I just don't get some people

On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 1:17:16 PM UTC-4, Pat wrote:

They apparently took the kitten indoors last night (saw them out there will
the light on) and she is not in the carrier now (but it is still on their
porch). Hopefully yesterday was a terrible mistake that will not be
repeated. I will continue watching the situation.

That's wonderful news, but I unfortunately can't see a long and happy life for that poor tortie. People like that should not be allowed to own pets.

Jane
- incensed on behalf of the Princess Rita, a very indulged and beloved tortie.

Matthew wrote:
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
...

Pat wrote:
"Sherry" wrote

Why in the world are they leaving it in the carrier?
You know, that kitten *could* disappear. Seriously.

==================

No, it can't get out of the carrier. And they would instantly know who
got her. The umbrella has Dave's name and address on it, and it's been
seen by several people going in and out of that house today.
So? Just be sure no one's watching when you do it, and adopt your best
"Who? Me?" response if they challenge you. If they abuse their pets,
maybe they abuse their kids, too - how about an anonymous call to CPS?

Ok Evelyn that is a VERY BAD idea if she has no proof. If she lived here in
Florida. You can get a 3rd degree felony against you and be sued civilly
for false allegations. Here any call to CPS has to be investigated and no
matter how anonymous you think you are being your not. Here your call is
recorded and no private or block calls accepted

Yeah, that part of my advice was (of course) meant to be
tongue-in-cheek. (However, I'm certainly serious about rescuing the
poor cat - here in Arizona, anyone leaving an animal out in the heat
with no shelter can be arrested.)

"Julie_Snowshoe" wrote in message
...

Pat,

It sounds to me like the animals in your community need a voice. You
might not be able to help this kitten or the dog living next door, but
perhaps you can help others that come after them. In my community it
is against the law to leave a dog tethered 12 hours at a time, and
even that must be on a running cable/line with access to food, water
and shade. All dogs are required to be kept in an enclosed area not
smaller than 100 square feet. that doesn't sound like much but it is
better than a rope at the base of a tree. Perhaps you should take up
the cause, you might eventually decide to run for a county office to
have the opportunity to make an even bigger difference. I'll bet if
you speaks up against the inhumane way family "pets" are allowed to be
kept and offer reasonable suggestions, then more people than you would
expect would stand behind you. It only takes one voice to begin a
campaign.

Just an idea.
Julie


- - - - - - - - -
Pat,

Didn't you receive a $5,000 grant from Pepsi for rescue work? Could part of
that be used to rescue cats in conditions like this? (not as an adoption,
but to put them in a better environment or to work for more humane local
regulations in your area).

MaryL

"MaryL" wrote
Pat,

Didn't you receive a $5,000 grant from Pepsi for rescue work? Could part
of that be used to rescue cats in conditions like this? (not as an
adoption, but to put them in a better environment or to work for more
humane local regulations in your area).

Mary, the grant was for the specific purpose of building the escape-proof
outside enclosure. We rescue cats in conditions like this continuously but
have been limited by not having sufficient space - and funds - to help more.

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

On Aug 30, 8:04*pm, "Pat" wrote:
"MaryL" wrote

Pat,

Didn't you receive a $5,000 grant from Pepsi for rescue work? *Could *part
of that be used to rescue cats in conditions like this? (not as an
adoption, but to put them in a better environment or to work for more
humane local regulations in your area).

Mary, the grant was for the specific purpose of building the escape-proof
outside enclosure. We rescue cats in conditions like this continuously but
have been limited by not having sufficient space - and funds - to help more.

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.
As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats. Surely the powers-that-be can figure
this out.

Sherry

"Sherry" wrote

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.
As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats. Surely the powers-that-be can figure
this out.

---------------

Those groups you named are probably not 501(c)(3) groups. There are all
sorts of non-profit organizations and all sorts of tax-exempt status. Some
are *only* for lobbying. The laws are complicated.

"Sherry" wrote

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.
As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats. Surely the powers-that-be can figure
this out.

---------------

Those groups you named are probably not 501(c)(3) groups. There are all
sorts of non-profit organizations and all sorts of tax-exempt status. Some
are *only* for lobbying. The laws are complicated.

On Aug 30, 9:40*pm, "Pat" wrote:
"Sherry" wrote

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.
As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats. Surely the powers-that-be can figure
this out.

---------------

Those groups you named are probably not 501(c)(3) groups. There are all
sorts of non-profit organizations and all sorts of tax-exempt status. Some
are *only* for lobbying. The laws are complicated.

No, our county humane society was definitely 501(c)3 status. I wonder
if
the laws vary state to state?

On Aug 30, 9:40*pm, "Pat" wrote:
"Sherry" wrote

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.
As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats. Surely the powers-that-be can figure
this out.

---------------

Those groups you named are probably not 501(c)(3) groups. There are all
sorts of non-profit organizations and all sorts of tax-exempt status. Some
are *only* for lobbying. The laws are complicated.

Read this, lobbying by a 501(c)3. Particularly the last graph is
so basic
and so true, "By NOT engaging in lobbying, your organization may be
failing t
o employ a very important activity that could be enormously helpful in
carrying out its mission."

Sounds like it has more to do with the amount of *money* spent on
lobbying.

http://www.asaecenter.org/Resources/...emnumber=12202

Sherry

On Aug 30, 9:36*pm, Sherry wrote:
On Aug 30, 8:04*pm, "Pat" wrote:

"MaryL" wrote

Pat,

Didn't you receive a $5,000 grant from Pepsi for rescue work? *Could *part
of that be used to rescue cats in conditions like this? (not as an
adoption, but to put them in a better environment or to work for more
humane local regulations in your area).

Mary, the grant was for the specific purpose of building the escape-proof
outside enclosure. We rescue cats in conditions like this continuously but
have been limited by not having sufficient space - and funds - to help more.

BTW a 501(c)(3) organization isn't allowed to do political lobbying.

Say what?? Seriously? As a cat rescue organization, you aren't
"allowed" to work for
more humane laws for animals? That's just plain crazy.

You're assuming they are actually a 501c3 organization. If so you
should be able to look them up quite easily, right?. Good luck with
that. There have been many lies that nobody seems to want to see.

As a humane society, we circulated petitions, met with local/state law
enforcement/
legislators. The whole *purpose* of a "humane society'', or even a
"rescue" is to
improve conditions, promote spay/neuter, promote basic responsible pet
ownership.
What else is there? If you're not part of the citywide/statewide/
countrywide solution,
you're just warehousing cats.



That's exactly what is happening and has been happening for a long
time. Who in their right mind would put a baby kitten back into a
situation that had left it "covered in excrement?" Would you? Of
course not. That's not what truly caring, decent people do. And then
to intentionally leave that little fact out when claiming that the
kitten having food and water meant that there was no legal
justification to remove it from the situation. A "before" photo would
have been sufficient evidence of abuse and there was every opportunity
to take one. The fence that was supposed to be financed by the Pepsi
grant should have been built by now, too, but that certainly hasn't
happened and I suspect it never will. I don't believe what is posted
on their "website" is truthful, either. People need to wake up on this
one.