Jackson Jambalaya

Rankin County approved everything, in advance, in accordance with existing laws, for the Animal Rescue Fund of Ms to be built in that County. ARF has done an EXEMPLARY job of accomplishing their mission--and are saving hundreds of abandoned and abused animals. They are located in an area that is zoned for HEAVY AGRICULTURE--meaning a HOG FARM could legally locate there.

If this shelter is destroyed by the actions of a few individuals--who built their homes in a heavy agriculture area--IT WILL BE A BLACK-EYE ON THE REPUTATION OF RANKIN COUNTY.

SHAME SHAME SHAME on the GOOD people of Rankin County if you don't STAND UP AND SUPPORT THIS SHELTER THAT IS DOING SO MUCH GOOD--so that YOU DON'T HAVE TO!

You've got--AT NO COST TO YOU--a FANTASTIC, NO-KILL ANIMAL SHELTER IN YOUR COUNTY! SUPPORT IT!

Serious question. Do you think there should be any regulation of animal shelters by a county or city?

Maybe if everyone behaved rationally (not emotionally), worked toward a resolution (not all or nothing) and didn't throw so many barbs, all of this could have been avoided.

Someone once said, "You catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar."

Miss Conner-Brown makes a shameless plea for contributions, which is fine, but not what this is about. It's about regulation, which only makes sense. If cemeteries, car washes, apartments, gas stations and landfills are regulated, why not animal shelters.

For people who don't like regulations, take a look at Highway 80 going through Pearl or any unincorporated area where you might have a $400,000 house, a hog pen, an auto junk yard and a grocery within six hundred yards of each other.

I cannot imagine a county having NO regulation. This is not to put down shelters. I love animals more than people so don't go slicing me up.

The first draft reg that I don't like, however, is the proposed restriction limiting an acre to one 'roaming animal'. An acre ought to be able to handle five or six but certainly more than ONE.

Sfax, you basically hit the nail on the head with your argument. Rankin has for years gone without regulation, thus the description you give of the County. Nice house next to an auto junk yard.

My understanding is this particular piece of property is zoned heavy ag. Thus you could have a hog pen - or better, an industrial hog farm - on this property. But no, in this case, a non-profit located an animal shelter on this property. I think, with the assistance of the Rankin County Board of Supervisors.

It fit the zoning, and complies with all existing regulations. The complaints against it (health, DEQ, etc.) have, according to articles published, have been found to be incorrect. Its just neighbors that don't like having their houses in the neighborhood with it.

The problem is now Rankin is wanting to change the rules after the "cats out of the bag, so to speak" and satisfy a couple of bitching neighbors. If they can do this, they can go move out all the auto yards, hog pens, car repair shops, vetinary clinics, etc. that exist up and down Fannin Road. Except that, I believe, there is a grandfather clause they may be violating there. And it would appear to me, they are violating it here.

Rankin needs an animal shelter - and if they close this one they can start paying for it out of their budget. But whose backyard are they going to put it in then? NIMBY will always exist - and it is always somebody's back yard.

I don't know, a horse like you might need five.

First of all, to say they don't need any regulation is to make them exempt from normal zoning rules that legitimately may exist in a city. County, not so much, but zoning is still present. An animal shelter of any size is a significant presence, and some level of regulation is necessary.

Next, I'm betting Shadowfax hasn't rescued as many abused and abandoned horses as I have. Five or six horses per acre might work for a short time, but it doesn't take that many horses to turn an acre of grass into a mud pit in about a week. Depending on the turnover, one horse per acre is probably about right as long as all you're trying to do is feed them and adopt them out. If they need rehabilitation or training, as virtually all of them do, the process isn't as cut and dried. We have 23 horses (today) on 40 acres - about half that in pasture - and we're overcrowded because only five or six of them don't need some sort of daily care. Unless the grazing animal is a goat, we need to keep those rescues separate from the small animal ones.

Finally, while no kill is an admirable goal that all of us try to achieve, it's an operational necessity to humanely euthanize if the animal can't be adopted. Otherwise the math of animal rescue is inarguable - you'll eventually have nothing but a sanctuary for a finite number of animals and won't be able to save any more until one dies of natural causes. In fact, an even higher rate of humane euthanasia is necessary if the problem of unwanted animals is ever going to be adequately resolved. There are lots of other things we can do to address this issue, but I won't hijack the thread any more than I already have. Bill Billingsley

My understanding is a county or city can change animal welfare regulations or ordinances if they want to.

If none of the parties will listen to reason, if certain party's agendae do not surface, if a plan of action is not executed; the county will introduce regulations regarding the conducting of a shelter "business" inside the county.

Just like statutes, they can pass ordinances to impact the delivery of the business, I believe. No changes to zoning, just regulations.

No one is winning here, especially the animals.

Worst mistake ARF supporters could make is pack a BOS meeting with a bunch of people..... from Jackson. I have a feeling if the board hears from nothing but Jackson people, it will hurt more than help. ARF supporters probably need to make it a Rankin County discussion and keep it to Rankin county supporters as much as possible.

I'm with you Bill

You know I've been close to this and at this point, I agree. If I had my input, I would be setting up closed door meetings between all parties to see if they can bring about a solution TO THE BOARD!

I'm not sure if it is too far gone at this point, the ordinance appears to be the extreme position. A response to current input from the involved parties (the other extreme).

If what you say would happen, I bet you dimes to dozen they pass it as is and no input from ARF, just a very large bill to meet the regulations and a short time window to do so.

Also, conversations have been had in Rankin, they happened and the best we were able to get out of the Board was to admit the Shelter is necessary.

The form of regulations is an altogether different matter. The board appears to be limiting the input to the parties involved. I do believe the board wants a compromise. If one is not presented, then they are left to decide based on impression - which will be made with an eye to the future and thus more strict than I believe ARF would like to see.

Bill,

Thank you for the input. I actually believe there should be a discussion, a rational one regarding the "business" of animal shelters. I've had it off-line for some time now and am constantly amazed at the varying degrees of "business acumen" vs. "passionate advocacy" within the many different animal rescues within the Tri-county area.

Shadowfax, I read Ms. Browne's plea for help and I found no wording asking for funding. All she says is support it i.e. go to a BOS hearing or call the supervisors and let them know what you think about their shameless attempt at stopping the attempts of people who are trying to save lives of animals. ARF is zoned correctly, which occurred with the help and approval of the BOS. Apparently the people who decided to build homes in an area of the county that is zoned intense agriculture are upset that they live next to an animal shelter. Should ARF leave, they could very well find themselve living next to a hog or chicken farm, not really an upgrade.

It is my understanding that members of the staff and board have had to take out restraining orders on some of the neighbors who have made threats of violence and harassing them as well. ARF has made very effort to try to appease the neighbors, including but not limited to offering them first rights of refusal were they to sell the property. Neighbors have declined to purchase the property so they they harass the staff, board members, and the county supervisors. ARF has passed every state and federal inspection that they need to pass. And you still think ARF is not cooperating???

No, I've NEVER rescued a horse. Frankly, my comment related to dogs. I had not considered how many horses need an acre to graze. I thought an acre for a dog was a bit unusual and am sorry if I misunderstood which animals would be on one acre.

If the county and its inhabitants favor allowing unrestricted businesses, then adopt no rules and move on. That way adjoining properties can't be sold except for crap-use. Maybe a skating rink, some "high-five" clubs or a nice sewage lagoon like the one up on 55 across from the middle income neighborhood would do well near the dog pound. Skaters aren't bothered by 24 hour yapping and the overutilization that results in the excess smell of urine and feces, I'm guessing.

As we know, in America, it's not simply a matter of who was here first. Just ask the native Americans or buffalo. People still rule unless the federal government is involved.

KK, your posts at 3 are so good they obviously won't be listened too. If the parties involved, Rankin County, neighbors, and shelter would all get into a room and discuss - by my definition that would mean talking back and forth between the parties - they could probably come up with a reasonable solution. Right now, it doesn't appear that any of the three (County, neighbors, or shelter) are willing to do this. And that's a true shame. Everybody loses under that scenario it seems to me. Rankin County loses a shelter, shelter folks close/move, and shelter folks sell land to some industrial agriculture producer that neighbors dislike more.

Reasonable heads need to get together - and talk.

Hypocrite: Those that don't live near the smell, filth and noise seem fairly passionate that the shelter stays where it is. I'm looking at you Jackson folks....and one Lake Caroline resident in particular who enjoys beautiful sunrises and sunsets on that (silent!) waterfront lot.

Yeah, those horses next door to ARF stink and they have more than the recommended 1 horse per acre proposed in the ordinance.

Mary Hawkins took over the Madison ARK .
The Rankin BOS might consider an inter-local agreement with her majesty to take over this operation.
At least the facility would get a makeover. New bricks, a couple of Greek columns, all animals would be welcome...except peacocks.

Mary didn't 'take over the Ark'. You might want to look into the shelter and who owned it to begin with. It was being terribly mismanaged. Parenthetically, I'm told many dogs are disappearing in the Madison area. I've seen signs posted for years about missing (good) animals. Somebody is stealing and selling dogs. Not sure how or if the Ark is affiliated with that.

From what I can tell it may be an act of kindness that some of these dogs go missing. Think about it, I see a lot of listing by shelter folks who say, "dog found while travelling in X". Look for yourself around on Social Media.

How is a 'missing pet'(lost animal) an act of kindness? They are being stolen. YOU think about it!

Arrrgghhhh.... the sky is falling 8:52AM.

The sky isn't falling but somebody is going to get their ass shot full of holes stealing dogs! The the ARKers can dedicate a plague to him/her.

dedicate a plague? what exactly does that mean? and are you implying that animal rescuers of the ARK are stealing dogs from perfectly good homes? why on earth would they do that when there are tons of homeless dogs that they are rescuing?

@7:27; as you probably know, this isn't about 'stinking horses' or acreage per horse. It's about barking all day and night long, crowded and unclean facilities and the runaway mentality of unreasonable shelter advocates who live many miles away.

7:32 AM Actually it is about a couple of people who are hell bent on getting rid of the facility b/c they frankly don't like it.

Their actions in public have not found their way into the media. There is no mention of the tactics they have employed in the media.

Those complaining should be wise to tend to their own actions and behaviors; lest their true intentions become known.

And yes, it is about horses, because the next door neighbor has a number of them, more than the 1/acre per horse outlined in the ordinance.

As to the conditions of the facility. Maybe take a look here, doesn't look like "crowded and unclean" facilities to me...

I prefer actual photos to opinions.

ARF Facility, no commentary, just pictures. Notice the details of the facility. Floors, beds, cages, food, beds, lighting, shelter.

C'mon folks, can't you see what the neighbors are attempting to do?

Why would 'the neighbors' give a rat's ass if the facility was not a nuisance? Nobody objects just for the hell of objecting. Who cares what's 'down the road' if it's not bothering them or reducing their property value? I think the Arfsters are misrepresenting the facts here.

In my opinion, landfills, mosques and animal shelters all ought to be twenty miles from the nearest civilization.

Alright. Given.

Animals need help. They definitely don't have enough safe places nor enough rescuers. The persons running Arf are much to be commended for saving animals who would have starved or been killed. At one point the dogs there were living in mud in outdoor cages. If Arf had the money for inside facilities the neighbors would have no complaints.
Too few people care about animals. They just don't care. And THAT is the DISGRACE, the cold attitude of shallow uncivilized humans toward helpless animals. If it weren't for the irresponsible and disgusting behavior of humans the animals would not be suffering, starving, dying, and would not need to be rescued. Good people with souls help animals, donate, rescue, foster and adopt. Other people just make contemptible and asinine remarks against rescue of animals and make their mean spirited remarks against helpless animals.

Too few animal rescuer's care about the big picture. If you are unable to take care of the dogs, or yourself, how do you pray-tell take care of the animals in a humane manner while your world is going to shit.

I am frankly sick and tired of the emotionalism that dominates "animal rescue/shelter/whatever" politics in this town.

If those of you who are so tied to this endeavor were ever able to put together a solid organization that brought about real change you would be supremely successful. MS is a state that actually cares about animals and you are losing the battle by continuing the "society" approach and the "I look good doing this" mentality. And, you want the truth, you look like freagin' crazy people by acting crazy. The more you act that way, the less people want to be involved.

Get over yourself. If you don't you are only hurting the animals. You don't get that. You are hurting the animals by your behavior. I hope you are listening. I do what I can for the sake of the animals. If you continue to act like a bunch of nuts, you will be labelled as such. It is your decision. Everyone watching is wondering when you actually get it.

And before everyone gets their panty's in a bunch, I'm not talking about anyone, I'm talking about everyone.

Those comments tearing down people who try to help animals made no sense to me whatsoever, sorry. I have no clue what the actual meaning of your tirade was, other than bashing of those helping animals and in some way connecting it unfavorably with the state of politics and the world. I hope your comments were not meant to represent the "big picture" to which you referred. Your reference to a "bunch of nuts" I assume was meant to demean those who save and rescue animals. I know you were not referring to me, and have no idea to whom your comments were directed, but for me I salute those who take the high road to save helpless animals.