The San Pedro Animal Hospital

[peterbj7]

an organization that dismissed the Vet

Technically this isn't what happened.  Laurie wrote publicly on this at the time, and said that she had been put in an impossible position and had therefore resigned.  In a normal commercial organisation this might well constitute "constructive dismissal" and be actionable, but I think we can forget such options in this context.  The "legacy board" of SAGA clearly retains to itself full jurisdiction over SAGA, resorting to tricks to enforce its will.  Again, in another context this would be actionable.  I certainly feel that they have used up much of their public credibility, hounding out of office the second vet in not much more than a year, and my view is much as it was several years ago when I offered my financial services to SAGA and was spurned, that the entire board should be replaced.

[2Aggies]

I will concede that, on technical grounds.

[pedro]

SAGA have said through their spokesperson,who is a board member that SAGA is not a retail operation and will not sell/provide any items medical or otherwise to DVM Dorke or SPAH

Just recently Laurie asked to purchase a heart worm test for a dieing dog which have an expiry date in january and can only be used by a vet and this request was turned down out of hand-the dog would have died either way

[Phil]

No offense, but the issues of how publicly donated money is being used by SAGA still comes into play. I would assume the SAGA board is fully aware of comments posted on the message boards and has done nothing to change the perception. i.e. making financial statements public, including Pedro's Inn in the Thank You section on their website for funds raised, etc. Since this is a thread about the successful opening and planned acquisitions by the new clinic I think it somewhat inappropriate to be plugging for the very group that ran the vet off. IMHO of course.

I agree 100% that the well being of the animals is priority number one, but that does not seem to be the focus of SAGA.

Back on track with this thread I want to again congratulate the vet and Peter for taking the initiative to create a place where the animals can be properly cared for by a licensed veterinarian. The expedient manner in which they built the clinic reduced the amount of time the island and more importantly the animals were without a facility.

I took the bolded part of your comment to question their use of finances. Did I misunderstand?

[Phil]

Not a personal attack 2 Aggies. Your views seem formed  by the info you have seen on this public forum and Saga, wrongly in my opinion, have decided discretion is the better form of valour. There are always two sides to a story and through no fault of your own you and most of us haven't seen both sides.

[Phil]

I'm not a Saga Board member but I seem to remember that as Sagas drugs are donated via a registered US Charity and that as donees have had tax credits for it is illegal(?) or outside the t/c's of the charity to sell or give them to third parties to be used for profit.

[Phil]

Pedro - you'd better edit your last post on Lauries name before she sees it as you'll be in all sorts of trouble!!!

[peterbj7]

So what now happens to those drugs?  Is SAGA going to announce that for the time being, until they again have a vet of their own, they will no longer be accepting such donations?  If people give them and then find that they were wasted and that was always going to be their fate, that will hammer the last nail into the coffin of SAGA's credibility as a charity.

But in any case, surely SAGA could provide them to Laurie on a case-by-case basis to use to treat SAGA-supplied animals?

What Peter said about Laurie not being permitted to purchase a drug that she needed and which was in any case about to become out of date is most discouraging.  As I see it SPAH is here to stay.  Enough has been invested in it to ensure that.  If SAGA won't deal with them, whether for personal reasons or whatever, then SAGA will be the loser.  In that event SAGA would cease being an effective animal charity and should be wound up.

Did SAGA really refer to Laurie as DVM Droke (I presume Dorke is a typo by Peter)?  After employing her for a year?  If that's the case I fear the scenario I postulate in my last paragraph is already starting to come about.  SAGA is coming out of this VERY badly.

[Phil]

Maybe they have a Vet starting tomorrow? I don't know but I do know their actively recruiting. Ask Saga for an accurate response. They can't be purchased full stop. Given in these circumstances is fine I imagine. These aren't heartless people that are suddenly rabid animal haters. Get a grip.

[pedro]

Phil she is not an idiot and I actually quoted her.

It would probably easier for you if as you have said in the past the SAGA board hate me and through that Laurie -they blame me for all the ills of that organisation

for years they have never provided accounts and you agree by saying they legally do not have to-fair enough

When I organised the Halloween Bash -helped by many it was put down as a non-SAGA related event so they did not have to thank Pedro's

The money was agreed to buy an anasthesia machine but they changed their minds

they do not give a crap about the animals if they perceive in any way shape or form that I am involved-I was told this by an ex board member on xmas night in my bar

[peterbj7]

Even if that is the case (that a new vet may start soon), and it seems unlikely in this timeframe, what future is there for animal care in San Pedro if this deeply unprofessional petty squabbling is going to continue?

[pedro]

Phil I will send you the email from SAGA and I would like you to acknowledge that what I said was correct.

Just out of interest I did not notice you saying anything about SPAH'S free speying and neutering program

[Phil]

Even if that is the case (that a new vet may start soon), and it seems unlikely in this timeframe, what future is there for animal care in San Pedro if this deeply unprofessional petty squabbling is going to continue?

How do you know this Peter? Simply put you don't.

Even if that is the case (that a new vet may start soon), and it seems unlikely in this timeframe, what future is there for animal care in San Pedro if this deeply unprofessional petty squabbling is going to continue?

They aren't. It's a one sided viewpoint that I had hoped to stop and have now seemingly stirred up, and you are intentionally doing the same. What is there to gain from it - that's why I assume Saga isn't getting involved. Laurie moved on and with able help from Pedro has opened her own Animal Hospital which is great and I haven't heard one person not happy about this. ME INCLUDED. Sadly people are starting to take Saga's silence the wrong way and I tried to stand up for them. I'm a saga supporter and have been for almost ten years but I'm not against Laurie, Pedro or the SPAH.

[Phil]

Phil she is not an idiot and I actually quoted her.

It would probably easier for you if as you have said in the past the SAGA board hate me and through that Laurie -they blame me for all the ills of that organisation

for years they have never provided accounts and you agree by saying they legally do not have to-fair enough

When I organised the Halloween Bash -helped by many it was put down as a non-SAGA related event so they did not have to thank Pedro's

The money was agreed to buy an anasthesia machine but they changed their minds

they do not give a crap about the animals if they perceive in any way shape or form that I am involved-I was told this by an ex board member on xmas night in my bar

I certainly didnt call Laurie an idiot if thats what you mean and I'm not sure I understand the rest of your post Peter. Do you not think it better to move forward. You and Laurie in your direction Saga in theirs.

[bethieb]

saga's acrimony toward SPAH is just sad.  saga has, in my mind, lost all credibility because of it's board's actions.  i have been a supporter of saga over 10 years; they did make great contributions to the animals over the years.  but i don't think that saga is acting in the best interest of animals nor its intended purpose.  people have donated so much to it.  any other vet worth his/her salt will not last under those circumstances.