Hundreds of small animals meant for adoption may have been frozen, fed to reptiles

Washington Post
By Kim Bellware
November 17, 2023 at 6:00 a.m. EST

The San Diego Humane Society was buzzing on a hazy summer morning as staffers eased more than 300 small animals into carriers lined with straw and blankets. The bunnies, guinea pigs, hamsters, rats and mice were about to embark on a hopeful journey to Tucson, where they might be adopted into “forever homes.”

In the caption of a video showing the Aug. 7 send-off, the California rescue organization called the transfer the largest in its history, thanking its counterpart, the Humane Society of Southern Arizona, for helping ease overcrowding by taking in the adoptable animals. “Looking good,” one worker was heard saying in the clip as another crouched to scoop up a white rabbit.

Then came the disappearing act.

More than three months later, about 250 of the 318 animals from the August transfer remain unaccounted for. In a scandal that has forced high-level departures at the Arizona shelter, prompted multiple investigations and raised the specter of legal action, humane society officials this week made a stunning disclosure: The animals were probably fed to reptiles — either alive or frozen.

“A Hollywood horror writer couldn’t write something like this,” Gary Weitzman, CEO of SDHS told The Washington Post.

More than three months later, about 250 of the 318 animals from the August transfer from San Diego Humane Society to the Humane Society of Southern Arizona remain unaccounted for. (San Diego Humane Society)
Weitzman has deep regrets about the transfer — “I desperately wish we hadn’t done this,” he said — but he also never imagined SDHS, one of the oldest and largest shelter organizations in the United States, would be betrayed by peers in the animal rescue world.

SDHS is typically the safety-net shelter other smaller shelters transfer animals into, making the large August shuffle a first for the California organization. The San Diego shelter was at 160 percent capacity, its staff was overtaxed, and many of the small animals had been there or in foster homes for nearly a year, according to Weitzman. SDHS does not euthanize animals, including for capacity reasons.

When officials at the Tucson shelter offered to take in hundreds of small animals, saying its inventory was low, staff at the San Diego shelter breathed a sigh of relief, Weitzman said.

Although the Tucson organization was much smaller, leaders there — primarily then-chief operating officer Christian Gonzalez — made “elaborate” and “comforting” assurances to their San Diego counterparts, Weitzman said. Gonzalez promised the animals would be transferred to a network of trusted rescue partners, which would then put them up for adoption.

Gonzalez, who resigned from the shelter in October after being suspended amid the saga, could not be reached for comment.

“When I look at back, we certainly should have said, ‘How can you do this? We can’t even do this, and this is an enormous organization,’” Weitzman said, estimating HSSA’s intake is roughly one-tenth of SDHS’s.

Questions about the fate of the animals first arose within two weeks of the animals’ arrival in Arizona. In the close-knit world of animal welfare and adoption volunteers, the large shipment was well-publicized. But there was no fanfare at the Tucson shelter when the Guinea pigs, rabbits, hamsters and rats arrived.

No adoption listings appeared online, and no major adoption events were publicized. None of it was adding up to Kelly Paolisso, a psychologist and physical therapist in San Diego who is active in the animal rescue community. Paolisso said she was not reassured after speaking separately with Steve Farley, an ex-Arizona lawmaker who was then CEO of HSSA, and Gonzalez, as well as with Weitzman and SDHS leaders.

“I got two very different stories on what occurred, and it raised a lot of red flags,” said Paolisso, who criticized both organizations as insufficiently transparent on the matter.

As local broadcast stations dug into the mystery, Farley insisted the animals were in good hands. He told San Diego-based ABC 10 News in August that they were “in their forever homes right now and having a wonderful life.”

But when pressed, HSSA was unable to provide adoption records or proof the animals had even been processed for intake at the shelter before being sent to local rescues. By early September, leaders at the San Diego shelter had grown concerned, Weitzman said, as they were stonewalled their by Arizona counterparts.

Throughout the month of September, the more SDHS and animal rescuers like Paolisso pressed for answers, the stranger the story grew. In an effort to soothe HSSA volunteers, Farley told them the animals had been transferred the same day as their arrival to a “family-run, family-funded rescue” that wished to remain anonymous to avoid being flooded with more animal drop-offs, according to an early September email reviewed by The Post.

Later, he announced that 62 animals from the California shelter had been returned to HSSA, prompting Paolisso and others to drive to Tucson to adopt two dozen of the animals.

But as summer turned to fall, SDHS still had no clarity on where the other roughly 250 animals had landed and sent formal legal requests to extract information from HSSA. Paolisso and other animal welfare activists did their own sleuthing, eventually tracking down the mystery recipient of the animals— a family in Apache Junction, Ariz. Arizona Public Media’s Danyelle Khmara broke the story that the animal advocates had identified the recipients of the shipment, brothers Trevor and Colten Jones, prompting HSSA to later confirmed it had an existing relationship with the brothers, via Gonzalez.

Colten Jones was ultimately identified not as the operator of a “family-run, family-funded rescue,” but of the Fertile Turtle — an informal reptile breeding business that has reportedly advertised selling animals for reptile food. The Fertile Turtle does not appear in Arizona Corporation Commission records and does not appear in nonprofit business records as an animal rescue. The Post’s attempts to reach Jones for comment were unsuccessful.

Gonzalez tried to quell concerns by saying the brothers told him they had placed the 250 or so animals in adoptive homes by simply calling friends and family, Arizona Public Media reported.

That response did little to satisfy either humane society. By early October HSSA’s board, under pressure from a coalition of animal rescue groups, had ousted Farley and Gonzalez. Both shelters launched internal probes and hired private investigators in hopes of finding the missing animals. The Tucson Police Department also opened an investigation.

Then, last week, came a devastating new discovery. Investigative reporter Chorus Nylander with Tucson’s NBC affiliate KVOA, who had been chasing the story, obtained a text message Colten Jones sent to a Phoenix reptile breeder Aug. 8 — the day after the animals made it to Tucson.

“Do you have the ability to freeze off a bunch of guinea pigs and or rabbits? I don’t have the manpower or labor to be able to do it in time for the show and it’s too much time for me,” the message read, according to KVOA, which reported that the “show” referenced an upcoming reptile show in California.

While the text was not absolute proof, it was the strongest indication yet that missing animals were probably dead — frozen, or already fed to reptiles.

Weitzman received news of the text in the midst of a meeting.

“It dropped me to my knees,” Weitzman said. “I don’t know why I had such a visceral reaction to that, because it’s not like I thought this was going to be a fairy-tale ending.”

With little hope remaining that the missing animals are still alive, the two humane societies say they are now working together to find answers and seek accountability.

“Based on all the information we have, everyone who is responsible is gone,” said Robert Garcia, HSSA’s board chairman, in reference to Farley and Gonzalez.

Both organizations said they are also reviewing transfer and vetting protocols. They have left open the possibility of civil action, which, in HSSA’s case, could include former employees, as well as Jones, Garcia told The Post. Whether to open a criminal case will be up to local prosecutors. Finding sufficient proof could be difficult, though Weitzman said all of the rabbits in the transfer were microchipped.

For Weitzman and others, the lingering question is how animals could meet such a tragic end while in the care of those who purport to care about animal welfare.

“But nothing makes sense,” Weitzman said. “There is no gain here.”

Wow, that's disturbing. I have no doubt that small animals put up for "adoption" may sometimes meet such fates in private hands, but you sure don't expect anyone representing a large shelter to be involved in such deception, especially on such a massive scale.

No matter how logical this "solution" may seem to snake-keepers (or to an overcrowded shelter, for that matter), this doesn't warm the public's heart toward reptile keepers in general. :( No one appreciates deception. It would be as if one of us put a pet snake up for adoption & got reassurances that it was going to a "good home", then found out someone fed it to their king cobra. And "no-kill" Humane Society shelters often rely on volunteers as foster- care for "unusual" pets until homes can be found for them- I can well imagine how the staff & volunteers felt after getting this news, after putting in all that effort to save them.

It's horror stories like this that makes people push to ban snake-keeping...that's why this story should matter to all of us.

For some reason, I feel this story casts reptile keepers in a bad light, even though, it was the Humane Society that was deceptive.

Absolutely agree with Bogertophis. Also, this situation would never have happened if shelters, sanctuaries, and rescues were given a bit more support.

Donations to shelters are way, way down in the last couple of years and they are really struggling. It'll get tougher with the holidays, as people tend to surrender their animals due to holiday expenses, and many 'gifted' animals end up surrendered.

This is a good reminder that, if you can, please donate to your favorite non-profit shelter or rescue. For me, that's the sanctuary run by Lori Torrini and her husband, and a rescue group for unwanted giant snakes. But you may have local or other rescue organizations you'd like to support. No matter which one it is, these groups need help; the situation is very rough at the moment for most of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homebody

For some reason, I feel this story casts reptile keepers in a bad light, even though, it was the Humane Society that was deceptive.

---

You're right about that mainly (IMO) because the general public dislikes snakes and really dislikes the notion of feeding cute furry animals to them. While I'm looking at it as an indicator of the need to support shelters and rescues, I think you and Bogertophis are absolutely correct in thinking that this situation does no favors at all to the reptile keeping community even though none of us would agree with what happened.

I have a strong hunch that Gonzalez, who later left the Tucson shelter's employment, had always been working there with the idea of helping his buddies in the reptile business. There are scoundrels in every line of work, but the deception by someone trusted to care for loved animals is especially egregious. It would be like finding out that child care workers are really human-traffickers. I hope there are some real consequences for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlin

You're right about that mainly (IMO) because the general public dislikes snakes and really dislikes the notion of feeding cute furry animals to them. While I'm looking at it as an indicator of the need to support shelters and rescues, I think you and Bogertophis are absolutely correct in thinking that this situation does no favors at all to the reptile keeping community even though none of us would agree with what happened.

---

I think that's because most people think of reptile keepers as ONLY reptile lovers. They put us all in a separate category & don't realize how many of us are into ALL kinds of other animals too, so it's easy for them to assume that we're all the worst version of reptile keepers they can envision. Unfortunately it only takes a few creepy videos of the types who enjoy live feeding snakes "a little too much" for them to make these assumptions. A special thanks to all the really dumb horror movies too.

Most folks aren't vegetarians either, but that's somehow different than us feeding our reptiles. We always have to remember just how much prejudice & hatred exists towards snakes & other reptiles, & when people hate or fear something, they close their minds to what the animal is actually like. That carries over to those keeping them. Our language reinforces these stereotypes. "Cold-blooded", "reptilian" or "snake" (in the grass) are very common insults. :rolleyes:

Yeah.... I saw this post while recovering from surgery last week.

It's disgusting. Short and Simple.

There is absolutely no excuse for a reptile 'rescue' or breeder or general owner for that matter, to have taken animals in this situation and done what they did.

One or two animals in the case of extreme overcrowding? Maybe...
10? Eh... These are animals that deserved better and were pets, not 'feeders'.

Have I done something like this? Once... With a hamster at a pet store I worked at once. He was over a year and a half, no one would adopt him, he was getting old, sluggish and was always dealing with 70% baldness and constant itchiness due to alopecia and had terrible 'tude. My manager at the time and I both agreed that a CO2 gas was better than just letting him suffer away in small bin. So I 'adopted' him.

But this is someone looking for a quick buck with absolutely no care about the how, just some way to quickly feed their animals and make a few bucks at a show. These were animals deemed well enough to go to homes and be happy.


One of the ways they got caught?
The microchips on rabbits weren't getting updated with new info on ownership. So many animals with so many years they could have had.

It's sad overall and I hope this 'fertile turtle' gets the shunning that they need from the reptile community that knows them. They are making the whispers of your animals listed 'free to good home' means 'free snake food' true again. They're putting the worst kind of bullseye on the reptile community. And this is another cup not drop into the bucket that people keep adding to in regards to wanting reptile laws.

The Humane Society of Southern Arizona's attempt at damage control is pretty interesting: https://hssaz.org/from-our-chair/. Not surprisingly, they attempt to put the blame primarily on the reptile breeders while acknowledging that their staff didn't follow procedures.

Arizona humane should absolutely be held accountable for their part as well...
I just expected better of reptile groups. Especially if they're also claiming to be a rescue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Armiyana

Arizona humane should absolutely be held accountable for their part as well...
I just expected better of reptile groups. Especially if they're also claiming to be a rescue

---

Yes, for sure. The shelter didn't vet the "adopter" & should have been very suspicious at anyone taking in so many animals all at once. "Hello?" But in this case, the shelter put someone in charge that was dishonest & had their own agenda. Shelters generally cannot pay great wages & good (dedicated, hard-working & honest) help is hard to come by. I'm a former board member of a local humane society shelter in my town. Several years ago, we found ourselves with a very untrustworthy employee- not working in the shelter with animals, but supervising the thrift store that raises money for the shelter. What a nightmare some employees can turn out to be, no matter how thorough you think you've been when hiring them.

As far as the reptile "rescue"- there's a HUGE difference between calling yourself a rescue & actually BEING a rescue. There are plenty of animal hoarders (for all kinds of animals) with their hands out for any free "rescue" animals that are NOT qualified as rescuers...not even close! There are also plenty who claim to be a rescue to get a tax write off & other perks (free animals, & other donations) that just turn around & sell the animals entrusted to them, keep the donated money, or like in this case, use the animals as feeders.

Never take anyone's word for it that they're a "rescue". Check it out first...demand proof.

I've been thinking about this and this is how I think this whole thing went down. The CEO or COO of the Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) realized that he could free up capacity in his shelter and make a few bucks at the same time. If it was the CEO, the COO went along with it to keep his job. If it was the COO, he did it behind his boss's back. After he sold off the stock from his own shelter, he contacted San Diego to get more. San Diego was so happy to be rid of them that they didn't ask questions.

Unfortunately, for the HSSA plotter(s), San Diego held a big old media event announcing the transfer. Had to make sure their donors knew what a good job they're doing. So, when the animals never showed up in Arizona, people noticed and started asking questions. This pressure caused the HSSA board to get involved.

This wasn't a plot built to weather scrutiny. At first, the plotter(s) lied and said they sent the animals to a private shelter. When they couldn't produce any paperwork supporting this, the board demanded they get the animals back. The Jones brothers then returned the 62 animals they hadn't managed to euthanize. This satisfied no one. A little more digging and it became clear exactly what had happened, and the CEO and COO lost their jobs.

I'm sure the Jones brothers knew what they were doing wasn't above board, but I think HSSA is the bad guy here. The Jones brothers were struggling to get their business off the ground. They just couldn't say no to a cheap feeder supply. They also may have told themselves that it was a victimless crime. They were only making use of animals no one else wanted. The HSSA plotter(s) on the other hand were entrusted with finding homes for these animals and instead sold them as food. Fearing a lawsuit, the HSSA board continues to deny culpability. Their denials ring hollow though, and I'm sure that, if there is legal action, the truth will come out and they'll be forced to pay.

There is absolutely no reason a reptile company should exist on using shelter animals as feeders. If they can't afford it or want to use shelter animals to turn a quick buck at a reptile show, they absolutely should not be in business. They deserve as little sympathy as you have for the Arizona shelter staff.

I couldn't afford to buy frozen rats when my collection grew past 14 last year. I didn't start skimming craigslist and the local shelters for handouts. I started breeding my own feeders.


I haven't seen all the updates and digging into things as again... I was recovering from surgery. Last week when this broke all we knew about was fertile turtle. Now that the rest of the info is falling into place, the shelter deserves just as much scrutiny and anger for their part. But trying to say the brothers were just looking for a way to get business started? It makes you sound like you agree with the practice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Armiyana

But trying to say the brothers were just looking for a way to get business started? It makes you sound like you agree with the practice

---

I was kind of afraid my post sounded like that. While I believe the HSSA plotter(s) were worse, the reptile breeders are definitely a sketchy bunch. And, as you know better than I, reptile breeders live and die by their reputations. I wouldn't trust these guys and I wouldn't buy from them. and I would expect anybody else that cares about the business to do the same. If as a result of this case, the Fertile Turtle goes under. I'll send up a cheer.

While we're assigning blame, why did San Diego, a no kill shelter, send animals to Tucson, a kill shelter? Did they really expect that a smaller shelter would be able to adopt out animals that they couldn't? Or did they send them for Tucson to do their dirty work for them? Is that how San Diego manages to keep its no kill policy? By sending its excess capacity to kill shelters? Wouldn't that be scandalous?

It's becoming fairly commonplace for places to network out with other shelters and rescues when dealing with adoptions. I actually had 3 kittens I fostered shipped from CA to WA for adoption. Shelters are just flooded where I am in Orange County. Even finding a rescue to help me out with these guys had taken me 3 weeks.

San Diego was probably working on the assumption that things had been on the up and up in AZ. There was no real reason to assume otherwise until they started questioning why rabbits were not updated in the microchip database after being 'adopted' in AZ.
If they do more digging and find some fault in SD, CA then I hope they are also held accountable.

As far as 'assigning blame': Anyone involved in this this knowing the animals were to be given off as reptile food should absolutely be held accountable. No ifs ands or buts. It's not rocket science there. Investigations should continue and policy should be scrutinized.

The sad reality of animal shelters is that we are leaving a majority of those animals there to die. Full stop.
Regardless of if it's a no kill shelter or high risk shelter. Many are operating at a capacity that they can barely handle because people just suck that much. I've worked with a few amazing people in animal rescue... it's a thankless job that weighs horribly on you. Physically, mentally and monetarily. If there's a glimmer of hope that someone can help you, many would jump at the opportunity. This county has absolutely terrible standards when it comes to animal welfare. There needs to be a rework of the system and more funding than there is... But we can't even do that for homeless people most of the time.


Honestly though Homebody... Your postings are also just not gelling with me and I don't want to think less of you because of this. Up until this post I've respected many of your posts here. Saying what you did about business starting and now conspiracy theory for shelters just puts a sour taste in my mouth...and that's what my surgery was supposed to prevent. Lol.
So this is going to be the last I'm commenting on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Armiyana

Honestly though Homebody... Your postings are also just not gelling with me and I don't want to think less of you because of this. Up until this post I've respected many of your posts here. Saying what you did about business starting and now conspiracy theory for shelters just puts a sour taste in my mouth...and that's what my surgery was supposed to prevent. Lol.
So this is going to be the last I'm commenting on this.

---

Aw, don't be like that. I don't know a thing about the animal shelter system. I'm postulating and asking questions in a discussion that I hope will edify everyone, including me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homebody

While we're assigning blame, why did San Diego, a no kill shelter, send animals to Tucson, a kill shelter? Did they really expect that a smaller shelter would be able to adopt out animals that they couldn't? Or did they send them for Tucson to do their dirty work for them? Is that how San Diego manages to keep its no kill policy? By sending its excess capacity to kill shelters? Wouldn't that be scandalous?

---

In the world of pet shelters & rescues, it's not unheard of for shelters with too many animals to ship (drive) them to another area where "neuter & spay" policies have actually gotten the desired results & there's actually too few pets available for adoption. That's a good thing, but it's still very costly & hard to find volunteers willing & able to do the transporting. I've even heard of a program where pilots volunteer to fly pets to remote areas to get the dogs homes where they're wanted & needed. It's great when it works. I know they've flown dogs from very crowded kill shelters in Los Angeles to states in the northwest, but obviously this is a slow process- it's normally a small privately-owned plane so they can only take so many at a time.

While we're discussing shelter issues (& specifically, doing the dirty work for others), I have to say that while I love the idea of a "no-kill" shelter as much as all animal lovers do (& our local shelter is a "no-kill" too), it's an idea that's both good & bad for the animals housed there. In reality, most of the shelter space is taken up by large & less-adoptable dogs (especially pit bulls & pit-mixes) which many adopters cannot or will never adopt. When you have a long waiting list for unwanted dogs to be accepted into the only shelter around, that means that many dogs that are very adoptable get no help, & as a result, many desperate people just dump them- or worse.

Meanwhile, unwanted dogs sit in the shelter way too long, & develop personality issues that make it much harder for them to ever adapt to a home. All dogs need training & socializing- it's hard to achieve that even in the best of shelters, & the problems they come in with often just get worse. So while I can't imagine ever working in a "kill" shelter (& the only ones I've ever visited left me in tears & haunted by the sad state of so many loving animals) I think we also have to consider the quality of life issues for the long-term un-adopted residents...is that fair? wouldn't euthanasia be kinder? (I often think it would be kinder.) & in the long run, that would help get homes for the more adoptable ones that otherwise are turned away. Basically I'm saying that the "kill" shelters are actually doing the dirty work for the "no-kill" shelters. In a way, "no-kill" shelters make the problems worse, but people feel better about it because they don't see the big picture. :confusd:

It's a nasty situation brought about by humans breeding too many pets- either on purpose or by neglect, or a desire to sell or merely enjoy pups & kittens for a while, while ignoring the reality of overpopulation. It bears mentioning that BPs run the risk of a similar situation- not enough homes with the skills, time, money, & dedication to take good care of them for life. Please think about that before you breed them.

The Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) released its report on this incident. It can be found here (34 pp). In a nutshell, under pressure from the Board and the CEO to raise adoption numbers, the CPO agreed to accept a transfer of animals from the San Diego Humane Society (SDHS) that was too large (300+) for HSSA to handle. The CPO solved this problem by diverting the animals to the Jones brothers, unaware that they have a business selling reptile feeders. When the SDHS and others inquired about the status of the animals, the Jones brothers returned 62. The report contains a lot of specific information that wasn't in the news articles, so if you're interested in this case, it's definitely a read.

Thanks for posting that. It looks like, just as in so many situations where bad things happen, there's enough blame to go around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homebody

While we're assigning blame, why did San Diego, a no kill shelter, send animals to Tucson, a kill shelter? Did they really expect that a smaller shelter would be able to adopt out animals that they couldn't? Or did they send them for Tucson to do their dirty work for them? Is that how San Diego manages to keep its no kill policy? By sending its excess capacity to kill shelters? Wouldn't that be scandalous?

---

It seems incredibly ignorant of the San Diego shelter to think anything more moral than this was going on. I have to wonder what sort of shelter other than a brand new one with a lot of funding is able to take in that amount of animals. I have to wonder why it's only feeder types of animals, how many rodent-only shelters exist? It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you think about it more than 5 seconds. I imagine at 160% capacity in a no-kill shelter, they are pretty desperate for help and probably didn't want to look at the situation critically. But then why look into it further later? If the Arizona shelter that was given the shipment originally was a kill shelter, even being of less than good intentions, why didn't they just say the animals had been euthanized? It's probably quite paranoid, but in the back of my mind is the thought that something like this was intentional to stir up controversy about reptiles.


I think what bothers me the most about this story is that it sounds like the person that killed the animals was selling them to people at a reptile show, based on the messages about freezing them before the show. That adds a whole new layer of evil to it in my eyes. It disgusts me so much that people would turn such a sad situation into a deceitful money making scheme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkubus

It's probably quite paranoid, but in the back of my mind is the thought that something like this was intentional to stir up controversy about reptiles.

---

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's razor