Antone's Nightclub
Lately 'Chronicle' Sloppy and Careless
RECEIVED Wed., Oct. 19, 2005
Dear sir or madam,
Since arriving five years ago, I have come to regard the Chronicle as the most valuable local news and lifestyle source. I value having an honest, progressive paper dedicated to bettering this city. But lately, some sloppy reporting and careless word choices are endangering the very institutions that make Austin livable.
Dan Mottola's report on Ecology Action's troubles was not only well behind the pace of events (EA has been posting signs about the issue for months) but overlooked the very source of the problem: People are mistaking the recycling center for a dump, and leaving “mystery bags” full of nonrecyclable garbage after hours [“Ecology Action: Recycled by Zoning?,” News, Oct. 14]. By overlooking this, Mottola makes it sound like it's all Ecology Action's fault just how things are done there. He was right about one thing: People do depend on EA, including me, since city recycling won't service apartments like mine. Therefore, I have to set the record straight before I lose my freedom to recycle.
Similarly, p.102's notice on EmanciPet made a tasteless joke about animal euthanasia at Town Lake Animal Center [“Best of Austin,” Oct. 14], the second time I've observed this year that the Chronicle has mentioned TLAC solely in that context, and making it sound like a heartless game. As a volunteer there, I remind you that TLAC is the only shelter in town that does take animals in, and that all the others, including the no-kill shelters, get their adoption animals from us. Euthanasia, meanwhile, really is a last resort, and the numbers you cited should tell you how many more animals we successfully adopt out. We would have been no-kill as early as 2002 if Austin would just spay/neuter, but instead, this kind of coverage makes it sound like we kill animals without a thought, and makes our efforts that much harder.
Since arriving five years ago, I have come to regard the Chronicle as the most valuable local news and lifestyle source. I value having an honest, progressive paper dedicated to bettering this city. But lately, some sloppy reporting and careless word choices are endangering the very institutions that make Austin livable.
Dan Mottola's report on Ecology Action's troubles was not only well behind the pace of events (EA has been posting signs about the issue for months) but overlooked the very source of the problem: People are mistaking the recycling center for a dump, and leaving “mystery bags” full of nonrecyclable garbage after hours [“Ecology Action: Recycled by Zoning?,” News, Oct. 14]. By overlooking this, Mottola makes it sound like it's all Ecology Action's fault just how things are done there. He was right about one thing: People do depend on EA, including me, since city recycling won't service apartments like mine. Therefore, I have to set the record straight before I lose my freedom to recycle.
Similarly, p.102's notice on EmanciPet made a tasteless joke about animal euthanasia at Town Lake Animal Center [“Best of Austin,” Oct. 14], the second time I've observed this year that the Chronicle has mentioned TLAC solely in that context, and making it sound like a heartless game. As a volunteer there, I remind you that TLAC is the only shelter in town that does take animals in, and that all the others, including the no-kill shelters, get their adoption animals from us. Euthanasia, meanwhile, really is a last resort, and the numbers you cited should tell you how many more animals we successfully adopt out. We would have been no-kill as early as 2002 if Austin would just spay/neuter, but instead, this kind of coverage makes it sound like we kill animals without a thought, and makes our efforts that much harder.
Yours sincerely,
Nicholas Ivan Hentschel
Nicholas Ivan Hentschel
[Rachel Proctor May responds: A major topic of discussion at last night's animal advisory commission meeting was how too many Austinites don't know TLAC is a kill facility, and thus too easily dump their pets with a clear conscience. It was the majority opinion that more needs to be done to let people know that if you leave your animal at TLAC, death is not an unlikely outcome. According to last year's statistics, 53% of the 23,016 animals TLAC received were euthanized, while 19% were adopted out. (Another 11% went to rescue groups, and 13% were returned to their owners.) Finally, the cited blurb, on p.102 says that TLAC kills a lot of animals "because a whole lot of y'all don't spay and neuter your animals." That sounds like a condemnation of the community – not TLAC – to me.]
