PJBoosinger

If Maura Davies’ lips are flapping, you can be pretty sure a lie is being told!  Here’s a transcript of a bit of wfaa.com’s video:

• Maura Davies: “the animals seem to have food, they seem to have water, they seem to have shelter but, um…cats that are being held… locked in… no way of escaping”
• Reporter: “the ammonia levels in parts of the house are off the charts.  It should be at zero.  This test says the level’s at 27.”
• Maura Davies: “That level of ammonia can cause health issues in humans after just a few minutes.”

And from the SPCAT (SPCA of Texas) website: “The ammonia level in the room in the barn where the cats were kept was 27 parts per million. As a frame of reference, short term exposure to any ammonia level over 25 parts per million will cause health issues in humans.”

PLEASE note that the reporter says “house” and the SPCAT then says “barn”.  It’s important and I’ll come back to that point.  First the BIGGER point…

WHERE DO YOU IDIOTS GET YOUR INFORMATION?  Let’s start with the fact that they’ve changed the story since it was originally published.  Maybe I wasn’t the only one who noticed them mention that the meter they were using maxes out at “27”, hence the “off the chart” remark.  I don’t know whose “chart” you’re using because 27 ppm isn’t anywhere near being “off the chart” for NORMAL ammonia charts.  And, because the gadget maxed out at 27, nobody actually knows what the level was, nor if it was measured as per any form of regs, state of federal.

“any ammonia level over 25 parts per million will cause health issues in humans”?  BULLCRAP.  The odor threshold, the level at which ammonia gas can be smelled: “Reported values vary widely; 0.6 to 53 ppm; geometric mean: 17 ppm (detection)”.  The most often cited number is 20 or 25 ppm.  As the world has become less stinky in some ways, the number has been dropping.  Here we see the geometric mean (average) is down to 17 ppm.  I’m talking about the MINIMUM level at which average, normal people will smell ammonia.  And odor is NOT a reliable way of detecting whether or not there is a hazard.  Id.  Note that comes from the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, a bit more conservative and protective of workers than our own OSHA!

“The current TLV for ammonia is 25 ppm with a short-term exposure limit of 35 ppm. Both were designed to be low enough to cause no irritation in unhardened people. The OSHA PEL for ammonia is 50 ppm, as is the NIOSH Recommended Standard.”  TLV is the threshold limit value, “a level to which it is believed a worker can be exposed day after day for a working lifetime without adverse health effects”.  PEL is the permissible exposure limit.  In other words, OSHA permits workers to be exposed at 50 ppm of ammonia in working environments on a regular day to day basis for YEARS; and that is indeed the current OSHA PEL standard: 50 ppm.  That mention of “unhardened people” is significant.  Some people are more sensitive to ammonia than others and some develop quite a bit of tolerance and can withstand far higher than normal limits without ill health effects.  (And some animal rights activists appear to have sensitized themselves so they can sniff out ammonia.)

To put it bluntly, that old woman grew up in a tougher world than we now expect and probably has quite a bit higher than normal tolerance by today’s lowering standards.  She darn sure didn't look to be suffering any ill effects from the ammonia in and around her home.

“At moderate levels of concentration, ammonia can irritate the eyes and respiratory tract; at high concentrations, it can cause ulceration to the eyes and severe irritation to the respiratory tract (Table 1):

Hey Maura, did you catch the use of the word “can” in the above sentence?  So much for “any ammonia level over 25 parts per million will cause health issues in humans” you lying witch!  Oh, no, sorry, that would really be an insult to witches; make that you lying ARA HO because clearly you are for sale!

Hey Maura and WFAA, do you SEE that chart above that goes all the way up to 10,000???  Well, how about the CDC page that mentions 250 and 300 ppm?  And you simply MUST check out this CDC page and the chart at the bottom.  Would you just check that out?  That chart goes all the way up to 40,300 ppm.  WOW, and you think 27 is “off the chart”?  Oh, hey, did you notice that the half hour lethal dose is upwards of 2,000?  Hey, dingdongs that’s because our bodies actually know how to process pretty high levels of ammonia through and ditch it in our waste.

Since we’re starting to see you ARA twits in full body protection suits, you might actually want to check out the levels where that’s actually recommended.  Those darn suits and respirators get expensive when you’re WASTING them in non-hazard areas!

27 ppm of ammonia is “off the chart”.  I’m just vibrating with ANGER that such CRAP makes it on the airwaves!  WFAA, you owe your audience a prominent retraction and an infomercial on ammonia!

Simple truth is that ammonia gases are all around us and are often higher in rural areas.  In fact, “Soil typically contains about 1-5 ppm of ammonia” and it’s necessary to plant growth.  “Ammonia contributes significantly to the nutritional needs of terrestrial organisms by serving as a precursor to food and fertilizers.”  Thought I’d toss that in just in case anyone is wondering why the ARAs would be trying to lower ammonia levels unreasonably.  I’ll be blunt.  It’s because doing so would limit the prosperity of humans AND animals, because they want to put all animal farming out of business.  Here’s the deal, while ammonia can be toxic, it is also necessary to life.  In areas where many plants OR animals exist, higher levels of ammonia will likely exist than would be “normal” in an urban environment.  Still, all we mammals excrete ammonia in our waste.

“Under some circumstances, a hardened person can accept an exposure that will result in inflammation of the throat, bronchi, and possibly eyes. An exposure to 300 to 500 ppm for 30 to 60 minutes would cause such an effect and might be hazardous to health.”  That is from 1989 and we’ve certainly decided to lower the acceptable levels of ammonia in workplaces since then.  However, it doesn’t change the FACT that people (and animals) can tolerate MUCH higher levels than the piddly “27” ppm that Maura is citing.

I don’t know what kind of Podunk meter you were using that maxes out at “27” but you people need to get your SH** together before going after people and their animals.  You’re looking incredibly STUPID of late.

OK, so let’s talk about measuring ammonia levels a bit.  It ain’t as simple as point and shoot of a tinkertoy.  Levels are affected by humidity as well as what the sensor is made of.  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6THH-4XT3HM3-1&_user=10&_coverDate=03%2F04%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1308239615&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=98c6570864d7ca5c5b10e962d4d59bec  Ammonia levels in horse stalls can indeed run above 100 ppm using traditional methods in the stalls.  Of course, they’re trying to sell a product to reduce ammonia levels over the use of traditional sand so I’d take what they say with a grain of salt.  But it still brings me back around to that little “house” v. “barn” issue.  That makes a difference because of air flow; that too affects measurements of ammonia.

The little handheld meters can be affected by a multitude of other chemicals in the environment.  “Some representative examples of the common compounds and the corresponding signals they are shown below. Care needs to be exercised when using this instrument in the presence of large concentrations of interfering gases. Contact the manufacturer if difficulties are suspected with other gases, or with other usage problems. In addition variations in the baseline, as a result of variations in concentrations of compounds other than ammonia, during the course of the measurement, can impact the reading.”  But wait, that isn’t even the most important part.  The important part is the TWA (Time Weighted Average) mentioned near the top of the page.

You see, one doesn’t take a single measurement; one takes multiple measurements over time and gets and AVERAGE.  The process is actually pretty involved.  See the 19 PAGES of information on methodology for measuring ammonia at the CDC website.  Or cheat and get the general gist of limits and weighting averages at this website.  And, finally, of course, with governmental agencies bringing the allowable levels down, there are companies doing research on how to reduce ammonia levels like this one in 1994.  Still we have much higher levels of ammonia at or near landfills.  Thing is that it’s all rather new and EXPENSIVE to implement and so there’s still LOTS and LOTS of ammonia in the environment, especially our homes.

 Does anybody think these fools took accurate measurements of the ammonia levels at this poor woman's home?  Not me!

Well, I’ve probably bored you to tears now with information on permissible ammonia levels in work environments and, frankly, it has little to do with permissible levels of ammonia in a HOME.  You know, a house or barn or whatever on PRIVATE PROPERTY.

The fundamental rights listed at Wikipedia is incomplete but here are some pertinent ones:

• Right to property
• Right to privacy
• Freedom of religion
• Right to procreate
• Right to direct a child’s upbringing

Life, liberty, and property.  These are the fundamentals.  How we choose to live, procreate, even die are built upon our rights and religious beliefs.  That includes how we treat our animals.  And animals ARE our PROPERTY.

When one looks at noise ordinances, noise is commonly measured “at the property line”.  See Section 4.10(B)(1) of the Windsor, VT ordinances for an example.  See also Subsection (3): “smoke dust, odors, noxious gases, or other forms of air pollution which CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE TO OTHER LANDOWNERS…” (emphasis added)  In fact, read through the rest of the subsections.  They all have a common element in “at the property line”, “beyond the property line”, and “detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare”.  These terms have reason and meaning.  They recognize our right to privacy and to do as we please on our own property so long as we do not affect others and that means other HUMANS and not other humans’ sensibilities about your privately owned animals.  NO WHERE in the foundation or history of this country is there an “except if you have animals and then your rights are void” provision.

Yet that is exactly what we are seeing.  If one owns animals, the activists are getting away with peeking in your bedroom windows.  This is no different than when Texas police used to set up gay couples to “catch” them and prosecute them.  If you own animals, you can now expect these animal rights activists and other power mongers to use those animals to coerce, force, or otherwise enter upon your property (media in tow), rummage through your home and belongings without regard to your fundamental rights to privacy, with no regard for any form of due process rights or the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.  They'll usually put your name and pictures of you, your property, your HOME - pictures from INSIDE your HOME - on the internet and proceed to defame you repeatedly with their allegations of "animal cruelty".

While I will acknowledge that government has SOME right to intervene where animals end up in the food chain and MAYBE even when they end up in interstate commerce, I will also ask a simple question.  By what right does the government, any American government, seek to enter upon your private property, search and seize our animals and/or other property without following the usual rules applicable to searches and seizures?  Someone PLEASE show me where we delegated that to our governments because all that we do not so delegate is reserved to US, you and I.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  U.S. Constitution, Amendment X.  I can find no place where we have delegated to the federal government an overriding interest in our personal, private property such as animals (and the Feds surely went fishing to "find" such to enact the AWA).  I can find no place in the Texas Constitution where Texas claims that authority and I know Texas history well enough to know that the founders of Texas would NOT have approved of the Republic of Texas or the new State of Texas assuming such a right.  The founders of this state (and probably most of the US states) would have screamed bloody murder at this concept.  It was the English government’s assumption of the right of ownership of all property (to tax it into oblivion if they wished) that lead to us Declaring our Independence.  Our founders were all fiercely protective of private property, both real and personal.

And several cases of animal seizures lately have raised other historical specters as well.  These cases have involved the taking of animals from the elderly and ill.  In one case, there was the mention of “civil commitment” that certainly appeared to be a threat to the animal owner (as in, give them up or else we’ll have you committed).  In another case, the SPCA of Texas knew someone had been removed to hospital, left notices AT THE PROPERTY, and then proceeded to take the animals.  And they took and PUBLISHED pictures of the inside of the home.  How dare SPCAT publish pictures inside the home of someone who they KNOW is in the hospital?  Attempted to contact my ASS.  If APS is involved then you bloody well ought to know how to reach this person’s ad litem who would be responsible for tending their property!  Oh, yes, I know.  You people at SPCAT clearly don’t give a rat’s ass about the law.  All you ever even attempt is a good “story” that makes it look like you’ve done “right” except I’m doubting that you ever follow the law.  Somehow you think the law is your personal sword to cleave other humans with by severing them from their property.

I am ever so glad you’ve gone the extra mile in this case to make a bold faced LIE about ammonia levels.  You’ve finally left no doubt whatsoever that you will tell your “stories” that are total fiction, do whatever it takes to thieve your inventory from others.  Then you kill what you don’t want and sell the rest; all the while preying upon the public sympathies for donations to continue your abuses.

“One of the more commonly accepted definitions of elder abuse is "a single, or repeated act, or lack of appropriate action, occurring within any relationship where there is an expectation of trust which causes harm or distress to an older person."”  Many of these cases are darn sure looking like elder abuse to me!

Stalking can be defined as a pattern of repeated and unwanted attention, harassment, contact, or any other course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear.

It is a course of conduct that can include:

• Repeated, unwanted, intrusive, and frightening communications from the perpetrator by phone, mail, and/or email
• Repeatedly leaving or sending victim unwanted items, presents, or flowers
• Following or laying in wait for the victim at places such as home, school, work, or recreation place
• Making direct or indirect threats to harm the victim, the victim's children, relatives, friends, or pets.
• Damaging or threatening to damage the victim's property
• Harassing victim through the internet
• Posting information or spreading rumors about the victim on the internet, in a public place, or by word of mouth
• Obtaining personal information about the victim by accessing public records, using internet search services, hiring private investigators, going through the victim's garbage, following the victim, contacting victim's friends, family work, or neighbors, etc.

Source: Stalking Resource Center, National Center for Victims of Crime

Yep, what I see the ARAs doing looks like stalking too!  What else can one call the intrusions upon private property combined with “comply with our demands OR ELSE”?

And the various governmental agents involved?  Do ANY of you even know the definition of “civil rights”?  In case you don’t: “Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples' physical integrity and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds such as physical or mental disability, gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, national origin, age, immigrant status, etc; and individual rights such as the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, and movement.  Political rights include natural justice (procedural fairness) in law, such as the rights of the accused, including the right to a fair trial; due process; the right to seek redress or a legal remedy; and rights of participation in civil society and politics such as freedom of association, the right to assemble, the right to petition, and the right to vote.”  LEOs, my darling dears, you are supposed to be PROTECTING us all from abuses like illegal searches and seizures, illegal takings of property; not participating in them!  What are you LEOs thinking when you help to take advantage of/abuse the elderly and ill?  Maybe you’re thinking you’re doing what’s “best” for those people but, my dear LEOs, please remember that isn’t your job.  They are adults with RIGHTS you are not to violate.  They should not have to stand behind a shotgun to keep you at bay.

Well, I’m utterly exhausted at this point but I must say that, if I choose to live on a pig farm where the ammonia level regularly runs at 70 ppm AND to have dogs and cats, it is NOBODY’S DAMN BUSINESS but mine!!!

Now where’s my bottle of Windex, I need to clean some windows…  Y’all do know ammonia is what causes that nasty smell in Windex (and most other glass cleaners), right?  Oh, oops, maybe that isn’t a good idea.  Maura might rush in with her little gadget and find the air to be “off the charts”.