Discussion in 'Dogs - General Dog Chat' started by DryCreek, Jan 26, 2008.
Fear Mongering at HSUS: â€œI Chose a Childâ€™s Face Over My Dogâ€
Read blog HERE
That article was very informative. I didn't realize that HSUS was as bad as PETA...
Even though I disagree with his "Overpopulation is a myth" thing, I have great respect for all Nathan Winograd has done for the No-kill Movement.
I have been thinking, I bet most kids who are bit by dogs have done something to deserve it. One of my friends in rescue told me about an incident that ocurred with a westie. A child picked up the westie by his face and put his face in the dog's face, and of course the dog bit the child. The owners got rid of the dog. Dogs shouldn't be expected to be stoic.
I dont understand the title?
Dr. Katz wrote a book with that title which the HSUS backed, and Nathan Winograd was ranting about it, among other things.
Katz is FULL OF SH!T.
God, that guy makes me angry.
Good article, though.
1) Jon Katz is an idiot.
2) I'm not sure I agree that no-kill is the way to go. I think it is taken to an extreme by some shelters/rescues, just as some shelters take euthansia to an extreme.
Just something about the "no-kill" thing...
We advertise ourselves as being no-kill. To me, being no-kill means that you do not euthanize healthy, adoptable dogs. However, we will euthanize a dog that is terminally ill or has too many behavioral issues to safely be around people.
So, do I agree with euthanizing healthy, adoptable dogs? No
But do I agree with euthanizing unhealthy/unadoptable dogs that will never become healthy or adoptable? Yes
That is pretty much exactly what he says in the article.
i guess the question is, what is "Adoptable"? there's a lot of gray area there.
while i agree with a lot of what nathan winograd has to say, he really really rubs me the wrong way for some reason.
not to mention that i simply cannot believe that there is truly a safe home for every homeless pit bull in this country.
I suspect there might be, if dog lovers all said they'd take an extra dog or agreed to take a pit bull as their first dog. The problem is that although there might be enough dog lovers with space, you may have a hard time convincing them that they really want a pit bull. I have nothing against the bully breeds. I enjoy their company at the dog park. But I do not want one: they just aren't quite my type of dog. Then there's the fact that all the legal and liability issues would have to evaporate before I'd even consider it . . . but I think its probably more of an issue that bluntly, not everyone who wants dogs wants a bully. Even if you have nothing against them . . . even if you rather like them in an abstract way. The same goes for some of the other commonly abandoned breeds . . . I don't especially want a lab or a small terrier of undefinable heritage either . . .
I have some fairly big problems with Winograd just in general.
But the "we're a no-kill shelter but we do euth for health or serious behavior problems" thing just really gets my back up. There are many open door shelters around the country that try really hard to maintain the same standards: euth for health or behavior only, not space. But they don't call themselves no-kill because they are not. If you euth unadoptable animals, I don't understand how that is no-kill.
There is a large "no kill" shelter here in Pittsburgh that is so well-funded they actually receive over 1/4 of all animal-welfare related charitable donations in the region (there are 2 other large animal shelters here and numerous smaller shelters and rescues--for one shelter to be getting 1/4 of all donations is way out of proportion). People feel all fuzzy that they are no-kill and want to give them money. Because coming to one of the other shelters is sad and depressing and no one likes that and that does not open people's pockets. But I've been on the inside of one of the other shelters as a volunteer and their goal is always no euths for space if it can possibly be helped--temporary foster homes are found, some dogs are sent to the boarding kennel the shelter owns, staff take dogs home for a while, if space gets tight they bend over backwards to make it work. But they are an open door shelter and can't turn away any animal due to space. People don't like to hear that. So which shelter got the nice huge new facility due to people throwing money at it? The no-kill, which can and does close it's door to intakes. Not the open door which could really use the space because they never turn an animal away. I just do not understand how that is fair or right.
except most casual dog owners simply should not have a pit bull. these are not dogs that do well in casual homes. they need strong leadership, they need owners who are going to be excessively responsible at all times, they are often dog-aggressive which means no dog parks and separated from other dogs at all times when not directly supervised.
it's perfectly fine and appropriate and acceptable that not everybody wants a bully. they're not easy dogs to own! and i'd much rather people understand that and choose a dog that's more appropriate for them than to take a bully out of guilt and it be a disaster.
'50% of kids hace been bitten by a dog before their 12th birthday'
i bet 90% of those kids kicked the dog first.
[kids can be evil!]
I agree that there, sadly, probably is not a home for every homeless Pit Bull in this country. There's not a home for every homeless dog of any breed.
I do not agree with a truly "no kill" (no euthanasia under any circumstances) policy. The shelter I volunteer for tries not to euthanize healthy dogs, but dogs that have been in the shelter for months on end have often developed behavioral problems that further prevent them from being adopted by the average family. These problems get worse the longer dogs stay in the shelter. It's a vicious cycle and in the end, the dog loses.
When I pulled Zaphod out, he was really close to being PTS. He was losing weight dramatically and wasn't healthy, but he was/is also a behavioral and emotional wreck. He is still unable to handle living inside my house. Nobody would have adopted a dog like that (hell, I have second thoughts sometimes) so would it truly have been fair to Zaphod to make him sit in that cage for another year, two, three before he finally bit somebody, killed another dog/cat due to frustration, or escaped to his death?
Though Zaphod is getting some training and I now consider him borderline adoptable, what if he had been adopted when he wasn't adoptable because the shelter guilt-tripped someone into taking him? You know, the whole "his time is running out, all he needs is a family, etc." thing. Works for very gentle, sweet, soft dogs but not for dogs like my Z. He's not an easy keeper, he's too aggressive for most people to handle, he's too strong for most small people, too boisterous for kids under 12, too protective for people with a very active social life... Really, think about it. What home would that dog fit into, untrained as he was? He certainly didn't (and doesn't yet, though he's getting better) fit into mine. He can't stand being in the house, for one. That in itself would've caused the poor guy to be returned to a shelter... Or maybe put in a backyard, with nothing to do except relish the fact that he has his own territory, and grow increasingly more protective until someone winds up getting bit because they walked into or near his territory...
I truly do think some dogs are better off dead than in the wrong hands.
"No kill" is just impractical. I am an animal shelter employee. I see it every day. How can we keep all of them alive if there is no room? If they have health problems that we cannot afford to treat? If they pose a threat to the public? If we simply cannot find room for all of them? Unfortunately, the least adoptable of dogs, when they cannot be saved.. there's not much of a choice until more is done to address animal overpopulation. That doesn't mean we continue to say "Oh, it needs to be done".. But rather you get your butt out there doing something. Educating the public, making it so that people need licenses to breed, doing more to shut down puppy mills, etc etc etc.
Separate names with a comma.