Linda Brink Writes: As much as I deplore the ASPCA action--and truly, I hate what they did--I have a hard time ever mounting a campaign against any animal rescue organization if that organization is doing any good at all--and the ASPCA does do some good. When animal activists attack animal rescue groups who do some legitimately good work, it splits the forces...... Use what happened to Oreo to highlight the real issue, not the failings of the ASPCA. The failings are a symptom. The issue is the disease.Reply: With all due respect, there are major holes in your argument.
You say, "The ASPCA does some good." You speak about the ASPCA as if it were some tiny animal rescue group operating on a shoe string budget.
In reality, the ASPCA soaks up MOST of the donation dollars of the entire animal welfare, rights and even rescue movement. We are talking of an organization that has raised 30 million dollars from ONE commercial!
The question needs to be asked, "What is the ASPCA doing with all those millions of dollars?" (Obviously, SOME good has to arise!)
In many ways, the ASPCA has sold out the very animals it portends to speak for, "Oreo" being only one sad example -- a "symbol" so to speak of the whole.
Yesterday, I wrote about the ASPCA's long, sordid history of killing and then blaming the animal victims for their own executions. "Most of the animals are old, sick or vicious." This is obviously the tactic the ASPCA used to justify the destruction of Oreo. ("She was aggressive.")
You seem to think that the public will come to some sort of enlightenment on its own.
Why should it?
The ASPCA has been putting out the message for years now that, "New York City is on the road to no kill." Many people interpret that message to mean NYC is "no kill" now.
There is no sense of public URGENCY to help save strays or shelter animals or, quite frankly, for the public to neuter its own pets as most people believe all pet related problems have been solved. Many otherwise animals lovers now buy pets from pet stores or breeders rather than adopt as they believe that the only animals "euthanized" in shelters are "old, sick or vicious."
Complacency and naivete are major parts of the "disease" you speak about. And the ASPCA has been one of the biggest contributors to that disease of misinformation and denial.
How can NYC be "on the road to no kill" when we don't even have ONE fully functioning and humane Animal Control shelter in the entire city? Does anyone think to ask that the ASPCA donate some of its millions to help build ONE state of the art, Animal Control shelter in NYC?
The ASPCA will of course argue that it is a "National" organization whose agenda isn't NYC "stray" cats and dogs. But, what exactly has the ASPCA achieved on behalf of animals suffering nationwide? Has it launched a nationwide media campaign against puppy mills or factory farms? Has it focused on the national epidemic of dog fighting and the breeding, abuse and abandonment of Pitbulls?
One is hard pressed to come up with one major achievement for animals by the ASPCA, other than its Spay/Neuter van. -- And that doesn't cost 100 million dollars.
Finally, you speak about "splitting the forces." But, it seems from the messages I have read it is you who is being somewhat divisive in defending the ASPCA. The rest of us seem to be on the same page in agreeing that some action needs to be taken to insure that what happened to Oreo does not occur again to some other hapless animal under the ASPCA's control and "care."
As for the ASPCA signing its letter to concerned citizens with, "Public Information Department" rather than an actual name, I think that seems to show its utter disdain and arrogance towards those who were distraught by the needless death of Oreo. -- Either that or those at the ASPCA are ashamed of their own letter, as no one seemingly wants to take the responsibility (or blame) for it. --- PCA
********
3 comments:
A high visibility organization with the massive funding and community standing of the ASPCA has a responsibility to set an example. By killing Oreo, the example they set is that it's ok to put down pitbulls because they are vicious and can not be rehabilitated. The average person knows nothing about this breed except what they hear on the news. They think all pits are dangerous and should be put down. The ASPCA has done nothing but re-affirm that misconception. People are the problem, not the pitties.
I know from experience that pitbulls can be very loving and loyal animals, despite the widespread public misconception about the breed. Although most pitbulls end up being put down at the shelters, those who are lucky enough to be rescued can make wonderful companions. We rescued one recently, who was obedient, loving, and sensitive, even moreso than my own 2 dogs who are not pits. All he wanted was human attention and affection. He was fortunate enough to be given the chance to live. Responsible pitbull ownership can go a long way in helping to change the unfair stigma associated with this breed. Shame on us for what we have done to these dogs.
Post a Comment