Kennel where Biden bought puppy is cited
Monday, December 15, 2008, 9:44 PM
By Amy Worden, Philadelphia Inquirer, Commonwealth Confidential
http://tinyurl.com/55k8z7
The state Department of Agriculture has issued citations to the owner of the Chester County kennel where Vice President-elect Joe Biden recently bought a puppy.
In a kennel inspection report posted online Monday night Linda Brown, owner of Wolf Den kennel, was cited for violating the dog law for failing to provide records for dogs purchased or sold and failing to produce complete rabies vaccination records for her adult dogs.
Rabies vaccinations are required for all dogs over three months of age.
Dog wardens also found a strong ammonia smell inside the house where a number of dogs are housed, and broken wires and piping in several outdoor kennel areas. As a result they issued warnings for maintenance and sanitation and will conduct a follow up inspection in the near future, the report said.
Brown could face fines of up to $500 for each citation. It was the kennel's first negative inspection report in five years.
Brown, of Spring City, who also operates as Jolindy's German Shepherds, holds a commercial kennel license that allows her to keep more than 250 dogs. She had 84 dogs on the property when the inspection took place on Dec. 10.
Biden bought the six-week-old male German Shepherd puppy from the kennel earlier this month.
Five warnings, two citations issued four days after Biden paid her a visit on December 6 to buy his puppy! Remarks from the actual PA kennel inspection report are below.
WOLF DEN KENNEL
723 SAYLORS MILL
SPRING CITY PA 19475
610-495-7247 (Business)
Inspection of kennel took place on December 10, 2008. A total of 85 dogs were located on the premises at the time of inspection. Kennel owner was unable to produce the Bureau's 2008 kennel license for verification, however, Warden Orlando Aguirre verified said license through Bureau's database. Inspection was performed with Kathy Andrews.
The inspection of Wednesday, December 10, 2008 is as follows:
21.21(a) - Maintenance
There were several broken wires in the outside kennel area. Also, outside fencing near entrance of kennel had broken piping. In the house there was a medium-sized hole approximately 14" x 6".
*Warning Issued
21.26 – Ventilation
There was a significant smell of ammonia present within the kennel that was not present at the prior inspection. Warden Andrews attributes the increase of ammonia to the house's windows and doors being closed during the winter months.
*Warning Issued
21.29(b) – Sanitation
There was an accumulation of dog hair/dog food underneath the piping in primary enclosures within the house.
*Warning Issued
21.29(c) – Housekeeping/pests
Several open bags as well as numerous cobwebs were noted throughout the barn where dogs were housed.
*Warning Issued
21.41(a) – Records Kept
Kennel owner did not possess all records for dogs sold/boarded/adopted/ transferred/returned to owner during the 2008 calendar year. Numerous records possessed by kennel owner failed to contain the complete name and address of where dogs went.
Kennel owner must keep all records for dogs sold/boarded/adopted/ transferred/returned to owner during the 2008 calendar year. Kennel owners must go through her records and complete name and address portions of said records thereby indentifying where and to whom dogs went.
*Citation to follow
21.42 – Bill of Sale
Bills of sale were not available for this warden's review.
*Warning Issued
455.8 – Rabies Vaccination
Rabies vaccination records were not available for review upon this warden's inspection. Despite anindication by kennel owner that all dogs on the premises that were 3 months and older were vaccination for rabies, kennel owner was unable to produce all records on the date of this inspection. Kennel owner was advised she had 48 hours to produce said records.
*Citation to follow
Recheck to be done. As of the filing of this inspection report, kennel owner had not produced all records for rabies.
Citation Issued on 12/10/2008 by Warden Orlando Aguirre
-----
As a sidenote, a recent visitor to these kennels described:
"When I was there she had dogs living outside in igloos and a large side building wrapped in blue plastic... the barking was deafening.... her inspection report states approximately 100 breeding dogs... she sold more than 275 dogs in 2006.....it was a stupid move on Biden's part... a puppy mill, for sure. "
*****
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
THE SHAME AND HYPOCRISY OF OUR NATION'S LEADERS
Forwarded Mail:Have you heard the bad news that Vice President-elect Joe Biden bought a dog from a breeder rather than adopting one from a shelter? UGH times a gazillion! However, since he is not picking up the dog for a month, we have a chance to change his mind.
President-elect Obama is featured in a book, A Rare Breed of Love, with Baby, an abused 3-legged survivor of the dog breeding industry. Here, Barack pledges his support to stop the cruelty of the dog breeding world and to promote the adoption of the 4-5 million shelter dogs who are euthanized each year. With the Biden's purchase, rather than an adoption, the dog breeding industry will only be emboldened to continue to fuel the pet overpopulation epidemic. It will also perpetuate the horrific cruelty at puppy mills by increasing the demand for the kind of dog the Bidens bought.
In case you've heard that the American Kennel Club (AKC) approves of the breeder the Biden's chose, please know that the AKC are the bad guys. They are “the front” for the puppy mill industry as well as all breeders who breed irresponsibly. The AKC's spin that they only endorse "humane breeders" is a patent lie. Moreover, "humane breeder" is a contradiction in terms given that millions of loving, adoptable dogs are dragged to the gas chambers every day precisely because breeders continue to flood the market with new puppies, just like the one the Bidens bought.
WHAT WE CAN DO:
Please e-mail Vice President-elect Biden at http://change.gov/page/s/yourvision to firmly, yet politely ask him to cancel his purchase and adopt from a shelter instead. Feel free to include some or all of the following talking points:
1) By buying a dog from a breeder, VP-elect Biden is supporting cruel puppy mills. The puppy shown to them may look cute, but the unseen victims are all the mother dogs who are forced to live their entire lives in tiny cages without exercise, socialization, proper vet care, and of course, ever being part of a family.
2) Let VP-elect Biden know it costs taxpayers $2 billion a year to round up, shelter, and euthanize 4-5 million homeless dogs. By adopting, he will set a national example that would be a win-win for homeless dogs and Americans who are looking to put more money in their pockets.
3) In A Rare Breed of Love, President-elect Obama pledges his support to protect the millions of innocent animals who are brutalized 24 hours a day by the puppy mill industry by helping to shut them down and promote adoption. Why isn't VP-elect Biden upholding this pledge?
4) Since the buying habits of our leaders and celebrities are, sadly, imitated by millions, remind VP-elect Biden that he has a golden opportunity to set a humane example. All he has to do is cancel his purchase and have a big ol’ press conference at a shelter!
As always, thank you for speaking up for those who can’t,
Mary
PERSONAL COMMENT:
President-elect Obama is featured in a book, A Rare Breed of Love, with Baby, an abused 3-legged survivor of the dog breeding industry. Here, Barack pledges his support to stop the cruelty of the dog breeding world and to promote the adoption of the 4-5 million shelter dogs who are euthanized each year. With the Biden's purchase, rather than an adoption, the dog breeding industry will only be emboldened to continue to fuel the pet overpopulation epidemic. It will also perpetuate the horrific cruelty at puppy mills by increasing the demand for the kind of dog the Bidens bought.
In case you've heard that the American Kennel Club (AKC) approves of the breeder the Biden's chose, please know that the AKC are the bad guys. They are “the front” for the puppy mill industry as well as all breeders who breed irresponsibly. The AKC's spin that they only endorse "humane breeders" is a patent lie. Moreover, "humane breeder" is a contradiction in terms given that millions of loving, adoptable dogs are dragged to the gas chambers every day precisely because breeders continue to flood the market with new puppies, just like the one the Bidens bought.
WHAT WE CAN DO:
Please e-mail Vice President-elect Biden at http://change.gov/page/s/yourvision to firmly, yet politely ask him to cancel his purchase and adopt from a shelter instead. Feel free to include some or all of the following talking points:
1) By buying a dog from a breeder, VP-elect Biden is supporting cruel puppy mills. The puppy shown to them may look cute, but the unseen victims are all the mother dogs who are forced to live their entire lives in tiny cages without exercise, socialization, proper vet care, and of course, ever being part of a family.
2) Let VP-elect Biden know it costs taxpayers $2 billion a year to round up, shelter, and euthanize 4-5 million homeless dogs. By adopting, he will set a national example that would be a win-win for homeless dogs and Americans who are looking to put more money in their pockets.
3) In A Rare Breed of Love, President-elect Obama pledges his support to protect the millions of innocent animals who are brutalized 24 hours a day by the puppy mill industry by helping to shut them down and promote adoption. Why isn't VP-elect Biden upholding this pledge?
4) Since the buying habits of our leaders and celebrities are, sadly, imitated by millions, remind VP-elect Biden that he has a golden opportunity to set a humane example. All he has to do is cancel his purchase and have a big ol’ press conference at a shelter!
As always, thank you for speaking up for those who can’t,
Mary
PERSONAL COMMENT:
Better than emailing, it is more important to CALL Biden's Washington office:
(202) 224-5042
Obama and Biden are role models for millions of people in this country who voted for this ticket with the belief that these men cared about the downtrodden and exploited.
The buying of dogs from breeders sends a ghastly message that rescued and shelter animals are not good enough for our nation's so-called, "elite." But, more important, it is a message of blatent hypocrisy.
Joe Biden "rides the train to work" everyday -- but buys his animals from breeders. Obama and Biden pretended to care about injustice and important social issues, but at least to this point, Biden's action betray that claim.
Millions of adoptable animals are killed in shelters every year simply because they have NO HOME TO GO TO.
Why couldn't Biden offer a home to one of these condemned animals? The puppy pictured on the news yesterday, appears to be a German Shepherd. Following Pitbulls and Rottweilers, German Shepherds and Shepherd mixes are among the most common dogs to go down in shelters.
We might expect such ignorant and uncaring action to come from Sarah Palin, but not Joe Biden.
The action is disgraceful to the platform and claims of the Democratic party. It smacks of pure pretense, elitism and hypocrisy.
Oprah Wimprey recently did a show exposing the horrors of overbreeding in this country and the deaths of millions of animals in shelters. She begged her viewers to ADOPT animals from shelters, rather than buy.
Oprah passionately supported Barack Obama.
The purchasing of a dog from a breeder completely undermines all that we are trying to accomplish in animal shelters and rescue.
Unless we who care about animals act quicky and strongly on this in terms of speaking out and calling the Senator's office, we can expect Barack Obama to do the same as Biden -- buy a puppy from a breeder.
That is extremely bad news for animals across the board. More will die in shelters. And more will be continue to be abused via the breeding industry.
PLEASE MAKE THIS IMPORTANT CALL TODAY. (202) 224-5042. PLEASE SPEAK FOR THE MILLIONS OF ANIMALS DYING IN PUPPY MILLS, SHELTERS AND THROUGH THE ABUSES OF BACKYARD BREEDERS AND PET SHOPS ! ---PCA
****
Monday, December 15, 2008
The Ultimate Christmas Wish
(Picture Left: Carrie and Julie. Julie is a sweet, Austrailian Kelpie mix who was on Euth list at shelter for failure to be adopted in less than a week. Fortunately, for Julie, Carrie was willing and able to take in a second, "Eleventh Hour dog." That only there were no more "eleventh hours" for all the others we can't get to in time.)
Ah, ten days before Christmas.
Like everyone else, animal rescuers usually find themselves in a mad rush before the holidays, but, not so much in traveling or family plans, but rather acknowledgment of those who have supported the organization over the past year, either through contributions or adoption.
Try as we may though, we know we don't get to everyone.
"Support" comes in many ways. The most obvious is financial donation, but just as important (or even more so) are those people who have fostered animals over the year or who have adopted a cat or dog.
All three are necessary for an organization or rescue group to be "successful" and continue to be able to responsibly rescue, care for and place animals.
These days, rescue has become more and more expensive and challenging.
Unlike past decades when animals were offered to the public "as is" with little or no information known about the pets and little attention paid to the animals' medical needs, these days shelters and animal rescuers are not only expected to "know" everything about a particular animal, but also to be able to predict how animals will behave in individual homes and take care of all the animals' medical needs prior to adoption, including neutering.
Adopters seemingly are only required to know what they want.
As covered in previous entries, what people "want" and what is actually good for them can be two very different things.
I have many people to be grateful to for helping to get the organization and me through what has been a pretty tough year for the animals.
The current economic crisis is impacting negatively upon all animal shelters and shelters in turn, place more pressure on rescues to take animals.
But, rescues can only take animals according to the availability of open foster homes or their means to pay high boarding expenses. Additionally, they have to be able to place/adopt out animals at a pretty fast pace in order to take in new ones.
Most rescues -- especially cat rescues -- are completely "maxed out" at this point.
But, still there are all those kind and generous people who have supported, one way or the other over the year.
They need to be acknowledged, thanked and updated, particularly at the end of the year.
I am quite busy right now in trying to get out a year-end newsletter, send out Christmas cards and figuring out acknowledgements or gifts to those who have been particularly helpful in fostering -- indeed, the lifeblood of any rescue group. Without fosters, it is virtually impossible to do rescue in any appreciable numbers. On the contrary, there is too much danger of some rescuers taking in too many animals as individuals and dancing with the line of eventually becoming "collectors."
Certainly that danger is one that every animal rescuer has to face and be always acutely aware. One has to lean how to draw lines and learn when and how to say, "no."
I in fact, had to say "no" to a fellow rescuer last week who was in a dire emergency situation when one her fosters suddenly bailed on three cats. "Jane" (not her real name) begged me to take in the three cats. I told her I could not bring in more cats to my home even on a temporary basis, but was willing to help her with boarding costs.
I am not sure what Jane ultimately decided (hopefully she found other people to take in the cats). I felt terrible saying "no" to a friend and colleague, but I had to. There was no other choice. I am at my limit in terms of animals in my home.
I hope in writing this journal that more people are inspired to help in hands-on ways. While this journal focuses on the animal overpopulation and abandonment problems in New York City, it could be written from Anywhere, USA, as the animal situations are pretty much the same in all large cities and indeed, the smaller communities throughout our land.
All rescues need fosters. All shelters and rescues need donations. And of course, we all strive for the all important adoptions.
But, ultimately, our "dream" is that there would come a day when we no longer receive the "dire emergency" ("Please take in these animals!") 11 th hour phone calls and "Euthanasia Alerts" on our computers everyday.
Rescue itself will never "go out of business," because there will always be need to help those animals whose owners have fallen on particularly desperate times or those animals struggling, breeding and dying on our streets.
It's just the 11 th hour, "do or die" nature of these events that is so troubling and ultimately defeating and depressing. - That and the lack of places to send animals on such short, "make or break" notice.
If only the availability of rescues, fosters and resources was able to meet the demands for these services, oh, what a wonderful world it would be!
That is my ultimate Christmas wish: A day when there was no "Euthanasia List." -- A day when no loving cat or dog would die for simple lack of a place to go. --- PCA
**********
Like everyone else, animal rescuers usually find themselves in a mad rush before the holidays, but, not so much in traveling or family plans, but rather acknowledgment of those who have supported the organization over the past year, either through contributions or adoption.
Try as we may though, we know we don't get to everyone.
"Support" comes in many ways. The most obvious is financial donation, but just as important (or even more so) are those people who have fostered animals over the year or who have adopted a cat or dog.
All three are necessary for an organization or rescue group to be "successful" and continue to be able to responsibly rescue, care for and place animals.
These days, rescue has become more and more expensive and challenging.
Unlike past decades when animals were offered to the public "as is" with little or no information known about the pets and little attention paid to the animals' medical needs, these days shelters and animal rescuers are not only expected to "know" everything about a particular animal, but also to be able to predict how animals will behave in individual homes and take care of all the animals' medical needs prior to adoption, including neutering.
Adopters seemingly are only required to know what they want.
As covered in previous entries, what people "want" and what is actually good for them can be two very different things.
I have many people to be grateful to for helping to get the organization and me through what has been a pretty tough year for the animals.
The current economic crisis is impacting negatively upon all animal shelters and shelters in turn, place more pressure on rescues to take animals.
But, rescues can only take animals according to the availability of open foster homes or their means to pay high boarding expenses. Additionally, they have to be able to place/adopt out animals at a pretty fast pace in order to take in new ones.
Most rescues -- especially cat rescues -- are completely "maxed out" at this point.
But, still there are all those kind and generous people who have supported, one way or the other over the year.
They need to be acknowledged, thanked and updated, particularly at the end of the year.
I am quite busy right now in trying to get out a year-end newsletter, send out Christmas cards and figuring out acknowledgements or gifts to those who have been particularly helpful in fostering -- indeed, the lifeblood of any rescue group. Without fosters, it is virtually impossible to do rescue in any appreciable numbers. On the contrary, there is too much danger of some rescuers taking in too many animals as individuals and dancing with the line of eventually becoming "collectors."
Certainly that danger is one that every animal rescuer has to face and be always acutely aware. One has to lean how to draw lines and learn when and how to say, "no."
I in fact, had to say "no" to a fellow rescuer last week who was in a dire emergency situation when one her fosters suddenly bailed on three cats. "Jane" (not her real name) begged me to take in the three cats. I told her I could not bring in more cats to my home even on a temporary basis, but was willing to help her with boarding costs.
I am not sure what Jane ultimately decided (hopefully she found other people to take in the cats). I felt terrible saying "no" to a friend and colleague, but I had to. There was no other choice. I am at my limit in terms of animals in my home.
I hope in writing this journal that more people are inspired to help in hands-on ways. While this journal focuses on the animal overpopulation and abandonment problems in New York City, it could be written from Anywhere, USA, as the animal situations are pretty much the same in all large cities and indeed, the smaller communities throughout our land.
All rescues need fosters. All shelters and rescues need donations. And of course, we all strive for the all important adoptions.
But, ultimately, our "dream" is that there would come a day when we no longer receive the "dire emergency" ("Please take in these animals!") 11 th hour phone calls and "Euthanasia Alerts" on our computers everyday.
Rescue itself will never "go out of business," because there will always be need to help those animals whose owners have fallen on particularly desperate times or those animals struggling, breeding and dying on our streets.
It's just the 11 th hour, "do or die" nature of these events that is so troubling and ultimately defeating and depressing. - That and the lack of places to send animals on such short, "make or break" notice.
If only the availability of rescues, fosters and resources was able to meet the demands for these services, oh, what a wonderful world it would be!
That is my ultimate Christmas wish: A day when there was no "Euthanasia List." -- A day when no loving cat or dog would die for simple lack of a place to go. --- PCA
**********
Friday, December 12, 2008
"Be Careful of What You Wish For...."
(Picture Left: "Lady" -- Our latest rescue. Wonderful, fully trained and affectionate Mastiff mix. Great with kids and cats. But, will be a hard adoption due to size and age -- about 7 years.)Good news on Goldie, our Cocker Spaniel. She is doing wonderfully in her new home. Goldie is happy, as is her new family with her.
But, as noted the other day, that is an adoption we really had to "work" for.
In the end, common sense prevailed and rather than worry about unforeseen or possible events due to Goldie's "age," the people opted to make the sensible and right choice in adoption.
But, too often those seeking animals are searching on superficial or unrealistic basis.
There is usually much emphasis on "breed" type, age, size or looks of the animal, rather than what dog or cat would be the right animal for the particular situation.
For example, many dog seekers with small children or cats in the home fail to mention these important facts to the adoption agency they are calling. Or, they fail to mention they have long work schedules or live with roommates.
They will however, communicate what type or breed of dog they are seeking, as well as the age and size the dog should be.
But, adoption failures often occur when an animal who may fit the breed, size and age the people seek goes into a home to which the animal is ill fitted and prepared.
An example of this is a call I received a few weeks ago:
The gentleman told me that he and his family had gone to their local shelter and adopted a purebred Yorkshire Terrier.
The dog had arrived at the shelter after "his owner died."
Meanwhile, this dog (who can be presumed to have formerly lived with an elderly person) was placed into a home with small, active children.
The man told me the little dog was terrified of, growling at and trying to bite the children in the home. The dog seemed to be only comfortable with him and spent most of his time with the husband, cowering from and running away from the children and even the wife.
The parents didn't know what to do as the adoption clearly was not working.
I told the man this was a poor adoption choice as the dog was not accustomed to being in a noisy, active home with children and his "adjustment" to such would require a great deal of time, patience and understanding on the part of the adopters and probably some help from a trainer.
The alternative was to return the dog to the shelter where the little Yorkie might be more suitably placed and instead seek a bigger, perhaps younger dog who was more comfortable with kids. -- A Lab mix for example.
Many parents of young children are in fact, frustrated and dismayed that many rescue groups and some shelters generally are reluctant to place small dogs into homes with young children.
The above scenario is the main reason why.
Too often the little dogs have come from quiet homes where they formerly lived with one person -- usually a senior citizen. The adjustment to a drastically different situation is often too much for them to contend with. Add to that the fact that many small dogs are generally more "nervous" and easily threatened than larger dogs and you have a recipe for disaster should the dogs be inappropriately placed.
Goldie was the exception to the rule. But, in Goldie's case, I had information from former owners that Goldie "loved kids" and it was obvious from the start that Goldie was a very well socialized dog who seemed to love everyone she met. She had no obvious "issues" or fears.
Another area where people often run into trouble "getting what they wish for" is in the insistence and choice for very young dogs.
Often there is the expectation that puppies or young dogs will behave like adults.
But, that's like expecting human babies to be born toilet trained.
Young dogs are young dogs and behave in many ways, like human children.
They are active, often "disobedient" and rebellious and can often run havoc in an otherwise, quiet, peaceful home.
Unless exercised properly and enough, a young dog's energy can be unleashed in the home where it can result in excess barking or destructive behaviors a la, "Marley and Me."
And while the antics of Marley to his owners might make for humorous reading or a comedy movie, one can presume they weren't so "funny" to the people while they were occurring.
Fortunately, for Marley, his owners kept him.
But, in too many cases, young dogs wind up being abandoned to pounds and streets after they chew up the couch or tear through a door.
What the owners don't seem to understand is that one cannot expect a puppy or adolescent dog to behave like a mature and already trained dog.
Then there are the people who don't seem to know what they want.
A few days ago, I fostered out an older, (about 7 years) already trained Shepherd/Samoyed mix ("Teddy) to a young, married couple with a cat.
Teddy is good around cats so that wasn't a problem.
But, apparently in a past home, his former owners allowed Teddy to sleep on the couch.
When he settled down on the young couple's fruton (which they didn't want) and the husband attempted to yank Teddy down, the dog snapped at him.
They returned Teddy the following day not so much for the fruton incident, but more so, because the young man explained that they really want a younger dog.
I showed the couple a couple of young dogs we have for adoption, but they felt they couldn't deal with the energy of the overly exuberant pups.
The young man now tells me they want a dog "about 4-years-old" or another cat.
I am not sure what they really want.
The couple's cat is going to be "stressed out" no matter what new animal they bring in.
The bottom line to all this is that there really is no such thing as the "perfect" adoption.
All animals are going to present with certain challenges, "positives" and "negatives."
The advantage of senior pet adoptions is that the animals are almost always trained, generally easier to deal with in terms of energy levels and needs and they more easily fit into working situations or city apartments.
The disadvantages are yes, the animal probably won't live as long as a younger one and some animals can be stubborn or set in their ways (as Teddy jumping on and sleeping on a fruton).
Chance, my older Pomeranian, for example, was apparently never allowed to go on furniture in his former home and though I welcome him to sleep on the couch or bed in my home, chooses nevertheless to always sleep on the floor. It's apparently what Chance is comfortable with and accustomed to so I just let the situation be. (Tina, my other dog sleeps with me anyway.)
While one can still "teach old dogs new tricks," it takes time to reverse the conditioning that many dogs have grown up with and incorporated into their psyches. One doesn't accomplish those things in a few hours or a day.
The advantages of adopting younger animals are that one can more easily "shape" the animal in terms of the dynamics of the home (i.e. children, other pets, etc.) and that the pet will most likely live longer.
But, the disadvantages, as previously noted, are the "shaping" itself -- which in almost all cases, involves training. Additionally, the exercise and chewing needs, particularly of puppies and adolescent dogs are usually a significant challenge to most people. One needs a great deal of time and patience when dealing with young dogs.
So, yes, there is no such thing as the perfect adoption, but there can be the sensible adoptions that in the end, almost always work out.
If only people would put aside the superficial demands, "wishes" and concerns for breed, size, looks and to some degree, age and seek more the animal that is appropriate for their situation.
As the old saying goes: "Be careful of what you wish for. You just might get it." -- PCA
But, as noted the other day, that is an adoption we really had to "work" for.
In the end, common sense prevailed and rather than worry about unforeseen or possible events due to Goldie's "age," the people opted to make the sensible and right choice in adoption.
But, too often those seeking animals are searching on superficial or unrealistic basis.
There is usually much emphasis on "breed" type, age, size or looks of the animal, rather than what dog or cat would be the right animal for the particular situation.
For example, many dog seekers with small children or cats in the home fail to mention these important facts to the adoption agency they are calling. Or, they fail to mention they have long work schedules or live with roommates.
They will however, communicate what type or breed of dog they are seeking, as well as the age and size the dog should be.
But, adoption failures often occur when an animal who may fit the breed, size and age the people seek goes into a home to which the animal is ill fitted and prepared.
An example of this is a call I received a few weeks ago:
The gentleman told me that he and his family had gone to their local shelter and adopted a purebred Yorkshire Terrier.
The dog had arrived at the shelter after "his owner died."
Meanwhile, this dog (who can be presumed to have formerly lived with an elderly person) was placed into a home with small, active children.
The man told me the little dog was terrified of, growling at and trying to bite the children in the home. The dog seemed to be only comfortable with him and spent most of his time with the husband, cowering from and running away from the children and even the wife.
The parents didn't know what to do as the adoption clearly was not working.
I told the man this was a poor adoption choice as the dog was not accustomed to being in a noisy, active home with children and his "adjustment" to such would require a great deal of time, patience and understanding on the part of the adopters and probably some help from a trainer.
The alternative was to return the dog to the shelter where the little Yorkie might be more suitably placed and instead seek a bigger, perhaps younger dog who was more comfortable with kids. -- A Lab mix for example.
Many parents of young children are in fact, frustrated and dismayed that many rescue groups and some shelters generally are reluctant to place small dogs into homes with young children.
The above scenario is the main reason why.
Too often the little dogs have come from quiet homes where they formerly lived with one person -- usually a senior citizen. The adjustment to a drastically different situation is often too much for them to contend with. Add to that the fact that many small dogs are generally more "nervous" and easily threatened than larger dogs and you have a recipe for disaster should the dogs be inappropriately placed.
Goldie was the exception to the rule. But, in Goldie's case, I had information from former owners that Goldie "loved kids" and it was obvious from the start that Goldie was a very well socialized dog who seemed to love everyone she met. She had no obvious "issues" or fears.
Another area where people often run into trouble "getting what they wish for" is in the insistence and choice for very young dogs.
Often there is the expectation that puppies or young dogs will behave like adults.
But, that's like expecting human babies to be born toilet trained.
Young dogs are young dogs and behave in many ways, like human children.
They are active, often "disobedient" and rebellious and can often run havoc in an otherwise, quiet, peaceful home.
Unless exercised properly and enough, a young dog's energy can be unleashed in the home where it can result in excess barking or destructive behaviors a la, "Marley and Me."
And while the antics of Marley to his owners might make for humorous reading or a comedy movie, one can presume they weren't so "funny" to the people while they were occurring.
Fortunately, for Marley, his owners kept him.
But, in too many cases, young dogs wind up being abandoned to pounds and streets after they chew up the couch or tear through a door.
What the owners don't seem to understand is that one cannot expect a puppy or adolescent dog to behave like a mature and already trained dog.
Then there are the people who don't seem to know what they want.
A few days ago, I fostered out an older, (about 7 years) already trained Shepherd/Samoyed mix ("Teddy) to a young, married couple with a cat.
Teddy is good around cats so that wasn't a problem.
But, apparently in a past home, his former owners allowed Teddy to sleep on the couch.
When he settled down on the young couple's fruton (which they didn't want) and the husband attempted to yank Teddy down, the dog snapped at him.
They returned Teddy the following day not so much for the fruton incident, but more so, because the young man explained that they really want a younger dog.
I showed the couple a couple of young dogs we have for adoption, but they felt they couldn't deal with the energy of the overly exuberant pups.
The young man now tells me they want a dog "about 4-years-old" or another cat.
I am not sure what they really want.
The couple's cat is going to be "stressed out" no matter what new animal they bring in.
The bottom line to all this is that there really is no such thing as the "perfect" adoption.
All animals are going to present with certain challenges, "positives" and "negatives."
The advantage of senior pet adoptions is that the animals are almost always trained, generally easier to deal with in terms of energy levels and needs and they more easily fit into working situations or city apartments.
The disadvantages are yes, the animal probably won't live as long as a younger one and some animals can be stubborn or set in their ways (as Teddy jumping on and sleeping on a fruton).
Chance, my older Pomeranian, for example, was apparently never allowed to go on furniture in his former home and though I welcome him to sleep on the couch or bed in my home, chooses nevertheless to always sleep on the floor. It's apparently what Chance is comfortable with and accustomed to so I just let the situation be. (Tina, my other dog sleeps with me anyway.)
While one can still "teach old dogs new tricks," it takes time to reverse the conditioning that many dogs have grown up with and incorporated into their psyches. One doesn't accomplish those things in a few hours or a day.
The advantages of adopting younger animals are that one can more easily "shape" the animal in terms of the dynamics of the home (i.e. children, other pets, etc.) and that the pet will most likely live longer.
But, the disadvantages, as previously noted, are the "shaping" itself -- which in almost all cases, involves training. Additionally, the exercise and chewing needs, particularly of puppies and adolescent dogs are usually a significant challenge to most people. One needs a great deal of time and patience when dealing with young dogs.
So, yes, there is no such thing as the perfect adoption, but there can be the sensible adoptions that in the end, almost always work out.
If only people would put aside the superficial demands, "wishes" and concerns for breed, size, looks and to some degree, age and seek more the animal that is appropriate for their situation.
As the old saying goes: "Be careful of what you wish for. You just might get it." -- PCA
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The Greatest "High"
(Picture Left: "Goldie" -- Happy at last!)Goldie, our older and very socialized Cocker Spaniel was finally adopted yesterday morning. As a result of her adoption, in addition to Lady's placement last week, we were able to rescue two new dogs from the shelter yesterday. But, more about that later.......
Despite being a healthy, happy, frisky and extremely loving and gentle purebred dog, Goldie was nevertheless a tough adoption. I had to keep her in boarding for more than three weeks.
What was the "problem?"
Apparently, Goldie's age.
She was somewhere between 7 and 10 years of age. (It said "10 years" on Goldie's shelter record and anything in the double digits represents problems in trying to place.)
In fact, I was speaking with Goldie's ultimate adopter for more than a week. The woman's biggest concern was Goldie's age.
"I would hate to adopt a dog that might get sick or die. That would be devastating to my kids," Donna said to me.
And no, I could not lie to the woman and promise that Goldie would live ten or fifteen years.
But, I could easily see Goldie going another 5 to 8 years.
By that time, Donna's kids would be in college.
Donna and I had several, rather long conversations about Goldie.
The family had been seeking a Cocker Spaniel for some time. (Donna grew up with one.) To their credit, they did not want to purchase a dog, but instead wanted to adopt from a shelter or rescue. They wanted to help save a dog.
But, the reality is, that most smaller dogs that come to shelters or rescues, are, in fact, older.
Like declawed cats, it is rare that people would spend a great deal of money to purchase (or declaw) an animal and then dump the pet a few months or even a couple of years later. That is, unless the animal has very serious medical or behavioral problems. For example, there was an adorable, purebred 4-month-old Shih Tzu puppy at the shelter the other day. The puppy was brought in by people who "couldn't afford" to have their pet treated for a case of Mange. (One wonders of course, how the people could "afford" to buy an expensive Shih-Tzu puppy in the first place -- unless, of course the puppy was a "gift" from someone else.)
Aside from the unwanted "gifts" or people who can't deal with the training or exercise needs of a puppy, most smaller dogs given up to shelters are mature dogs who usually arrive due to some kind of changes to or issues of the owner. In Goldie's case, her former family had "personal problems" -- whatever that means.
At the same time she was speaking with me, Donna was also in contact with another rescue group in Connecticut. They had a two-year-old Cocker Spaniel for adoption, and like us, had the dog in boarding.
While understandably anxious to place their rescued dog, the group's spokesperson was honest with Donna in telling her the young Spaniel had "issues with strangers" and would require adopters with patience and experience and perhaps training help in dealing with the problem.
I told Donna honestly that such problems are not solved overnight and a dog who has fear issues with strangers would not be appropriate for a family with children. Even if the dog learned to love the kids in the home, s/he could represent a liability for other kids (or adults) visiting. Were the dog to bite someone, the family would be looking at a lawsuit.
Donna and her family considered all the matters discussed both, with me and the other rescue organization.
While desire was (understandably) for a younger dog, ultimately Donna's family made (what I am sure is) the right choice for Goldie.
I even truthfully told Donna, "If the situation were reversed and I had the younger, more protective or fearful Cocker and the other rescue group had Goldie, I would still recommend Goldie to you. That's how strongly I feel about this decision."
It was wonderful yesterday, seeing Goldie happily jump into the car of Donna and her very kind, enthusiastic husband. Goldie seemed to "know" that she was going to her new home. She settled down on Donna's lap in the back seat and even played with Donna's husband before he started the car. The couple had already purchased a beautiful leash and collar for Goldie, as well as a bed, treats and toys.
Part of me wanted to cry -- but such would have been tears of joy.
As hard, frustrating and "depressing" as rescue and placement can often be there are those times when you have saved an animal from certain death and are there to see him or her go off to a wonderful and loving home. -- That home you know is going to be forever.
That is the part of rescue that is in some ways, "addicting" and what one can never walk away from.
There is no greater "high" or feeling in the world! -- PCA
********
Despite being a healthy, happy, frisky and extremely loving and gentle purebred dog, Goldie was nevertheless a tough adoption. I had to keep her in boarding for more than three weeks.
What was the "problem?"
Apparently, Goldie's age.
She was somewhere between 7 and 10 years of age. (It said "10 years" on Goldie's shelter record and anything in the double digits represents problems in trying to place.)
In fact, I was speaking with Goldie's ultimate adopter for more than a week. The woman's biggest concern was Goldie's age.
"I would hate to adopt a dog that might get sick or die. That would be devastating to my kids," Donna said to me.
And no, I could not lie to the woman and promise that Goldie would live ten or fifteen years.
But, I could easily see Goldie going another 5 to 8 years.
By that time, Donna's kids would be in college.
Donna and I had several, rather long conversations about Goldie.
The family had been seeking a Cocker Spaniel for some time. (Donna grew up with one.) To their credit, they did not want to purchase a dog, but instead wanted to adopt from a shelter or rescue. They wanted to help save a dog.
But, the reality is, that most smaller dogs that come to shelters or rescues, are, in fact, older.
Like declawed cats, it is rare that people would spend a great deal of money to purchase (or declaw) an animal and then dump the pet a few months or even a couple of years later. That is, unless the animal has very serious medical or behavioral problems. For example, there was an adorable, purebred 4-month-old Shih Tzu puppy at the shelter the other day. The puppy was brought in by people who "couldn't afford" to have their pet treated for a case of Mange. (One wonders of course, how the people could "afford" to buy an expensive Shih-Tzu puppy in the first place -- unless, of course the puppy was a "gift" from someone else.)
Aside from the unwanted "gifts" or people who can't deal with the training or exercise needs of a puppy, most smaller dogs given up to shelters are mature dogs who usually arrive due to some kind of changes to or issues of the owner. In Goldie's case, her former family had "personal problems" -- whatever that means.
At the same time she was speaking with me, Donna was also in contact with another rescue group in Connecticut. They had a two-year-old Cocker Spaniel for adoption, and like us, had the dog in boarding.
While understandably anxious to place their rescued dog, the group's spokesperson was honest with Donna in telling her the young Spaniel had "issues with strangers" and would require adopters with patience and experience and perhaps training help in dealing with the problem.
I told Donna honestly that such problems are not solved overnight and a dog who has fear issues with strangers would not be appropriate for a family with children. Even if the dog learned to love the kids in the home, s/he could represent a liability for other kids (or adults) visiting. Were the dog to bite someone, the family would be looking at a lawsuit.
Donna and her family considered all the matters discussed both, with me and the other rescue organization.
While desire was (understandably) for a younger dog, ultimately Donna's family made (what I am sure is) the right choice for Goldie.
I even truthfully told Donna, "If the situation were reversed and I had the younger, more protective or fearful Cocker and the other rescue group had Goldie, I would still recommend Goldie to you. That's how strongly I feel about this decision."
It was wonderful yesterday, seeing Goldie happily jump into the car of Donna and her very kind, enthusiastic husband. Goldie seemed to "know" that she was going to her new home. She settled down on Donna's lap in the back seat and even played with Donna's husband before he started the car. The couple had already purchased a beautiful leash and collar for Goldie, as well as a bed, treats and toys.
Part of me wanted to cry -- but such would have been tears of joy.
As hard, frustrating and "depressing" as rescue and placement can often be there are those times when you have saved an animal from certain death and are there to see him or her go off to a wonderful and loving home. -- That home you know is going to be forever.
That is the part of rescue that is in some ways, "addicting" and what one can never walk away from.
There is no greater "high" or feeling in the world! -- PCA
********
Monday, December 8, 2008
Only the Names Have Changed
Today is my birthday.
I am officially "old."
What are the advantages of getting old?
Well, there are a few -- like only paying $10.00 a year now ("Senior Membership") at the city recreation center where I swim.
One is also supposed to get "wiser" with age.
Well, I don't know about that one -- unless one equates crankiness and impatience with "wisdom."
Perhaps that is due to us old folks realizing we don't have that much time to right the world.
Idealism of course, dissipates with age.
We tend not to see the world the way we would like it to be, but rather what it is.
In fact, one of my favorite lines to people calling to "put my pet up for adoption" but also saying they don't want their dog or cat "put to sleep" is, "The world doesn't revolve around what you want, Ma'am, it revolves around what IS."
Definitely a line from an old, cranky curmudgeon.
Sometimes I think I am getting too old for animal rescue work.
Yesterday, I was in Petco with one of my foster people, (Sarah) showing Foxy, our sweet little Pom mix for adoption. We had been invited to bring the dog by Gisella of "Zany's Furry Pets" who runs adoptions there on Sundays.
I used to run adoptions at the Upper East Side store during the late 90's. We were in fact at Petco 7 days a week, 12 hours a day. A grueling schedule to be sure and one where one tends to "burn out" after a few years.
Yesterday's brief experience felt like "de-ja vu" to me -- especially when Gisella said to a passerby, "All these cats were on the euth list of the city shelter and we rescued them. They all need homes now."
How many times did I say the same exact thing to customers wandering in and out of the store 8 to 12 years ago?
Thousands of times.
When hearing it again yesterday, I could only think to myself:
"Ten years later and only the names of the players have changed. But, the situation is still the same."
Sarah and I didn't stay too long at the store. Foxy was a bit stressed with all the activity around him and for me it was, "Been here, done that."
Perhaps I would have felt the same had it been a trip back to Xenon's, China Club, Visage or Studio54.
Only it wouldn't have been quite so depressing.
There is a saying that "One can never go home again."
There is a reason I haven't hankered to get back to store adoptions.
Ten years later and nothing has changed.
Will it ever change?
Will there ever come a time when we don't have to say:
"We rescued these animals off the Euth list?"
Not in my lifetime -- but hopefully for those who are younger.
Perhaps its that realization that makes so many of us "senior folks" old and cranky. -- PCA
********
I am officially "old."
What are the advantages of getting old?
Well, there are a few -- like only paying $10.00 a year now ("Senior Membership") at the city recreation center where I swim.
One is also supposed to get "wiser" with age.
Well, I don't know about that one -- unless one equates crankiness and impatience with "wisdom."
Perhaps that is due to us old folks realizing we don't have that much time to right the world.
Idealism of course, dissipates with age.
We tend not to see the world the way we would like it to be, but rather what it is.
In fact, one of my favorite lines to people calling to "put my pet up for adoption" but also saying they don't want their dog or cat "put to sleep" is, "The world doesn't revolve around what you want, Ma'am, it revolves around what IS."
Definitely a line from an old, cranky curmudgeon.
Sometimes I think I am getting too old for animal rescue work.
Yesterday, I was in Petco with one of my foster people, (Sarah) showing Foxy, our sweet little Pom mix for adoption. We had been invited to bring the dog by Gisella of "Zany's Furry Pets" who runs adoptions there on Sundays.
I used to run adoptions at the Upper East Side store during the late 90's. We were in fact at Petco 7 days a week, 12 hours a day. A grueling schedule to be sure and one where one tends to "burn out" after a few years.
Yesterday's brief experience felt like "de-ja vu" to me -- especially when Gisella said to a passerby, "All these cats were on the euth list of the city shelter and we rescued them. They all need homes now."
How many times did I say the same exact thing to customers wandering in and out of the store 8 to 12 years ago?
Thousands of times.
When hearing it again yesterday, I could only think to myself:
"Ten years later and only the names of the players have changed. But, the situation is still the same."
Sarah and I didn't stay too long at the store. Foxy was a bit stressed with all the activity around him and for me it was, "Been here, done that."
Perhaps I would have felt the same had it been a trip back to Xenon's, China Club, Visage or Studio54.
Only it wouldn't have been quite so depressing.
There is a saying that "One can never go home again."
There is a reason I haven't hankered to get back to store adoptions.
Ten years later and nothing has changed.
Will it ever change?
Will there ever come a time when we don't have to say:
"We rescued these animals off the Euth list?"
Not in my lifetime -- but hopefully for those who are younger.
Perhaps its that realization that makes so many of us "senior folks" old and cranky. -- PCA
********
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Forever a Dream, Unless......
(Picture Left: "Lady" Throwaway Mama Pitbbull. Loving, gentle and sweet. Missing her babies. Lady was on Euth list yesterday, but saved at the last minute by "Stray from the Heights." Now in boarding and awaiting foster or adoptive home. Lady is one of the very lucky ones. Rescue not the fate of most abandoned Pitbulls.)
http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21599217/foster_homes_needed.htm?q=FOSTER+HOMES+NEEDED
The above link is to a video produced this past Friday on Fox News.
Special thanks and praise go to Megan Kelly, one of the anchors of the conservative leaning station who called on Thursday asking how she could help animals.
I told Ms. Kelly that while donations are the fuel and lifeblood of any shelter or rescue organization, what was even more needed was greater public awareness to the realities facing animals, shelters and rescues, as well as greater public responsibility and willingness to help on a proactive basis -- i.e. specifically, fostering.
While I talked to Megan Kelly for more than an hour over the phone, the actually news piece which evolved from that conversation the very next day was only two minutes long.
To her credit, Ms. Kelly did an amazing and very professional job in condensing into a two minute presentation, what really is a very complex and nuanced problem. (My personal biggest complain about most cable and broadcast news shows, is they merely skim issues without going into any kind of depth or examination.)
I was invited on the program and I in turn invited another rescuer from a mostly cat rescue organization to come on with me. Gisella from "Zany's Furry Friends" brought several rescued cats for showing on the program, while I brought along two of NYCA's rescued dogs.
The Center for Animal Care and Control was also invited to bring some of the shelter's animals for show, but they declined supposedly due to the shelter and I not being on the same page in terms of " public message."
(Most full service [or "euthanizing"] shelters don't like to admit publicly that they are forced to put animals to death on a daily basis.)
The "message" that has been going out publicly for almost a decade now in New York City by the major shelters and organizations is that New York was and is, "on the road to no kill" -- a message that I feel, while well intentioned, has had disastrous consequences. The message has had disastrous results, not only because it was an impossible feat in a city that lacked sufficient shelters to serve a human population of over 8 million and an estimated 5 million pets, but even more importantly because it lulled the people of New York City into a complacent mindset, thinking wrongly, that we had already "solved" our pet overpopulation and abandonment/cruelty issues.
We haven't.
The "On the Road to No Kill" message has thus had the cumulative effect of "anesthetizing the public" from the harsh realities that befall tens of thousands of pets being bred, sold, abandoned and dying in our city animal shelters every single day or on our city streets.
There was little incentive for people to "do the right thing" by neutering their pets and taking the responsibilities of pet keeping more seriously because many were under the illusion that if bringing litters of kittens or unwanted dogs and cats to the shelters all the animals would be adopted or rescued.
And yes, while much progress has been made over the last decade in shelters being able to adopt out or send to rescue most small and purebred (other than Pits or Rotties) dogs, the fact is these animals don't represent the MAJORITY of animal arriving at city shelters on a daily basis.
Cats, kittens, PitBulls, Rotties and larger mixed breed dogs DO!
And the majority of THESE animals end up dying -- if not directly from "euthanasia" in the pounds, then often due to secondary illnesses and infections acquired in the shelters.
The increase particularly of cat and kitten intakes (and subsequent deaths) over the past 5 years or so is, I believe a direct consequence of the ultimately destructive, false and misleading "no kill" message. The same could be said for the huge increase in Pitbull and large dog abandonments.
People dropping off these animals to the shelters wrongly believe the pets are all getting adopted or rescued.
The shelter meanwhile, apparently prefers to blame rises in cat intakes and deaths, to "climate change" -- a ludicrous notion when one considers most cats being abandoned to city shelters are not "feral strays," but rather cats from human HOMES.
"Denial" is not just a river in Eqypt!
And yes, so the city shelter declined to go on the Fox news program mostly because they did not want to be associated with the main message of the brief, two minute segment.
That is, that "everyday New York City shelters are forced to put down between 25 and 100 dogs, cats, kittens and puppies."
The shelter could of course argue that they normally don't have to put down small puppies. But, in fact, many of the Pitbulls destroyed are under one-year-old, an age that technically defines them as "puppies."
Many shelters and rescues would prefer to be able to avoid thinking of Staffies and Pits as even being dogs. But, the fact is they ARE dogs. -- In most cases, very loving and smart dogs.
It is of course, not fair to blame shelters for problems that humans CREATE.
It is not the shelters breeding or selling or abusing or abandoning animals.
But, it IS the shelters who are to blame for most people not understanding the TRUTH and the realties.
The cat and dog problems in shelters are in fact, very different.
Rises in cat abandonments and deaths is more attributed to the general public being mislead on the realities of adult cat adoptions in shelters.
However, because most of the dogs arriving at city shelters are now in fact, Staffies and Pitbulls, this is a very specific problem that needs to be addressed and targeted towards certain population groups in the city.
I personally believe we desperately need Humane Education programs in city schools -- particularly those in the inner city. -- We need to get to the kids, before the streets do.
I'd also like to see some famous Rap star or highly respected figure in the minority community to step forward and and say something like, "Hey, people, we need to be doing better by our pets. Too many of them are dying in our animal shelters! Spay/neuter, that's the answer. C'mon, people, we gotta do it!"
Until, some of these things are accomplished, we are forever spinning our wheels and surreptiously rushing the bodies of the dead out the back doors of our animal shelters.
The dream of "no kill" animal control shelters remains forever a dream; it's possible reality one day, not only years away, but in fact, decades. ---PCA
The above link is to a video produced this past Friday on Fox News.
Special thanks and praise go to Megan Kelly, one of the anchors of the conservative leaning station who called on Thursday asking how she could help animals.
I told Ms. Kelly that while donations are the fuel and lifeblood of any shelter or rescue organization, what was even more needed was greater public awareness to the realities facing animals, shelters and rescues, as well as greater public responsibility and willingness to help on a proactive basis -- i.e. specifically, fostering.
While I talked to Megan Kelly for more than an hour over the phone, the actually news piece which evolved from that conversation the very next day was only two minutes long.
To her credit, Ms. Kelly did an amazing and very professional job in condensing into a two minute presentation, what really is a very complex and nuanced problem. (My personal biggest complain about most cable and broadcast news shows, is they merely skim issues without going into any kind of depth or examination.)
I was invited on the program and I in turn invited another rescuer from a mostly cat rescue organization to come on with me. Gisella from "Zany's Furry Friends" brought several rescued cats for showing on the program, while I brought along two of NYCA's rescued dogs.
The Center for Animal Care and Control was also invited to bring some of the shelter's animals for show, but they declined supposedly due to the shelter and I not being on the same page in terms of " public message."
(Most full service [or "euthanizing"] shelters don't like to admit publicly that they are forced to put animals to death on a daily basis.)
The "message" that has been going out publicly for almost a decade now in New York City by the major shelters and organizations is that New York was and is, "on the road to no kill" -- a message that I feel, while well intentioned, has had disastrous consequences. The message has had disastrous results, not only because it was an impossible feat in a city that lacked sufficient shelters to serve a human population of over 8 million and an estimated 5 million pets, but even more importantly because it lulled the people of New York City into a complacent mindset, thinking wrongly, that we had already "solved" our pet overpopulation and abandonment/cruelty issues.
We haven't.
The "On the Road to No Kill" message has thus had the cumulative effect of "anesthetizing the public" from the harsh realities that befall tens of thousands of pets being bred, sold, abandoned and dying in our city animal shelters every single day or on our city streets.
There was little incentive for people to "do the right thing" by neutering their pets and taking the responsibilities of pet keeping more seriously because many were under the illusion that if bringing litters of kittens or unwanted dogs and cats to the shelters all the animals would be adopted or rescued.
And yes, while much progress has been made over the last decade in shelters being able to adopt out or send to rescue most small and purebred (other than Pits or Rotties) dogs, the fact is these animals don't represent the MAJORITY of animal arriving at city shelters on a daily basis.
Cats, kittens, PitBulls, Rotties and larger mixed breed dogs DO!
And the majority of THESE animals end up dying -- if not directly from "euthanasia" in the pounds, then often due to secondary illnesses and infections acquired in the shelters.
The increase particularly of cat and kitten intakes (and subsequent deaths) over the past 5 years or so is, I believe a direct consequence of the ultimately destructive, false and misleading "no kill" message. The same could be said for the huge increase in Pitbull and large dog abandonments.
People dropping off these animals to the shelters wrongly believe the pets are all getting adopted or rescued.
The shelter meanwhile, apparently prefers to blame rises in cat intakes and deaths, to "climate change" -- a ludicrous notion when one considers most cats being abandoned to city shelters are not "feral strays," but rather cats from human HOMES.
"Denial" is not just a river in Eqypt!
And yes, so the city shelter declined to go on the Fox news program mostly because they did not want to be associated with the main message of the brief, two minute segment.
That is, that "everyday New York City shelters are forced to put down between 25 and 100 dogs, cats, kittens and puppies."
The shelter could of course argue that they normally don't have to put down small puppies. But, in fact, many of the Pitbulls destroyed are under one-year-old, an age that technically defines them as "puppies."
Many shelters and rescues would prefer to be able to avoid thinking of Staffies and Pits as even being dogs. But, the fact is they ARE dogs. -- In most cases, very loving and smart dogs.
It is of course, not fair to blame shelters for problems that humans CREATE.
It is not the shelters breeding or selling or abusing or abandoning animals.
But, it IS the shelters who are to blame for most people not understanding the TRUTH and the realties.
The cat and dog problems in shelters are in fact, very different.
Rises in cat abandonments and deaths is more attributed to the general public being mislead on the realities of adult cat adoptions in shelters.
However, because most of the dogs arriving at city shelters are now in fact, Staffies and Pitbulls, this is a very specific problem that needs to be addressed and targeted towards certain population groups in the city.
I personally believe we desperately need Humane Education programs in city schools -- particularly those in the inner city. -- We need to get to the kids, before the streets do.
I'd also like to see some famous Rap star or highly respected figure in the minority community to step forward and and say something like, "Hey, people, we need to be doing better by our pets. Too many of them are dying in our animal shelters! Spay/neuter, that's the answer. C'mon, people, we gotta do it!"
Until, some of these things are accomplished, we are forever spinning our wheels and surreptiously rushing the bodies of the dead out the back doors of our animal shelters.
The dream of "no kill" animal control shelters remains forever a dream; it's possible reality one day, not only years away, but in fact, decades. ---PCA
**********
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
