25 Reasons to Be an Animal Welfare Advocate
Current mood: chipper
Category: Pets and Animals
Hello MySpacers! It's been a long, long time. Here's a quick update and explanation for my lengthy absence: You might remember that I launched a freelance writing business back in September. Well, things are going well and it's keeping me quite busy. Check it out online at www.services.writingforward.com. In addition, I've been hosting a blog (outside of MySpace) about writing, which you can check out at www.writingforward.com.
As if that didn't keep me totally swamped, I went and launched another site at melissadonovan.com. This one features posts, articles, reviews, photography, art, and more. Plus, there's a special section for all my writing about pets and animals. I'll be talking about animal welfare advocacy and of course, using that space to promote the No Kill movement. I am looking forward to reaching a larger audience by blogging about these issues beyond MySpace, and if all goes well, I'll be putting up a site that focuses on pets and animals before the year is over.
Cats make great companions. Dogs are loyal. They will be your best friends in the world.
Over five million puppies, kittens, dogs, cats, and other companion animals are wrongly and unnecessarily killed in U.S. shelters every year.
Pigs are as smart, loyal, and protective as dogs are and they make great pets!
Each year, one million baby cows, or calves, are stuffed into 2×2-- crates, with their necks chained to impede any movement. They cannot turn around, stretch, or lie down. This makes their meat tender and it's how veal is made. So, when you eat veal, you're having tortured baby cow.
There are twenty more reasons where those came from, so please go ahead and read the rest by clicking here. You can leave comments there just like you would here on MySpace, and I'd love it if you would!
How to Invoke the Muse Using a Talisman
Current mood: artistic
Category: Writing and Poetry
Sometimes when we sit down to write, the muse is in full effect and the words pour forth effortlessly. Other times, we sit there staring at a blank screen waiting for creativity to manifest. We wait, and we wait. Writer's block is the state of being uninspired, but it's just a state of mind, and that, can be changed at will.
Years ago, when I used to draw and paint, I often listened to the Cure. It made for great artistic background music. As a result, every time I hear the Cure, I get an urge to pull out my watercolor pencils and sketchbook. Can you see where I'm going with this?
Talisman: anything whose presence exercises a remarkable or powerful influence on human feelings or actions. (Dictionary.com)
In a sense, a talisman can be used to program your muse to come out and get to work — on cue. Imagine having the ability to command your own creativity, to sit down and engage in your writerly work and automatically trigger inspiration.
Please add Nathan Winograd to your MySpace friends. His profile can be found at www.myspace.com/nathanwinograd. Plus, you can purchase the book by visiting Nathan's web site, where you'll be able to buy from your favorite online bookseller: www.nathanwinograd.com.
Before I start in on Chapter Four, I'd like to say that I'm ecstatic about seeing Nathan speak tomorrow night, and I will be back with a full report in the days to follow.
Chapter Four: Not in My Backyard
Anyone who knows the first thing about No Kill is well aware of the fact that the largest and most well-funded animal protection agencies in the world oppose it. Since I became an official No Kill advocate, this was at first a shock. Why would organizations like the ASPCA, HSUS, and PETA endorse killing animals? How would they go about refuting the success that No Kill has seen?
Chapter four of Redemption answered these burning questions. Sometimes it's easy to forget the flaws of the human race.
"One of the fundamental downsides of bereaucracies is their focus on self-preservation at the expense of their mission."
In order to discredit the success in San Fransico, which became No Kill under the leadership of Richard Avanzino, the following arguments were presented:
Published false statistics making it appear that San Francisco was killing more animals than they really were (this was done by including the deaths of wildlife animals in addition to domestic animals) - HSUS
Claimed that San Francisco only succeeded at No Kill because of its large homosexual population, arguing that gay people love animals - ASPCA
Outright lies accusing San Francisco of actually killing more instead of less animals - Nevada Humane Society
It's amazing what people will do to keep the good folks down, and mind boggling what lengths they will go to in order to continue killing innocent animals. One shelter administrator from Los Angeles actually claimed that San Francisco's success was due to the fact that it was "surrounded by water" and was therefore inaccessible; that is, animals could not come and go. I assume that administrator had never seen a map of his own state, because any California map clearly shows San Francisco as attached to the rest of the U.S. mainland.
"Whenever a shelter kills a homeless animal entrusted to its care, it has profoundly failed."
Why? This was the question that haunted me. Why won't the greater sheltering community get on board with No Kill? Four simple reasons:
Esteem - No Kill threatens the credibility and esteem of traditional, kill-happy leadership in the sheltering and animal rights communities
Guilt - They've killed so many that embracing No Kill now would mean a huge burden of guilt over their past actions.
Ignorance - They're just plain dumb.
Don't Care - They're not there for the animals. They don't care that much about the animals. Or maybe they're just jaded.
As with every chapter I've reviewed here, there is much, much more to this. Reading this book will take you through every emotion imaginable. I've put it down in moments of sheer rage and frustration, I've wept into it, and smiled during the more tender moments.
* * * * *
If you have read Redeption, or are reading it now, or if you plan to read it in the future, be sure to join the Redemption Book Club on MySpace at http://groups.myspace.com/nokillrevolution.Check it out now -- there are new posts about recent chapters!
Saturday morning, I was curled up fast asleep in my bed when I heard voices downstairs. There was some shuffling going on down in the laundry room and I could hear my sister and my mom. I rent the upstairs studio apartment at my parents' house and it can get loud when people are near the stairwell that leads to my place. After tossing and turning for a while, I heard my sister climbing the stairs.
Dammit, I thought, I am trying to sleep.
She knocked on the door, then entered immediately. So much for privacy. Then again, I could be a little more disciplined about locking up. I closed my eyes and hoped she'd see me sleeping and tiptoe quietly away, but no.
"MELISSA! Melissa look!"
Great, she wants to show me some new thing she got. Probably the keys to her new car.
"I'm sleeping!" I mumble and start to roll over when something catches my eye. Something soft and furry tucked into my sister's hoodie sweater.
"Melissa, I want you to see my new kitten."
"I'm sleeping!" I whisper harshly, and cuddle into my blankets, one eye open and focused on the little face peeping out at me. Then I get this feeling. And I know what she's going to say next.
"Just kidding, he's YOUR kitten!" my sister exclaims and I sit up like a dart, like a bullet. Superman, eat your heart out.
"This is Boo," she says as my arms fly out at the speed of light.
"Let me see him! Let me see him."
Quicker than you can say Boo, I was completely in love. Friends, readers, meet Boo, the latest addition to my family:
I haven't raised a kitten since I was 19 years old. Here's what I've got going on so far. Any additional advice would be totally appreciated:
-Obviously he has the basics: food (Science Diet for kittens), litter (organic wheat litter safe for kittens), a cozy bed made from a box and a soft, warm blanket. -Litter box is Booda Dome (the dome is currently off and functioning as a hiding toy for him). -Toys: mouse on a fishing pole (always put away when not in use for his safety), a little fuzzy play mouse that stays with him, and a ball with a bell on it. -Scratch pad - Petlinks refillable scratching system. -Paper bag for play. -Worm and flea shots done -Vaccines next week (getting the BIG package) -Treats - organic from chicken (free range chicken kitty treats!) -Breakaway collar, which I haven't had the heart to put on yet.
Boo will be getting fixed when he's six months old.
The next words out of my mouth were, "He's so small, he can't be eight weeks old yet. He should still be with his mommy."
So where did Boo come from? Apparently a girl at my sister's work came in with a box of kittens. She claimed they were twelve weeks old, and with me in mind, my sister volunteered to take one. This was Operation Kitty Cat, in which my mom was also a co-conspirator. Boo went to the vet before I even met him and got his worm/flea shots, and turns out he was only seven weeks old! My sister is not happy that the girl lied to her, and now I'm kind of worried about Boo's siblings. Why couldn't she wait another week?
I felt bad that Boo didn't come from a shelter for about .05 second. I still want to drive up to the high kill shelter, which is a couple hours away and get Boo a little buddy to play with. Maybe in a month or so, after Boo settles in, if I feel that I can afford it. I tend to spoil them pretty good ;)
Anyway, I love this little guy no matter where he came from.
Redemption (A Look at the First Three Chapters)
Current mood: hopeful
Category: Pets and Animals
Before I get started discussing the groundbreaking book by Nathan Winograd, Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America, I have a few notes.
First, a huge thanks to Sue for giving away five free copies of this book to her blog readers. You can check out the contest, and the winners by clicking here.
Next, a reminder to add Nathan Winograd to your MySpace friends by visiting his profile at www.myspace.com/nathanwinograd. You can purchase the book by visiting Nathan's web site, where you'll be able to buy from your favorite online bookseller: www.nathanwinograd.com.
In his book, Redemption, Nathan Winograd debunks the myth that pet overpopulation and an irresponsible public are solely to blame for 5+ million homeless pets being killed in the U.S. each year. Nathan turns our attention to the shelter system and points out that in the vast majority of these facilities, not enough is being done to find homes for the animals. He exposes practices and ethics that are standard among the sheltering community, and presents facts which demonstrate that most major players in the shelter community and big league animal rights organizations fail to make a genuine effort to save lives. As a result, the public is errantly blamed and millions of lovable animals are destroyed.
Chapter One: Betrayal
In the first chapter, Nathan introduces us to the history of animal welfare advocacy, started in the U.S. by a man named Henry Bergh, whose love and compassion for animals drove him to become their protector, their nurturer, and their voice. Henry Bergh is a name that should be known to anyone who cares for the well being of animals:
"In early 1866, Bergh returned to his native New York City, a city now filled with a million residents, and discovered -- on every street, in every corner, as part of virtually every industry -- an overcrowded city built upon the suffering of animals and crying out for reform. On February 8, 1866, to a well-filled room of attendees including the mayor, Bergh delivered the first lecture on animal protection in the United States. He called upon the gathering to undertake a moral fight to better the plight of animals: 'This is a matter purely of conscious. It has no perplexing side issues. Politics have no more to do with it than astronomy. No, it is a moral quesion in all its aspects.'"
Bergh went on to found the ASPCA, an organization that was built on uninhibited compassion but which sadly lost its way once its founder passed away. Following Bergh's death, his vision was neglected when the organization started shifting its focus from saving animals to sheltering them as contractors for the local government. This turned into what can only be called an epidemic as other organizations, many of them SPCAs (each SPCA is a separate entity) followed suit and became impound facilities for animals rather than humane organizations that looked after animal welfare.
After reading this first chapter, I was hooked, and continued to turn the pages, eager to learn more about the history of animal advocacy, humane organizations gone awry, and methodology for saving animals which, though proven, goes ignored by an astonishing number of individuals within the sheltering and animal rights communities.
Chapter Two: Blaming the Victim
Since World War II, pets have been increasingly cherished in America. Here are just a few examples of how we view pets in this country:
Six out of ten American families have animal companions.
Tens of billions of dollars are spent annually on pet care and comfort.
A 1987 study found that 99% of pet guardians talk to their animals.
A 1999 study found that almost nine out of ten people include pets in holiday celebrations.
A 1983 study found that three out of four think of their pets as family members.
Obviously, we love our pets, so why are we killing them in our shelters?
Winograd explains how shelter killing came to be standardized, accepted, and even embraced by shelters across America. You'll be shocked to learn that organizations such as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), have traditionally supported killing shelter animals as an alternative to exploring lifesaving solutions. In fact, not only did HSUS endorse the killing, they actually went out of their way to prevent animals from being saved and adopted.
How did killing homeless pets become standard practice for shelters throughout the nation? Who is to blame for these deaths? Why do we blindly accept killing them as "the only way?"
If you've ever asked these questions, look no further. Nathan Winograd provides clear answers, which are carefully researched and cited.
Would you believe that blaming the public for all those deaths was actually part of a plan developed by several major organizations including HSUS, the American Humane Association (AHA), the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), and the American Kennel Club (AKC)?
Nathan explains how through Legislation, Education, and Sterilization (LES), (note that this was not low-cost or free sterilization), these organizations began a campaign that placed restrictions, unnecessary requirements, and unreasonable prohibitions on the pet-loving public and also villified pet guardians and homeless pets.
Meanwhile, ordinary animal lovers who work in shelters become increasingly frustrated at the number of animals they are forced to put to death. Decisions are being made at the top, based on bureaucratic principles, while caring members of society are forced to carry out the deeds and in this case, the deed is injecting, gassing, or otherwise terminating animal lives.
"Shelters began to blame the very people they needed to embrace in order to save the lives of animals in their care. Shelters across the country enacted laws that put a stranglehold on the community -- pet limits, registries, even laws making it a crime to feed stray cats. As a result, compassion became control. And animals -- the healthy and treatable side-by-side with the hopelessly ill -- died in shelters by the millions."
The killing went on and on. Shelter workers were encouraged to fault the public for being irresponsible, and a growing disdain for the public at large began to perpetuate through shelter culutre. The organizations said there was "no other way," and even provided workshops to help shelter workers cope with "euthanasia," until the cliché became universally accepted: there are just too many animals, and not enough homes." But it's not true.
Chapter Three: Miracle on 16th Street
Now that we know, from the first two chapters, about how animal rights activism started in the U.S., and how it became corrupt during the 1970s, it is time to meet a man who pioneered No Kill and laid the foundation for revolutionizing sheltering in America.
Richard Avanzino took over the San Francisco ASPCA in 1976:
"...as an outsider to the animal shelter industry, he was not schooled in conventional sheltering wisdom and could see the possibilities for more lives saved through innovative, lifesaving programs..."
Avanzino began implementing new programs, one by one, including:
Sterilizing animals before adoption
Harnessing the help of volunteers
Instating a foster care program
Off-site adoptions
Keeping the shelter open on evenings and weekends
"Every innovation led to increased lifesaving, which also resulted in more revenue, donations, volunteers, and other support, which in turn allowed Avanzino to innovate further... the results -- lower impounds, less killing, and more adoptions -- were nothing short of revolutionary."
Richard Avanzino was himself a revolutionary who went on to separate the SFSPCA from its animal control role so that it could focus entirely on saving lives. However, when he tried to bring his programs to the greater sheltering community, he was met with resistance and refusal. Again and again, we see the biggest players in rescue and sheltering turn a cold shoulder on methods that save and protect pets. This is what will confound you as you read this eye-opening book.
This book is a must read for anyone who cares about animal at all.
What? Nothing from the ASPCA, HSUS, or PETA? Ask yourself why these huge, multi-million dollar organazations aren't even commenting on a book that is slated to revolutionize animal sheltering and save millions of lives.
Now tell me, have you read this book? Are you reading it now? Do you plan on reading it? Visit Nathan's web site to order a copy through your preferred bookseller, and then join the Redemption Book Club here on MySpace.
If you have any links to reviews, please share them by leaving a comment!
Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize! What Do You Think? (Updated w/Comments)
Current mood: content
Category: News and Politics
Update: I haven't had much time lately to respond to comments like I once did, but I was able to respond to all the comments on this post, which brought a very large and interesting set of responses. Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussion, and welcome to all of the new folks who seem to have found their way to my blog!
Today, Al Gore was awarded the prize to end all prizes: the Nobel Peace Prize.
The prize was awarded to both Al Gore and the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for their work to raise awareness about the threat of global warming.
I feel that Al Gore has been instrumental in raising awareness about global warming, and also in helping to increase environmental and conservation efforts. Yet this is a man who has been criticized for flying around in a private jet, driving an SUV, and also for misleading the public. Some people still feel that global warming is a mere illusion and that all the energy we humans are using on the planet has no effect on its climate.
I personally feel that no matter what we do to the planet it will recover. Mother Earth is awfully robust! However, the damage that we cause has a negative impact on the habitats and resources that human beings, as well as other species and life forms need to survive. It is for this reason that I choose to support environmentalism.
With regards to global warming - when I consider the massive amounts of heat and energy that humans generate through machines, factories, and electronics, I must assume that it has some impact on the overall climate. When I put my hand an inch away from a 60-watt light bulb, I can feel the heat. Now, multiply that by billions of light bulbs. Then start thinking about all the other items we use which generate heat! I'm no scientist, but I can't see how we wouldn't be affecting the climate. Geez... my two dogs, a computer, and I can heat up a small room when the entire house is otherwise freezing.
Feedback Friday: I want to know what YOU think. Do you feel that Al Gore deserved this recognition? Is global warming a real threat? Who or what does it threaten? Are you afraid of the future? What do you do in your daily life to protect the environment and/or thwart global warming?
Currently
listening
:
Big Yellow Taxi
By
Joni Mitchell
Release date: 09 January, 1996
Is it Plural or is it Possessed? When to Use an Apostrophe with an
Current mood: amused
It's one of those grammar glitches that makes English teachers twitch. Knowing how to use an apostrophe and when to use one with an "s" can be tricky but this grammar quickie provides all you need to know about plural versus possession when it comes to the "s."
Pluralization
You can have one or you can have many. Do you have a dog or do you have dogs? Generally speaking when you're using an "s" to indicate more than one, you simply add an "s" to the word.
Journaling Made a Writer of Me
Current mood: calm
Category: Writing and Poetry
My first journal was a tiny diary that I received as a birthday present when I was a little girl. I regarded it as a log and wrote a few entries chronicling my daily life. It was boring, and I left most of the good stuff out for fear that someone in my family would find it and read my innermost thoughts. Soon, I gave up on it entirely.
Then, in junior high, which is really when the writer in me sprouted, I was required by my English teacher to keep a daily journal. We had about ten or fifteen minutes at the start of each class session to write in our journals. Sometimes we were given topics, or a question to answer pertaining to the literature we were reading (Flowers for Algernon, I remember well). Usually, we had free reign and could write whatever we wanted.
I really liked this particular teacher, who happened to be a student teacher, and I opened up a lot in that journal.
Living in a Laundry Room (Updated Re: Comments)
Current mood: energetic
Category: Pets and Animals
I didn't realize until just now that I had comments & kudos disabled on this post and I'm not quite sure how that happened. So, this update is just to let everyone know that comments are open now. Thanks everyone and sorry about that!
Yesterday, I introduced you to Sue (Sue Wants a No Kill Nation), who has recently posted a blog titled "PETA Calls for More Shelter Killing." In her post, Sue outlines comments made by PETA representative Teresa Chagrin encouraging shelters to kill animals instead of trying to save them. In the following quote, Chagrin is referring to the Tomkins County shelter:
"The shelter is inundated, with 450 cats and animals being kept in cages in every corner of the shelter, including the kitchen and laundry room.... We all want to see an end to euthanizing animals in shelters for lack of homes, but as this situation makes clear, simply refusing to euthanize animals isn't the solution."
Chagrin is arguing that an animal who has ended up in a shelter is better off dead than living in less than ideal circumstances for any length of time. And her statements were clearly directed toward discrediting the leader of the no kill movement, Mr. Nathan Winograd, who happens to be the man responsible for turning Tomkins County into a no kill zone in the first place.
If you do not believe that it's acceptable to kill animals who have ended up in shelters, I urge you to learn more about Nathan Winograd. Some of you will remember the post I wrote about him, Nathan Winograd, a No Kill Hero.
Nathan is not one to stand by and let people promote unnecessary and unethical solutions to shelter overpopulation. He rebutted Teresa's Chagrin's statements in his own blog post, PETA Wants Tomkins County to Kill:
"Saving lives requires a shelter to be flexible and innovative. And if that means a dog has to spend a few days in the laundry room to avoid being killed, lifesaving should always take precedence over killing out of convenience."
This man has been fighting for years to keep shelter animals alive, and he's gone up against some major players such as the ASPCA. Now he appears to be standing up to PETA and this is good. Because PETA is bad. They kill a huge percentage of the animals they "save." Their philosophy is something like: don't kill animals for food, just kill them because you can't figure out what else to do with them.
You tell me: would you rather die or spend a few days living in a laundry room? How long would you have to live in that laundry room, or even in a cage, before death became preferable?
I'd like to add the following:
Please visit and subscribe to Sue's blog, as she does a momentous job advocating for the no kill movement!
Also, please take a few moments out of your busy day and click on the links in this blog and learn a little more about Nathan Winograd and the no kill movement. Then share that information with your family and friends. Write about it on your blog. This is a pet-loving nation yet we all stand by and let animals that could have been somebody's best friend die at the hands of unethical shelters who refuse to embrace the no kill model. Be educated, then educate! Please...
Currently
reading
:
Marley and Me
By
John Grogan
Release date: 29 June, 2006
Everyday Heroes: Where Are They?
Current mood: motivated
Category: motivated Friends
Tonight I set out on a search for humanitarians, philanthropists, and activists. My mission was to find people who are using MySpace to affect positive change in the world. I know all about the major players like Our Planet (they're on my friends list). I wanted to find regular individuals who have dedicated at least a healthy portion of their MySpace profile and/or blog to making the world a better place.
Of course, I started on my own friends list and I found lots of folks who are committed to helping animals.
This is "Find LOVE in a Georgia AC," one of my very good friends here on MySpace. This wonderful friend to the animals uses her MySpace presence to help find homes for animals in Georgia shelters, and not just any animals. She is dedicated to helping animals that face the ultimate threat - death. By posting pictures and pleas in her blogs and bulletins, and using persuasive language and imagery on her profile page, she does a great job making the world a better place. As I read her most recent blog entry, "These babies die Wednesday, 9/19 - adopt today!" I decided that the everyday heroes on MySpace have gone unsung long enough. If you live in Georgia and have room in your heart and in your home, please pay attention!
Meet Sue. She wants the same thing I want. Sue Wants a No Kill Nation. Here is a woman who is focused and driven and she keeps her eye on the goal: making the world a place where homeless animals are allowed the most basic right of all, the right to live. Sue's page has no kill banners, and her blog is packed with news and information about the no kill movement. She's an everyday hero doing what she can to fight the injustice of shelter killing.
I love the passion! And I love pit bulls. That's why Save the Pitbulls is a MySpace Everyday Hero. When I visit this profile, I can feel the love for these wonderful animals who have been wrongfully depicted by the media. I cannot endorse this woman or her cause enough! But who is the mystery woman behind this profile? A 26 year old woman from Pennsylvania is all I could gather, but I do know this: she's a woman dedicated to her pitbull friends!
As a matter of fact, my friends list is packed with animal lovers and people who utilize MySpace to advocate for animal rights. So be sure to check them out and be a friend to the animals. They need you!
Most of you have noticed by now that I'm passionate about the no-kill movement, which seeks to put an end to killing shelter animals as a solution to the overpopulation problem.
There are many other issues that affect animals as well as humans. I think one of the reasons I feel compelled to speak out for animals is that they have no voice to speak out for themselves. Another reason is that almost all the suffering among animals occurs at the hands of humans, and this strikes me as particulary disturbing.
Still, there are any number of movements within the animal rights communities, so why no-kill? I want to share a story that will help explain why the no-kill movement is such a high priority for me and maybe it will give you a little insight as to why I've chosen to use my writing as a way to inform and educate people about this cause.
When I was a little girl, my dad often delivered bad news about the reality of the world we live in. I must have been about five or six years old when I started suggesting that we let our cat have kittens. My dad was totally against it. He challenged me by asking, "How will we find homes for all of them?"
"We'll give them to everyone in the family," I responded.
"What if they don't want a kitten?"
"We'll give them away in front of the market." I thought I was clever.
"And if we can't find a home for all of them?"
"Well take them to the pound. They'll find homes for them." Oh, naive little thing!
"Are you kidding? Do you know what happens to animals at the pound?"
"They find homes for them!" I was pretty sure about this.
"Do you know what happens to the animals that they can't find homes for?" My dad's tone was growing dark.
"ummm... no."
"They kill them."
I laughed. I actually laughed. Because this was ridiculous to my young mind.
"You think I'm kidding but I'm serious." I looked at his face. He was serious.
I was speechless for a moment but then I launched into a dozen questions. Why? How? Why don't you vote and make them stop? Does the President know about this? Doesn't anyone care? Who is in charge here anyway?
I was a small child but I remember the thoughts that went through my mind that day as if it were yesterday. I remember thinking that grown-ups were obviuosly stupid and had no concept of right and wrong. I couldn't understand why people who would resort to killing animals were in charge of anything, let alone animal shelters, and why were all the other people, the ones who weren't in charge just sitting back and allowing this to happen? I thought this was a free country. Apparently not for the animals!
The whole thing disturbed me on a very deep level. I hated "the pound" with a passion after that. To me, they were nothing more than heartless murderers and I made it my business to tell that to just about anyone who would listen. My dad was pretty amused by my intense reaction. Hey, I didn't read Charlotte's Web 100 times before I turned seven for nothing!
The impression of learning about how animals are killed in shelters has stayed with me ever since that day. Many children grow up and eventually accept the things that seemed, well, not quite right, about the world. I was not one of those kids, and I feel somewhat blessed that I have retained the ideals and visions that only a small child could envision and believe in, such as a world where animals don't have to die because the people who are responsible for them do not do what is necessary to keep them alive.
And that's the bottom line with no-kill. Human beings take charge of these animals, then fail them, refusing to protect the very thing they chose to possess in the first place. And whatever people say to me about killing as a solution in the shelters, I will always respond with three simple words: It's just wrong.
I believe that every great writer starts out as a reader, who, over time, falls in love with books, stories, and characters.
I learned to read when I was just three years old. My mom taught me because she herself was an avid reader, and spent many hours curled up on the couch with a good book. Once I learned to read, I would curl up next to her and together we'd escape the world, lost in our own respective tales. She says I once opened up a newspaper and started reading it aloud in front of my grandparents in an attempt to impress them, and it worked! They were amazed.
No Dog for You!
Current mood: confused
Category: Pets and Animals
In an effort to ensure that adoptions are successful and permanent, many animal shelters have started implementing strict adoption policies. It's not uncommon for a shelter to require that every member of a household visit the shelter to meet an animal before it's allowed to be adopted.
When 79-year-old Genevieve Klobas tried to adopt a dog from ARF, she explained that her husband was convalescing from a stroke. He could neither walk nor talk and would not be able to come to the shelter to meet the Beagle that she and her grandson wanted to adopt. But because Mr. Klobas was a resident of the household, and failed to meet the requirement to come in and meet the dog, the shelter denied Genevieve's application. To add insult to injury, they told her that the application was also being rejected because she lacked experience with animals.
Genevieve told news reporters, "Well, I tell you, it would have [been] easier probably to adopt a baby. It was absolutely ridiculous."
For the record, ARF is Tony La Russa's Animal Rescue Foundation, not a city or county shelter. They rescue cats and dogs from being killed at animal shelters, treat and evaluate them, and then try to place them in homes.
By law, every city and county must have a facility for taking in stray and abandoned animals. They are not allowed to refuse admission to any animal, on any grounds whatsoever. ARF is not one of these.
ARF is a private rescue organization. Because they are not government operated such organizations can pick and choose which animals they take in, charge high rates for adoptions, and be selective about who they allow to adopt.
Many of these rescues advertise themselves as no-kill but the fact of the matter is that they don't have to take in more animals than they can adopt out, so they're never faced with overpopulation in the first place. Even city and county shelters that are lucky enough to enjoy a minimal animal population and zero kill rates will implement strict adoption polices like ARF's. My own city shelter requires a visit from all members of a household, and they have a host of other stipends that people must agree to in order to adopt.
I feel a lot of conflict when I think about Genevieve and policies like ARF's. In particular, it bothers me that an animal rescue would refuse adoption because of lack of experience. This means anyone who has never owned a pet... never will. Think about that. Plus, many of these organizations disencourage breeding and purchase of animals. "Adopt, don't buy!" they say. Just don't adopt from us.
At the same time, I think about humans and the way many of them regard pets, as if they are household items that can be returned or tossed out when they lose their shine or don't live up to expectations. I see many animals at the local shelter who've been surrendered by their owners because they had to move. One of the dogs we had was debarked, but he still made a heck of a lot of noise. It was pretty obvious the owners had resorted to vanity surgery because they were either too lazy or too stupid to train the dog, and when that didn't keep him quiet, they gave up on him and dropped him off at the pound. Oh, and here's my favorite: (Whoops) the cat had kittens and we can't find homes for them. Well if you're not prepared to find homes for a litter of kittens, you best get your cat fixed, don't you think?
Letting someone else deal with it seems to be the philosophy for many irresponsible animal owners. Strict adoption policies help to prevent an animal from being returned to the shelter a few months down the road.
At the same time, I think of the five to eight million dogs and cats that are killed in shelters every year across America and I wonder how anyone could refuse an animal a home, because each adoption, theoretically, makes space for another animal whose life is in danger.
If the shelters and rescues would build a better network, they could make better use of their space and ultimately, more animals would find homes and less of them would be put to death. Someday, we might reach a point where it would be reasonable to screen adoption applicants to such a high degree as ARF practices. But, until the national kill rate hits zero, these organizations need to relax their policies.
I do believe that shelters and rescues should screen applicants, but no so severely. If a man can't walk or talk, what is the purpose of having him meet the animal? How is a family to gain experience raising an animal if they're not given the opportunity to adopt one? For over five months I've been actively researching, writing, and getting involved in animal rights and especially the no-kill movement. Yet every day the animal activism community becomes more and more perplexing to me.
FEEDBACK FRIDAY: Don't forget to leave a comment answering the question at the end of the post!
-----------------------------------
So, I'm about seven years old. I'm sitting at the table with my family having a barbecued chicken dinner. This is some time around the end of the seventies, so you can imagine the olive green linoleum floor, white formica countertops, and burnt orange shag carpet. Me in my pink leotards, jean skirt and pigtails, fumbling with my fork and pondering the English language.
"Why do they call this chicken?" I ask nobody in particular.
My dad gives me one of his looks. He has a lot of looks and this is the one that says, oh this is going to be fun. He smirks and replies, "Why do you think it's called chicken?"
"I dunno."
He blinks, and stares at me. My mom is glaring at him, silently beckoning him to make something up. She knows there could be serious fallout. I take a bite out my drumstick.
"It's called chicken because it is chicken."
"What do you mean?"
"I mean it's a bird. That's a dead cooked bird you're eating." He's trying not to laugh at the horrified look on my face.
I swing my head around to look at my mom.
"Mom, is that true?"
She stares at me, then at my dad, then back at me again.
"Eat your dinner," she says.
"Where do you think food comes from?" my dad asks. "Do you know where hamburger comes from?"
"Bill!" my mom snaps.
I feel sick. This can't be for real. We eat dead animals? That's the most disgusting thing I've ever heard of in all my life. I set my drumstick down and try not to be sick all over the place.
----------------------------------
That little episode didn't make me a vegetarian but I've never eaten a drumstick since, unless it's the kind with ice cream dipped in chocolate. I think a lot about vegetarianism though, and maybe someday I'll make the leap. I'm well on my way since last spring I added pork to the growing list of previously breathing foods that I refuse to consume.
What are you: a carnivore, herbivore, or omnivore?
Currently
listening
:
American Cheese
By
Nerf Herder
Release date: 13 August, 2002
You Do Your Thing, Let Me Do Mine
Current mood: annoyed
Category: Pets and Animals
I was recently reading the USA TODAY article titled "Merits of no-kill shelters," which attempts to validate the practice of killing animals in shelters by quoting leaders of animal rescue organizations such as Ed Sayres, the president of the ASPCA who says, "There is no room for no-kill as morally superior."
Find the article by accessing the link from Nathan Winograd's blog (myspace keeps changing my links so they don't work)
The article itself is a prime example of flawed journalism. Only one side of the issue is presented and no mention of the benefits of no-kill are mentioned. It appears the article's writer, Elizabeth White of the Associated Press failed to do her homework.
And people noticed. While a small handful of people who commented on the online article sided with the likes of Mr. Sayres, the vast majority supported no-kill as viable and desirable:
"My money is on Best Friends and San Fransisco SPCA as models for No-Kill Sheltering and on Nathan Winograd for how to get to No-Kill." -Morgaine
"The HSUS should be ashamed of itself. Instead of bashing the movement to stop the killing of companion animals why not find solutions to make it a reality." -Lovemeforever
"Frankly I am appalled at the one-sidedness of this article. I would hope that a newspaper professional would have the courtesy to fully research both sides of an issue before publishing her findings." -woodj
As a person who rallies for the no-kill movement, I was pleased to see that the majority of readers seemed to want the no-kill solution and were openly opposing the article.
Then I came across a comment that disturbed me. This exemplifies one of the major obstacles that animal rights activists face every day - the idea that our efforts are being wasted on animals and our focus should be on people:
"We have a stray pet / feral animal epidemic. For the cost of public management of these discarded pets, we could feed, clothe and shelter hundreds of thousands of homeless people in the US. For the cost of vet care for overfed and un-exercised obese, unhealthy and neurotic dogs and cats, we could feed half of the hungry, homeless and abandoned people in the US. Something is very, very wrong with the social health of our society." -Dee Smith
I'm bothered by Dee Smith's comment for several reasons. First of all, her comment comes across as, "my causes are better than yours." She also suggests that because some people choose to concentrate their efforts on helping animals, there is something "wrong with the health of our society." The fact that the animals and humans on this planet need such assistance as is generated by non-profit organizati
chipper
artistic
Sometimes when we sit down to write, the muse is in full effect and the words pour forth effortlessly. Other times, we sit there staring at a blank screen waiting for creativity to manifest. We wait, and we wait. Writer's block is the state of being uninspired, but it's just a state of mind, and that, can be changed at will. 
hopeful
Please add Nathan Winograd to your MySpace friends. His profile can be found at 
jubilant
content
amused
calm
energetic
Nathan Winograd has successfully converted numerous shelters around the U.S. to no kill using the model that he developed, and which eventually led to founding 
Meet Sue. She wants the same thing I want. 
I love the passion! And I love pit bulls. That's why 
contemplative
nostalgic
confused
busy
annoyed