrong for out-of-date drugs to be used for commercial work when it is illegal for a private vet to do the same. She is after a level playing field.

Since when is it a "level playing field" for a johnny-come-lately private practice to be dictating how a humane society conducts itself?

Aren't we done beating this dead dog.

Dead dog somebody call a vet.

How could that be reaper? It is the timely demise of the poor dead dog that has been used to help inflame matters at hand.

39 pages of four different posts regarding this issue. It seems to me SAGA has a board of directors to conduct and oversee their business. Dr. Droke now conducts her business.
The "Trial" of "who is guilty of what" is being held here on AC.com. I wish we had a "Hot Topic" forum that only the "regulars" could participate in, like the "Business Forum".
If I was a new visitor to this website I would be afraid to donate any money to SAGA and think Dr. Droke is an evil moneygrubber. That's just the way these all read out.

Or maybe two sub-categories - Friends of Pedro vs non-friends of Pedro.

But then what would Peter Jones and his flock of non-Belize people do for entertainment?

But then what would Dr. Droke and Pedro do to SAGA?

How much longer is this subject going to circle around the drain?

I can't name one person I know in the WORLD that is perfect or whose opinion I agree with ALL of the time.

I do see that this is a very biased thread. Not to try and determine who is right or who is wrong - but if it is a one sided "debate" it is difficult to determine all of the facts in order to come to clear and logical conclusion.

It seems that the majority of the posters don't actually "know" the players and are being fed their facts from other people that don't know the players or the ins and outs of Saga and SPAH.

I can understand people really dislike, even hate Peter Lawrence for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with animal foundations. But painting Dr. Droke with that same brush is not fair.

I have seen an incredible "pack mentality" regarding this bandwagon. People are picking sides, jeering and heckling people on the street, talks of boycotting businesses, threats of almost end of the world magnitude. Whew.

I am sure I am not the only person that LIVES HERE and has to see and hear about this issue first hand that is tired of the entire situation.

And in the meantime Baby Daniel, who is a little person battling for his right to live, has his plight being pushed into the background.

The San Pedro Polyclinic - that caters to a town of 22,000 people doesn't have so many necessary items that it has a tough time servicing the island.

Let's put some things in perspective again.

I just spoke with Ilda. Baby Daniel needs $150,000 deposit for a $350,000 liver transplant operation. His condition is deteriorating each week. I am begging all of you to send a donation.

Reaper, Amanda--That was the best hijack ever. Turn it into something positive. Good Job!!

I guess they would just go back to reading your paper.

So you are making a donation?

I have made a number of donations to the Baby Daniel fund. And I also make donations to the Lions Club/San Pedro Poly Clinic. I have donated cash to both Saga and SPAF. Thanks for asking. You know me well enough by now - money where my big fat mouth is!! Love me or hate me - I do try to do the right thing.

I think Jesse was jabbing at Kathyw.

No one will every question your loyalty to SP with your checkbook, Amanda.

I know, but I love to mess with Jesse! And let me tell you a secret..... he enjoys it!

Apparently you didn't notice that I was responding to KathyW's out-of-left-field post....

I do like to spar with you but never over your extremely generous donations and assistance to virtually every needy situation in nSan Pedro. Keep it up!!!!!!!!!!

Actually I was looking on line for the bank or address to do just that. Not only am I donating, I will match your donation plus $10.00 Jesse.

My problem is, I could only find a phone number in Los Angeles listed not an account we can put our donation. Maybe in another thread? Amanda, can you help with that?

Lets have a challenge with all on the SAGA thread to donate.

So what am I donating Jesse? Hurry and let me know cause I'm up to bat! (by the way you asked the question, I just answered the way I see it)

I also donate and bring supplies to SAGA and would like to see two Vets on the island.

Thanks Amanda. You cut right through the BS like so many times before.
Hopefully people are not too exhausted from writing pages of blahblah here and still have a little energy to support Saga and, as you said, another main concern of ours, Baby Daniel.

kathyw - I will ask Ilda to give us a bank account number to deposit to. Thanks for pointing out this oversight.

i am closing this latest version of this thread. i have closed two already. nuff said. we are not the ones who decide. we are the ones who go on and on and don't get anything done. Let the licensing board do their work.

Many people are tired of it whether they live on the island or NOT. BUT. Let's do NOT forget how it started. Power moves by certain people to deny SAGA a licensed vet in order to fatten their own pocketbooks. The rest is reaction.

And people in the streets protesting are doing it on their own accord. If this has stirred up a tempest, its not because of the board. It's because of the action perpetrated.

So don't kill the messenger.