|
Welcome to the YorkieTalk.com Forums Community - the community for Yorkshire Terriers. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You will be able to chat with over 35,000 YorkieTalk members, read over 2,000,000 posted discussions, and view more than 15,000 Yorkie photos in the YorkieTalk Photo Gallery after you register. We would love to have you as a member! Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please click here to contact us. |
|
| LinkBack | Thread Tools |
04-01-2010, 11:48 AM | #31 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | I found this article: not incredibly informative, but sheds some more light on the issue. The major argument against no-kill appears to be that you can't do it with an open admissions policy. PETA and Euthanasia - Newsweek.com
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. |
Welcome Guest! | |
04-01-2010, 11:54 AM | #32 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | <Duh, responding to livingdustmops> But Winograd DOES have an answer to the size of the pet population. Maybe it's wrong, but here it is: - over half of the dogs in shelters can be re-united with their original homes. They get lost in the shelter system and are euthanized instead. - of the remaining 4 million pets, 20 million people want to get a pet this year. 3 million already plan to adopt from a shelter. So even capturing a tiny percent of the remaining 17 million would mean that virtually all of these animals can be adopted out. The thing that sickens me about PETA is not that it's 3,000 or whatever... it's the 90% kill rate. With a budget most shelters would die for. How can PETA claim to stand for ethical treatment of animals when it doesn't bother to take care of the animals in its charge? This is unforgivable. The ASPCA in the area has an almost zero kill rate, WITH open admissions, and a fraction of the budget. I know PETA has brought attention to other areas of animal cruelty. They are good at making noise. I think they should acknowledge their grevious errors at shelter management, and either man up, go no-kill, or get out of the shelter business.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. Last edited by QuickSilver; 04-01-2010 at 11:56 AM. |
04-01-2010, 11:59 AM | #33 |
Princess Poop A Lot Donating Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,728
| I think we also have to remember where the stats come from on euthanizing these animals. Last I knew it was from city owned shelters and shelters/rescues/humane organizations voluntering this info. It was expressed in the article I read a few years ago it was believe it was only 50% of the true numbers and I can imagine in todays economy it is worse. I also remember when I lived in Tucson the city run shelter was running out of $$$ so they started charging people who were turning in their animals and guess what people just started dumping them in the desert and they were starving to death. I also just read an article where a massive grave was found in Tucson where animals were shot to death or allowed to starve. It was found because someone saw horse there..desert of death.
__________________ Cindy & The Rescued Gang Puppies Are Not Products! |
04-01-2010, 12:04 PM | #34 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Here's another article. It's pretty frustrating. It seems like there's a quote from Winograd, then a quote from PETA / a shelter manager, and then very few facts about what's actually happening. PETA's Euthanasia Rates Have Critics Fuming - AOL News
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. |
04-01-2010, 12:08 PM | #35 |
Princess Poop A Lot Donating Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,728
| Again, I don't want to see this thread turned into a PETA discussion....I take parts from them...and throw other parts away... I guess what I find so surprising is how so many people hate PETA and believe everything that is put in the press. I did for a long time until I started to realize they were the first ones to bring to light many of the cruel things going on in this world. Okay, lets say his numbers are true but is he saying every year 17 million people would step up to the plate and adopt a rescue? It doesn't even happen on YT In order to understand each issue, you have to understand we have city shelters, county shelters, not for profit shelters etc. PETA can not dictate the laws if they are involved with city shelters...laws are written by the city and have to be inforced with the shelters. This is why some shelters shoot the dogs/cats or gas them - it is a financial isue. It is a huge issue to understand each part of it. PETA is not a shelter they are advocates for animals. Just like lobbyists with our government.
__________________ Cindy & The Rescued Gang Puppies Are Not Products! |
04-01-2010, 12:09 PM | #36 | |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Quote:
I've heard about Tucson... I'm still not sure that justifies so much euthanasia. Winograd's argument is that many shelters have adopted a defeatist attitude towards adoption; they don't trust the public to adopt (despite the fact that the animals are almost guaranteed to die in the shelter); many won't allow rescue groups to take dogs from their care (though again, why not allow them to take dogs if they have no chance in the current shelter), or don't bother to notify rescues if qualifying dogs come in; and they don't want to tighten up and demand excellence, or even competance, from their employees. Again, I don't think this is all shelters, but it is giving me a lot of food for thought.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. | |
04-01-2010, 12:13 PM | #37 | |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Quote:
I am having trouble finding anything about the guidelines on PETA's shelters... however, PETA itself did not say it was operating according to state law, and neighboring shelters have far superior adoption rates, so I have trouble believing they are just doing what they are told. PETA has defended itself vigorously on the matter, and what they say is that the animals are too far gone. Again, I believe this is probably untrue, AND, PETA has the money. It could certainly run a very expensive no-kill shelter if it chose to prioritize its funds that way.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. | |
04-01-2010, 12:14 PM | #38 |
Princess Poop A Lot Donating Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,728
| I really am going to sign off...I don't want to sit and make this into a PETA thread as I can see you will not get your answers from me. There is a lot more to all of this then just PETA.
__________________ Cindy & The Rescued Gang Puppies Are Not Products! |
04-01-2010, 12:15 PM | #39 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Also, no, he's not saying 17 million people lookng for a pet will adopt from shelters. He's saying that if we got even 20% of those people to adopt rather than buy, the shelter problem is eliminated. This seems attainable to me.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. |
04-01-2010, 12:17 PM | #40 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Well, I'm sorry to hear that you will not be posting more in this thread, because I am really interested in your input. Is it not possible for you to get answers from me? Isn't it possible that I am right about PETA's shelter, that it is serious, that's it's not just a misinformation campaign? And no, I don't just mean to make this about PETA. I'm hoping we can all learn something here, as well as inform.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. |
04-01-2010, 12:40 PM | #41 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Sorry if I'm getting too heated, obviously this is a topic near and dear to my heart. I know on controversial issues, people tend to get more firm about their beliefs and argue about the same things over and over. I'm really not wedded to one viewpoint here... I'm open. My hope is that we can learn something and maybe change our minds if it will help animals. That's a lot to ask for on an internet discussion, I know.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. |
04-01-2010, 04:33 PM | #42 |
Princess Poop A Lot Donating Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,728
| I didn't say I wouldn't post again but I DO NOT want this to be a PETA post... Here is a website that I agree with: Animal Advocates Society of BC | Dog Breeding Regulations - "Too Many Dogs" Why is there so much breeding of dogs? The major reason is easy, untraceable, untaxable money - Animal Advocates estimates, from scrutinizing some pet stock sections of the Sun and the Province newspapers, that there are dogs and puppies being offered for sale some weeks by private individuals to the value of $300,000. Further hundreds of thousands of dollars worth are being sold in pet stores. (In 1999, Animal Advocates Society submitted to many municipalities our report/proposal to improve the lives of puppies in pet stores, "Pups in Pet Stores - Legalized Cruelty".) Because dog breeding and reselling is entirely unregulated, it became a "cottage industry", a source of undeclared income, and often a supplement to welfare. See our investigative report "Breeding and Puppymills in BC". Because breeding is unregulated, abuse is endemic. To allow this is a betrayal of helpless dogs. Throughout the province of BC there are thousands of backyard casual breeders, puppymills and puppy resellers. No municipality is exempt. Puppy reselling is an issue that can and should be dealt with through business licensing, but standards need to be written. Currently there are no regulations, and reselling puppies in quantity has become a big business. Even in municipalities that have no actual puppymills (very few) there is casual backyard breeding where puppies are sold while too young, unhealthy, and unidentifiable. Puppy reselling — the importing and selling of puppymill pups — is also on the increase. The answer to the result of uncontrolled breeding — thousands of abandoned and unwanted dogs — is not just kinder pounds and ever more people trying to rehabilitate, retrain, and rehome all the abandoned, surrendered, and desocialized dogs that we show in our Investigative Report "No More Yard Dogs". Rescue and rehoming and kind pounds are the "feel good" solutions, but all these have the effect of "enabling" the breeders to escape their moral responsibility to the pups they breed and sell. Breeders could not escape their responsibility without all the kind "rehomers and rescuers" who take that responsibility for them. The breeders of unclaimed dogs in pounds could be fined, making the breeder responsible, if all pups had to be micochipped. The responsibility must be placed where it belongs for the problem to ever change. Breeding licenses that demand standards of care and identification, and are not cheap, will discourage many backyard and puppy mill breeders. Licensing breeders will also discourage backyard and puppy mill breeders because of the possibility that the income from the pups will be traceable. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The solution to "Too Many Dogs" First - why mandatory spay/neuter laws are not the solution Go to the website to read why mandatory spay/neuter is not the answer... It also has a link to the sled dog issue which few people know about...I believe many dogs suffer and die because of that hobby.
__________________ Cindy & The Rescued Gang Puppies Are Not Products! |
04-01-2010, 04:47 PM | #43 |
Princess Poop A Lot Donating Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,728
| Here is an article about the dogs being imported into the US. Since 2006 287,000 dogs have been imported but this is not just rescue dogs..this is all dogs that come in, including soldiers bringing home dogs. Nothing is ever black and white in the animal sellilng business. REBUTTAL TO SHELTER & RESCUE IMPORTS, by Karen Metcalf I don't know the ogranizations (I still have to do more research on this) to see how valid I believe they are but I do know MANY brokers/breeders are now calling their dogs rescue when clearly they are not. We have seen it before and it is only getting worse IMHO. I do know the Biewers were imported into the states are part of this number along with people getting Yorkies from Brazil, Hungary, Italy etc. All of these animals had to have health checkups before they could go through customs etc. I will do more research on the organizations listed.
__________________ Cindy & The Rescued Gang Puppies Are Not Products! |
04-01-2010, 05:32 PM | #44 | |
Donating Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,564
| Quote:
I think it's great that you've donated to help the animals in Haiti and I wouldn't be against bringing some here for adoption due to the situation there. I am against seeking to import dogs for shelter adoptions in the normal course of things, however. I know first-hand how the animals suffer during a disaster as I live in the impact area of Hurricane Katrina. It really was staggering....animals just wandering the streets with a lost look in their eyes, and not just strays. I saw quite a few obviously well cared for pure breds wandering aimlessly. If it wasn't for outside groups, many more animals would have suffered and it was bad enough as it was. So, hats off to you for remembering the Haitian animals. Gosh, I missed quite a few posts due to company coming over. After reading through them, I'll just comment that even though the HSUS and PETA are certainly the most well-funded groups, people shouldn't look to them for solutions. I don't think their missions are to get down to the nuts and bolts of solving this problem. My own opinion is that both these groups are squandering money for uses other than what was intended by many donors. Actually, the truth may be that many local shelters aren't doing all they can with THEIR resources and I think that deserves more attention. To focus on PETA and HSUS really sidetracks from what is a local issue multiplied many times over nationwide. Also, local in the sense that every region has unique circumstances and national in the sense that there are common problems with common solutions. Back to the disaster scenario. I saw what can be done after Katrina when shelters co-operate and network. It's amazing what can be done when people put their minds to it. Maybe the solutions are already in front of our faces but we only put them to use when a disaster strikes. The rest of the time it seems like business as usual...which overall is a failure. I REALLY need to get Winograd's books, but from what I've read from him so far leads me to think he's on the right track. His is a voice that needs to be heard.
__________________ ORANGUTANS ARE DYING FOR THE SAKE OF CHEAP PALM OIL....AND YOU USE IT!!! http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/ani...m-oil-you.html | |
04-01-2010, 05:43 PM | #45 |
Thor's Human Donating Member | Okay, I guess most of my posts did end up being about the Group Who Must Not Be Named. I'll stop that. However, with regard to HSUS, apparently, most shelters follow their written guidelines, so I do think they are a piece of this puzzle. Winograd lives in SF (so do I), so I will be looking more into if this is a valid movement, and if so, if I can help on the local level. For some reason, I feel like I can really get my teeth into this issue and maybe make a real difference. One of the things that confused me is that Winograd said that SF was on its way to becoming the first no-kill community in the US -- and then, he's very vague on why it did not, except to blame his usual targets. I guess one thing that makes me nervous it that he basically wants an unfunded mandate on shelter care (California's a big fan of those!). Basically, we make it a law that you cannot euthanize a healthy animal. I would love to see that happen in practice, but I don't know that I believe it should be a law, unless we explicitly say how we plan to pay for it.
__________________ If you love something, set it free. Unless it's an angry tiger. Last edited by QuickSilver; 04-01-2010 at 05:46 PM. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Thread Tools | |
| |
|
|
SHOP NOW: Amazon :: eBay :: Buy.com :: Newegg :: PetStore :: Petco :: PetSmart