Getting ready for a new aby kitten in Chicago-advice on vets and preparations needed

wrote in message
...
kaeli wrote:
I agree. This is why I adopt from kill shelters, such as the one over on
Western. They aren't so picky.

I adopt from kill shelters because the cats are going to get killed. That
and I despise the attitude that says kill shelters are evil just cause
tehy kill. Some one unfortunately has to do it and the no kill shelters
aren't exactly great on that end, they either refuse the cat cause of no
room, kill ones they find unadoptable before they evne get a chance, or
send them off to the kill shelter themselves. They just don't have the
room to take them all so som eone has to. And since there are so many cats
and not enough room, unfortunately some one has to put them to sleep,
especially when it is mandated they take in every pet surrendered to them.

I work for a kill shelter; I was certified in April to perform euthanasia. I
can tell you from personal experience that we do our damnedest to get every
animal a home, provided they show no serious aggression problems and have no
medical conditions that are outside of what we can afford. If we hit
capacity, it's those animals that are euthanised first. We have cats from
November of last year still on the adoptable floor. We have a purebred Staff
terrier who came in in January, and she has a display room all to herself.
Our shelter, at least, does NOT kill within a time limit. It's sad how many
people (even highly educated people) still believe we do.

I'll give my money to a kill shelter over a no kill because they need it
more. Peopel are less willing to give their money over and the more moeny
they have the more resources they have to take care of pets and may be
able to take in more and give the animals more time.

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 26 Jul 2003 18:53:28 -0700, (-L.) wrote:


Not always, IME.

Based on what I can see, I would guess Aby mix - but wouldn't be
surprised if this was a "pedigreed" cat. My friend has a "pedigreed"
black lab with rotty markings - sometimes papers don't mean diddly
squat!

*grin* She has a pointed Lab? Let me guess, field lines?
They tend to pop up a lot in the field side. I think they're really
pretty. And it's a great demonstration of the colour genetics in
Labs, and how solid black is just a masking gene.

No. HE has a dog that is clearly part rottweilier.

-L.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 26 Jul 2003 18:53:28 -0700, (-L.) wrote:


Not always, IME.

Based on what I can see, I would guess Aby mix - but wouldn't be
surprised if this was a "pedigreed" cat. My friend has a "pedigreed"
black lab with rotty markings - sometimes papers don't mean diddly
squat!

*grin* She has a pointed Lab? Let me guess, field lines?
They tend to pop up a lot in the field side. I think they're really
pretty. And it's a great demonstration of the colour genetics in
Labs, and how solid black is just a masking gene.

No. HE has a dog that is clearly part rottweilier.

-L.

Arjun Ray wrote in message . ..
In ,
(Orchid) wrote:

| That, IMO, is where the major thrust of our efforts to reduce the
| shelter population should go. We need to pound into peoples' thick
| skulls that pets are a *lifelong commitment*, and that altering is
| not only not cruel, but is beneficial.

But breeders are somehow exempt? How convenient a dispensation.

| If, once the moggy and feral shelter population has been reduced
| to the level that the purebred population is currently,

"Purebred" cats are an essentially modern affectation. There was no
good reason for it to have started at all. People projected onto cats
what was once a reputable practice with dogs.

| there is still a huge shelter overpopulation problem we should look
| at purebred cats as a problem, but not until then. Why drain an
| lake with an eyedropper when you can use a bucket?

Because if we thought of the problem as merely one of scale, we'd have
no option but to throw up our hands in despair.

You want to know about drops in the bucket? Consider me. I've lost
count of the number of cats I've participated in the TNR of. The number
of times I've baited a trap is now in the thousands. The number of
times I've carted a trap away from a trapping ground to a holding area,
or brought one up into a mobile S/N van, or transported to a clinic, is
in the hundreds.

But what are these hundreds and thousands when there are *millions* of
unwanted cats? Drops in the bucket, that's what. You want one or two
here or there ignored as negligible. What is your argument that my
hundreds are *not* negligible also? What are one or two zeros behind a
number when the problem involves six or seven? You want to pretend that
a number like 1000 is "big" and "makes a difference" when it's actually
one tenth or hundredth of one measly percent? Why should my efforts
make even the slightest bit of difference? By your *logic* - and not
ignorant fascination with numbers taken in isolation - they don't.

Because your *logic* is waiting for a one-fell-swoop solution. We wake
up one day and lo, those millions have magically disappeared. However,
in reality, there is no *scale-based* solution to the problem. It has
become an issue of principle, where every last goddamn drop counts and
makes a difference, because the ONLY WAY we're ever going to make even
the slightest dent in the provlem is NECESSARILY in drips and drabs at a
time.

Sheesh.


Damn. You're good. Couldn't have said it better, myself.

-L.

Arjun Ray wrote in message . ..
In ,
(Orchid) wrote:

| That, IMO, is where the major thrust of our efforts to reduce the
| shelter population should go. We need to pound into peoples' thick
| skulls that pets are a *lifelong commitment*, and that altering is
| not only not cruel, but is beneficial.

But breeders are somehow exempt? How convenient a dispensation.

| If, once the moggy and feral shelter population has been reduced
| to the level that the purebred population is currently,

"Purebred" cats are an essentially modern affectation. There was no
good reason for it to have started at all. People projected onto cats
what was once a reputable practice with dogs.

| there is still a huge shelter overpopulation problem we should look
| at purebred cats as a problem, but not until then. Why drain an
| lake with an eyedropper when you can use a bucket?

Because if we thought of the problem as merely one of scale, we'd have
no option but to throw up our hands in despair.

You want to know about drops in the bucket? Consider me. I've lost
count of the number of cats I've participated in the TNR of. The number
of times I've baited a trap is now in the thousands. The number of
times I've carted a trap away from a trapping ground to a holding area,
or brought one up into a mobile S/N van, or transported to a clinic, is
in the hundreds.

But what are these hundreds and thousands when there are *millions* of
unwanted cats? Drops in the bucket, that's what. You want one or two
here or there ignored as negligible. What is your argument that my
hundreds are *not* negligible also? What are one or two zeros behind a
number when the problem involves six or seven? You want to pretend that
a number like 1000 is "big" and "makes a difference" when it's actually
one tenth or hundredth of one measly percent? Why should my efforts
make even the slightest bit of difference? By your *logic* - and not
ignorant fascination with numbers taken in isolation - they don't.

Because your *logic* is waiting for a one-fell-swoop solution. We wake
up one day and lo, those millions have magically disappeared. However,
in reality, there is no *scale-based* solution to the problem. It has
become an issue of principle, where every last goddamn drop counts and
makes a difference, because the ONLY WAY we're ever going to make even
the slightest dent in the provlem is NECESSARILY in drips and drabs at a
time.

Sheesh.


Damn. You're good. Couldn't have said it better, myself.

-L.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:28:35 -0500 (CDT), wrote:


This is exactly what I mean by pretentious bull****. Just reading that
makes me cringe, as does the fact that the poster sings her own praises
about volunteering at shelters, yet kicked those shelter cats to the
curb and bought cats from a breeder.

Megan, I don't sing my own praises about anything. People ask
what I do, I tell them. I'm sorry that I don't fit your mental
picture of a 'cat rescuer', but not all of us want to live in a small
apartment with 25 cats. I didn't 'kick shelter cats to the curb', I
still foster and volunteer with the same places I did before.

That is the ultimate example of a
selfish and cold personality.

Why, thank you, Megan! You're such a sweetheart yourself, you
know. Not at all holier-than-thou or a bit judgemental. Really, your
openmindedness and tolerance for others' beliefs and lifestyles has
been one of the things I respect most about you!

All these ridiculous human standards are
forced on cats that render them either "perfect" (in human eyes only) or
"imperfect," and we know what happens to some of those cats. And often
the "standard" changes and the cats are forced to as well, usually to
the detriment of their health, but hey, that flat face is soooo
cute...NOT.

*sigh* Arjun asked if the pictures he posted of a cat looked
like an Aby, ie, matched the written standard closely enough. I
examined the pictures against the written standard, and gave him my
honest opinion.
As for standards causing poor health, there are two types of
cat that has had this happen, and I think it is just as abhorrent as
you do. However, you seem to be missing the point that not all
breeders breed for features that are detrimental to health, as not
every breeder breeds Persian-types or Oriental-types. As well, there
are breeders who have refused to breed for those extreme features,
which is why we have both classic Persians and classic Siamese out
there still.

The whole breeding industry is one big disgusting pile of dung, and what
people sometimes force their cats to do in terms of breeding would be
looked upon in disgust if those same things were done to humans.

'Force their cats to do'? Last time I looked, it wasn't
possible to force a cat to mate.

You've never seen a queen post-multiple-breeding-sessions then. I
have helped to suture up cats that were forced to mate repetedly, all
in the name of "breeding". I've also seen video of bitches being
forcibly restrained by humans to breed.


What exactly are you talking about
here?

The
term "purebred" is the ultimate oxymoron considering that most so-called
breeds are the result of a freak of genetics, barn cats that looked
different, crosses between different types of cats to create new ones,
etc.

No offense, Megan, but all "so-called" breeds of every species
are the results of selective breeding,

Selective inbreeding.

a process that indeed starts
with a genetic mutation to cause a feature that humans consider to be
desirable. If the above was meant to be insulting, sorry, but common
knowledge isn't. Hell, we have domestic cats in the first place
because we selectively bred the African and Euopean wildcats that were
the 'prettiest' and most human-friendly.

"Pureness" was never there and is not now, and certainly not in the
hearts of people that continue to promote this particularly heinous
atrocity.

Hyperbole much, Megan dear?

AFAIC the *only* standard that should be applied across the
board is that the cat has a good home, is well cared for, and is happy.

Across the board? Absolutely. There is no one feature that
every cat should have to have. However, since I suspect that what you
meant to say was that you desire there to be only one standard at all,
we can simply disagree. I believe that the happiness of the human
should be included,

Even at the expense of cats? Interesting.


and I believe that every kitten should be a
wanted, socialised, well-cared-for kitten.
Sadly, the vast majority of cats and kittens in shelters are a
result of our disposable society. People who adopt kittens

Or buy them, or breed them.

and throw
them away when they are cats, people who won't deal with illnesses or
behavioural problems, people who get cats as toys for their children,
people who consider cats to be nothing more than an accessory to be
replaced when they replace their furniture. Kittens pour into
shelters from people who don't want to spend the money to alter their
cats, people who think it's cruel for some reason, people who want to
let their children experience the 'miracle of life', people who don't
really care what their free-roaming, free-breeding cats do.

Last I looked, some of these these people also A.) are breeders or B.)
get their cats from breeders. The "disposable" mentality is not
monopolized by those who adopt or acquire random-bred cats, ya know.


That, IMO, is where the major thrust of our efforts to reduce
the shelter population should go. We need to pound into peoples'
thick skulls that pets are a *lifelong commitment*, and that altering
is not only not cruel, but is beneficial.

Tell that to the breeders, then, as well.

If, once the moggy and
feral shelter population has been reduced to the level that the
purebred population is currently, there is still a huge shelter
overpopulation problem we should look at purebred cats as a problem,
but not until then. Why drain an lake with an eyedropper when you can
use a bucket?

Every drop in needs to be stopped, plain and simple. You cannot
excuse one offender and condemn another. They're all guilty.

-L.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:28:35 -0500 (CDT), wrote:


This is exactly what I mean by pretentious bull****. Just reading that
makes me cringe, as does the fact that the poster sings her own praises
about volunteering at shelters, yet kicked those shelter cats to the
curb and bought cats from a breeder.

Megan, I don't sing my own praises about anything. People ask
what I do, I tell them. I'm sorry that I don't fit your mental
picture of a 'cat rescuer', but not all of us want to live in a small
apartment with 25 cats. I didn't 'kick shelter cats to the curb', I
still foster and volunteer with the same places I did before.

That is the ultimate example of a
selfish and cold personality.

Why, thank you, Megan! You're such a sweetheart yourself, you
know. Not at all holier-than-thou or a bit judgemental. Really, your
openmindedness and tolerance for others' beliefs and lifestyles has
been one of the things I respect most about you!

All these ridiculous human standards are
forced on cats that render them either "perfect" (in human eyes only) or
"imperfect," and we know what happens to some of those cats. And often
the "standard" changes and the cats are forced to as well, usually to
the detriment of their health, but hey, that flat face is soooo
cute...NOT.

*sigh* Arjun asked if the pictures he posted of a cat looked
like an Aby, ie, matched the written standard closely enough. I
examined the pictures against the written standard, and gave him my
honest opinion.
As for standards causing poor health, there are two types of
cat that has had this happen, and I think it is just as abhorrent as
you do. However, you seem to be missing the point that not all
breeders breed for features that are detrimental to health, as not
every breeder breeds Persian-types or Oriental-types. As well, there
are breeders who have refused to breed for those extreme features,
which is why we have both classic Persians and classic Siamese out
there still.

The whole breeding industry is one big disgusting pile of dung, and what
people sometimes force their cats to do in terms of breeding would be
looked upon in disgust if those same things were done to humans.

'Force their cats to do'? Last time I looked, it wasn't
possible to force a cat to mate.

You've never seen a queen post-multiple-breeding-sessions then. I
have helped to suture up cats that were forced to mate repetedly, all
in the name of "breeding". I've also seen video of bitches being
forcibly restrained by humans to breed.


What exactly are you talking about
here?

The
term "purebred" is the ultimate oxymoron considering that most so-called
breeds are the result of a freak of genetics, barn cats that looked
different, crosses between different types of cats to create new ones,
etc.

No offense, Megan, but all "so-called" breeds of every species
are the results of selective breeding,

Selective inbreeding.

a process that indeed starts
with a genetic mutation to cause a feature that humans consider to be
desirable. If the above was meant to be insulting, sorry, but common
knowledge isn't. Hell, we have domestic cats in the first place
because we selectively bred the African and Euopean wildcats that were
the 'prettiest' and most human-friendly.

"Pureness" was never there and is not now, and certainly not in the
hearts of people that continue to promote this particularly heinous
atrocity.

Hyperbole much, Megan dear?

AFAIC the *only* standard that should be applied across the
board is that the cat has a good home, is well cared for, and is happy.

Across the board? Absolutely. There is no one feature that
every cat should have to have. However, since I suspect that what you
meant to say was that you desire there to be only one standard at all,
we can simply disagree. I believe that the happiness of the human
should be included,

Even at the expense of cats? Interesting.


and I believe that every kitten should be a
wanted, socialised, well-cared-for kitten.
Sadly, the vast majority of cats and kittens in shelters are a
result of our disposable society. People who adopt kittens

Or buy them, or breed them.

and throw
them away when they are cats, people who won't deal with illnesses or
behavioural problems, people who get cats as toys for their children,
people who consider cats to be nothing more than an accessory to be
replaced when they replace their furniture. Kittens pour into
shelters from people who don't want to spend the money to alter their
cats, people who think it's cruel for some reason, people who want to
let their children experience the 'miracle of life', people who don't
really care what their free-roaming, free-breeding cats do.

Last I looked, some of these these people also A.) are breeders or B.)
get their cats from breeders. The "disposable" mentality is not
monopolized by those who adopt or acquire random-bred cats, ya know.


That, IMO, is where the major thrust of our efforts to reduce
the shelter population should go. We need to pound into peoples'
thick skulls that pets are a *lifelong commitment*, and that altering
is not only not cruel, but is beneficial.

Tell that to the breeders, then, as well.

If, once the moggy and
feral shelter population has been reduced to the level that the
purebred population is currently, there is still a huge shelter
overpopulation problem we should look at purebred cats as a problem,
but not until then. Why drain an lake with an eyedropper when you can
use a bucket?

Every drop in needs to be stopped, plain and simple. You cannot
excuse one offender and condemn another. They're all guilty.

-L.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 28 Jul 2003 19:03:43 -0700, (-L.) wrote:

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 26 Jul 2003 18:53:28 -0700, (-L.) wrote:


Not always, IME.

Based on what I can see, I would guess Aby mix - but wouldn't be
surprised if this was a "pedigreed" cat. My friend has a "pedigreed"
black lab with rotty markings - sometimes papers don't mean diddly
squat!

*grin* She has a pointed Lab? Let me guess, field lines?
They tend to pop up a lot in the field side. I think they're really
pretty. And it's a great demonstration of the colour genetics in
Labs, and how solid black is just a masking gene.

No. HE has a dog that is clearly part rottweilier.

My apologies for the gender assumption. As for 'a dog that is
clearly part Rottweiler', why? Simply because of the markings? Or is
there conformation evidence as well? The reason I ask is that
purebred tanpoint Labs pop up not infrequently in field lines -- see
picture here -- http://www.odnarb.com/drmdogs.JPG -- all three dogs in
the picture are purebred and littermates.


As a puppy he looked like a barrel-chested black lab. As he aged, the
markings showed up, and he has quite a few rotty characteristics.
looking at link

His markings are not as pronounced as the dog in your pic. He's also
HUGE in comparison - broader with a thick head and neck, shorter
snout - rotty like. The dog is clearly a rot/lab mix.

-L.

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 28 Jul 2003 19:03:43 -0700, (-L.) wrote:

(Orchid) wrote in message . com...
On 26 Jul 2003 18:53:28 -0700, (-L.) wrote:


Not always, IME.

Based on what I can see, I would guess Aby mix - but wouldn't be
surprised if this was a "pedigreed" cat. My friend has a "pedigreed"
black lab with rotty markings - sometimes papers don't mean diddly
squat!

*grin* She has a pointed Lab? Let me guess, field lines?
They tend to pop up a lot in the field side. I think they're really
pretty. And it's a great demonstration of the colour genetics in
Labs, and how solid black is just a masking gene.

No. HE has a dog that is clearly part rottweilier.

My apologies for the gender assumption. As for 'a dog that is
clearly part Rottweiler', why? Simply because of the markings? Or is
there conformation evidence as well? The reason I ask is that
purebred tanpoint Labs pop up not infrequently in field lines -- see
picture here -- http://www.odnarb.com/drmdogs.JPG -- all three dogs in
the picture are purebred and littermates.


As a puppy he looked like a barrel-chested black lab. As he aged, the
markings showed up, and he has quite a few rotty characteristics.
looking at link

His markings are not as pronounced as the dog in your pic. He's also
HUGE in comparison - broader with a thick head and neck, shorter
snout - rotty like. The dog is clearly a rot/lab mix.

-L.

In ,
(-L.) wrote:

| His markings are not as pronounced as the dog in your pic. He's also
| HUGE in comparison - broader with a thick head and neck, shorter
| snout - rotty like. The dog is clearly a rot/lab mix.

Well, being classified as a lab at least saved his tail.