News – According to animal advocates the New York city Health Department fails to fund services for stray animals and as a result of that broken promise many animals die every year. But if you think about it the problem goes beyond space and food for these animals. Is there anything we can do to stop people from abandoning their once wanted pets?
Sometimes(sorry: too often), it seems that the people don't really realize that to have a pet is an enormous responsability (financial and emotional) and not so big than to have a child of course but....It's why I think they must be punished where it hurts: the purse! (a law which fine them seriously!)
Agree with everything except the fine. Sometimes people have to choose between their childrens welfare and that of a pet. kindess thing to do would be put them down, if they can't fine a good home for them.
I think Francisca is saying the fine is for people who simply abandon the animal on the street - not people who take them to a shelter
Taking pets to a shelter (pound) is the same as putting them down, only it will be done by a total stranger.
Several MILLION unwanted pets are killed every year in this country in shelters and 'dog pounds'.
People should NOT ever even get a pet if they are not ALREADY committed to taking care of that pet REGARDLESS of their circumstances.
People don't leave children behind when they move or when they are bankrupt or when they are displaced, but they leave pets behind ALL THE TIME in that circumstance.
In too many cases, pets are treated like inanimate objects - a piece of furniture or and old pair of shoes. When a pet owner faces 'problems', the pet is discarded, thrown away.
If a person cannot make a LIFETIME commitment to owning a pet, they should never get one - period.
Hurricane Katrina - tens of thousands of pets were LEFT BEHIND when people evacuated the gulf coast. Most of them drowned or otherwise died (started, dehydrated).
I know of one horrible story - a relative of a coworker of mine left the coast but left their lab in the house in one of the rooms with some food and water. Their house was totally engulfed with water and the dog was left to DROWN.
Again - people treat pets like pieces of furniture - nice to have until they wear out a little or until it is 'inconvenient' to keep them.
Totally and completely irresponsible and ignorant ...
Bubba
The rescue groups who use foster homes are much better than the shelters
We support several in our area
The pets get to live in an actual home until adopted
Yes ... I have worked in rescue in my area for over 8 years now.
Our 'city' shelter is horrible - so horrible, in fact, that we have formed and activist group to bring attention to it. We are getting some results.
Many rescue groups in this area get all of their rescues from local shelters - they are always full because they can fill slots (successful adoptions) any day of the week with adoptable strays from the area shelters.
The overpopulation and owner irresponsibility problem is HUGE in this area (Memphis), and dogfighting is very pervasive and the authorities turn a blind eye more than they attempt to prosecute.
It is VERY frustrating, but our new 'activist' group has decided that enough is enough and we will continue to keep attention focused on the problems until something REALLY is done about them.
Good economy or bad economy it makes no difference The shelters are always overflowing. That makes it a bit heartbreaking to work at one.
I belong to, and of course because of that, work with a couple of animal rescues in my area. It's really hard to see the animals without what we call "forever" homes. A lot of people do adopt, my dog (who you can see in the upper left corner of this comment) is from a rescue. The hardest unwanted pets to deal with are those that come into the rescues for some reason when they are older. It's much harder to find people to adopt a cat, or especially a dog, that is 7, 8, or 9 years old. Last summer we had someone take a 9 year old Beagle to the Humane Society, that one was very difficult to get back into a permanent home. Anyway, I'm rambling, because you know how us heartless neo-cons are about animals, all we want to do is torture them, make sure they end up on the street or in a shelter, just ask anyone on the far left, I'm sure it's all Bush's fault somehow...
Anyway, for any of you that really do want to save an animal that is in great risk of being put down, please check out this site -
I went to this site . There are no dogs closer than 250 miles from my house . Got any other sites ?
I realize that at the site you went to that the dogs may not be near your home, but the point of that site is that the dogs are going to be put down if no one adopts them, and when you look at a dog on the site it shows you how many days the dog has left to live if it's not adopted. Now as far as a rescue closer to your home, tell me what area you're in, and if you want what type type of animal, cat or dog, and what breed, and I'll find you a place close to you.
Bringing in politics to this discussion about abandoned pets, does that make you a happy rambler?
Yes, when I'm responding to David, who in the very first comment brought his political views, if you really read his comment, into this thread. And if you care to look again, you might just see that my mentioning politics in this thread was not the first comment here to do so, that is if you know anything about David.
And David, for you, I'm not trying to insult you, just point out that you took a veiled shot at Bush, at least it looked that way to me. Hope that explanation satisfies you Charlson, and if you knew anything of me, you'd have realized I was, in my way, saying I thought it was kind of bad to bring politics into this, and in the very first comment, just like you seem to think, so believe it or not, I was agreeing with you, and you can ask most here that know me from prior comments and threads if what I just told you is true.
PETA's Dirty Secret
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaKillsAnimal...
Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly complaining about the "unethical" treatment of animals by restaurant owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret.
PETA kills animals. By the thousands.
From July 1998 through the end of 2005, PETA killed over 14,400 dogs, cats, and other "companion animals" -- at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. That's more than five defenseless animals every day. Not counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 90 percent of the animals it took in during 2005 alone. And its angel-of-death pattern shows no sign of changing.
Year ReceivedÃ;¢; Adopted Killed Transferred % Killed % Adopted
2005 2,145...
2004 2,640...
2003 2,224...
2002 2,680...
2001 2,685...
2000 2,684...
1999 1,805...
* 1998 943 1...
Total 17,8...
* figures represent the second half of 1998 only
Ã;¢; other than spay/neuter animals
Ã;;Ã;» skeptical? click here to see the proof
PETA kills animals. Because it has other financial priorities.
PETA raked in nearly $29 million last year in income, much of it raised from pet owners who think their donations actually help animals. Instead, the group spends huge sums on programs equating people who eat chicken with Nazis, scaring young children away from drinking milk, recruiting children into the radical animal-rights lifestyle, and intimidating businessmen and their families in their own neighborhoods. PETA has also spent tens of thousands of dollars defending arsonists and other violent extremists.
Try gathering your idiotic thoughts in one post instead of grandstanding.
Grandstanding or not, he is correct about PETA.
Their 'master' plan is to totally eliminate domestic pets from the face of the planet. They 'claim' to be humane but they really want extinction for all domestic animals.
The Humane Society of the United States is not much better although they are 'some' better.
If you want to donate to a national pet welfare organization that really DOES help animals, check out the ASPCA, Best Friends, and Last Chance for Animals.
I like the ASPCA. They have a wildlife care center here whcih is very active and much needed in our community.
Go Nature and Wildlife.
Bubba, this is a response to you, STOP THAT, I can't remember ever having to agree with you before, like I do 100% with your comment above, and for that matter, every comment you've made on this thread. Somehow you and I agreeing on something just feels so strange to me, but at least when it did happen here, it was a good thing to be agreeing on.
LOL ... I have always thought that any 2 people can find something that they agree on or have in common.
Anyone that has compassion for animals is a-ok in my book - doesn't matter what else we may or may not agree on.
It's nice to know that there are a lot of people out there that care about the unwanted pets in this country and are trying to be their voice.
Keep up the good work!
kinda off topic at a glance, but the reality and compassion is(if not for the cartoon version of animals) would be to cycle them through, as Darwin would prefer,
a farmer may put a pet or animal down, I trust his judgement, alternatives in the city would be meals for the zoo, food for those that choose, whatever,
but to choose to be high and mighty and play god when the math don't work and have to kill them in giant freezers and carry them to the dump, all the while begging money from the compassionate, as PETA does, is the height of hypocracy.
I've never been a PETA supporter. but, I will say that putting an animal down is sometimes the only alternative to suffering or attempting "quality of Life" behind caged doors. (or, in an expiremtal lab, or a factory farm)
And, oh, btw, there is a huge difference between an animal lover and a pet owner.
the real "animal lover" doesnt eat what they love. (unless absolutely needed for survival.)
"pets" are like family members. people who would abandon them treat their friends and family on the same level.
STOP BUYING PETS! If you must have a pet, adopt only!!!
If I were an abandoned dog, I'd rather be put to sleep in America than prepared for food in certain parts of China. For some reason, Chinese seem to think that an animal needs to be alive in the boiling water or fire, or, it hurts the taste. Give me bland dog to eat any day, sir, than have the poor thing suffering for my taste buds sake.
ok-
i was going along with your logic until the end when it appeared you were joking. Aside from your jovial attitude, the Chinese and the Japanese have been involved with decimating our shark populations around the globe. you can visit this web site for more information: www.sharkwater.com
Jovial attitude? I wasn't trying to be funny. Since humans are into eating fish now, shark populations have to shrink, or, no more fish for both species. By the way, do YOU feel safe swimming in the ocean knowing sharks could be lurking about? You can't see them, but, to them, you are as visible as a soft, tasty cloud.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
hitraysat
Steve-N-Lee
dexlovex2
toilnaa
giroro13
SuburbanHouseHunters
Hullios
jokefrog
tongfanpupay
lavena13
samurnovsky
kungfudunk13
sandking101
dimplesing
Lasvegasguy
Shannonyork
nostalgia
Cattywomen
psysex
suznmy
pawfoots
Lifeoflava
BoBo in Texas
pfestus
gatitabonitasen
thinkingserious
MacTeP
JoseArmando
neogen
cindys
jacobhill69
sarmatt
jwaterfalls
DianCor
STONERS
loganbeach
Chader
TalSiach
Mdiar
Debbie
bubanco
dorado
molnatisi
snowhite12
contentmanager
caste
Wolfie2007
Mutainia
dirtyfratboy
cactushair
57)
One of the sad downsides of the failing economy is that Fido and Fluffy, once beloved pets, become too expensive to care and maintain. As a result, they are given to animal shelters for adoption. The resources for those shelters are drying up as fast as jobs in Michigan. Hence, when given a choice between Rover and the family home, most will go with their homes. Particularly sad are those cases in which people try to keep their pets despite being evicted from their homes.
It doesn't cost that much to keep an animal unless they have a chronic health condition. I understand they aren't free but the vast majority of people should never have to choose between a healthy pet and their home.
Yeah I think so
Personally, I am not an advocate of pets. (I'm sure this will get allot of people upset, but, really folks, pets are a luxury.)
the only pets that should be had are ones that are abandoned. or service animals for the handicapped and elderly.
stop buying pets...and there will be no need for puppy mills, pet abandonment, etc.
we need more WILD animals.
Pets are hardly just a luxury. They help people that are depressed, lonely, sick. Unfortunately, If I had the choice I'd take a pets companionship over a human's any day.
I can certainly relate to your statement:
"I had the choice I'd take a pets companionship over a human's any day."
the sole reason we have an overpopulation issue with abandoned pets can be reflected in your statement.(humans are the culprit!)
Humans are part of the problem. I remember an ad that used to run at Christmas time. It said something to the fact that a pet is not for Christmas It's for Life. Many people don't understand that.
Exactly. the pet industry is thriving. (as well as our rescue centers for abandoned animals.) see the corelation?
Pets can bring great joy to responsible beings with a receptive heart.
correction: I AM a pet advocate, but, I do not condone the purchasing of pets. There are too many who need adopting.