A cat forum. CatBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CatBanter forum » Cat Newsgroups » Cat rescue
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Non-euthanizing groups



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 6th 04, 05:36 AM
Kalyahna
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Sharon Talbert" wrote in message
ashington.edu...

Kal, I hope you stay with this newsgroup and that you never allow your
voice to be stilled. I admire the work of most private shelters and
always will, but I am very sorry the blurry term of "no-kill" was ever
invented. Better for all facilities to agree to "low-kill" (with an
actual definition of the term to work from) and for private and public
shelters to work together toward a common goal: that of educating the
public to spay and neuter and to adopt for life.

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats


Thank you, Sharon, for your continued support. Interestingly enough, in
reference to your last comment, on February 21st of this year, we're having
an event called Mardi Paws. This is our first event to focus on cats, and
with our staff vets and volunteer vets (and much, much volunteer
assistance), we're hoping to spay and neuter over 100 cats from outside
sources: breed rescues, other shelters, and low cost assistance program
surgeries. It'll be an exciting day for all of us!


  #12  
Old February 6th 04, 07:24 PM
Fan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 12:55:27 -0800, Sharon Talbert
wrote:


Fan, I admire your posting on the subject of euthanasia and "no-kill"
shelters. Do you work in a public shelter or a private shelter that
assumes the responsibility of euthanasia as necessary?

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats


I have volunteered several hundred hours at a private shelter for over
two years. In that time, I have seen perfectly healthy cats and dogs
euthanised. Everyone, absolutely everyone, there hates when that
happens, but there are no viable alternatives sometimes. When you are
out of space to the point of housing animals in people's offices, out
of foster families, and all the other shelters are out of space, what
is the alternative?

I respect the work that the "no-kill" shelters do, but I have zero
respect for those who look down their nose on the shelters who do
euthanise when there are no alternatives. The local city shelter will
euthanise any animal that has not been adopted in x number of days.
That should be unacceptable, but there are too few of us to change the
city's policy.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #13  
Old February 6th 04, 11:29 PM
Sharon Talbert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Glad to hear of your Mardi Paw! Does your shelter have a website, by the
way?

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats

  #14  
Old February 7th 04, 12:05 AM
Sharon Talbert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I have volunteered several hundred hours at a private shelter for over
two years. In that time, I have seen perfectly healthy cats and dogs
euthanised. Everyone, absolutely everyone, there hates when that
happens, but there are no viable alternatives sometimes. When you are
out of space to the point of housing animals in people's offices, out
of foster families, and all the other shelters are out of space, what
is the alternative?


The alternative for some "no-kills" I know about:

Refusal of all but the cream of the crop
Acceptance of only "adoptables" from the immediate area
Euthanasia of the "unadoptables"
Transfer of the surplus animals to a public shelter for euthanasia
Tethering of suplus animals in alleyway behind shelter

Sad but true.

I respect the work that the "no-kill" shelters do, but I have zero
respect for those who look down their nose on the shelters who do
euthanise when there are no alternatives.


Ditto all over the place. And of course "no-kill" must logically be
accompanied by "kill." I recently communicated with a public shelter
employee who actually referred to her shelter as a "kill shelter."


The local city shelter will
euthanise any animal that has not been adopted in x number of days.
That should be unacceptable, but there are too few of us to change the
city's policy.


Not necessarily that there are too few of you, but that there are too many
unwanted pets pouring into the shelters. And, sadly, more than ever
pouring into (or attempting to, anyway) the so-called "no-kill" shelters.
People are assuming these private shelters are a safe haven for their
throwaway pets.

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

  #15  
Old February 7th 04, 11:40 AM
RedRiver35
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I respect the work that the "no-kill" shelters do, but I have zero
respect for those who look down their nose on the shelters who do
euthanise when there are no alternatives.


Not to be argumentative, but I have zero respect for many shelters, including
many kill facilities, in particular, our local public shelter, which claims
it is striving to become a no-kill facility. This group is not striving to
become anything, except more burocratic(spelling?). The head of this facility
actually works to NOT get the animals adopted. I am not the only rescue
person who has made this comment.

It is sickening the number of animals that this place (and others, I am sure)
kills in one day because of the idiotic ideas:

1. Not enough space. I have walked in there several days when they claimed on
their reports they did not have space -- 15 unused cages in adoption
(accounting for cages that are vacant when an animal is seeing the vet). 8
unused cages in stray-wait/lost-and-found. This is the most pathetic and
inexcusable excuse.

2. Too many inappropriate judgements about nonrehabable temper. Someone with
no training goes in and sticks a pen in the cats faces to see what their
reaction is -- a stranger sticks a pen in my face and I am going to spit or
hiss or swat or what have you, and I am not even a cat. Inappropriate
procedures carried out by an unqualified employee.

3. The killing of supposedly unadoptable cats who would actually be adoptable.
How do they kill the animals, anyway? They won't tell me, or anyone else I
have spoken with. Do they do a heart stick? Do they sedate the animal first?
How well are the vet assistants trained? Is this their first job? Who
actually screened this person's background and personality to make sure
someone does not get a job there just for the joy of kiling an innocent cat,
dog, rabbit, or whatever?

4. The person who runs the shelter tells me that I cannot be in line to adopt
a 17 year old Siamese if the rescue groups are full -- they would rather
"euthanize" (they really like to use that word) her instead of "playing games"
with me and letting me adopt her if the rescue group is full or only wants
kittens.

5. The person who runs the shelter looks at me and asks me why I want to adopt
an old animal, an animal with fe leuk, a handicapped animal, a supposedly
nonrehabable animal, instead of one of the perfectly healthy cats that they
have "in the next building". What can I say -- if I choke her they will never
let me back on the facility grounds (maybe I should, the animals would be
better off without her).

I have been around long enough to realize that killiing excess pets is
unavoidably necessary, and in some cases it is better than letting them wander
the street to suffer persecution and abuse by disturbed members of the public
at large, etc, etc. BUT --

My rage comes because the facility is not run well, they actively try to NOT
adopt the animals, especially the cats, and when I do adopt an animal from
there they loose the paperwork, claim that they need to neuter a male who had
been previsouly neutered (I talked to the vet who did it and had the papers
faxed to me); don'f follow their own policy about making special arrangements
to pickup an animal when I have to work late; they take a kitten who spilled
her water all over herself, do not dry her off, and put her in a cage where the
cold air conditioning will blow on her and she has no box to hide in; they
don't tell you that when you try to adopt a cat who has been cleared for the
adoption building that you must specifically tell them beforehand that you will
accept a cat with fe leuk. They killed the sweet, sociable,
adoptable-temperamented cat without even asking if I wanted him if he had fe
leuk. It did not occur to me to ask about this or reject him because he had fe
leuk - after all he had been cleared for adoption. I could go on for days on
this subject. Killing excess pets because there are no other alternatives is
one thing, but this situation is made so much worse and so much more tragic
when the facility it not run well and the animals are the ones who pay the
price for human stupidity, power games and inefficiency; and it is made so
much more pathetic and down right mean, hateful and cowardly when they insist
on using the word "euthanize" when an animal is NOT injured, in mental
distress, old, or too sick. They should at least live up to the distinction
between the words, and use "kill" when destroying excess pets just because they
are excess pets.

And that is just the local facility -- what about the one in your town? The
one two counties over? In the next state?

Disorganization and corruption are no reasons for the murder of innocents.

Michelle A.
"The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights
which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny.
The question is not can they REASON, nor can they TALK, but can they SUFFER?"
-- Jeremy Bentham
  #16  
Old February 7th 04, 07:37 PM
Cat Protector
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I don't know how you came by this information about no-kills but mine says
something different. When the no-kills have space here is what I know about.

No-kills accept cats from other shelters (thus eliminating your cream of the
crop theory) to spear them from euthenasia.
No-kills have fostering programs so when they are filled to capacity some of
the cats are taken into private homes to be fostered.
No-kills have accepted cats from other areas besides their own. I know this
to be true because one of them did take in a cat that I rescued and I was in
a different city.
No-kills mean exactly that. They do not kill and will do everything they can
to find a cat a good and loving home.

I find it interesting that you state how experienced you are but totally
give mis-information when it comes to no-kill shelters.

--
Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs!
www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek

Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com
"Sharon Talbert" wrote in message

The alternative for some "no-kills" I know about:

Refusal of all but the cream of the crop
Acceptance of only "adoptables" from the immediate area
Euthanasia of the "unadoptables"
Transfer of the surplus animals to a public shelter for euthanasia
Tethering of suplus animals in alleyway behind shelter

Sad but true.

I respect the work that the "no-kill" shelters do, but I have zero
respect for those who look down their nose on the shelters who do
euthanise when there are no alternatives.


Ditto all over the place. And of course "no-kill" must logically be
accompanied by "kill." I recently communicated with a public shelter
employee who actually referred to her shelter as a "kill shelter."


The local city shelter will
euthanise any animal that has not been adopted in x number of days.
That should be unacceptable, but there are too few of us to change the
city's policy.


Not necessarily that there are too few of you, but that there are too many
unwanted pets pouring into the shelters. And, sadly, more than ever
pouring into (or attempting to, anyway) the so-called "no-kill" shelters.
People are assuming these private shelters are a safe haven for their
throwaway pets.

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet

News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000

Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via

Encryption =---



  #17  
Old February 8th 04, 05:55 AM
Fan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 11:37:33 -0700, "Cat Protector"
wrote:

I don't know how you came by this information about no-kills but mine says
something different. When the no-kills have space here is what I know about.

No-kills accept cats from other shelters (thus eliminating your cream of the
crop theory) to spear them from euthenasia.
No-kills have fostering programs so when they are filled to capacity some of
the cats are taken into private homes to be fostered.
No-kills have accepted cats from other areas besides their own. I know this
to be true because one of them did take in a cat that I rescued and I was in
a different city.
No-kills mean exactly that. They do not kill and will do everything they can
to find a cat a good and loving home.

I find it interesting that you state how experienced you are but totally
give mis-information when it comes to no-kill shelters.


Cat Protector neglected to answer some questions and concerns that I
had about a previous post before repeating some of the same statements
that I questioned a few days ago. It was implied that only no-kill
shelters have true concern for animals. That is totally untrue and
insulting to the dedicated people who work and volunteer there.

I again ask you "What do think we should do with animals
that are too dangerous to be adopted, or even fostered when all the
behavior specialists say there is no hope for rehabilitation?

What would you do with a dog that has killed other dogs, bit multiple
people over a period of time, and has now severly injured a child. Do
you want to foster a pit bull that has been trained to kill and is out
of control?"

You have the right to say anything that you want to here, but I would
ask you to be more honest and to reply to the questions that I asked
before.

What is done with out-of-control animals who are dangerous? What about
ones who are dying and in pain? You say they are never euthanised, but
I cannot believe that is the truth.

Does anyone believe there are enough no-kill shelters with unlimited
funds who can take in every animal that is offered to them or find
them another shelter or foster? The no-kills in my area certainly
don't have that luxury.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #18  
Old February 8th 04, 06:14 AM
Fan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 07 Feb 2004 10:40:45 GMT, (RedRiver35) wrote:


I respect the work that the "no-kill" shelters do, but I have zero
respect for those who look down their nose on the shelters who do
euthanise when there are no alternatives.


Not to be argumentative, but I have zero respect for many shelters, including
many kill facilities, in particular, our local public shelter, which claims
it is striving to become a no-kill facility. This group is not striving to
become anything, except more burocratic(spelling?). The head of this facility
actually works to NOT get the animals adopted. I am not the only rescue
person who has made this comment.

It is sickening the number of animals that this place (and others, I am sure)
kills in one day because of the idiotic ideas:

1. Not enough space. I have walked in there several days when they claimed on
their reports they did not have space -- 15 unused cages in adoption
(accounting for cages that are vacant when an animal is seeing the vet). 8
unused cages in stray-wait/lost-and-found. This is the most pathetic and
inexcusable excuse.

2. Too many inappropriate judgements about nonrehabable temper. Someone with
no training goes in and sticks a pen in the cats faces to see what their
reaction is -- a stranger sticks a pen in my face and I am going to spit or
hiss or swat or what have you, and I am not even a cat. Inappropriate
procedures carried out by an unqualified employee.

3. The killing of supposedly unadoptable cats who would actually be adoptable.
How do they kill the animals, anyway? They won't tell me, or anyone else I
have spoken with. Do they do a heart stick? Do they sedate the animal first?
How well are the vet assistants trained? Is this their first job? Who
actually screened this person's background and personality to make sure
someone does not get a job there just for the joy of kiling an innocent cat,
dog, rabbit, or whatever?

4. The person who runs the shelter tells me that I cannot be in line to adopt
a 17 year old Siamese if the rescue groups are full -- they would rather
"euthanize" (they really like to use that word) her instead of "playing games"
with me and letting me adopt her if the rescue group is full or only wants
kittens.

5. The person who runs the shelter looks at me and asks me why I want to adopt
an old animal, an animal with fe leuk, a handicapped animal, a supposedly
nonrehabable animal, instead of one of the perfectly healthy cats that they
have "in the next building". What can I say -- if I choke her they will never
let me back on the facility grounds (maybe I should, the animals would be
better off without her).

I have been around long enough to realize that killiing excess pets is
unavoidably necessary, and in some cases it is better than letting them wander
the street to suffer persecution and abuse by disturbed members of the public
at large, etc, etc. BUT --

My rage comes because the facility is not run well, they actively try to NOT
adopt the animals, especially the cats, and when I do adopt an animal from
there they loose the paperwork, claim that they need to neuter a male who had
been previsouly neutered (I talked to the vet who did it and had the papers
faxed to me); don'f follow their own policy about making special arrangements
to pickup an animal when I have to work late; they take a kitten who spilled
her water all over herself, do not dry her off, and put her in a cage where the
cold air conditioning will blow on her and she has no box to hide in; they
don't tell you that when you try to adopt a cat who has been cleared for the
adoption building that you must specifically tell them beforehand that you will
accept a cat with fe leuk. They killed the sweet, sociable,
adoptable-temperamented cat without even asking if I wanted him if he had fe
leuk. It did not occur to me to ask about this or reject him because he had fe
leuk - after all he had been cleared for adoption. I could go on for days on
this subject. Killing excess pets because there are no other alternatives is
one thing, but this situation is made so much worse and so much more tragic
when the facility it not run well and the animals are the ones who pay the
price for human stupidity, power games and inefficiency; and it is made so
much more pathetic and down right mean, hateful and cowardly when they insist
on using the word "euthanize" when an animal is NOT injured, in mental
distress, old, or too sick. They should at least live up to the distinction
between the words, and use "kill" when destroying excess pets just because they
are excess pets.

And that is just the local facility -- what about the one in your town? The
one two counties over? In the next state?

Disorganization and corruption are no reasons for the murder of innocents.

Michelle A.
"The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights
which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny.
The question is not can they REASON, nor can they TALK, but can they SUFFER?"
-- Jeremy Bentham


You make some very good points here. I have had to do business with
many organizations who employ incompetent people. Some of them seem to
have a goal of taking a good idea and proving that it can not work.

It is even worse when the organization is a non-profit. It is worse
still when peole and/or animals are hurt by the incompetence.

When I was first starting out in the business world, I would have
advised you to talk to the shelter director. You could find out why
the decisions were made and ask them to make the changes that you
suggested to make things better. After years of doing just that, I
have found it too often totally ineffective.

I have come to believe that most organizations that are incompetent
are not going to change. This is because it starts at the top and
filters down. Even if the person on top is not a bad business person,
themselves, they employ bad people and then don't independently check
up on them.

There is little that anyone can do about these situations and it is
frustrating. I wish I had something helpful to say, but this is a
common, but terrible situation. The only way this is going to change
is if enough of us band together to make it change. Good luck ever
seeing that happen.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #19  
Old February 8th 04, 08:16 AM
Cat Protector
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

How is my saying I support no-kill shelters insulting to them? I don't get
it. As for animals being too dangerous to be adopted, I am not sure if that
is possible since I believe most if not all animals can be rehabilitated.
Animal Cops which was a show on Animal Planet showed that they can. I don't
believe those animal behaviorists who say there is no hope. There is always
hope. BTW, I wish you would not put words in my mouth. I never said
dangerous animals aren't euthanized. In fact I never even mentioned
dangerous animals. This whole thread has been those who euthanize vs those
that don't. I don't believe in the practice. The only time a cat should be
put to sleep is when they are in so much pain for them due to illness that
it would be very hard for them to go on. The animal I also believes chooses
the time they wish to leave this plane just as we humans do. It is called
free will and free choice.

As for unlimited funds for no-kill shelters, most rely on donations and some
also go to great lengths to foster. You seem to have this vision that
no-kills are false and are not as good as those that euthanize. That is pure
hogwash in my book. No-kills mean just that. They do not kill. I think every
shelter should be no-kill. At least then every cat could have a place to go
and have double the chance of getting adopted.

--
Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs!
www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek

Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com
"Fan" wrote in message
...

Cat Protector neglected to answer some questions and concerns that I
had about a previous post before repeating some of the same statements
that I questioned a few days ago. It was implied that only no-kill
shelters have true concern for animals. That is totally untrue and
insulting to the dedicated people who work and volunteer there.

I again ask you "What do think we should do with animals
that are too dangerous to be adopted, or even fostered when all the
behavior specialists say there is no hope for rehabilitation?

What would you do with a dog that has killed other dogs, bit multiple
people over a period of time, and has now severly injured a child. Do
you want to foster a pit bull that has been trained to kill and is out
of control?"

You have the right to say anything that you want to here, but I would
ask you to be more honest and to reply to the questions that I asked
before.

What is done with out-of-control animals who are dangerous? What about
ones who are dying and in pain? You say they are never euthanised, but
I cannot believe that is the truth.

Does anyone believe there are enough no-kill shelters with unlimited
funds who can take in every animal that is offered to them or find
them another shelter or foster? The no-kills in my area certainly
don't have that luxury.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet

News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000

Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption

=---


  #20  
Old February 8th 04, 10:53 PM
Wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just curious if anyone happened to see the HBO special called "Shelter
Dogs"?

W
"Cat Protector" wrote in message
news:SmlVb.39197$L_4.29384@okepread01...
How is my saying I support no-kill shelters insulting to them? I don't get
it. As for animals being too dangerous to be adopted, I am not sure if that
is possible since I believe most if not all animals can be rehabilitated.
Animal Cops which was a show on Animal Planet showed that they can. I don't
believe those animal behaviorists who say there is no hope. There is always
hope. BTW, I wish you would not put words in my mouth. I never said
dangerous animals aren't euthanized. In fact I never even mentioned
dangerous animals. This whole thread has been those who euthanize vs those
that don't. I don't believe in the practice. The only time a cat should be
put to sleep is when they are in so much pain for them due to illness that
it would be very hard for them to go on. The animal I also believes chooses
the time they wish to leave this plane just as we humans do. It is called
free will and free choice.

As for unlimited funds for no-kill shelters, most rely on donations and some
also go to great lengths to foster. You seem to have this vision that
no-kills are false and are not as good as those that euthanize. That is pure
hogwash in my book. No-kills mean just that. They do not kill. I think every
shelter should be no-kill. At least then every cat could have a place to go
and have double the chance of getting adopted.

--
Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs!
www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek

Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com
"Fan" wrote in message
...

Cat Protector neglected to answer some questions and concerns that I
had about a previous post before repeating some of the same statements
that I questioned a few days ago. It was implied that only no-kill
shelters have true concern for animals. That is totally untrue and
insulting to the dedicated people who work and volunteer there.

I again ask you "What do think we should do with animals
that are too dangerous to be adopted, or even fostered when all the
behavior specialists say there is no hope for rehabilitation?

What would you do with a dog that has killed other dogs, bit multiple
people over a period of time, and has now severly injured a child. Do
you want to foster a pit bull that has been trained to kill and is out
of control?"

You have the right to say anything that you want to here, but I would
ask you to be more honest and to reply to the questions that I asked
before.

What is done with out-of-control animals who are dangerous? What about
ones who are dying and in pain? You say they are never euthanised, but
I cannot believe that is the truth.

Does anyone believe there are enough no-kill shelters with unlimited
funds who can take in every animal that is offered to them or find
them another shelter or foster? The no-kills in my area certainly
don't have that luxury.


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet

News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000

Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption

=---



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
feed Nutro? Tamara Cat health & behaviour 90 November 19th 03 01:57 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CatBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.