PDA

View Full Version : Animal Planet Heroes Should Cover No-Kills


Cat Protector
January 16th 06, 06:27 PM
"Animal Planet Heroes Phoenix is an exciting drama that showcases the
lifesaving work of the Arizona Humane Society's specially trained Emergency
Animal Medical TechniciansT. Before the first rescue was caught on tape,
however, more than a year of work on the series had already been done behind
the scenes."

I have to wonder how many times the AHS will toot their own horn? Perhaps
Animal Planet should have looked at the no-kill shelters first. No-kill
shelters definately deserve more consideration for a show than the AHS. Why
is it that Animal Planet insists on doing these shows that actually cover
shelters that are known to euthanize animals? I think groups like AzCATs,
Animal Welfare League, Sun Valley Animal Shelter, etc deserve to be seen a
hell of a lot more.

It's time Animal Planet start showing the true unsung heroes out there for
these types of shows. As much as I have enjoyed Animal Cops I still feel
that no-kill shelters deserve more consideration. Apparently rescuing a cat
from the euthanasia list of known kill shelters is not as exciting to Animal
Planet. AzCATs for example does TNR of feral cats in the Phoenix area but
yet don't get the credit they deserve for the work they do. I guess rescuing
and trapping feral cats is not exciting because apparently you have to have
a big budget and have a reputation for euthanizing in order to make it on
Animal Planet.

Yes, these are my opinions but I think it is time for the no-kill shelters
and rescue organizations to get the credit they deserve. They also deserve
to get donations as well. Yes, during the Katrina disaster I donated to the
ASPCA which is not no-kill but I also donated to Alley Cat Allies. ACA which
is the national organization for feral cats hardly has the budget the ASPCA
does but also does not have the budget the AHS does.

According to one site charitynavigator.org which lists non-profit budgets
and also salaries of the CEO's shows that the head of the AHS Cheryl Naumann
makes over a $161,026 a year as her salary while the head of Alley Cat
Allies Donna Wilcox makes only $58,710 per year. Alley Cat also doesn't
have the enormous budget that the Humane Society has but there is still
something very wrong with this picture. Heck even the head of the Arizona
Animal Welfare League which states they are the largest and oldest no-kill
shelter in the state of Arizona doesn't have the budget the AHS has. The
head of that organization Betty Welton only makes $65,880 a year as salary.

I think this pattern shows that unless you have the money, Animal Planet and
other media outlets are not as interested in your story. It is about time
this changes. No-kills work just as hard and seem to get very little credit
or nods from the media. Every year the AHS has a telethon on one of the
local TV channels (ABC 15 I believe) to raise money and also gets their own
show on Channel 3. Do the no-kill organizations get the same consideration?
Heck no. The no-kills are lucky they get a small mention in the newspaper
let alone a major fundraiser.

I think no-kills are the unsung heroes of the rescue community. They take in
many animals in the hopes they get adopted and also are willing to work with
the more difficult cases. I remember rescuing one cat who was apparently
abused and had a very **** poor attitude. He took swipes and hit and spit.
Luckily I contacted Sun Valley Animal Shelter in Glendale who worked with
this cat and eventually fully rehabilitated him and got him placed in loving
home. It took two tries to get the right placement but he still did. If he
had gotten placed in a shelter known for euthanasia I don't think he'd be
alive today. Feral cats also face a lot of doom when it comes to shelters
known to euthanize.

I challenge the media to finally start covering and lending support to
no-kills. These organizations work just as tirelessly to rescue animals as
well as getting them placed. I applaud the efforts of organizations like
AzCATs which are starting to get a little more support for their efforts
(they host a show every Sunday on one of the local AM stations here in
Phoenix which deals with animals. It's called The Animal World and can be
heard on KKNT 960AM radio and KTIE 590AM radio in Los Angeles) but the
press still seems to shy away from covering feral cat issues.

Wake up Animal Planet. It's time to start covering the no-kills. They may
not have the budget but their work deserves some credit.

BTW, if there are fans of AHS on this group, I will say that some of their
programs are not all bad. To AHS's credit they do have a low-cost spay
neuter program which has better rates for shots and a few other services
than the vets do. Of course the vet for my cats is a little more (a few
dollars more) which I gladly pay now instead of going halfway across town to
the AHS to get them. Pets on Parade which is hosted by the Humane Society on
Channel 3 is also not bad either. They show animals up for adoption and also
have a few other bits of info about animal care and a few interesting
stories as well. I just wish that the AHS goes no-kill. They certainly have
the budget and support for it.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com

-L.
January 16th 06, 11:33 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> "Animal Planet Heroes Phoenix is an exciting drama that showcases the
> lifesaving work of the Arizona Humane Society's specially trained Emergency
> Animal Medical TechniciansT. Before the first rescue was caught on tape,
> however, more than a year of work on the series had already been done behind
> the scenes."
>
> I have to wonder how many times the AHS will toot their own horn? Perhaps
> Animal Planet should have looked at the no-kill shelters first. No-kill
> shelters definately deserve more consideration for a show than the AHS. Why
> is it that Animal Planet insists on doing these shows that actually cover
> shelters that are known to euthanize animals?

"No kills" kill animals too. They do it by default; by refusal, by
picking and choosing which animals to accept. They do it when the
animal is sick or ailing. There is no such thing as a "no kill"
shelter. The term "no kill" is merely a pretty name they like to call
themselves so they don't have to face the reality of what they do.

Furthermore, the general pubic needs to understand what happens when
they refuse responsibility for their pets. They need to see that when
they dump fluffy or fido many times the animal ends up being hit by a
car, starved or worse, and that its fate is death - either as a result
of their actions or because the shelters have few resources and have no
recourse but to euthanize them. That is one reason shows like Animal
Cops focus on orgs like the SPCA and Humane Scoiety.

>I think groups like AzCATs,
> Animal Welfare League, Sun Valley Animal Shelter, etc deserve to be seen a
> hell of a lot more.
>
> It's time Animal Planet start showing the true unsung heroes out there for
> these types of shows. As much as I have enjoyed Animal Cops I still feel
> that no-kill shelters deserve more consideration. Apparently rescuing a cat
> from the euthanasia list of known kill shelters is not as exciting to Animal
> Planet. AzCATs for example does TNR of feral cats in the Phoenix area but
> yet don't get the credit they deserve for the work they do. I guess rescuing
> and trapping feral cats is not exciting because apparently you have to have
> a big budget and have a reputation for euthanizing in order to make it on
> Animal Planet.
>
> Yes, these are my opinions but I think it is time for the no-kill shelters
> and rescue organizations to get the credit they deserve. They also deserve
> to get donations as well. Yes, during the Katrina disaster I donated to the
> ASPCA which is not no-kill but I also donated to Alley Cat Allies. ACA which
> is the national organization for feral cats hardly has the budget the ASPCA
> does but also does not have the budget the AHS does.
>
> According to one site charitynavigator.org which lists non-profit budgets
> and also salaries of the CEO's shows that the head of the AHS Cheryl Naumann
> makes over a $161,026 a year as her salary while the head of Alley Cat
> Allies Donna Wilcox makes only $58,710 per year. Alley Cat also doesn't
> have the enormous budget that the Humane Society has but there is still
> something very wrong with this picture. Heck even the head of the Arizona
> Animal Welfare League which states they are the largest and oldest no-kill
> shelter in the state of Arizona doesn't have the budget the AHS has. The
> head of that organization Betty Welton only makes $65,880 a year as salary.

Why don't you take a look at the number of animals served by each org
and the areas served. It will shine a light on the salary differences.


>
> I think this pattern shows that unless you have the money, Animal Planet and
> other media outlets are not as interested in your story. It is about time
> this changes. No-kills work just as hard and seem to get very little credit
> or nods from the media. Every year the AHS has a telethon on one of the
> local TV channels (ABC 15 I believe) to raise money and also gets their own
> show on Channel 3. Do the no-kill organizations get the same consideration?
> Heck no. The no-kills are lucky they get a small mention in the newspaper
> let alone a major fundraiser.
>
> I think no-kills are the unsung heroes of the rescue community. They take in
> many animals in the hopes they get adopted and also are willing to work with
> the more difficult cases. I remember rescuing one cat who was apparently
> abused and had a very **** poor attitude. He took swipes and hit and spit.
> Luckily I contacted Sun Valley Animal Shelter in Glendale who worked with
> this cat and eventually fully rehabilitated him and got him placed in loving
> home. It took two tries to get the right placement but he still did. If he
> had gotten placed in a shelter known for euthanasia I don't think he'd be
> alive today. Feral cats also face a lot of doom when it comes to shelters
> known to euthanize.

When you only have X number of dollars to spend on X number of animals,
it makes most sense to spend those dollars on the animals which are
most likely to be adopted - which ferals and cats with behavioral
issues are not. "No kills" who can pick and choose which animals they
"want" might have that luxury - Humane Societies and SPCAs which serve
all animals all the time do not.

>
> I challenge the media to finally start covering and lending support to
> no-kills. These organizations work just as tirelessly to rescue animals as
> well as getting them placed. I applaud the efforts of organizations like
> AzCATs which are starting to get a little more support for their efforts
> (they host a show every Sunday on one of the local AM stations here in
> Phoenix which deals with animals. It's called The Animal World and can be
> heard on KKNT 960AM radio and KTIE 590AM radio in Los Angeles) but the
> press still seems to shy away from covering feral cat issues.
>
> Wake up Animal Planet. It's time to start covering the no-kills. They may
> not have the budget but their work deserves some credit.
>
> BTW, if there are fans of AHS on this group, I will say that some of their
> programs are not all bad. To AHS's credit they do have a low-cost spay
> neuter program which has better rates for shots and a few other services
> than the vets do. Of course the vet for my cats is a little more (a few
> dollars more) which I gladly pay now instead of going halfway across town to
> the AHS to get them. Pets on Parade which is hosted by the Humane Society on
> Channel 3 is also not bad either. They show animals up for adoption and also
> have a few other bits of info about animal care and a few interesting
> stories as well. I just wish that the AHS goes no-kill. They certainly have
> the budget and support for it.

You are obviously ignorant of how Humane Societies are run and what
they do. While the "no kill" private shelters have their place in
helping to control the unwanted pet overpopulation problem,
organizations like the Humane Society, which serve all animals all the
time, carry the brunt of this burden.

Good luck getting the "no kill" shelters some media attention from the
major syndicate - fat chance it will happen, though.

-L.

Steve Crane
January 17th 06, 01:29 AM
-L. wrote:
> Cat Protector wrote:
> > I have to wonder how many times the AHS will toot their own horn? Perhaps
> > Animal Planet should have looked at the no-kill shelters first. No-kill
> > shelters definately deserve more consideration for a show than the AHS. Why
> > is it that Animal Planet insists on doing these shows that actually cover
> > shelters that are known to euthanize animals?
>
> "No kills" kill animals too. They do it by default; by refusal, by
> picking and choosing which animals to accept. They do it when the
> animal is sick or ailing. There is no such thing as a "no kill"
> shelter. The term "no kill" is merely a pretty name they like to call
> themselves so they don't have to face the reality of what they do.

Exactly correct. What the local "no kill" shelter doesn't accept, end
up at another shelter without the same policy. I think it is the height
of hypocrisy for any shelter to call themselves a "no kill" shelter
just to garner additional funding and support and make some people feel
better - it is without question a huge sham and deceit. Publicly
operated shelters end up taking all the cast-offs that the local
"no-kill" shelter refuses. The "no-kill" shelter gets to fool
themselves and their clients and leaves the publicly operated facility
to take all the risk and all the grief.

NMR
January 17th 06, 02:36 AM
Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I fund
as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both completely no
kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will never
return. Both local humane societies and the animals control come to us with
their over burden of animals. They are no kill also. We find room for
every cat that comes to us either thru foster families or permanent homes.
Other animals that comes to us we find room where ever we can even if we
have to load the animal up and drive to another state.
We also have associations that find homes for these animals by what ever
means necessary. We do a lot of elderly people pet fosters since It has
been proven an elderly person with the ability to actively have access to
pet shows improventment in their life( to sum it up quickly). There are so
many of no kill shelters here in Florida that do the same thing as us.
Everyone of the hurricane refugees we took everyone that they needed us to
take we adopted every one and happy to report many of cats were returned
to their families. So please don't include all us no kill shelters in this

abRokeNegRo
January 17th 06, 02:59 AM
-L. wrote:

> Good luck getting the "no kill" shelters some media attention from the
> major syndicate - fat chance it will happen, though.
>
> -L.

this "sounds" like horse ****

the public "thinks" no kill means...

we adopt them out oppossed to killing them

there is no way you can say that no kill shelters pick and choose who
they will not
take...maybe some do; but im sure it's the minority

you don't have a case
sit you tail down

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 04:09 AM
I bet you can't prove it can you that no-kills actually kill animals. None
of the no-kills that I am aware actually kill animals. I would like to see
proof from you that no-kills actually by their own hands kill animals. I
think it is funny that when someone rises to the defense of the no-kills
they are called ignorant or that they don't have a clue. It is time many
here wake up to reality that no-kills make a significant impact on the
rescue of animals.

As for your hypothisis regarding salaries, I would love for you to explain
how a national organization like Alley Cat Allies which is national makes
less money than the AHS? Last time I checked feral cats are plenty and when
they get into a shelter known for euthanizing they are put down simply
because they are feral cats. From what I have heard, any cat deemed feral is
put down because shelters simply do not have any knowledge about feral cats
nor do they even want to take the time to learn. Euthanizing a feral cat is
not an effective way to deal with the situation. TNR is.

I would sooner bring a cat to a no-kill shelter than one known for
euthanizing. As for turning away animals I can see how this can happen
during cat and kitten season. So many are born because people fail to spay
or neuter their animals and then on top of that they get dumped into the
streets because they don't want the responsibility. This is not the fault of
the shelters but the stupid ass humans who care only about themselves. Even
the AHS has been trying to prevent this by trying to educate the public.

No-kills mean just that. They are no-kill and will allow an animal to be
fostered in their network or allowed to have refuge until they are adopted
or until their life ends. Like any shelter they can turn animals away and
the only time I have seen this is when it is cat and kitten season. If you
don't believe that no-kill shelters exist then I challenge you to check out
Sun Valley Animal Shelter or even AAWL in Arizona. In fact AAWL has greatly
assisted AzCATs in getting the kittens from feral cats in the system so they
can be adopted.

As for media attention, no-kills are starting to get a little more attention
where they are locally. They certainly did get some media attention during
Katrina. However, they deserve more. Animal rescue workers from no-kills are
often spending much of their own money to foster animals. Do they get
recognition from the media? Absolutely not.

I applaud the efforts of animal rescue organizations that rescue animals
including AHS but I also believe the no-kill organizations deserve their
moment in the sun. I think organizations like AzCATs which faces an uphill
battle to educate the public about feral cats deserves a lot of media
attention and applause from the public. Volunteers from that organization
are out every day trapping feral cats so they can be spayed or neutered and
then returned to their environment where a human caregiver makes sure the
cats have enough food or water and are looked after. To me organizations
like this definately deserve attention and more donations and support from
businesses. Luckily, they are getting some.

It is obvious by your posting that you don't support no-kills or shelters
that have similar policies. I wonder what would happen if you went to a
no-kill shelter and said that they were actually a kill shelter simply
because animals are turned away. One thing I can applaud the AHS for is not
turning away animals but when they have behavior or medical issues they are
often euthanized where they could be saved.

I know of a few no-kills that rescue animals from the euthanasia list. I
think this deserves kudos and certainly erases your position that even
no-kills actually kill. Many of these shelters are on very limited budgets
but are still willing to say to those animals on the euthanasia list that
"we will take you." I do know that the AHS and even Maricopa County Animal
Care & Control work with these organizations.

I am not totally against the AHS because I am sure they don't want to
euthanize but sometimes I feel they are somewhat quick to do so. I think
their low cost spay neuter program is also good and think some of their
programming like Pets on Parade is good by showing animals up for adoption.
I love watching the cats on that show. It is cool they have an EAMT program
but I think no-kills would have them if they actually had the financial
support.

I think however it is time to start supporting the no-kills a little more
and give them their own shows. In some ways they do have them. AzCATs has
their own radio show every weekend and I think it is wonderful. They often
have guests who are actively involved in supporting no-kill organizations. I
think AzCATs has done a terrific job. They may not have the budget but they
have one of the toughest jobs in the TNR of feral cats. I think Animal
Planet should really do a series about them.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com

"-L." > wrote in message
> "No kills" kill animals too. They do it by default; by refusal, by
> picking and choosing which animals to accept. They do it when the
> animal is sick or ailing. There is no such thing as a "no kill"
> shelter. The term "no kill" is merely a pretty name they like to call
> themselves so they don't have to face the reality of what they do.
>
> Furthermore, the general pubic needs to understand what happens when
> they refuse responsibility for their pets. They need to see that when
> they dump fluffy or fido many times the animal ends up being hit by a
> car, starved or worse, and that its fate is death - either as a result
> of their actions or because the shelters have few resources and have no
> recourse but to euthanize them. That is one reason shows like Animal
> Cops focus on orgs like the SPCA and Humane Scoiety.
>
>>I think groups like AzCATs,
>> Animal Welfare League, Sun Valley Animal Shelter, etc deserve to be seen
>> a
>> hell of a lot more.
>>
>> It's time Animal Planet start showing the true unsung heroes out there
>> for
>> these types of shows. As much as I have enjoyed Animal Cops I still feel
>> that no-kill shelters deserve more consideration. Apparently rescuing a
>> cat
>> from the euthanasia list of known kill shelters is not as exciting to
>> Animal
>> Planet. AzCATs for example does TNR of feral cats in the Phoenix area but
>> yet don't get the credit they deserve for the work they do. I guess
>> rescuing
>> and trapping feral cats is not exciting because apparently you have to
>> have
>> a big budget and have a reputation for euthanizing in order to make it on
>> Animal Planet.
>>
>> Yes, these are my opinions but I think it is time for the no-kill
>> shelters
>> and rescue organizations to get the credit they deserve. They also
>> deserve
>> to get donations as well. Yes, during the Katrina disaster I donated to
>> the
>> ASPCA which is not no-kill but I also donated to Alley Cat Allies. ACA
>> which
>> is the national organization for feral cats hardly has the budget the
>> ASPCA
>> does but also does not have the budget the AHS does.
>>
>> According to one site charitynavigator.org which lists non-profit budgets
>> and also salaries of the CEO's shows that the head of the AHS Cheryl
>> Naumann
>> makes over a $161,026 a year as her salary while the head of Alley Cat
>> Allies Donna Wilcox makes only $58,710 per year. Alley Cat also doesn't
>> have the enormous budget that the Humane Society has but there is still
>> something very wrong with this picture. Heck even the head of the Arizona
>> Animal Welfare League which states they are the largest and oldest
>> no-kill
>> shelter in the state of Arizona doesn't have the budget the AHS has. The
>> head of that organization Betty Welton only makes $65,880 a year as
>> salary.
>
> Why don't you take a look at the number of animals served by each org
> and the areas served. It will shine a light on the salary differences.
>
>
>>
>> I think this pattern shows that unless you have the money, Animal Planet
>> and
>> other media outlets are not as interested in your story. It is about time
>> this changes. No-kills work just as hard and seem to get very little
>> credit
>> or nods from the media. Every year the AHS has a telethon on one of the
>> local TV channels (ABC 15 I believe) to raise money and also gets their
>> own
>> show on Channel 3. Do the no-kill organizations get the same
>> consideration?
>> Heck no. The no-kills are lucky they get a small mention in the newspaper
>> let alone a major fundraiser.
>>
>> I think no-kills are the unsung heroes of the rescue community. They take
>> in
>> many animals in the hopes they get adopted and also are willing to work
>> with
>> the more difficult cases. I remember rescuing one cat who was apparently
>> abused and had a very **** poor attitude. He took swipes and hit and
>> spit.
>> Luckily I contacted Sun Valley Animal Shelter in Glendale who worked with
>> this cat and eventually fully rehabilitated him and got him placed in
>> loving
>> home. It took two tries to get the right placement but he still did. If
>> he
>> had gotten placed in a shelter known for euthanasia I don't think he'd be
>> alive today. Feral cats also face a lot of doom when it comes to shelters
>> known to euthanize.
>
> When you only have X number of dollars to spend on X number of animals,
> it makes most sense to spend those dollars on the animals which are
> most likely to be adopted - which ferals and cats with behavioral
> issues are not. "No kills" who can pick and choose which animals they
> "want" might have that luxury - Humane Societies and SPCAs which serve
> all animals all the time do not.
>
>>
>> I challenge the media to finally start covering and lending support to
>> no-kills. These organizations work just as tirelessly to rescue animals
>> as
>> well as getting them placed. I applaud the efforts of organizations like
>> AzCATs which are starting to get a little more support for their efforts
>> (they host a show every Sunday on one of the local AM stations here in
>> Phoenix which deals with animals. It's called The Animal World and can be
>> heard on KKNT 960AM radio and KTIE 590AM radio in Los Angeles) but the
>> press still seems to shy away from covering feral cat issues.
>>
>> Wake up Animal Planet. It's time to start covering the no-kills. They may
>> not have the budget but their work deserves some credit.
>>
>> BTW, if there are fans of AHS on this group, I will say that some of
>> their
>> programs are not all bad. To AHS's credit they do have a low-cost spay
>> neuter program which has better rates for shots and a few other services
>> than the vets do. Of course the vet for my cats is a little more (a few
>> dollars more) which I gladly pay now instead of going halfway across town
>> to
>> the AHS to get them. Pets on Parade which is hosted by the Humane Society
>> on
>> Channel 3 is also not bad either. They show animals up for adoption and
>> also
>> have a few other bits of info about animal care and a few interesting
>> stories as well. I just wish that the AHS goes no-kill. They certainly
>> have
>> the budget and support for it.
>
> You are obviously ignorant of how Humane Societies are run and what
> they do. While the "no kill" private shelters have their place in
> helping to control the unwanted pet overpopulation problem,
> organizations like the Humane Society, which serve all animals all the
> time, carry the brunt of this burden.
>
> Good luck getting the "no kill" shelters some media attention from the
> major syndicate - fat chance it will happen, though.
>
> -L.
>

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 04:15 AM
You have got to be kidding. The only time I have seen any no-kill shelter
say we can't take any more animals is during cat and kitten season. Often
times shelters are filled to capacity with felines because people fail to
have their cats spayed or neutered.

I would love for you to go to a no-kill shelter and tell the volunteers that
you think that non-kills are all sham artists and that they are hypocrites.
I am willing to bet you will not get a positive reaction and be met with
angry volunteers who work tirelessly to rescue the many animals that get
dumped in the city streets by uncaring humans. I can come up with a whole
list of no-kill shelters that do exactly what they say they do and do not
kill animals.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com

"Steve Crane" > wrote in message so they don't have to
face the reality of what they do.
>
> Exactly correct. What the local "no kill" shelter doesn't accept, end
> up at another shelter without the same policy. I think it is the height
> of hypocrisy for any shelter to call themselves a "no kill" shelter
> just to garner additional funding and support and make some people feel
> better - it is without question a huge sham and deceit. Publicly
> operated shelters end up taking all the cast-offs that the local
> "no-kill" shelter refuses. The "no-kill" shelter gets to fool
> themselves and their clients and leaves the publicly operated facility
> to take all the risk and all the grief.
>

January 17th 06, 04:17 AM
Steve Crane wrote:
>
> Exactly correct. What the local "no kill" shelter doesn't accept, end
> up at another shelter without the same policy. I think it is the height
> of hypocrisy for any shelter to call themselves a "no kill" shelter
> just to garner additional funding and support and make some people feel
> better - it is without question a huge sham and deceit.

Bingo. It makes me sick, really.

> Publicly
> operated shelters end up taking all the cast-offs that the local
> "no-kill" shelter refuses. The "no-kill" shelter gets to fool
> themselves and their clients and leaves the publicly operated facility
> to take all the risk and all the grief.

Yep.

-L.

January 17th 06, 04:22 AM
Cat Protector wrote:


> Wake up Animal Planet. It's time to start covering the no-kills. They may
> not have the budget but their work deserves some credit.
>

I think it is better that they stick with the public facilities that do
put down animals.

Why?

Because these programs are good for educationg the public. When they
see a dog get rescued, brought back to health, and then put down
because there is no room or it can't pass the temperment test - well,
that is what we are really facing, isn't it?

Why would we want to gloss over the problem? We need a reality check.
Cats and dogs are being killed every day for lack of homes as well as
abuse. People need to see this.


If they featured "no-kill" shelters, what would we see on the program?
People bringing in their pets to drop them off? Adoption day at the
local pet store or cat show?

Shelters do a lot of great work, and I agree that we should support
them. But we need to get people's attention. We need to show them some
good stories but also some bad stories. The ones that get people
willing to change.

Check out your local craigslist pet section. Every day, you can see
animals being sold or given away because they owner is moving, having a
baby, or is suddenly allergic. And then there are the tons of people
looking for a stud, advertising a stud, or promoting their new litter
or kittens or puppies. Most of these people have never heard of testing
eyes, heart, or hips. They have no idea that THEY are the problem.

Every litter created out of ignorance is the same as sending an equal
number of cats or dogs to the local shelter, kill or not. every kitten
they place means another that dies somewhere for lack of a home.

You want to make a difference? Start educating the public. Respond to
those ads. Speak up. On my local list, I respond to the breeders and
ask if they have done the tests. Do they know the pedigree of their dog
or cat? Do they know the health of the animals listed in that pedigree.
Do they realize that their 6 kittens will prevent 6 cats from getting a
home? etc.

It's easy to ignore the problems if we don't see them. I am very
greatful the the shelters, ALL of them. But we need to put out the bad
stories, the ones that get people feeling angry and guilty enough to
take action.

If I were to add a program, I would like to see stories of animals
purchased from breeders who had health and temperment issues from
irresponsible breeding. My current sheltie came from a backyard
breeder. She was 4 years old when she was rescued. They were keeping
her to breed her, and hadn't done so yet because they only had one
male, her father. She was outside in a kennel by herself, never
socialized with people or other dogs. She should never have been kept
for breeding. She was undersized, had poor conformation, prick ears,
and not that great a coat. And once we got her, we learned she had poor
vision and an oversized heart. So, health problems too. This was one
messed up dog. It took well over a year to get to "almost normal". And
it doesn't take much to set off the old fears. Most people, had they
adopted this dog would have dumped her at the shelter in less than a
week. She could not walk on smooth surfaces such as linoleum and hard
wood floors. She couldn't do stairs or doorways. She freaked in a
kennel and on a leash. She was afraid of the dark (barked in the middle
of the night), and she was not housebroken. Most people can't deal with
a dog like this.

My first sheltie was adopted from a shelter. She was turned in as a
public nuisance. She was an awesome dog that just needed a better home.
She also had a health problem. She went blind at age 9 because of a
common genetic fault. If breeders tested and worked to eliminate these
problems, they wouldn't be so common. I can't believe how many people
told me to put her down and get a new dog.

If the average person could see what happens to thes dogs and cats,
they wouldn't be so quick to breed them. A lot of people just don't
know better. They need to be educated.

January 17th 06, 04:26 AM
Cat Protector wrote:
> You have got to be kidding. The only time I have seen any no-kill shelter
> say we can't take any more animals is during cat and kitten season.

Oh really? do they take all FeLV and FIV positive cats? What about
kittens with FIP? What about old, feral Tomcats who are meaner than
****? Cats on the brink of death for one reason or another?

>Often
> times shelters are filled to capacity with felines because people fail to
> have their cats spayed or neutered.

(Now we know what kind of nimord we are dealing with, Steve...)

>
> I would love for you to go to a no-kill shelter and tell the volunteers that
> you think that non-kills are all sham artists and that they are hypocrites.
> I am willing to bet you will not get a positive reaction and be met with
> angry volunteers who work tirelessly to rescue the many animals that get
> dumped in the city streets by uncaring humans.

I bet what we will find are a bunch of ignorant housewives who
volunteer at no kills because they think it is a "kinder and gentler"
shelter. They haven't got a clue about the real politics of animal
welfare and pet overpopulation.


I can come up with a whole
> list of no-kill shelters that do exactly what they say they do and do not
> kill animals.

If you think no-kills never kill animals, you are a fool. Of course
they do - either directly because they are ill or old, because doing so
is humane, or they do so indirectly by turning away the
"uindesirables". The no-kill here doesn't even take cats anymore and
haven't for over 2 years. All they are is a warehouse for cats that
annot be placed - what a great life that must be - to live your life in
a cage.

I will take the letal injection over a life in prison, any day.
-L.

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 04:31 AM
I have been at and talked to many no-kills that actually rescue animals from
the euthanasia list from both county shelter and AHS. I think it is pretty
bogus when someone here calls no-kills hypocrites or puts them in a bad
light. The no-kills here in the Phoenix area often see and rescue animals
from tough situations. I remember being at Sun Valley once when they brought
in a 1 day old kitten who was dumped out of a car next to a busy freeway. I
actually got to hold this kitten and my heart just went out to them.

This same no-kill shelter also took in abused cats which otherwise would be
euthanized at AHS or the county shelters simply because they were scared
after being treated so badly. I know firsthand because I rescued a cat of
suspected abuse. The cat was also dumped outside and was declawed and his
humans moved away. I had him for only one day before driving him to Sun
Valley. The slighest movement set this cat off but if you sat calmly with
him he'd put his paws up on you and gave you a hug. or allowed you to pet
him. He had a sweet side. Knowing this, Sun Valley took him in despite being
full and got him rehabilitated and eventually placed in a loving home.

Sun Valley like many no-kills work under a heck of tighter budget than those
that euthanize. I think its time they get more support and credit. They do
alot for the cats that need help and many would not be alive today to get
adopted if not for their efforts and those of their volunteers.

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
"NMR" > wrote in message
.. .
> Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I
> fund as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both
> completely no kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life
> will never return. Both local humane societies and the animals control
> come to us with their over burden of animals. They are no kill also. We
> find room for every cat that comes to us either thru foster families or
> permanent homes. Other animals that comes to us we find room where ever we
> can even if we have to load the animal up and drive to another state.
> We also have associations that find homes for these animals by what
> ever means necessary. We do a lot of elderly people pet fosters since It
> has been proven an elderly person with the ability to actively have access
> to pet shows improventment in their life( to sum it up quickly). There
> are so many of no kill shelters here in Florida that do the same thing as
> us. Everyone of the hurricane refugees we took everyone that they needed
> us to take we adopted every one and happy to report many of cats were
> returned to their families. So please don't include all us no kill
> shelters in this
>

cybercat
January 17th 06, 04:37 AM
> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Cat Protector wrote:
>
>
> > Wake up Animal Planet. It's time to start covering the no-kills. They
may
> > not have the budget but their work deserves some credit.
> >
>
> I think it is better that they stick with the public facilities that do
> put down animals.
>
> Why?
>
> Because these programs are good for educationg the public. When they
> see a dog get rescued, brought back to health, and then put down
> because there is no room or it can't pass the temperment test - well,
> that is what we are really facing, isn't it?
>
[...]

> If the average person could see what happens to thes dogs and cats,
> they wouldn't be so quick to breed them. A lot of people just don't
> know better. They need to be educated.
>

Well-said, Meghan.

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 04:40 AM
Actually I know one no-kill organization that actually does take in special
needs cats. Arizona Feline Network is one organization that quickly comes to
mind. It is funny that because you don't have a leg to stand on you quickly
resort to name calling.

BTW, calling me Nimrod I'll take as a compliment. Thanks to NBC's show
Surface, Nimrod is now considered cool. If you don't watch Nimrod is the
name of one of the creatures on that show that is pretty caring and
intelligent.

It is you who doesn't have a clue and is acting foolish by condemning the
volunteers for their work at no-kill shelters and organizations. Obviously
you are one of those who don't bother to volunteer or rescue cats in your
area. You are pretty sad if you are going to **** all over the efforts who
give up their time and money to help make life a little easier and better
for those cats awaiting adoption at no-kill shelters. All I can say is shame
on you!

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Cat Protector wrote:
>> You have got to be kidding. The only time I have seen any no-kill shelter
>> say we can't take any more animals is during cat and kitten season.
>
> Oh really? do they take all FeLV and FIV positive cats? What about
> kittens with FIP? What about old, feral Tomcats who are meaner than
> ****? Cats on the brink of death for one reason or another?
>
>>Often
>> times shelters are filled to capacity with felines because people fail to
>> have their cats spayed or neutered.
>
> (Now we know what kind of nimord we are dealing with, Steve...)
>
>>
>> I would love for you to go to a no-kill shelter and tell the volunteers
>> that
>> you think that non-kills are all sham artists and that they are
>> hypocrites.
>> I am willing to bet you will not get a positive reaction and be met with
>> angry volunteers who work tirelessly to rescue the many animals that get
>> dumped in the city streets by uncaring humans.
>
> I bet what we will find are a bunch of ignorant housewives who
> volunteer at no kills because they think it is a "kinder and gentler"
> shelter. They haven't got a clue about the real politics of animal
> welfare and pet overpopulation.
>
>
> I can come up with a whole
>> list of no-kill shelters that do exactly what they say they do and do not
>> kill animals.
>
> If you think no-kills never kill animals, you are a fool. Of course
> they do - either directly because they are ill or old, because doing so
> is humane, or they do so indirectly by turning away the
> "uindesirables". The no-kill here doesn't even take cats anymore and
> haven't for over 2 years. All they are is a warehouse for cats that
> annot be placed - what a great life that must be - to live your life in
> a cage.
>
> I will take the letal injection over a life in prison, any day.
> -L.
>

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 04:50 AM
Only one problem with that. The public needs to see the no-kills in action.
It is a lot more than drop offs. They need to see the faces of the animals
that get left behind because people move without their animals. They need to
see the shelters that rescue animals from the euthanasia list. They need to
see the no-kills working on half the budgets that those that euthanize do.
They need to see the lengths that they have to go through in order to raise
money. They need to see the adoption events. They need to see the volunteers
at these no-kill shelters that actually talk to an adopter one on one about
the cat's needs. Sun Valley is a great example of this. You can actually
interact with the cat you are going to adopt and also find out the history
of the animal as well as what they are like.

It may not make for great TV for some but I actually think the volunteers at
no-kill shelters and organizations are the unsung heroes and deserve to be
recognized. It reminds me of truck drivers. Most people who go to the
supermarket don't realize how that canned food or product got there. They
just see the item and the price and that is all they care about. They don't
think about how it got on the shelf for them to buy. If not for the truck
drivers, many would not have that item to buy. Same analogy can be used for
the no-kills.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Because these programs are good for educationg the public. When they
> see a dog get rescued, brought back to health, and then put down
> because there is no room or it can't pass the temperment test - well,
> that is what we are really facing, isn't it?
>
> Why would we want to gloss over the problem? We need a reality check.
> Cats and dogs are being killed every day for lack of homes as well as
> abuse. People need to see this.
>
>
> If they featured "no-kill" shelters, what would we see on the program?
> People bringing in their pets to drop them off? Adoption day at the
> local pet store or cat show?
>
> Shelters do a lot of great work, and I agree that we should support
> them. But we need to get people's attention. We need to show them some
> good stories but also some bad stories. The ones that get people
> willing to change.
>
> Check out your local craigslist pet section. Every day, you can see
> animals being sold or given away because they owner is moving, having a
> baby, or is suddenly allergic. And then there are the tons of people
> looking for a stud, advertising a stud, or promoting their new litter
> or kittens or puppies. Most of these people have never heard of testing
> eyes, heart, or hips. They have no idea that THEY are the problem.
>
> Every litter created out of ignorance is the same as sending an equal
> number of cats or dogs to the local shelter, kill or not. every kitten
> they place means another that dies somewhere for lack of a home.
>
> You want to make a difference? Start educating the public. Respond to
> those ads. Speak up. On my local list, I respond to the breeders and
> ask if they have done the tests. Do they know the pedigree of their dog
> or cat? Do they know the health of the animals listed in that pedigree.
> Do they realize that their 6 kittens will prevent 6 cats from getting a
> home? etc.
>
> It's easy to ignore the problems if we don't see them. I am very
> greatful the the shelters, ALL of them. But we need to put out the bad
> stories, the ones that get people feeling angry and guilty enough to
> take action.
>
> If I were to add a program, I would like to see stories of animals
> purchased from breeders who had health and temperment issues from
> irresponsible breeding. My current sheltie came from a backyard
> breeder. She was 4 years old when she was rescued. They were keeping
> her to breed her, and hadn't done so yet because they only had one
> male, her father. She was outside in a kennel by herself, never
> socialized with people or other dogs. She should never have been kept
> for breeding. She was undersized, had poor conformation, prick ears,
> and not that great a coat. And once we got her, we learned she had poor
> vision and an oversized heart. So, health problems too. This was one
> messed up dog. It took well over a year to get to "almost normal". And
> it doesn't take much to set off the old fears. Most people, had they
> adopted this dog would have dumped her at the shelter in less than a
> week. She could not walk on smooth surfaces such as linoleum and hard
> wood floors. She couldn't do stairs or doorways. She freaked in a
> kennel and on a leash. She was afraid of the dark (barked in the middle
> of the night), and she was not housebroken. Most people can't deal with
> a dog like this.
>
> My first sheltie was adopted from a shelter. She was turned in as a
> public nuisance. She was an awesome dog that just needed a better home.
> She also had a health problem. She went blind at age 9 because of a
> common genetic fault. If breeders tested and worked to eliminate these
> problems, they wouldn't be so common. I can't believe how many people
> told me to put her down and get a new dog.
>
> If the average person could see what happens to thes dogs and cats,
> they wouldn't be so quick to breed them. A lot of people just don't
> know better. They need to be educated.
>

January 17th 06, 09:35 AM
Cat Protector wrote:
> Only one problem with that. The public needs to see the no-kills in action.
> It is a lot more than drop offs. They need to see the faces of the animals
> that get left behind because people move without their animals. They need to
> see the shelters that rescue animals from the euthanasia list. They need to
> see the no-kills working on half the budgets that those that euthanize do.
> They need to see the lengths that they have to go through in order to raise
> money.

Are you here to promote a particular shelter? I see most of the
shelters doing a great job with the resources they have. I support a
local no-kill shelter. I certainly have nothing against them. But I
know that they are "no-kill" because they have the ability to turn away
animals they don't think they can place, or they simply don't take any
more in when they are full or past their budget. They know their limit
and do the best they can with what they have. I don't see how that
makes them superior to a kill shelter who has a larger budget *BUT* is
required to take in every animal, regardless of adoptibility.

It happens to be a kill shelter that picked up my mom's dog when she
got loose a few years ago. The truck pulled in with her only a couple
minutes after my sister checked to see if she had been brought there.
The driver ran back out, caught up with my sister a few blocks away,
and waved her over. My mom's dog was home only 2 hours from when she
escaped.

We actually got that dog because the local purebred rescue group knew
we were looking for a rescue dog, and knew we could handle behavior
problems since we had done well with Jenny. Rather than go pick up the
dog, get her spayed, and train her to improve her behavior, they saved
money by calling us. It would actually have been cheaper for us to wait
for them to do all the work because their adoption fee was less than it
cost us to get her spayed.

>
> It may not make for great TV for some but I actually think the volunteers at
> no-kill shelters and organizations are the unsung heroes and deserve to be
> recognized.

I agree with that. It might be nice to show some clips of interviews
with shelter workings and hear some of their stories. The lady I have
worked with has had people bring in cats because they had worms or
fleas. They were ready to dump a cat for that. But I don't see how a
weekly program on that would get viewers, and you need to keep people
watching to educate them. People will watch the current programs
because it is the cops style. You get to see some of these people
punished. And with a regular shelter, they can't do that, so that would
never be in the program.

-L.
January 17th 06, 12:05 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> I bet you can't prove it can you that no-kills actually kill animals.

All no kills kill animals - they have to.

>None
> of the no-kills that I am aware actually kill animals.

You are either extremely young or extremely naive.

>I would like to see
> proof from you that no-kills actually by their own hands kill animals.

I'd like to see a list of no kills that don't. There is no "no kill"
shelter that does not kill animals.

> I
> think it is funny that when someone rises to the defense of the no-kills
> they are called ignorant or that they don't have a clue. It is time many
> here wake up to reality that no-kills make a significant impact on the
> rescue of animals.

I said they did, but they do it by promoting themselves as something
they are not. They lie.

>
> As for your hypothisis regarding salaries, I would love for you to explain
> how a national organization like Alley Cat Allies which is national makes
> less money than the AHS?

Do you really have to ask this question....?

> Last time I checked feral cats are plenty and when
> they get into a shelter known for euthanizing they are put down simply
> because they are feral cats. From what I have heard, any cat deemed feral is
> put down because shelters simply do not have any knowledge about feral cats
> nor do they even want to take the time to learn. Euthanizing a feral cat is
> not an effective way to deal with the situation. TNR is.

Euthanizing a feral cat makes sure the population doesn't grow. TNR is
effective but it does not ensure every feral in every colony is TNR'ed
and that every cat has quality of life. Ferals are culled because they
are less desirable and harder to place than non-ferals.

>
> I would sooner bring a cat to a no-kill shelter than one known for
> euthanizing. As for turning away animals I can see how this can happen
> during cat and kitten season.

And in doing so, they sentance those cats to death.

Enough said.

<snip the obvious...>

> No-kills mean just that. They are no-kill and will allow an animal to be
> fostered in their network or allowed to have refuge until they are adopted
> or until their life ends.

As long as they are accepted into the system. Thousands of animals are
turned away from "no kills" every day. Those animals end up being
killed, in part, because the "no kills" wouldn't accept them. The "no
kills" have blood on their hands.


> Like any shelter they can turn animals away and
> the only time I have seen this is when it is cat and kitten season.

Then you haven't been around very long. I can assure you they turn
away FeLV, FIV or FIP-laden cats, and most likely aggressive cats and
cats with severe behavioral issues (like biters). Very few will take
FeLV or FIV cats, no one will take an FIP kitten except to euth it.
Biters are a liability and are euthanized.

>If you
> don't believe that no-kill shelters exist then I challenge you to check out
> Sun Valley Animal Shelter or even AAWL in Arizona.

I can guarante you that both of those shelters euthanize cats.


> In fact AAWL has greatly
> assisted AzCATs in getting the kittens from feral cats in the system so they
> can be adopted.
>
> As for media attention, no-kills are starting to get a little more attention
> where they are locally. They certainly did get some media attention during
> Katrina. However, they deserve more. Animal rescue workers from no-kills are
> often spending much of their own money to foster animals.

Are you so naive to think that people who volunteer at HSs or SPCAs
don't do so out of their own pockets?

>Do they get
> recognition from the media? Absolutely not.
>
> I applaud the efforts of animal rescue organizations that rescue animals
> including AHS but I also believe the no-kill organizations deserve their
> moment in the sun.

"No kills" simply need to be honest about what they do. They kill
animals. For that reason I will never support one, nor will many
people.

<snip>

>
> It is obvious by your posting that you don't support no-kills or shelters
> that have similar policies. I wonder what would happen if you went to a
> no-kill shelter and said that they were actually a kill shelter simply
> because animals are turned away.

I hate to be the one to tell you but this is a truth that the kill
shelters know. It's not exactly a secret. It's just their "dirty
little secret" they don't want the public to know.


<snip the rest - you are extremely naive and under the impression that
"no kill" shelters do not kill animals>

Look - no one is negating the good work that no-kill shelters perform.
But the cold, hard fact is, no kill shelters have limited intake and
only retain animals which they can either wearhouse or place. Any
other animal they take in is euthanized for the reasons stated above.
The SPCA in San Francisco is held up as the ideal model for a "no kill"
shelter, and has been in the forefront of the "no kill" movement. Last
year they took in only 148 animals from the public. When I worked at
the Humane Society in Indianapolis about 10 years ago, we would take in
148 animals from the public in a day, easily. Furthermore, even the SF
SPCA admits they cull animals: "Animals are euthanized only if they are
too sick to be rehabilitated, or too aggressive to be safely placed in
a home." What they don't admit is that they poreselect animals so that
only very few will ever fit the criteria of having to be euthanized.
The bottom line is - from their own website - they KILL animals. As do
all "no kill" shelters.

-L.

-L.
January 17th 06, 12:08 PM
NMR wrote:
> Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I fund
> as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both completely no
> kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will never
> return.

IOW, they are a kill shelter. They kill animals. I will also bet they
have limited intake and preselect the animals they take in. So thus,
they kill by exclusion. What do you think happens to the animals they
turn away?



> Both local humane societies and the animals control come to us with
> their over burden of animals. They are no kill also. We find room for
> every cat that comes to us either thru foster families or permanent homes.
> Other animals that comes to us we find room where ever we can even if we
> have to load the animal up and drive to another state.
> We also have associations that find homes for these animals by what ever
> means necessary. We do a lot of elderly people pet fosters since It has
> been proven an elderly person with the ability to actively have access to
> pet shows improventment in their life( to sum it up quickly). There are so
> many of no kill shelters here in Florida that do the same thing as us.
> Everyone of the hurricane refugees we took everyone that they needed us to
> take we adopted every one and happy to report many of cats were returned
> to their families. So please don't include all us no kill shelters in this

Hate to break it to you, Matty boy, but it is a kill shelter. They
kill animals - they just aren't honest about it.

-L.

-L.
January 17th 06, 12:11 PM
wrote:
>
> If I were to add a program, I would like to see stories of animals
> purchased from breeders who had health and temperment issues from
> irresponsible breeding.

Amen to that. When I worked at HS Indy, at one time 25% of our animals
available for adoption were purebred.

-L.

whayface
January 17th 06, 02:51 PM
>> > I have to wonder how many times the AHS will toot their own horn? Perhaps
>> > Animal Planet should have looked at the no-kill shelters first. No-kill
>> > shelters definately deserve more consideration for a show than the AHS. Why
>> > is it that Animal Planet insists on doing these shows that actually cover
>> > shelters that are known to euthanize animals?
>>
>> "No kills" kill animals too. They do it by default; by refusal, by
>> picking and choosing which animals to accept. They do it when the
>> animal is sick or ailing. There is no such thing as a "no kill"
>> shelter. The term "no kill" is merely a pretty name they like to call
>> themselves so they don't have to face the reality of what they do.
>
>Exactly correct. What the local "no kill" shelter doesn't accept, end
>up at another shelter without the same policy. I think it is the height
>of hypocrisy for any shelter to call themselves a "no kill" shelter
>just to garner additional funding and support and make some people feel
>better - it is without question a huge sham and deceit. Publicly
>operated shelters end up taking all the cast-offs that the local
>"no-kill" shelter refuses. The "no-kill" shelter gets to fool
>themselves and their clients and leaves the publicly operated facility
>to take all the risk and all the grief.


Like North Shore which has a show on Animal Planet refused to take back a dog they had
placed for I forget the reason so the owner was taking it to a local shelter which was not
a "no kill" shelter so actually North Shore killed the animal in round about way!!

-L.
January 17th 06, 06:41 PM
whayface wrote:
>
> Like North Shore which has a show on Animal Planet refused to take back a dog they had
> placed for I forget the reason so the owner was taking it to a local shelter which was not
> a "no kill" shelter so actually North Shore killed the animal in round about way!!

I didn't see that episode. I have never encountered a shelter that
wouldn't take a return. :/
-L.

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 06:56 PM
No-kills are exactly that. They are no-kill shelters. Do you understand what
the term means or do some of you who claim they kill animals just prefer to
argue without proof because you like to argue. I think the ones downplaying
no-kills and saying they actually kill animals are usually the ones who
don't volunteer or even donate to them.

None of those claiming that no-kills actually euthanize (I am not talking
about animals too sick to survive where euthanizing is the only option) have
offered proof nor provided us in here with an actual manager of a no-kill
sanctuary claiming they kill animals. They also have not provided physical
documentation claiming no-kill shelters kill animals. The only thing these
people who say no-kill shelters kill animals have offered is "they turn
animals away so that alone is proof." This not evidence. Some no-kills have
had to turn animals away because during cat and kitten season many shelters
are filled to capacity with felines. This is the result because some stupid
assed humans fail to have their cat spayed or neutered. This is not the
fault of the shelters.

Some people have taken to think that a shelter being no-kill is a drop-off
hotel during a natural disaster. I am reminded of one no-kill shelter in
Texas that was in the path of Hurricane Rita and some people actually
thought they could dump their cat or dog off there instead of taking them
with them. When the shelter said they could not take them a few got mean and
one woman started yelling obscenities at the shelter workers. This shelter
already had animals they took in and it is shocking that some people feel
they can just dump their animal off as if it were a hotel or leave them
behind in their homes so they can save their own asses. This happened during
Katrina as well. A lot of people who otherwise could have taken their
animals left them behind when they evacuated. Some actually did stay behind
with their animals because the stupid organizations like the Red Cross which
could have assisted animal rescue efforts by saving both humans and 4-legged
creatures did not do so. Animal rescue efforts were also hindered by red
tape leaving a lot of animals to having to wait even more to the point they
were starving.

For those of you who believe no-kill animals actually kill animals it is
obvious you have no clue how hard the volunteers actually work and how many
animals are alive today because these organizations not only worked
tirelessly to rescue them from the streets but also from the euthanasia
lists. For those of you who condemn the volunteers and the no-kill shelters
they work for, shame on you! It is obvious that you don't know anything
about animal rescue because you'd realize that no-kills work on less than
half (or sometimes half) the budget than those who have a practice of
euthanasia. Some rescues also don't have shelter facilities and instead use
a network of fosters to care for animals.

It is funny when you suggest that euthanizing a feral cat makes sure the
population doesn't grow. You obviously have no clue about feral cats or you
wouldn't have said that. TNR is the best and only way to deal with the feral
cat situation. I suggest you read about it or volunteer with an organization
that does this. If you want to read more about TNR I suggest you check out
the AzCATs web site at www.azcats.org or Alley Cat Allies at
www.alleycat.org unless of course you just want to pull statements or info
out of your butt that isn't true.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
"-L." > wrote in message
> All no kills kill animals - they have to.
>
>>None
>> of the no-kills that I am aware actually kill animals.
>
> You are either extremely young or extremely naive.
>
>>I would like to see
>> proof from you that no-kills actually by their own hands kill animals.
>
> I'd like to see a list of no kills that don't. There is no "no kill"
> shelter that does not kill animals.
>
>> I
>> think it is funny that when someone rises to the defense of the no-kills
>> they are called ignorant or that they don't have a clue. It is time many
>> here wake up to reality that no-kills make a significant impact on the
>> rescue of animals.
>
> I said they did, but they do it by promoting themselves as something
> they are not. They lie.
>
>>
>> As for your hypothisis regarding salaries, I would love for you to
>> explain
>> how a national organization like Alley Cat Allies which is national makes
>> less money than the AHS?
>
> Do you really have to ask this question....?
>
>> Last time I checked feral cats are plenty and when
>> they get into a shelter known for euthanizing they are put down simply
>> because they are feral cats. From what I have heard, any cat deemed feral
>> is
>> put down because shelters simply do not have any knowledge about feral
>> cats
>> nor do they even want to take the time to learn. Euthanizing a feral cat
>> is
>> not an effective way to deal with the situation. TNR is.
>
> Euthanizing a feral cat makes sure the population doesn't grow. TNR is
> effective but it does not ensure every feral in every colony is TNR'ed
> and that every cat has quality of life. Ferals are culled because they
> are less desirable and harder to place than non-ferals.
>
>>
>> I would sooner bring a cat to a no-kill shelter than one known for
>> euthanizing. As for turning away animals I can see how this can happen
>> during cat and kitten season.
>
> And in doing so, they sentance those cats to death.
>
> Enough said.
>
> <snip the obvious...>
>
>> No-kills mean just that. They are no-kill and will allow an animal to be
>> fostered in their network or allowed to have refuge until they are
>> adopted
>> or until their life ends.
>
> As long as they are accepted into the system. Thousands of animals are
> turned away from "no kills" every day. Those animals end up being
> killed, in part, because the "no kills" wouldn't accept them. The "no
> kills" have blood on their hands.
>
>
>> Like any shelter they can turn animals away and
>> the only time I have seen this is when it is cat and kitten season.
>
> Then you haven't been around very long. I can assure you they turn
> away FeLV, FIV or FIP-laden cats, and most likely aggressive cats and
> cats with severe behavioral issues (like biters). Very few will take
> FeLV or FIV cats, no one will take an FIP kitten except to euth it.
> Biters are a liability and are euthanized.
>
>>If you
>> don't believe that no-kill shelters exist then I challenge you to check
>> out
>> Sun Valley Animal Shelter or even AAWL in Arizona.
>
> I can guarante you that both of those shelters euthanize cats.
>
>
>> In fact AAWL has greatly
>> assisted AzCATs in getting the kittens from feral cats in the system so
>> they
>> can be adopted.
>>
>> As for media attention, no-kills are starting to get a little more
>> attention
>> where they are locally. They certainly did get some media attention
>> during
>> Katrina. However, they deserve more. Animal rescue workers from no-kills
>> are
>> often spending much of their own money to foster animals.
>
> Are you so naive to think that people who volunteer at HSs or SPCAs
> don't do so out of their own pockets?
>
>>Do they get
>> recognition from the media? Absolutely not.
>>
>> I applaud the efforts of animal rescue organizations that rescue animals
>> including AHS but I also believe the no-kill organizations deserve their
>> moment in the sun.
>
> "No kills" simply need to be honest about what they do. They kill
> animals. For that reason I will never support one, nor will many
> people.
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> It is obvious by your posting that you don't support no-kills or shelters
>> that have similar policies. I wonder what would happen if you went to a
>> no-kill shelter and said that they were actually a kill shelter simply
>> because animals are turned away.
>
> I hate to be the one to tell you but this is a truth that the kill
> shelters know. It's not exactly a secret. It's just their "dirty
> little secret" they don't want the public to know.
>
>
> <snip the rest - you are extremely naive and under the impression that
> "no kill" shelters do not kill animals>
>
> Look - no one is negating the good work that no-kill shelters perform.
> But the cold, hard fact is, no kill shelters have limited intake and
> only retain animals which they can either wearhouse or place. Any
> other animal they take in is euthanized for the reasons stated above.
> The SPCA in San Francisco is held up as the ideal model for a "no kill"
> shelter, and has been in the forefront of the "no kill" movement. Last
> year they took in only 148 animals from the public. When I worked at
> the Humane Society in Indianapolis about 10 years ago, we would take in
> 148 animals from the public in a day, easily. Furthermore, even the SF
> SPCA admits they cull animals: "Animals are euthanized only if they are
> too sick to be rehabilitated, or too aggressive to be safely placed in
> a home." What they don't admit is that they poreselect animals so that
> only very few will ever fit the criteria of having to be euthanized.
> The bottom line is - from their own website - they KILL animals. As do
> all "no kill" shelters.
>
> -L.
>

PawsForThought
January 17th 06, 07:07 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> Only one problem with that. The public needs to see the no-kills in action.
> It is a lot more than drop offs. They need to see the faces of the animals
> that get left behind because people move without their animals.

Prettying up the picture for these idiots is not going to help, imo.
No, the public needs to see the faces of the animals that get
euthanized. They need to take the camera in the euthanasia room so
these irresponsible, selfish people see what they are doing.

Lauren

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 07:08 PM
No but I have mentioned quite a few no-kills as examples of deserving to be
recognized. I know I would rather support no-kills first. I also know that
animals that haven't had the best attitudes actually have been rehabilitated
at a no-kill. I rescued one cat that was obviously abused and then dumped by
his humans who then moved away and left him outside. On top of that he was
declawed. Sudden movements set him off but he did show signs of a sweet
side. Nonetheless, I got him to a no-kill shelter who not only took him in
but rehabilitated him and he eventually found a loving home.

I think no-kills need to be recognized for their hard work and the media
needs to start supporting that effort. Some have gotten a little recognition
but not enough.

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
> wrote in message
oups.com...

> Are you here to promote a particular shelter? I see most of the
> shelters doing a great job with the resources they have. I support a
> local no-kill shelter. I certainly have nothing against them. But I
> know that they are "no-kill" because they have the ability to turn away
> animals they don't think they can place, or they simply don't take any
> more in when they are full or past their budget. They know their limit
> and do the best they can with what they have. I don't see how that
> makes them superior to a kill shelter who has a larger budget *BUT* is
> required to take in every animal, regardless of adoptibility.
>
> It happens to be a kill shelter that picked up my mom's dog when she
> got loose a few years ago. The truck pulled in with her only a couple
> minutes after my sister checked to see if she had been brought there.
> The driver ran back out, caught up with my sister a few blocks away,
> and waved her over. My mom's dog was home only 2 hours from when she
> escaped.
>
> We actually got that dog because the local purebred rescue group knew
> we were looking for a rescue dog, and knew we could handle behavior
> problems since we had done well with Jenny. Rather than go pick up the
> dog, get her spayed, and train her to improve her behavior, they saved
> money by calling us. It would actually have been cheaper for us to wait
> for them to do all the work because their adoption fee was less than it
> cost us to get her spayed.
>
>>
>> It may not make for great TV for some but I actually think the volunteers
>> at
>> no-kill shelters and organizations are the unsung heroes and deserve to
>> be
>> recognized.
>
> I agree with that. It might be nice to show some clips of interviews
> with shelter workings and hear some of their stories. The lady I have
> worked with has had people bring in cats because they had worms or
> fleas. They were ready to dump a cat for that. But I don't see how a
> weekly program on that would get viewers, and you need to keep people
> watching to educate them. People will watch the current programs
> because it is the cops style. You get to see some of these people
> punished. And with a regular shelter, they can't do that, so that would
> never be in the program.
>

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 07:21 PM
How is that prettying the picture up? I think it is sad when people leave
animals behind to fend for themselves because they move or because they get
dumped because a human claims a baby is on the way. That is not a pretty
picture to me. The public deserves to see the no-kills in action. They
deserve to see how hard these volunteers work. They also need to see the
animals at no-kills which have been in the system finally get adopted. I
don't know about you but I like to see positive stories regarding rescue.
Animal Planet has well covered those that euthanize and mention it happens
more times than I can count. But happy endings are also worthy of the
coverage.

As for taking a camera into the euthanasia room for all the irresponsible
humans to see I am not sure that will change their thinking. Most who drop
off an animal at a shelter known for euthanasia have very little regard for
the animal and are often told this might happen if the animal is not
adopted. In fact I have heard of some people saying that it is ok with them.
These same people are often ones who will turn the other way when they
witness acts of animal cruelty.

I think if we cover the no-kills it might just show these insensitive people
who dump their animal off at a shelter that another human found your animal
worthy to adopted. Positive stories can be just as effective as negative
ones.

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com


"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Prettying up the picture for these idiots is not going to help, imo.
> No, the public needs to see the faces of the animals that get
> euthanized. They need to take the camera in the euthanasia room so
> these irresponsible, selfish people see what they are doing.
>
> Lauren
>

cybercat
January 17th 06, 07:28 PM
"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Cat Protector wrote:
> > Only one problem with that. The public needs to see the no-kills in
action.
> > It is a lot more than drop offs. They need to see the faces of the
animals
> > that get left behind because people move without their animals.
>
> Prettying up the picture for these idiots is not going to help, imo.
> No, the public needs to see the faces of the animals that get
> euthanized. They need to take the camera in the euthanasia room so
> these irresponsible, selfish people see what they are doing.
>

Hard as this sounds, you are right. The sad thing is there are lots of
people who will see it and will not care.

-L.
January 17th 06, 07:31 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> No-kills are exactly that. They are no-kill shelters. Do you understand what
> the term means or do some of you who claim they kill animals just prefer to
> argue without proof because you like to argue.

You're ignorant. I posted proof that they kill animals from the SF
SPCA - THE primere "no kill" shelter in the US!

> None of those claiming that no-kills actually euthanize (I am not talking
> about animals too sick to survive where euthanizing is the only option) have
> offered proof nor provided us in here with an actual manager of a no-kill
> sanctuary claiming they kill animals.

Go re-read the post I made about the SF SPCA - they kill directly
because of health and behavior issues. As do all "no kill" shelters.


They also have not provided physical
> documentation claiming no-kill shelters kill animals. The only thing these
> people who say no-kill shelters kill animals have offered is "they turn
> animals away so that alone is proof." This not evidence. Some no-kills have
> had to turn animals away because during cat and kitten season many shelters
> are filled to capacity with felines. This is the result because some stupid
> assed humans fail to have their cat spayed or neutered. This is not the
> fault of the shelters.

It is when they claim they are a "no kill shelter".

<snip>

> For those of you who believe no-kill animals actually kill animals it is
> obvious you have no clue how hard the volunteers actually work and how many
> animals are alive today because these organizations not only worked
> tirelessly to rescue them from the streets but also from the euthanasia
> lists.

You're naive and an idiot. And a top-poster too. Three strikes,
you're out.

<snip rest of incessant babbling>

-L.

-L.
January 17th 06, 07:38 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> No but I have mentioned quite a few no-kills as examples of deserving to be
> recognized. I know I would rather support no-kills first.

Why? because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy that it doesn't kill
animals, right?

You are a fool.

> I also know that
> animals that haven't had the best attitudes actually have been rehabilitated
> at a no-kill. I rescued one cat that was obviously abused and then dumped by
> his humans who then moved away and left him outside. On top of that he was
> declawed. Sudden movements set him off but he did show signs of a sweet
> side. Nonetheless, I got him to a no-kill shelter who not only took him in
> but rehabilitated him and he eventually found a loving home.
>
> I think no-kills need to be recognized for their hard work and the media
> needs to start supporting that effort.

The truth is, the media cares less about "no kill" shelters because
they know it's a lie. They would rather portray the truth about the
animal overpopulation problem, which is that animals die every day
because people are irresponsible. That breeding directly results in
animals dying. THAT is what the public needs to see. Not some whining
suburban housewife blathering on and on about how much "good' she is
doing because she picks and chooses adoptable cats from death row and
warehouses them until they are placed - or not.

-L.

-L.
January 17th 06, 07:50 PM
PawsForThought wrote:
>
> Prettying up the picture for these idiots is not going to help, imo.
> No, the public needs to see the faces of the animals that get
> euthanized. They need to take the camera in the euthanasia room so
> these irresponsible, selfish people see what they are doing.
>
> Lauren

One of the independant stations in Indy did this and caught major crap
for it. It aired on local TV stations - the public was outraged, not
because of euthanasia, but because they dared to televize it.

I think the media should show the path of an animal in the door of a
shelter and out the other - either back out the front door with a new
owner or out the back, via the dead pile. They should show everything.
The people who entertain themselves by visiting shelters for no
reason, the workers who try to keep favored animals off the euth list,
the people who apply to adopt and are denied and why, those who are
approved to adopt and why, the workers who work shifts in the
euthanasia room, the animals that are killed and why they are killed -
all of it. They should have to follow workers around to the cages in
the morning as they pick and choose which animals to have to die today.
Then they might get an idea why "just one litter' isn't a good idea.

-L.

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 08:02 PM
You didn't post proof. All you know how to do is name call and post stuff
that isn't true. As for the San Francisco SPCA nowhere does it state they
are no-kill although it does say:

"San Francisco has been on the forefront of the "no-kill" movement, which
aims to stop the killing of homeless cats and dogs. The San Francisco SPCA
guarantees to find a home for all San Francisco's adoptable cats and dogs -
animals that are healthy and free of serious behavior problems. In addition,
each year we save thousands of dogs and cats that need medical or behavioral
treatment before they're ready for adoption. Animals are euthanized only if
they are too sick to be rehabilitated, or too aggressive to be safely placed
in a home."

This does not mean they saying they are no-kill but aims to stop the killing
of animals. Apparently they are attempting to try a no-kill policy.

All of your posts have been stating over and over that no-kills indeed kill.
You made a very bold and untrue statement about Sun Valley and the Arizona
Animal Welfare League in another posting by saying that "you guarantee these
organizations actually kill." The truth is you can't guarantee anything
other than the fact you try to attack no-kills and that you act like your
word is the one the only one and those that disagree with you are either
stupid or ignorant.

You made a statement that euthanizing feral cats is an effective way of
dealing with them which is not true. Euthanizing will not stop feral cats
from breeding and is also expensive. Also when you kill a feral cat one or
two others will move in to take that cat's place. TNR is the best and only
way to effectively deal with the situation. It has been proven as fact.

You have called me naive and an idiot. Is name calling the only way you can
make your point? Apparently so. You are losing ground so now you have to
take the child's way out. I guess I'll just put you on ignore since you are
obviously only in this discussion to name call and bully.


--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Cat Protector wrote:
>> No-kills are exactly that. They are no-kill shelters. Do you understand
>> what
>> the term means or do some of you who claim they kill animals just prefer
>> to
>> argue without proof because you like to argue.
>
> You're ignorant. I posted proof that they kill animals from the SF
> SPCA - THE primere "no kill" shelter in the US!
>
>> None of those claiming that no-kills actually euthanize (I am not talking
>> about animals too sick to survive where euthanizing is the only option)
>> have
>> offered proof nor provided us in here with an actual manager of a no-kill
>> sanctuary claiming they kill animals.
>
> Go re-read the post I made about the SF SPCA - they kill directly
> because of health and behavior issues. As do all "no kill" shelters.
>
>
> They also have not provided physical
>> documentation claiming no-kill shelters kill animals. The only thing
>> these
>> people who say no-kill shelters kill animals have offered is "they turn
>> animals away so that alone is proof." This not evidence. Some no-kills
>> have
>> had to turn animals away because during cat and kitten season many
>> shelters
>> are filled to capacity with felines. This is the result because some
>> stupid
>> assed humans fail to have their cat spayed or neutered. This is not the
>> fault of the shelters.
>
> It is when they claim they are a "no kill shelter".
>
> <snip>
>
>> For those of you who believe no-kill animals actually kill animals it is
>> obvious you have no clue how hard the volunteers actually work and how
>> many
>> animals are alive today because these organizations not only worked
>> tirelessly to rescue them from the streets but also from the euthanasia
>> lists.
>
> You're naive and an idiot. And a top-poster too. Three strikes,
> you're out.
>
> <snip rest of incessant babbling>
>
> -L.
>

Cat Protector
January 17th 06, 08:27 PM
I too think taking them in the euthanasia room would be somewhat effective
but I think showing someone's animal finally getting adopted by a loving
family after spending plenty of time at a no-kill can be equally effective.
They can see the face of this animal as being sad after being abandoned by
the very human who was supposed to take care of them. I saw this on the face
of a cat that HALO took in. The card read that the cat had been in their
care because the human moved away and would not take the cat with them. The
look on this cat was very sad and my heart really went out to him/her.

I think an effective tool would be for a camera to follow one cat from
dump-off by a human on camera (yes actually get the human on camera to show
how irresponsible they are and tell why they are doing it) to the cat
finally getting adopted. No-kills are a perfect platform because they can
see everything the cat goes through. They'll see the expression of the face.
They'll see how the volunteers care for them in the cattery until finally
one day, they get adopted.

A positive story about a no-kill shelter can be just as an effective tool in
gaining public support as ones that euthanize. If you continue to focus
stories on the ones that euthanize then no-kills will suffer. They need
public donations just a heck of a lot more than ones that euthanize do. Many
cats in those no-kill shelters definately have stories to tell and I am sure
the volunteers do as well. No-kills also work with the cats so they
definately can provide more information on the nature of the cat than one
that euthanizes simply because the volunteers work and play with the animal
every day.

I remember when I adopted my Isis from the Humane Society. All they had for
her was a card on the window of her cage telling what area she was picked up
from, her basic description (some of which they got wrong) and a process or
tag number. Yes, she was labled just a number and was given a paper collar
for around her neck. She had been at that shelter for 5 days at least before
I adopted her so time was not on her side. When I saw her, she meowed at me
and rubbed up against the glass as if she had known me all of her life. I
too felt a bond to her instantly and knew I'd be taking her home. When I
inquired about her to one of the workers all they could say was "you're the
first person she has taken to since we brought her in." Other than that they
didn't know anything else about her.

When I went to Sun Valley (which is no-kill) to do a show about cats, I was
amazed at how detailed each of the cats info was. They had a bulletin board
also with each cat's picture and tag number and the volunteers also were
able to tell me about each cat, how they were and other tidbits. They all
had tag numbers but the cats also had names as well. All of those cats had
some pretty heart wrenching stories as well as to how they ended up there
too. Some cats had been their a long time as well. They even had one cat
that was semi-feral. All of those cats made for good TV time because each
one of them had some pretty sad stories.

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...

> Hard as this sounds, you are right. The sad thing is there are lots of
> people who will see it and will not care.
>
>

-L.
January 17th 06, 08:41 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> You didn't post proof. All you know how to do is name call and post stuff
> that isn't true. As for the San Francisco SPCA nowhere does it state they
> are no-kill although it does say:
>
> "San Francisco has been on the forefront of the "no-kill" movement, which
> aims to stop the killing of homeless cats and dogs. The San Francisco SPCA
> guarantees to find a home for all San Francisco's adoptable cats and dogs -
> animals that are healthy and free of serious behavior problems. In addition,
> each year we save thousands of dogs and cats that need medical or behavioral
> treatment before they're ready for adoption. Animals are euthanized only if
> they are too sick to be rehabilitated, or too aggressive to be safely placed
> in a home."
>
> This does not mean they saying they are no-kill but aims to stop the killing
> of animals. Apparently they are attempting to try a no-kill policy.

They are a "no kill" shelter and have been held up as the model to
which no kill shelters strive to attain. You are just ignorant and
uninformed. In fact, Sun Valley receives funds from Maddie's Fund
project which is an off-shoot of tthe SF SPCA.


>
> All of your posts have been stating over and over that no-kills indeed kill.
> You made a very bold and untrue statement about Sun Valley and the Arizona
> Animal Welfare League in another posting by saying that "you guarantee these
> organizations actually kill." The truth is you can't guarantee anything
> other than the fact you try to attack no-kills and that you act like your
> word is the one the only one and those that disagree with you are either
> stupid or ignorant.

Call these shelters and talk to their ward manager or staff vet. I can
guarantee she has a vial of euthanasia solution ready to use and a
stock pile in the back. In fact, just to prove you wrong, I just
called Sun Valley and spoke to the receptionsit. They *do* euthanize
animals because of health reasons. They do not euth due to behavioral
issues because they preselect animals by doing a two-page check sheet
to ensure the animal has no behavioral problems. Call them yourself if
you do not believe me.

So what Sun Valley does, in effect, is it takes adoptable animals only,
thus sentencing all the others left behind to death. Nice.


>
> You made a statement that euthanizing feral cats is an effective way of
> dealing with them which is not true. Euthanizing will not stop feral cats
> from breeding and is also expensive.

Read your last sentence. A dead cat cannot breed.


> Also when you kill a feral cat one or
> two others will move in to take that cat's place.

You have still removed an animal from the population.

> TNR is the best and only
> way to effectively deal with the situation. It has been proven as fact.
>
> You have called me naive and an idiot. Is name calling the only way you can
> make your point? Apparently so.

Just making observations. With one phone call (which I had to do
because they are not honest on their website) I have proven that Sun
Valley is a kill Shelter. So is AAWL: From the Arizona Animal Welfare
League website (http://www.aawl.org/about/faqs.shtml):

Q: What does it mean when we say AAWL is a "No Kill" shelter?
A: "No kill" is a phrase commonly used in today's animal welfare
environment, and we want to be very clear about what our choices are
and how our decisions are made. As an organization, we aim to lead the
community in reducing euthanasia of adoptable animals, including those
in our own shelter and dogs and cats in other animal shelters.
Essentially, when we say we are a no kill shelter, we mean this:

The AAWL does not euthanize for space or for time, or as a means of
overpopulation control. We do not euthanize animals in our care that we
determine are adoptable animals.

******However, we are sometimes faced with situations in which we
conclude that euthanasia is our most humane option, such as when an
animal requires medical treatment that goes beyond our resources,
exceeds our ability to humanely provide comfort or pain management, or
has a condition that puts other shelter animals or workers at risk. We
might also choose euthanasia when an animal has negative behaviors,
such as unmanageable aggression towards other dogs, or aggression
towards people that goes beyond our ability to correct, especially if
that behavior presents a safety concern to a potential adopter or to
the community. We do not feel it is responsible to place a dangerous
animal in the community or to put shelter animals, staff or volunteers
- or visitors to our facility - at risk. We also do not feel it is
responsible to imply that we would.******

There are very few organizations with the money and facilities to
humanely keep animals that are ill or unsafe around people. AAWL is not
designed to function as a long-term sanctuary for animals, and we focus
our shelter resources on providing temporary care for animals until we
can find them permanent adoptive homes."

This is *EXACTLY* what I have said time and time again in this thread.
Are you going to shut up now?


>You are losing ground so now you have to
> take the child's way out.

No, you are talking out of your ass, and I have just proven so.

> I guess I'll just put you on ignore since you are
> obviously only in this discussion to name call and bully.

I have now *proven* that you are an idiot and have no idea what you are
even talking about, in front of thousands of Usenet readers.
Congratulations.

-L.

-L.
January 17th 06, 08:44 PM
Cat Protector wrote:

>They need
> public donations just a heck of a lot more than ones that euthanize do.

Since they handle a fraction of what the open intake shelters do, this
is false.

-L.

Phil P.
January 18th 06, 10:17 AM
"Steve Crane" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> Exactly correct.


How would you know?


What the local "no kill" shelter doesn't accept, end
> up at another shelter without the same policy. I think it is the height
> of hypocrisy for any shelter to call themselves a "no kill" shelter
> just to garner additional funding and support and make some people feel
> better - it is without question a huge sham and deceit. Publicly
> operated shelters end up taking all the cast-offs that the local
> "no-kill" shelter refuses. The "no-kill" shelter gets to fool
> themselves and their clients and leaves the publicly operated facility
> to take all the risk and all the grief.


Have a lot of experience with no-kill shelters, do you, Steve? That's a
rhetorical question- based on the stupidity of your statement, the answer is
obviously no.

Many no-kill shelters- like mine- take many cats with special needs, and
otherwise "unadoptables", *first*, from kill-shelter's death rows and
provide *life-long* care since those are the cats that would be killed
first. IOW, slick, we take the cats that the kill-shelters routinely kill-
not to mention older healthy cats as well.

No kill shelters also take healthy cats that kill shelters kill.

No kill shelters are also privately funded----

Its always the assholes who know nothing and do nothing that criticize the
people who do.

Phil P.
January 18th 06, 10:17 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
> > Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I
fund
> > as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both
completely no
> > kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will never
> > return.
>
> IOW, they are a kill shelter. They kill animals.

That's an utterly stupid statement- Euthanizing a suffering animal is not
the same as killing a healthy animal.

Don't judge all no kill shelters based on your limited experience.

-L.
January 18th 06, 10:40 AM
Phil P. wrote:
> "-L." > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
> > NMR wrote:
> > > Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I
> fund
> > > as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both
> completely no
> > > kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will never
> > > return.
> >
> > IOW, they are a kill shelter. They kill animals.
>
> That's an utterly stupid statement- Euthanizing a suffering animal is not
> the same as killing a healthy animal.

Didn't say it was.

>
> Don't judge all no kill shelters based on your limited experience.

Killing is killing Phil. You can't call a shelter a "no kill" if you
kill animals.
<shrug> You will note that the better limited-intake, placement
shelters do not use the term "no kill".
-L.

-L.
January 18th 06, 11:11 AM
Phil P. wrote:
> Many no-kill shelters- like mine- take many cats with special needs, and
> otherwise "unadoptables", *first*, from kill-shelter's death rows and
> provide *life-long* care since those are the cats that would be killed
> first. IOW, slick, we take the cats that the kill-shelters routinely kill-
> not to mention older healthy cats as well.

That's awesome. But you are a limited intake shelter, no doubt. Do
you take every animal offered to you or every animal on death row? Of
course not. And where do those animals that you refuse end up? - many
at the "kill shelters". And while I have no doubt that *you* provide
long-term, good quality of life for the animals you rescue, many "no
kill" shelters don't. Some "no kill" shelters are no better than
hoarding situations. There have been more than one instance of this
covered in the media.

>
> No kill shelters also take healthy cats that kill shelters kill.

Some do, yes. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

>
> No kill shelters are also privately funded----

Of course. As are many Humane Societies and SPCAs.

>
> Its always the assholes who know nothing and do nothing that criticize the
> people who do.

You always resort to attacking one's "lack of experience" when they
have a differing viewpoint. Funny, that.

The local "no kill" cat shelter here is a joke - they do not take in
animals and haven't for over 2 years. They have a warehouse of over
250 cats, most of whom will never get placed. I have to question the
quality of life for those animals. I looked into volunteering there
and quickly decided that my efforts are much better spent elsewhere.

Bottom line is, the "no kill" shelters provide a valuable service in
helping the homeless animal population. But "no kills" aren't serving
the same animal populace as the kill shelters do. "No kills" are
limited intake, they pick and choose which animals to take (many only
selecting the desirables) and they *do* kill animals, whether it be for
humane reasons, behavioral reasons, or whatever (all have different
criteria).

I think what I object to is the false idea or pretense that no animals
are killed in such shelters (which the OP insists is true). The truth
is, if one surrenders an animal and it gets sick and can't be
rehabilitated, or bites someone, it may be killed. I just wish they
were more forthcoming with that truth. Many of the websites do not
address their policies at all - and IMO, that's hypocritical, if you
are billing yourself as a "no kill" shelter. The general public thinks
"no kill" means just that - that animals are *never* killed there.


-L.

-L.
January 18th 06, 11:13 AM
Phil P. wrote:
> Many no-kill shelters- like mine- take many cats with special needs, and
> otherwise "unadoptables", *first*, from kill-shelter's death rows and
> provide *life-long* care since those are the cats that would be killed
> first. IOW, slick, we take the cats that the kill-shelters routinely kill-
> not to mention older healthy cats as well.

That's awesome. But you are a limited intake shelter, no doubt. Do
you take every animal offered to you or every animal on death row? Of
course not. And where do those animals that you refuse end up? - many
at the "kill shelters". And while I have no doubt that *you* provide
long-term, good quality of life for the animals you rescue, many "no
kill" shelters don't. Some "no kill" shelters are no better than
hoarding situations. There have been more than one instance of this
covered in the media.

> No kill shelters also take healthy cats that kill shelters kill.

Some do, yes. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

> No kill shelters are also privately funded----

Of course. As are many Humane Societies and SPCAs.

>
> Its always the assholes who know nothing and do nothing that criticize the
> people who do.

You always resort to attacking one's "lack of experience" when they
have a differing viewpoint. Funny, that.

The local "no kill" cat shelter here is a joke - they do not take in
animals and haven't for over 2 years. They have a warehouse of over
250 cats, most of whom will never get placed. I have to question the
quality of life for those animals. I looked into volunteering there
and quickly decided that my efforts are much better spent elsewhere.

Bottom line is, the "no kill" shelters provide a valuable service in
helping the homeless animal population. But "no kills" aren't serving
the same animal populace as the kill shelters do. "No kills" are
limited intake, they pick and choose which animals to take (many only
selecting the desirables) and they *do* kill animals, whether it be for
humane reasons, behavioral reasons, or whatever (all have different
criteria).

I think what I object to is the false idea or pretense that no animals
are killed in such shelters (which the OP insists is true). The truth
is, if one surrenders an animal and it gets sick and can't be
rehabilitated, or bites someone, it may be killed. I just wish they
were more forthcoming with that truth. Many of the websites do not
address their policies at all - and IMO, that's hypocritical, if you
are billing yourself as a "no kill" shelter. The general public thinks
"no kill" means just that - that animals are *never* killed there.


-L.

Phil P.
January 18th 06, 11:45 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Phil P. wrote:
> > "-L." > wrote in message
> > ups.com...
> > >
> > > NMR wrote:
> > > > Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both
shelters I
> > fund
> > > > as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both
> > completely no
> > > > kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will
never
> > > > return.
> > >
> > > IOW, they are a kill shelter. They kill animals.
> >
> > That's an utterly stupid statement- Euthanizing a suffering animal is
not
> > the same as killing a healthy animal.
>
> Didn't say it was.


Hard to tell what the hell you're saying. Seems to me that you implied
Mat's shelter is a kill shelter because they euthanize suffering animals.
That's not a kill shelter.


>
> >
> > Don't judge all no kill shelters based on your limited experience.
>
> Killing is killing Phil.


Another stupid statement. There's a difference between euthanizing a
suffering animal and killing a healthy animal. If you don't know the
difference, let me know- I'll be happy to educate you.



You can't call a shelter a "no kill" if you
> kill animals.

Another utterly stupid statement. Better to let suffering animals suffer,
eh, Lyn?



> <shrug> You will note that the better limited-intake, placement
> shelters do not use the term "no kill".
> -L.

My shelter *is* no kill- and mine *is* a "better" shelter. I have never
killed a healthy animal. Many of our cats have behavioral problems or have
chronic illnesses or are older and would have been killed a long time ago in
kill shelters. IOW, we take cats that kill shelters kill.

Most no-kill shelters are privately funded and accept as many animals as
they can possibly care for. That's the best they can do - both morally and
ethically.

What do you do other than bad mouth shelters that save cats' lives, huh?

Phil P.
January 18th 06, 11:45 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Phil P. wrote:
> > Many no-kill shelters- like mine- take many cats with special needs, and
> > otherwise "unadoptables", *first*, from kill-shelter's death rows and
> > provide *life-long* care since those are the cats that would be killed
> > first. IOW, slick, we take the cats that the kill-shelters routinely
kill-
> > not to mention older healthy cats as well.
>
> That's awesome. But you are a limited intake shelter, no doubt.


We take as many cats as we can provide proper care for.



Do
> you take every animal offered to you or every animal on death row?


Stupid question.



Of
> course not. And where do those animals that you refuse end up? - many
> at the "kill shelters".

We take cats *from* kill shelters that would have been killed.


>
> >
> > No kill shelters also take healthy cats that kill shelters kill.
>
> Some do, yes. I don't think anyone is arguing that.
>
> >
> > No kill shelters are also privately funded----
>
> Of course. As are many Humane Societies and SPCAs.


Most kill shelters are government funded. Most no-kills operate on their
own money and donations.


>
> >
> > Its always the assholes who know nothing and do nothing that criticize
the
> > people who do.
>
> You always resort to attacking one's "lack of experience" when they
> have a differing viewpoint. Funny, that.

Not really- The "differing viewpoints" are often due to "one's" lack of
experience or different experience or usually less experience than mine.

Actually, it *is* funny that a pet food salesman is criticizing no-kill
shelters!

-L.
January 18th 06, 12:01 PM
Phil P. wrote:
> Many no-kill shelters- like mine- take many cats with special needs, and
> otherwise "unadoptables", *first*, from kill-shelter's death rows and
> provide *life-long* care since those are the cats that would be killed
> first. IOW, slick, we take the cats that the kill-shelters routinely kill-
> not to mention older healthy cats as well.

That's awesome. But you are a limited intake shelter, no doubt. Do
you take every animal offered to you or every animal on death row? Of
course not. And where do those animals that you refuse end up? - many
at the "kill shelters". And while I have no doubt that *you* provide
long-term, good quality of life for the animals you rescue, many "no
kill" shelters don't. Some "no kill" shelters are no better than
hoarding situations. There have been more than one instance of this
covered in the media.

>
> No kill shelters also take healthy cats that kill shelters kill.

Some do, yes. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

>
> No kill shelters are also privately funded----

Of course. As are many Humane Societies and SPCAs.

>
> Its always the assholes who know nothing and do nothing that criticize the
> people who do.

You always resort to attacking one's "lack of experience" when they
have a differing viewpoint. Funny, that.

The local "no kill" cat shelter here is a joke - they do not take in
animals and haven't for over 2 years. They have a warehouse of over
250 cats, most of whom will never get placed. I have to question the
quality of life for those animals. I looked into volunteering there
and quickly decided that my efforts are much better spent elsewhere.

Bottom line is, the "no kill" shelters provide a valuable service in
helping the homeless animal population. But "no kills" aren't serving
the same animal populace as the kill shelters do. "No kills" are
limited intake, they pick and choose which animals to take (many only
selecting the desirables) and they *do* kill animals, whether it be for
humane reasons, behavioral reasons, or whatever (all have different
criteria).

I think what I object to is the false idea or pretense that no animals
are killed in such shelters (which the OP insists is true). The truth
is, if one surrenders an animal and it gets sick and can't be
rehabilitated, or bites someone, it may be killed. I just wish they
were more forthcoming with that truth. Many of the websites do not
address their policies at all - and IMO, that's hypocritical, if you
are billing yourself as a "no kill" shelter. The general public thinks
"no kill" means just that - that animals are *never* killed there.

-L.

CatNipped
January 18th 06, 04:43 PM
I'm not going to participate in a flame war of "no-kill" shelters being
better than "kill" shelters. However, I'd like to point out one logical
conclusion that seems to be ignored here.

If "no-kill" shelters were so successful, and never turned away a cat or
dog, then why do we still have cats and dogs being euthanized or dumped?
Why don't the "no-kill" shelters adopt every single animal on "death row" at
the HS?

I really don't think that "kill" shelters are deliberately holding on to
cats and dogs just so they can euthanize them - I am quite sure they would
be willing to give over all their cats and dogs to "no-kill" shelters rather
then euthanize them. The only reason they don't is that already-established
"no-kill" shelters are filled to capacity (the decent ones just refuse to
take more animals, the "hoarder" types just pack them into small cages,
sometimes more than one animal per cage, to live out their lives in a 2' x
2' space). Once a "no-kill" shelter is filled to capacity they have no
choice but to leave animals in the "kill" shelter with the obvious
consequence of euthanasia for the animal. Ergo, the "no-kill" shelter is
killing animals by default by not taking in every animal that is not wanted.

I got Sammy at a "no-kill" shelter showing at PetsMart during kitten season
last year when the woman whose cat had birthed Sammy and 3 other kittens was
told that she had to bring them to the local SPCA because their "no-kill"
was full (I grabbed Sammy before she left with the kittens mainly because
Sammy looked so much like my Bandit, even though we really couldn't afford
to support a fourth cat).

While I was oooo-ing and aaaa-ing over Sammy, two other people brought in
boxes of kittens and were told that the "no-kill" shelter had to refuse to
take them because they were full. That was about 10 or more kittens in the
space of 30 minutes - can you imagine how many kittens were turned away
during all of kitten season that year???! [I'm hoping Sammy's brothers and
sisters were adopted, but it's likely they were euthanized at the SPCA, *IF*
the woman bothered to drive the 30-some miles there and didn't just dump
them somewhere.]

I *REALLY* wish that not a single animal need ever be euthanized, but sadly
that is not now the case and, considering the lack of care and
responsibility of owners who do not have their animals desexed, it will not
be the case in the near future. The hard truth is that there just aren't
enough fosterers or potential homes to go around and "no-kill" shelters can
only call themselves "no-kill" for the small number of animals that they can
squeeze into their facilities - the excess that are refused are killed by
default, either humanely at the HS, or cruelly by one of the many ways
dumped animals die.

--

Hugs,

CatNipped

See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/

PawsForThought
January 18th 06, 06:24 PM
-L. wrote:
> NMR wrote:
> > Hold the phone don't add all no kill shelters to this. Both shelters I fund
> > as in I pay the bills and volunteer my time at. They are both completely no
> > kill unless they animal is so sick that it's quality of life will never
> > return.
>
> IOW, they are a kill shelter. They kill animals.

Would you rather they NOT euthanize sick animals who can't be
rehabilitated? The shelter where I adopted my cats from, and used to
volunteer at, will euthanize an animal if it is suffering and can't be
saved. I commend them for that.

Lauren

PawsForThought
January 18th 06, 06:29 PM
Cat Protector wrote:
> How is that prettying the picture up? I think it is sad when people leave
> animals behind to fend for themselves because they move or because they get
> dumped because a human claims a baby is on the way. That is not a pretty
> picture to me. The public deserves to see the no-kills in action. They
> deserve to see how hard these volunteers work. They also need to see the
> animals at no-kills which have been in the system finally get adopted.

Why, so they don't feel so bad that they dumped their pet? My point
was that hopefully by seeing the horrible aspects to shelters, perhaps
these people might think twice before they dump an animal at a shelter,
know what I mean?

-L.
January 18th 06, 07:01 PM
Phil P. wrote:
> >
> > Killing is killing Phil.
>
>
> Another stupid statement. There's a difference between euthanizing a
> suffering animal and killing a healthy animal. If you don't know the
> difference, let me know- I'll be happy to educate you.

You are limited intake, and the excess get euthanized. It's no
different than the kill shelters - the excess - healthy or not - are
euthanized, regardless. So, in effect, you kill by exclusion. You
just don't have to do the "dirty work".

>
> You can't call a shelter a "no kill" if you
> > kill animals.
>
> Another utterly stupid statement. Better to let suffering animals suffer,
> eh, Lyn?

You can't call yourself a "no kill" shelter if you kill animals. It's
deceptive. The general public (like the OP) thinks that means that no
animals are ever killed. What you can say in good conscience is that
you euthanize only when it is in the best interest of the animal, for
reasons of injury or illness. This is exactly the stance the SPCA of
SF takes.

> > <shrug> You will note that the better limited-intake, placement
> > shelters do not use the term "no kill".
> > -L.
>
> My shelter *is* no kill- and mine *is* a "better" shelter. I have never
> killed a healthy animal. Many of our cats have behavioral problems or have
> chronic illnesses or are older and would have been killed a long time ago in
> kill shelters.

That's great, as long as the quality of life is good for the animals.

> IOW, we take cats that kill shelters kill.

Some of them.

>
> Most no-kill shelters are privately funded and accept as many animals as
> they can possibly care for. That's the best they can do - both morally and
> ethically.

That's no different than kill shelters, except that some (not all)
receive city or county funds. They care for as many animals as they
can and kill those they can't place. You just never take the ones you
can't place. There is no moral righteousness in that.

>
> What do you do other than bad mouth shelters that save cats' lives, huh?

What do you do other than belittle people who share differing
viewpoints?

Now, tell me, am I supposed to list the volunteer activities I do in
the area of animal welfare because you asked that question? Why do I
need to do that, Phil? So you can play "I'm more dedicated than thou"?
Sorry, I won't play in your ****ing war.

I have no doubt you do a lot of good for the cats you rescue. But
don't belittle others simply because they don't toot their own horn,
too. Remember what I said about egotism.

-L.

-L.
January 18th 06, 07:26 PM
CatNipped wrote:
> I'm not going to participate in a flame war of "no-kill" shelters being
> better than "kill" shelters. However, I'd like to point out one logical
> conclusion that seems to be ignored here.
>
> If "no-kill" shelters were so successful, and never turned away a cat or
> dog, then why do we still have cats and dogs being euthanized or dumped?
> Why don't the "no-kill" shelters adopt every single animal on "death row" at
> the HS?

Because they can't. Just like the kill shelters can't keep them.

>
> I really don't think that "kill" shelters are deliberately holding on to
> cats and dogs just so they can euthanize them - I am quite sure they would
> be willing to give over all their cats and dogs to "no-kill" shelters rather
> then euthanize them. The only reason they don't is that already-established
> "no-kill" shelters are filled to capacity (the decent ones just refuse to
> take more animals, the "hoarder" types just pack them into small cages,
> sometimes more than one animal per cage, to live out their lives in a 2' x
> 2' space). Once a "no-kill" shelter is filled to capacity they have no
> choice but to leave animals in the "kill" shelter with the obvious
> consequence of euthanasia for the animal. Ergo, the "no-kill" shelter is
> killing animals by default by not taking in every animal that is not wanted.

Exactly. Animals are going to be killed, regardless. "No kill"
shelters provide a valuable service in that they place animals that
might have been killed otherwise - just like everyone who adopts from a
shelter does. Every little bit helps, but people create the problem by
being irresponsible in breeding. The good shelters have a free or
low-cost S&N program that they promote or implement, where the public
has access to those services.


>
> I got Sammy at a "no-kill" shelter showing at PetsMart during kitten season
> last year when the woman whose cat had birthed Sammy and 3 other kittens was
> told that she had to bring them to the local SPCA because their "no-kill"
> was full (I grabbed Sammy before she left with the kittens mainly because
> Sammy looked so much like my Bandit, even though we really couldn't afford
> to support a fourth cat).
>
> While I was oooo-ing and aaaa-ing over Sammy, two other people brought in
> boxes of kittens and were told that the "no-kill" shelter had to refuse to
> take them because they were full. That was about 10 or more kittens in the
> space of 30 minutes - can you imagine how many kittens were turned away
> during all of kitten season that year???! [I'm hoping Sammy's brothers and
> sisters were adopted, but it's likely they were euthanized at the SPCA, *IF*
> the woman bothered to drive the 30-some miles there and didn't just dump
> them somewhere.]

Well, they can't have any chance if they aren't taken in, right? I
know when I worked for the HS (a kill shelter) many times people would
leave animals knowing they would be euthanized because of lack of space
- We'd tell them, "If you leave this animal today, it will be
euthanized. If you wait a few days, it might have a better chance."
They would still leave the animal. Luckily, those days were the
minority. Usually if an animal was left, it had *some* chance of
placement.


>
> I *REALLY* wish that not a single animal need ever be euthanized, but sadly
> that is not now the case and, considering the lack of care and
> responsibility of owners who do not have their animals desexed, it will not
> be the case in the near future. The hard truth is that there just aren't
> enough fosterers or potential homes to go around and "no-kill" shelters can
> only call themselves "no-kill" for the small number of animals that they can
> squeeze into their facilities - the excess that are refused are killed by
> default, either humanely at the HS, or cruelly by one of the many ways
> dumped animals die

Yep. Like I said what I take exception to is the use of the term "no
kill". It creates a false sense of security, and the general public
thinks that it means no animals are killed. They should really be
called "leave-the-killing-to-someone-else" shelters.

What is needed is more dedication toward preventing births in the first
place.

-L.

PawsForThought
January 18th 06, 07:39 PM
-L. wrote:
What is needed is more dedication toward preventing births in the first
> place.

That is only one aspect of it, unfortunately. When I used to volunteer
at our local shelter, most animals that were relinquished were because
people claimed allergies, they were having a baby, they didn't have
time for a pet, the pet did this or that, not home enough, the animal
got too big (duh), moving and other assorted excuses. Unfortunately
this has become a throw away society where there is no accountability
or responsibility for many people. These kinds of people don't care
whether or not the animal gets euthanized. They just care that they
don't have the responsibility or "headache" anymore, and they're just
happy for someone else to clean up their "mess" so to speak :(

Lauren

NMR
January 18th 06, 08:24 PM
Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or scheduled
to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come bring the
cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take from them
are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them and they
are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we have areas to
send them to live out their lives.

A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack of
space

The 2 shelters I am proud of are the only ones that are private donation
only but all the sister cat societies around the US that are associated with
us both receive private and government funding.


SO PLEASE DON'T GROUP ALL NO KILL SHELTERS TOGETHER IT IS JUST LIKE SAYING
ALL WHITE PEOPLE ALL BLACK PEOPLE DO THIS IT IS ANNOYING AND ****ES PEOPLE
OFF.

abRokeNegRo
January 18th 06, 08:46 PM
NMR wrote:

> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack of
> space


she don't care NMR

she's just looking for somewhere to rattle her chains

CatNipped
January 18th 06, 08:52 PM
"NMR" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
> shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
> places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or
> scheduled to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come
> bring the cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take
> from them are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them
> and they are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we
> have areas to send them to live out their lives.
>
> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack
> of space
>
> The 2 shelters I am proud of are the only ones that are private donation
> only but all the sister cat societies around the US that are associated
> with us both receive private and government funding.
>
>
> SO PLEASE DON'T GROUP ALL NO KILL SHELTERS TOGETHER IT IS JUST LIKE SAYING
> ALL WHITE PEOPLE ALL BLACK PEOPLE DO THIS IT IS ANNOYING AND ****ES
> PEOPLE OFF.

Matthew, are you saying that there are no animals put to death in any
shelter within 90 miles of your "no kill" shelter? Does your shelter take
in every animal that would otherwise be euthanized by the "kill" shelters in
your area?

Please understand that I am not grouping all "no kill" shelters - there are
some very good ones out there as well as some bad.

Neither am I denigrating all the good work that you do, nor am I ignoring
the many cats that "no kill" shelters place that might have been euthanized
had it not been for that intervention.

All I'm saying is that "no-kill" shelter volunteers should not denigrate the
"kill" shelters just because they sometimes have to euthanize healthy
animals when they have no more room, supplies, or placement. The fact is
that "no-kill" shelters have the luxury of not euthanizing excess animals
only because they can refuse to accept animals after their limit is reached.
"Kill" shelters don't have that option. As harsh as the reality is, it *is*
a reality that space is limited and as long as people refuse to desex their
animals, the number of excess puppies and kittens is unlimited.
--

Hugs,

CatNipped

See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/

abRokeNegRo
January 18th 06, 09:12 PM
-L. wrote:
> PawsForThought wrote:
> >
> > Prettying up the picture for these idiots is not going to help, imo.
> > No, the public needs to see the faces of the animals that get
> > euthanized. They need to take the camera in the euthanasia room so
> > these irresponsible, selfish people see what they are doing.
> >
> > Lauren
>
> One of the independant stations in Indy did this and caught major crap
the cages in
> the morning as they pick and choose which animals to have to die today.
> Then they might get an idea why "just one litter' isn't a good idea.
>
> -L.


YES there are practices of death in all cat shelters
but you can't make rules based on the exceptions

damn

****it now, im tired of hearing about it

what i am hearing is anger!

yes

Im hearing anger that has nothing to do with a freagin cat

you got the big house, from what I read a beautiful child
and you're sittin up here acting like you have lost your mind

and it is an act


i can't help ya

-L.
January 18th 06, 11:26 PM
PawsForThought wrote:
> That is only one aspect of it, unfortunately. When I used to volunteer
> at our local shelter, most animals that were relinquished were because
> people claimed allergies, they were having a baby, they didn't have
> time for a pet, the pet did this or that, not home enough, the animal
> got too big (duh), moving and other assorted excuses. Unfortunately
> this has become a throw away society where there is no accountability
> or responsibility for many people.

Oh, ITA. But maybe if companion animals were more of a commodity (what
I mean by this, is, if they were harder to come by), this attitude
wouldn't prevail.

> These kinds of people don't care
> whether or not the animal gets euthanized. They just care that they
> don't have the responsibility or "headache" anymore, and they're just
> happy for someone else to clean up their "mess" so to speak :(

And they can get another
puppy/kitten/rabbit/hampster/snake/lizard/whatever next year from a
"free to good home" ad. It makes me sick.

-L.

-L.
January 18th 06, 11:30 PM
abRokeNegRo wrote:
> YES there are practices of death in all cat shelters
> but you can't make rules based on the exceptions
>
> damn
>
> ****it now, im tired of hearing about it
>
> what i am hearing is anger!
>
> yes
>
> Im hearing anger that has nothing to do with a freagin cat

This, coming from a white boy who has the nerve to call himself "a
broke negro". Do you realize how offensive that is, Barry?

>
> you got the big house,

How do you know?

> from what I read a beautiful child

Why thank you. Yes, he is.

> and you're sittin up here acting like you have lost your mind
>
> and it is an act
>
>
> i can't help ya

I haven't lost anything, Bubba. I am only advocating truth in
advertizing.
-L.

-L.
January 18th 06, 11:47 PM
NMR wrote:
> Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
> shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
> places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or scheduled
> to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come bring the
> cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take from them
> are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them and they
> are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we have areas to
> send them to live out their lives.
>
> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack of
> space

You and I know that, Mathew, but the general public doesn't. They see
"no kill" as some dreamy oasis, like to demonize regular shelters
because they do euthanize, and don't understand the differences between
a limited intake facility and one that has an open door policy. They
think a no kill shelter will take any animal and will never kill it -
that simply isn't true. The truth is, both serve a purpose in society,
and "no kill" shelters many times do euthanize for health and
behavioral issues. It's easy to call yourself "no kill" when you are a
limited intake facility.

I recently tried to find shelter for the pets (cats and dogs) of a
woman who was a victim of domestic violence. It was extremely
difficult to get anyone to respond to my calls. In fact, the local "no
kill" shelters never returned my calls, at all. The only orgnaization
that did was the local "kill" shelter, and they were extremely helpful
in helping us get these animals out of harm's way, and have a program
that will allow this woman to get her animals back if she is able to
get into a stable situation (which we are working toward). These are
the kind of stories about "kill" shelters that people don't hear about.
They do a ****load of good in society besides regular shelter
activities. The "no kill" shelters generally do not have the funds to
do anything but take a limited number of animals, rehome them or keep
them (sometimes warehousing them).

I would much rather spend my time, energy and money helping shelters
who *prevent* litters through spay and neuter, who have educational and
cruelty-prevention outreach programs, and who have other programs that
help animals in our society, rather than merely warehousing relatively
few animals.

-L.

NMR
January 19th 06, 12:02 AM
> Matthew, are you saying that there are no animals put to death in any
> shelter within 90 miles of your "no kill" shelter? Does your shelter take
> in every animal that would otherwise be euthanized by the "kill" shelters
> in your area?
>
The 4 surroundings counties here in Florida all have no kill policies. In
the county that my business is in where the mighty mouse's house is there
are over 40 cat societies rescue center that doesn't include humane
societies or animal control. There are 5 humane societies in my home county
and 15 cat societies. This is why so many people are up in arms why it has
taken so long to get the BILL passed to allow pets in hurricane shelters

If we don't take them we have sisters shelters that will. Don't every one
remember when we went to the other side of the state and brought all the
animals up from the Tampa area to get out of the way of hurricanes. The cat
societies are all over the state.


I am not thinking anyone is knocking the work that all of us shelter workers
do out there. I just hate the generalization of the phrases that are made
for you to think that it is all of them. I also just wanted to point out
that it is not all no kill shelters need to be included.

January 19th 06, 06:19 AM
NMR wrote:
> Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
> shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
> places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or scheduled
> to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come bring the
> cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take from them
> are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them and they
> are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we have areas to
> send them to live out their lives.
>
> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack of
> space
>
> The 2 shelters I am proud of are the only ones that are private donation
> only but all the sister cat societies around the US that are associated with
> us both receive private and government funding.

How many foster homes do you have? How many cats per cage, and how much
cage space does the shelter have?
The idea sounds *great*. But I can't seem to wrap my brain around the
logistics. There is a finite number of cages/foster homes. If they
actively rescue cats from out of county/area, and never turn down a
healthy cat, you must have a huge capacity.
The place you send the feleuk + cats, what is *their* total capacity?

Sherry

NMR
January 19th 06, 07:26 AM
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
>> Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
>> shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
>> places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or
>> scheduled
>> to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come bring
>> the
>> cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take from them
>> are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them and they
>> are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we have areas
>> to
>> send them to live out their lives.
>>
>> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack
>> of
>> space
>>
>> The 2 shelters I am proud of are the only ones that are private donation
>> only but all the sister cat societies around the US that are associated
>> with
>> us both receive private and government funding.
>
> How many foster homes do you have? How many cats per cage, and how much
> cage space does the shelter have?
> The idea sounds *great*. But I can't seem to wrap my brain around the
> logistics. There is a finite number of cages/foster homes. If they
> actively rescue cats from out of county/area, and never turn down a
> healthy cat, you must have a huge capacity.
> The place you send the feleuk + cats, what is *their* total capacity?
>
> Sherry
>

Sherry, I don't deal with the logistics of the F positive cats. I
personally have very little knowledge or experience about the disease only
that it is a killer and the ones that take care of them are the biggest
angels in the world. I think about 100 foster families not sure not my area
as I said but there are a few societies that deal strictly with them. They
have a lot of foster homes care for them.
We see over 7,000 cats alone at my 2 shelters yearly. Both shelters
are on huge properties with multiple buildings; the current property owner
and shelter manager took over a abandon steel operation at one site, the
other was a processing plant of some sort. Before I was involved she
converted both sites into holding areas, administrative and quarantined
sections; she has quite a bit of money. I came along and became one of the
trust holders and one of the main financial backer ( me and her) after
awhile . We still do fund raisers, get charity donations plus government
grants. I have a lot of money but not as much as her.
I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only done
during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum 2500
plus each site. That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more sister
cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us. We work with a
animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest *clients*;
it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
are popping up daily.
Our policy with the cats they all get vaccinations, they are neutered
or spayed and all get a professional health wise check up. If you bring
them back for their boosters we give them the booster shots at cost. We
also if the pet requires medical attention or healthy checkup charge only
cost or a vet visit of $ 20.
Maybe I should mention that we don't charge a big fee like most humane
societies do. The average at the humane society is about $150 for a
neutered vaccinated microchipped pet. Our charge is $ 15 for a background
includes a dmv check $35 for processing we will microchip for you at cost
of the chip I believe $25 ( than we recommend you to join a animal database)
so we are about half the price. We also throw so pet supplies, toys and
food into the deal for the new slaves.

My home county humane society sees over 15,000 animals a year that does
not include wildlife recovery or pet rescue. I would have to look into the
rest of the counties and their numbers. We are lucky there are plenty of
families wanting pets, plenty of the *nearly deads* ( just kidding ) There
is a lady that goes on the local news and shows the pets that are up for
adoption; every pets that is shown last maybe about an hour before there is
a line of people wanting to adopt that pet. If they are lucky they get
the shown pet but we are the lucky ones for the ones that don't get the dog
or cat they end up going home with a shelter pet; never fails. I think
that every shelter should advertise their refugees people love the media.

Matthew

Phil P.
January 19th 06, 09:48 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Phil P. wrote:
> > >
> > > Killing is killing Phil.
> >
> >
> > Another stupid statement. There's a difference between euthanizing a
> > suffering animal and killing a healthy animal. If you don't know the
> > difference, let me know- I'll be happy to educate you.
>
> You are limited intake, and the excess get euthanized.


You're just chock full of stupid statements, aren't you? We organized
specifically to rescue death row or otherwise unadoptable cats. Even Best
Friends- the largest animal sanctuary in the country has a limit. Your
argument- or whatever the hell you're trying to prove, is utterly asinine.

You're not helping the animals in the shelters by bad-mouthing the shelters-
or can't you think that far ahead when you type your assine posts?




>
> >
> > You can't call a shelter a "no kill" if you
> > > kill animals.
> >
> > Another utterly stupid statement. Better to let suffering animals
suffer,
> > eh, Lyn?
>
> You can't call yourself a "no kill" shelter if you kill animals. It's
> deceptive.


I don't think you understand the difference between euthanizing a suffering
animal and killing.


>
> > > <shrug> You will note that the better limited-intake, placement
> > > shelters do not use the term "no kill".
> > > -L.
> >
> > My shelter *is* no kill- and mine *is* a "better" shelter. I have never
> > killed a healthy animal. Many of our cats have behavioral problems or
have
> > chronic illnesses or are older and would have been killed a long time
ago in
> > kill shelters.
>
> That's great, as long as the quality of life is good for the animals.


Our cats have a better quality of life than many owned cats.



> > IOW, we take cats that kill shelters kill.
>
> Some of them.


As many as we can provide proper care for- and then some.


>
> >
> > Most no-kill shelters are privately funded and accept as many animals as
> > they can possibly care for. That's the best they can do - both morally
and
> > ethically.
>
> That's no different than kill shelters, except that some (not all)
> receive city or county funds. They care for as many animals as they
> can and kill those they can't place. You just never take the ones you
> can't place. There is no moral righteousness in that.

Are you intentionally obtuse or is it your natural state? Did you not
understand that I said we take the cats with chronic illnesses, surrendered
for behavioral problems, older- IOW, the cats that are the least likely to
be adopted? We rarely take private surrenders unless the cat has special
needs and would meet certain death in a kill shelter. We try to home as
many as we can, the ones we can't we provide care for life. So, no, we
don't only take cats we can place. In fact, its just the opposite.

If a no kill shelter took only one death row cat- that would be a life
saved. You don't seem to understand the concept. No one can save them all-
but we try to save as many as we can.



>
> >
> > What do you do other than bad mouth shelters that save cats' lives, huh?
>
> What do you do other than belittle people who share differing
> viewpoints?


This is more than differing opinions when you use words like "deceptive" to
poison the well.



> Now, tell me, am I supposed to list the volunteer activities I do in
> the area of animal welfare because you asked that question?


It was a rhetorical question. I don't think you do much- if anything, in
the area of animal welfare other than criticize those who do- maybe that's
why you criticize those who do If this all you know about no-kill shelters,
then you don't know very much.

Kill shelters and no kill shelters have different functions and purposes.
Kill shelters are often associated with ACs whose major function is just
cats off the streets or out of unwelcomed areas as well as take voluntary
surrenders. Some even charge a surrender fee which often leads to
abandonment. Their primary function isn't rescue or sanctuary. Occasionally,
they investigate and prosecute animal abuse cases. Their objective is
getting rid of unwanted animals one way or the other. Many have time limits
as short as 3 days. Some don't even wait that long. The function of no
kill shelters is rescue and sanctuary. Do you understand the difference? Or
do I have to explain that to you too?

Many- not all- no kills only rescue death row cats whether they're adoptable
or not. I'm sure there are some no kills that cherry pick.

Your problem is you only see in two dimensions and only in black and white
and you make sweeping generalizations based on your distorted and limited
understanding-- just like your ridiculous perception that pets are "bound in
servitude".

Cat Protector
January 19th 06, 10:33 AM
Actually the look on the animal's face says it all. My point is that even
no-kills have stories to share and should have that equal chance on air to
educate the public. BTW, do you honestly think those who don't dump their
animal off at a shelter known for euthanizing actually will feel bad about
it? Most who do it don't really care.

--
Cat Galaxy: All Cats! All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com

Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of Your Computer Needs!
www.panthertekit.com
"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> Why, so they don't feel so bad that they dumped their pet? My point
> was that hopefully by seeing the horrible aspects to shelters, perhaps
> these people might think twice before they dump an animal at a shelter,
> know what I mean?
>

Mr Tibbs
January 19th 06, 02:33 PM
-L. wrote:

> This, coming from a white boy who has the nerve to call himself "a
> broke negro". Do you realize how offensive that is, Barry?

oh comeon now, i hear far more degridating on national television from
black men
mmhmm

January 19th 06, 03:49 PM
NMR wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > NMR wrote:
> >> Once again don't group all no kill shelters in the same category. OUR
> >> shelter as along with many others who have no voice here go to the other
> >> places and get the cats (or animals ) that are a over abundance or
> >> scheduled
> >> to be killed. We get calls as far as 9 hours away for us to come bring
> >> the
> >> cats to the cats societies. The only animals that we don't take from them
> >> are the ones that are so sick that there is no recovery for them and they
> >> are suffering. That does not include F positive cats which we have areas
> >> to
> >> send them to live out their lives.
> >>
> >> A no kill shelter means one thing it does not euthanize animals for lack
> >> of
> >> space
> >>
> >> The 2 shelters I am proud of are the only ones that are private donation
> >> only but all the sister cat societies around the US that are associated
> >> with
> >> us both receive private and government funding.
> >
> > How many foster homes do you have? How many cats per cage, and how much
> > cage space does the shelter have?
> > The idea sounds *great*. But I can't seem to wrap my brain around the
> > logistics. There is a finite number of cages/foster homes. If they
> > actively rescue cats from out of county/area, and never turn down a
> > healthy cat, you must have a huge capacity.
> > The place you send the feleuk + cats, what is *their* total capacity?
> >
> > Sherry
> >
>
> Sherry, I don't deal with the logistics of the F positive cats. I
> personally have very little knowledge or experience about the disease only
> that it is a killer and the ones that take care of them are the biggest
> angels in the world. I think about 100 foster families not sure not my area
> as I said but there are a few societies that deal strictly with them. They
> have a lot of foster homes care for them.
> We see over 7,000 cats alone at my 2 shelters yearly. Both shelters
> are on huge properties with multiple buildings; the current property owner
> and shelter manager took over a abandon steel operation at one site, the
> other was a processing plant of some sort. Before I was involved she
> converted both sites into holding areas, administrative and quarantined
> sections; she has quite a bit of money. I came along and became one of the
> trust holders and one of the main financial backer ( me and her) after
> awhile . We still do fund raisers, get charity donations plus government
> grants. I have a lot of money but not as much as her.
> I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only done
> during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum 2500
> plus each site. That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more sister
> cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us. We work with a
> animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
> get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
> people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest *clients*;
> it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
> have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
> are popping up daily.
> Our policy with the cats they all get vaccinations, they are neutered
> or spayed and all get a professional health wise check up. If you bring
> them back for their boosters we give them the booster shots at cost. We
> also if the pet requires medical attention or healthy checkup charge only
> cost or a vet visit of $ 20.
> Maybe I should mention that we don't charge a big fee like most humane
> societies do. The average at the humane society is about $150 for a
> neutered vaccinated microchipped pet. Our charge is $ 15 for a background
> includes a dmv check $35 for processing we will microchip for you at cost
> of the chip I believe $25 ( than we recommend you to join a animal database)
> so we are about half the price. We also throw so pet supplies, toys and
> food into the deal for the new slaves.
>
> My home county humane society sees over 15,000 animals a year that does
> not include wildlife recovery or pet rescue. I would have to look into the
> rest of the counties and their numbers. We are lucky there are plenty of
> families wanting pets, plenty of the *nearly deads* ( just kidding ) There
> is a lady that goes on the local news and shows the pets that are up for
> adoption; every pets that is shown last maybe about an hour before there is
> a line of people wanting to adopt that pet. If they are lucky they get
> the shown pet but we are the lucky ones for the ones that don't get the dog
> or cat they end up going home with a shelter pet; never fails. I think
> that every shelter should advertise their refugees people love the media.
>
> Matthew

Sounds awesome.
I really hate to see the group break off into two "camps"..kill &
no-kill. Kill shelters serve a necessary if not pleasant service to the
animals. Before this county had a Humane Society, rural animals were on
their own; municipal shelters don't go outside city limits. At best,
folks called the county Sheriff's department, who'd come out and shoot
the animal. Now, at least they have a chance. Some of them are
euthanized. But there are worse things than euthanasia.....being dumped
in the country and starving to death is one.
No-kills are great, too; but truly, your shelter would be the
exception, here, not the rule. The majority don't accept incomings near
us. They are always full.
I am always suspect of any new application for 501(c)3 status when we
hear about someone opening a new "No Kill" shelter. There is one now.
The cats are in too-small cages, very crowded, and the dogs are
*outside* with not even enough doghouses. If the animals are going to
live their lives out at a shelter, at the very least they need optimum
conditions.
You said not to lump all no-kills into one category. So true. Some are
awesome, some are little more than collectors.
We didn't start our shelter until we had enough cash for start-up and
to build the facility debt-free. It is amazing how it has grown in the
past 8 years. I should check the figures and post the number of animals
that have been adopted. But sometimes I play this mind game and wonder
what would have happened if we had spent *all* the money on a massive,
county-wide, super-aggressive spay/neuter campaign. What impact that
would have on the number of strays/unwanteds today. Just a fantasy. (of
course, in the fantasy, somebody else takes care of the existing stray,
injured, and relinqushed animals. Hey. It's my fantasy)
Kill shelters aren't heartless, either. Particularly privately-run
ones. Some of the most compassionate people in the whole world are the
ones who do the euthanasia. (And that's the way it should be) Muncipal
shelters, maybe not always. They are city employees, and there are some
people where it's "just a job." They have no business being there.
Just my .02.

Sherry

January 19th 06, 04:15 PM
NMR wrote:
> I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only done
> during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum 2500
> plus each site. That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more sister
> cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us.

*Boggle* That's 5,000 cats. I can't even imagine taking care of that
many. How much manpower does it take just for day-to-day
cleaning/feeding/socialization?

We work with a
> animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
> get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
> people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest *clients*;
> it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
> have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
> are popping up daily.

That's a doubled-edged sword. I love to see elderly folks get a pet,
especially an older cat. But I hate to adopt to somebody with one foot
on a banana peel, so to speak. A young cat will most likely outlive the
owner. I *always* strongly discourage kittens and push for the older
cats. I bet you do, too.

NMR
January 19th 06, 04:16 PM
Sherry there are government grants and programs to help out 501c both state
and federal you just have to look for them.

And it is true alot of the shelters are over capacity and always full. I
find these shelters are run by truly helpful people but Everyone has to get
out there and catch the ball. Personally cable companies will donate time
to 501c if you bring it to their attention about over crowding. The media
will help out everyone loves a cute story.

January 19th 06, 04:27 PM
NMR wrote:
> Sherry there are government grants and programs to help out 501c both state
> and federal you just have to look for them.

We have received many grants, but AFAIK, no state or federal grants.
Maddie's Fund, Bob Barker, etc. etc. So, what's available on the
federal level?

Sherry

>
> And it is true alot of the shelters are over capacity and always full. I
> find these shelters are run by truly helpful people but Everyone has to get
> out there and catch the ball. Personally cable companies will donate time
> to 501c if you bring it to their attention about over crowding. The media
> will help out everyone loves a cute story.

NMR
January 19th 06, 04:35 PM
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
>> I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only
>> done
>> during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum
>> 2500
>> plus each site. That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more
>> sister
>> cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us.
>
> *Boggle* That's 5,000 cats. I can't even imagine taking care of that
> many. How much manpower does it take just for day-to-day
> cleaning/feeding/socialization?
>
Not that much we have 15 permanent employees at each site and have
between 10 and 50 volunteers a day helping out. We have 3 vets on permanent
salary we also get the trainess from the veternary assistant programs that
the shelter runs plus the students from the vet school that uses as sort of
to say *guines pigs*
At the shelter I have a section that I am in charge of now that I am
back again I make sure I got to each cat and give them so love at least
twice a day; that is hard not to get attached.
We also get the trustees that need to work their community service out;
we screen them before they even set foot here. And if we need extra help I
call my part time employees and see if the want some extra hours and put
them to work. I get asked every week if the shelter needs help lucky us no
worries about man power.

Most humane societies only have 3 or 4 employees plus volunteers and they
have an average of 2000 animals to take care of

> We work with a
>> animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
>> get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
>> people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest
>> *clients*;
>> it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
>> have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
>> are popping up daily.
>
> That's a doubled-edged sword. I love to see elderly folks get a pet,
> especially an older cat. But I hate to adopt to somebody with one foot
> on a banana peel, so to speak. A young cat will most likely outlive the
> owner. I *always* strongly discourage kittens and push for the older
> cats. I bet you do, too.
>

No that sword has already been dulled Elderly here in Florida is 65 + The
company already knows this and places the older cats with them. Kittens and
really young cats go to responsible people or to the homes where they become
a total house cat. We have one local nursing home that has 75 cats for all
their 500 residences. The have been doing pet therapy for years and have
seen a drastic improvement in their clients.

NMR
January 19th 06, 04:37 PM
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
>> Sherry there are government grants and programs to help out 501c both
>> state
>> and federal you just have to look for them.
>
> We have received many grants, but AFAIK, no state or federal grants.
> Maddie's Fund, Bob Barker, etc. etc. So, what's available on the
> federal level?
>
If you can get approvals or find them there are what they call government
filler grants. It is money that can be used for anything you have just got
to show the proposal and they agree to it. Roll of the dice I found our
stuff thru that guy on TV called Lesko

-L.
January 19th 06, 06:42 PM
NMR wrote:
> Sherry, I don't deal with the logistics of the F positive cats. I
> personally have very little knowledge or experience about the disease only
> that it is a killer and the ones that take care of them are the biggest
> angels in the world. I think about 100 foster families not sure not my area
> as I said but there are a few societies that deal strictly with them. They
> have a lot of foster homes care for them.
> We see over 7,000 cats alone at my 2 shelters yearly. Both shelters
> are on huge properties with multiple buildings; the current property owner
> and shelter manager took over a abandon steel operation at one site, the
> other was a processing plant of some sort. Before I was involved she
> converted both sites into holding areas, administrative and quarantined
> sections; she has quite a bit of money. I came along and became one of the
> trust holders and one of the main financial backer ( me and her) after
> awhile . We still do fund raisers, get charity donations plus government
> grants. I have a lot of money but not as much as her.
> I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only done
> during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum 2500
> plus each site.

Wow! 5000 animals?!?. What's the name of this organization? (You can
email me if you don't want to post it). They obviously have a lot to
teach us underlings in medium-sized cities like Chicago, Indy, Raleigh,
San Jose and Portland...

> That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more sister
> cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us. We work with a
> animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
> get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
> people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest *clients*;
> it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
> have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
> are popping up daily.
> Our policy with the cats they all get vaccinations, they are neutered
> or spayed and all get a professional health wise check up. If you bring
> them back for their boosters we give them the booster shots at cost. We
> also if the pet requires medical attention or healthy checkup charge only
> cost or a vet visit of $ 20.
> Maybe I should mention that we don't charge a big fee like most humane
> societies do. The average at the humane society is about $150 for a
> neutered vaccinated microchipped pet. Our charge is $ 15 for a background
> includes a dmv check $35 for processing we will microchip for you at cost
> of the chip I believe $25 ( than we recommend you to join a animal database)
> so we are about half the price. We also throw so pet supplies, toys and
> food into the deal for the new slaves.

You guys must have some major donators then. Minimum *cost* for a
beginner's package even with S/N donated by the vet students is around
$100.


>
> My home county humane society sees over 15,000 animals a year that does
> not include wildlife recovery or pet rescue. I would have to look into the
> rest of the counties and their numbers. We are lucky there are plenty of
> families wanting pets, plenty of the *nearly deads* ( just kidding ) There
> is a lady that goes on the local news and shows the pets that are up for
> adoption; every pets that is shown last maybe about an hour before there is
> a line of people wanting to adopt that pet. If they are lucky they get
> the shown pet but we are the lucky ones for the ones that don't get the dog
> or cat they end up going home with a shelter pet; never fails.

That's highly unusual for any city.

> I think
> that every shelter should advertise their refugees people love the media.

Most do.
-L.

NMR
January 19th 06, 11:38 PM
"-L." > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
>> Sherry, I don't deal with the logistics of the F positive cats. I
>> personally have very little knowledge or experience about the disease
>> only
>> that it is a killer and the ones that take care of them are the biggest
>> angels in the world. I think about 100 foster families not sure not my
>> area
>> as I said but there are a few societies that deal strictly with them.
>> They
>> have a lot of foster homes care for them.
>> We see over 7,000 cats alone at my 2 shelters yearly. Both shelters
>> are on huge properties with multiple buildings; the current property
>> owner
>> and shelter manager took over a abandon steel operation at one site, the
>> other was a processing plant of some sort. Before I was involved she
>> converted both sites into holding areas, administrative and quarantined
>> sections; she has quite a bit of money. I came along and became one of
>> the
>> trust holders and one of the main financial backer ( me and her) after
>> awhile . We still do fund raisers, get charity donations plus government
>> grants. I have a lot of money but not as much as her.
>> I am not sure if we overcrowd the holding pens which we have only
>> done
>> during Katrina rescue operations, without over crowding about minimum
>> 2500
>> plus each site.
>
> Wow! 5000 animals?!?. What's the name of this organization? (You can
> email me if you don't want to post it). They obviously have a lot to
> teach us underlings in medium-sized cities like Chicago, Indy, Raleigh,
> San Jose and Portland...
>
Lyn most no kill private shelters are about the same size at least here in
Florida they are. The humane society located in my home county runs
facility unfortunately is a kill facility the only one has the capacity for
it self at least 6000 animals it saw an average of 20,000 animals a year but
THANK THE GODS that with this new spay and neuter program that Florida
adopted in 2003 the number of animals has decreased by 60 % in this county
the surrounding areas have seen a drop in animals about 70 %. Every license
renewal or license tag that is done has money put aside that is donated to
low cost spay and neuter programs.

That number is not the daily average has been that high since 2003 except
for the disasters in the lastly 2 years. On average we may have 200 to 300
cats per site and our facilities are small compared to the ones down south
or on the west coast of Florida. Our operation is not some dirt road you
drive down and they have 20 or 30 cats in one building.

>> That is just the 2 societies there are over 60 more sister
>> cat societies here in Florida that are associated with us. We work with
>> a
>> animal placement association that helps find homes for the animals. They
>> get the furballs into the hands who will care for them a lot of elderly
>> people get the adoptee. These retirement homes are the biggest
>> *clients*;
>> it is proven a elderly person will live longer and happier lives if they
>> have a pet to care for. These retirement homes and assisted living homes
>> are popping up daily.
>> Our policy with the cats they all get vaccinations, they are
>> neutered
>> or spayed and all get a professional health wise check up. If you bring
>> them back for their boosters we give them the booster shots at cost. We
>> also if the pet requires medical attention or healthy checkup charge only
>> cost or a vet visit of $ 20.
>> Maybe I should mention that we don't charge a big fee like most humane
>> societies do. The average at the humane society is about $150 for a
>> neutered vaccinated microchipped pet. Our charge is $ 15 for a
>> background
>> includes a dmv check $35 for processing we will microchip for you at
>> cost
>> of the chip I believe $25 ( than we recommend you to join a animal
>> database)
>> so we are about half the price. We also throw so pet supplies, toys and
>> food into the deal for the new slaves.
>
> You guys must have some major donators then. Minimum *cost* for a
> beginner's package even with S/N donated by the vet students is around
> $100.
>
You want to know how the finances work I own now my son and daughter run 3
stores in Orlando. one is like a family general but the size of big lots.
2 others are corporate size store I wont say names but give an example of
the type of corporation wal-mart. One corporate store the profit goes back
into the company to do what ever needs to be done the other corporate the
money goes to the shelters to run the family store is sole profit and goes
into my fund.
We do fund raisers and receive some federal assistance. The shelter manager
owns the property it basically works this way I cover it or she covers it
but it gets covered no matter what. We have other donators such as the
local feed store that donates pet food to us for a tax tight off. This
might be work being done to save animals but it still is big business.
>
>> My home county humane society sees over 15,000 animals a year that
>> does
>> not include wildlife recovery or pet rescue. I would have to look into
>> the
>> rest of the counties and their numbers. We are lucky there are plenty of
>> families wanting pets, plenty of the *nearly deads* ( just kidding )
>> There
>> is a lady that goes on the local news and shows the pets that are up for
>> adoption; every pets that is shown last maybe about an hour before there
>> is
>> a line of people wanting to adopt that pet. If they are lucky they
>> get
>> the shown pet but we are the lucky ones for the ones that don't get the
>> dog
>> or cat they end up going home with a shelter pet; never fails.
>
> That's highly unusual for any city.
>
No remember Florida only had a few major cities the rest is rural county and
undeveloped. That number is light compared to miami and surrounding areas
down south; you all watch Miami version on animals planet

>> I think
>> that every shelter should advertise their refugees people love the
>> media.
>
> Most do.
> -L.
>

cybercat
January 20th 06, 01:41 AM
> When she climbs on my chest and snuggles up, or
> kneads us, we feel lucky to have her and glad we were able to make a
> difference in her life.
> --
>
> Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl

Pics! :)

Mr Tibbs
January 20th 06, 01:58 AM
cybercat wrote:

>
> Pics! :)

here is a pic
http://hillbillydwnunde.tripod.com/jupiter.jpg

i should have named her tasmanian she-devil

January 20th 06, 02:16 AM
NMR wrote:
>
> That number is not the daily average has been that high since 2003 except
> for the disasters in the lastly 2 years. On average we may have 200 to 300
> cats per site and our facilities are small compared to the ones down south
> or on the west coast of Florida. Our operation is not some dirt road you
> drive down and they have 20 or 30 cats in one building.

Do you guys have a website? Do you list your adoptables on your website?

CatNipped
January 20th 06, 02:36 AM
"Mr Tibbs" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>
>> Pics! :)
>
> here is a pic
> http://hillbillydwnunde.tripod.com/jupiter.jpg
>
> i should have named her tasmanian she-devil

OHMYGAWD! How cute is she!!!?

--

Hugs,

CatNipped

See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/

NMR
January 20th 06, 02:51 AM
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> NMR wrote:
>>
>> That number is not the daily average has been that high since 2003 except
>> for the disasters in the lastly 2 years. On average we may have 200 to
>> 300
>> cats per site and our facilities are small compared to the ones down
>> south
>> or on the west coast of Florida. Our operation is not some dirt road you
>> drive down and they have 20 or 30 cats in one building.
>
> Do you guys have a website? Do you list your adoptables on your website?
>
No we don't we refer everyone to petfinder.com

CatNipped
January 20th 06, 02:58 AM
"NMR" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>>
>> NMR wrote:
>>>
>>> That number is not the daily average has been that high since 2003
>>> except
>>> for the disasters in the lastly 2 years. On average we may have 200 to
>>> 300
>>> cats per site and our facilities are small compared to the ones down
>>> south
>>> or on the west coast of Florida. Our operation is not some dirt road
>>> you
>>> drive down and they have 20 or 30 cats in one building.
>>
>> Do you guys have a website? Do you list your adoptables on your website?
>>
> No we don't we refer everyone to petfinder.com

You really should have one, Matthew. I'm a web architect and I could help
you with that (on a volunteer basis, of course) if you'd like.

--

Hugs,

CatNipped

See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/

-L.
January 20th 06, 03:59 AM
NMR wrote:
> Lyn most no kill private shelters are about the same size at least here in
> Florida they are. The humane society located in my home county runs
> facility unfortunately is a kill facility the only one has the capacity for
> it self at least 6000 animals it saw an average of 20,000 animals a year


Those numbers are extraordinarily high.

In 2005, 8,534 animals were adopted through OHS's adoption program (an
open intake shelter). They have a 96% adoption rate for dogs and an
80% adoption rate for cats - and that is a STATE organization. I am
having a hard time beliving that a *county* HS has double the number of
animals we get from across the state and lower Washington state,
especially if there are so many other organizations there. Hell, the
SF SPCA (a no-kill) has a budget of 11.2M dollars and only handles
about 5000 animals a year with 6500 S/Ns.


<snip>

> No remember Florida only had a few major cities the rest is rural county and
> undeveloped. That number is light compared to miami and surrounding areas
> down south; you all watch Miami version on animals planet

Those numbers are high from my experience. I don't know anything about
Florida - will have to check it out.
-L.

NMR
January 20th 06, 04:02 AM
"CatNipped" > wrote in message
...
> "NMR" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>>
>>> NMR wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That number is not the daily average has been that high since 2003
>>>> except
>>>> for the disasters in the lastly 2 years. On average we may have 200 to
>>>> 300
>>>> cats per site and our facilities are small compared to the ones down
>>>> south
>>>> or on the west coast of Florida. Our operation is not some dirt road
>>>> you
>>>> drive down and they have 20 or 30 cats in one building.
>>>
>>> Do you guys have a website? Do you list your adoptables on your website?
>>>
>> No we don't we refer everyone to petfinder.com
>
> You really should have one, Matthew. I'm a web architect and I could help
> you with that (on a volunteer basis, of course) if you'd like.
>
> --
>
> Hugs,
>
> CatNipped
>
> See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/
>
>
>
I really appreciate that offer catnip I really do

The shelter manager does not want one. She personally hate computers
and if we did not need them to do office work that would be fine with her.
We recommend people over to petfinder.com and the other web adoptions
centers we have many of a cat on them.

I will not reveal my company name or shelter name. To many [email protected]@holes have
shown their ugly heads in these newsgroups to let out personal info on the
web. All I need is one of these trolls making harassing phones calls to the
shelter. That is all I need to deal with. Me and the Jennifer ( the
shelter manager and property owner) have been friends for years but she is
the type that would ask me to leave the shelter program if those problems
occurred.

I had a website before and had everything ready to go and told Jennifer;
the shelter manager and showed her what I had done for the shelter. If
looks could kill she ripped me up and down for doing that without her
permission. She is 5 ft 4 inch and about 110 lbs. She had me back me into
a corner and pinned me to the wall not wanting to move for the fear of this
woman's fury. She had a website before I came around some one hacked into
the system ( possibly a inside job never caught the person) The hacker
took the pictures and did some rude things to them. The hacker also got
into the company documents screwed them up where her finances were in
danger. There were criminals animal abuse cases that the shelter had
information on were destroyed or screwed up costing the cases. Ever since
than she does not trust technology, specially the web. I have tried bring
specialists in to explain security technology, show it to her how far it has
come to prevent theft and hacking. NO GO no matter what she will not budge.
Now to make matters worse after I did all this her than 16 year old daughter
got on the web chat rooms and a sex offender tracked her daughter and began
stalker her. It was awhile till they caught him. Now she won't touch a
computer if she needed to type up a report. She used a old type writer to
type it and than she would hand it to someone to put in the computer. I had
to buy her a word processor the ones that looks like a type writer for her
to use to stop the clutter that was happening. I had to show her that it
was not a real computer and had no access to her stuff.

So I really do thank you cat for the offer but I like my knees intact and my
wife still enjoys my man parts and I don't wish them to be handed to me. :-)

Matthew

January 20th 06, 04:33 AM
This conversation seems rather out-dated to me. In my neck of the
woods, the animal control offices and the humane societies and the
no-kills (one where I've been an active volunteer for years) - try to
cooperate to avoid needless euthanasia. There is an active animal
transfer service, and the euthanasia rate has come down significantly
in recent years. Everyone, "kill" and "no-kill" alike aspires to be as
"low-kill" as possible - and the SF SPCA is an excellent example of a
big-city shelter with animal control responsibilities that has embraced
the low-kill ethic. There's no comparison between it and some other
places where the kill rate still hovers at 50% or higher. They are
under 20% and closing in on 15% or less (depending how you compute
animals that come in sick). My little burg was 14% this year for cats
and quite low for dogs that aren't pit bulls - sigh.

It seems to me, that based on the potential adopters that I work with,
that people are kinda nuts to think that rubbing people's face in death
is really likely to make them more sympathetic to animal welfare
issues. I'm not convinced. My personal feeling is that all the
euthanasia publicity has made people implicitly avoid shelters as
horrible, sad, unpleasant places and feel wary of the pressure of
looking at animals for adoption while feeling they are condemning to
death the ones they don't choose. We get a pile of people over at the
no-kill specifically because they DO NOT want to deal with that.
(Although in most cases, they end up looking at cats who were on "death
row" at animal control last month, and just don't know it)

My shelter's not a no-kill. We have euthanized two cats in the last two
years. Both wrung my heart, but they happened. We also lost one cat to
old age and one to FIV. We currently have an FIV+ positive cat who is 8
years old and seems to have some symptoms, so he also may not make it.
We have adopted out 3 FELV+ positive cats over the last few years.

It's a limited admission shelter and can hold about 60 cats and yes,
when we're full, we're full. We take about 10 cats a month from the
local animal control which accounts for 50-75% of their overflow, then
owner-surrenders that would normally go to the city shelter but don't
have too, and then if there's space, we also look at other regional
shelters. We can barely make a dent in the region's worse shelter,
which is about 100 miles away and is a literal killing field with a 75%
kill rate. We are very serious about doing behavioral work with cats,
and will take shy ones, mild aggression, feral kittens and litterbox
problems, but we do a behavior assessment with adult ferals and will
not take cats who are totally adverse to touch. We do this because our
volunteers cannot be put in jeopardy when they interact with the cats,
as they do daily.

There is generally a one-cat window for FELV/FIV and we will carry one
some of the time, The longest we've kept a cat is 20 months, and
generally we're about 1/2 adult cats at 2+ years, and the rest younger
ones and kittens as otherwise we run out of space, as the adult cats
take a lot longer to find their people.

I kind've do see Cat Galaxy's point. More money and we could have the
capacity for
120 cats and then we could do a bit more in the region. But as it turns
out, there isn't any money, so we do what we can with what we have. I
have my complaints - as all volunteers do, but in general the cats are
well-treated during their stay.

Animal Planet would do well, I think, to spend less time on the horrors
of animal cruelty, and more on the rescue community, which does a lot
with very little, and could do much more. What about a show on the joy
of fostering? Or a story about a low-kill that got a big donation and
greatly increased their capacity locally?

It can't all be gloom and doom and violence. We have to demonstrate
positive models of what WOULD work and inspire people in a positive way
to become part of the solution.
Aversion thereapy results in ....aversion.

January 20th 06, 04:57 AM
wrote:
> This conversation seems rather out-dated to me. In my neck of the
> woods, the animal control offices and the humane societies and the
> no-kills (one where I've been an active volunteer for years) - try to
> cooperate to avoid needless euthanasia. There is an active animal
> transfer service, and the euthanasia rate has come down significantly
> in recent years. Everyone, "kill" and "no-kill" alike aspires to be as
> "low-kill" as possible - and the SF SPCA is an excellent example of a
> big-city shelter with animal control responsibilities that has embraced
> the low-kill ethic. There's no comparison between it and some other
> places where the kill rate still hovers at 50% or higher. They are
> under 20% and closing in on 15% or less (depending how you compute
> animals that come in sick). My little burg was 14% this year for cats
> and quite low for dogs that aren't pit bulls - sigh.
>
> It seems to me, that based on the potential adopters that I work with,
> that people are kinda nuts to think that rubbing people's face in death
> is really likely to make them more sympathetic to animal welfare
> issues. I'm not convinced. My personal feeling is that all the
> euthanasia publicity has made people implicitly avoid shelters as
> horrible, sad, unpleasant places and feel wary of the pressure of
> looking at animals for adoption while feeling they are condemning to
> death the ones they don't choose. We get a pile of people over at the
> no-kill specifically because they DO NOT want to deal with that.
> (Although in most cases, they end up looking at cats who were on "death
> row" at animal control last month, and just don't know it)
>
> My shelter's not a no-kill. We have euthanized two cats in the last two
> years. Both wrung my heart, but they happened. We also lost one cat to
> old age and one to FIV. We currently have an FIV+ positive cat who is 8
> years old and seems to have some symptoms, so he also may not make it.
> We have adopted out 3 FELV+ positive cats over the last few years.
>
> It's a limited admission shelter and can hold about 60 cats and yes,
> when we're full, we're full. We take about 10 cats a month from the
> local animal control which accounts for 50-75% of their overflow, then
> owner-surrenders that would normally go to the city shelter but don't
> have too, and then if there's space, we also look at other regional
> shelters. We can barely make a dent in the region's worse shelter,
> which is about 100 miles away and is a literal killing field with a 75%
> kill rate. We are very serious about doing behavioral work with cats,
> and will take shy ones, mild aggression, feral kittens and litterbox
> problems, but we do a behavior assessment with adult ferals and will
> not take cats who are totally adverse to touch. We do this because our
> volunteers cannot be put in jeopardy when they interact with the cats,
> as they do daily.
>
> There is generally a one-cat window for FELV/FIV and we will carry one
> some of the time, The longest we've kept a cat is 20 months, and
> generally we're about 1/2 adult cats at 2+ years, and the rest younger
> ones and kittens as otherwise we run out of space, as the adult cats
> take a lot longer to find their people.
>
> I kind've do see Cat Galaxy's point. More money and we could have the
> capacity for
> 120 cats and then we could do a bit more in the region. But as it turns
> out, there isn't any money, so we do what we can with what we have. I
> have my complaints - as all volunteers do, but in general the cats are
> well-treated during their stay.
>
> Animal Planet would do well, I think, to spend less time on the horrors
> of animal cruelty, and more on the rescue community, which does a lot
> with very little, and could do much more. What about a show on the joy
> of fostering? Or a story about a low-kill that got a big donation and
> greatly increased their capacity locally?
>
> It can't all be gloom and doom and violence. We have to demonstrate
> positive models of what WOULD work and inspire people in a positive way
> to become part of the solution.
> Aversion thereapy results in ....aversion.

I agree with much of what you're saying, but IMO the general public
(whose attitudes and experiences are FAR different than the people here
on this newsgroup) needs a reality check. I'm no saying to advertise
euthanasia or rub it in anyone's face; however, it behooves no one to
namby-pamby around with a "feel-good" public image.
Particularly the ones who relinquish. They need to *know* that when
they drop Fluffy off at a kill shelter, it isn't "The good people here
will find you a brand new home." Sometimes Fluffy is killed to make
room for more Fluffies. It's reality.

Sherry

cybercat
January 20th 06, 08:23 PM
> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:01:30 -0500, wrote:
>
> >On 20 Jan 2006 01:41:18 +0100, "cybercat" > wrote:
> >
> >>> When she climbs on my chest and snuggles up, or
> >>> kneads us, we feel lucky to have her and glad we were able to make a
> >>> difference in her life.
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl
> >>
> >>Pics! :)
> >>
> >Look for a few photos in the message with subject "Cat Five the tabby
girl"
> >in a.b.p.a

Hey, she is beautiful! She almost has a "ruff" in that last one. I like
the first with her lounging on her cat tree with her foot pointing down.
I love tabby cats, thanks for sharing!

Mr Tibbs
January 20th 06, 08:29 PM
cybercat wrote:

> I love tabby cats, thanks for sharing!

it's been proven that Tabby's are a smarter brand of cats

:)

cybercat
January 20th 06, 09:00 PM
"Mr Tibbs" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> cybercat wrote:
>
> > I love tabby cats, thanks for sharing!
>
> it's been proven that Tabby's are a smarter brand of cats
>
> :)
>

Absolutely. :)

cybercat
January 20th 06, 10:06 PM
> wrote in message
...
> On 20 Jan 2006 21:00:23 +0100, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> She also has various vocals that amuse us. She has a screechy one when she
> wants to be fed, and a lyrical one after she has her dental treat - a
> "meow-gasm" of sorts ;)
> --

Meow-gasm! I love this! :)