Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Your Opinion: Proposition B and animal rescues
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Dear Editor:
Phyliss Greenfield is right, I do not know her just as she does not know all the dog breeders that she condemns.
I’m sure that as a dog rescuer she sees the worst, never the good.
I have had experience in trying to rescue several dogs at different times near our farm. We do not have a shelter in Osage County so complaints about animal abuse and neglect are directed through local law enforcement and then to the Humane Society of St. Louis.
They are supposed to handle the rescue. However, what I have been told is that one or two dogs is a waste of their time. They do no garner enough publicity. That’s why you only hear of the rescues involving a lot of animals. Publicity means money and it feeds right into the HSUS’s agenda. There are plenty of dogs with fear aggression, mange, eyesores, broken bones and foot issues that are living in someone’s backyard but your groups do not wish to call attention to their plight because that would be stepping on the very toes that fund you.
As for breed specific rescues, yes it is a shame that pet owners rush out to buy whatever breed of dog it is that is currently starring in the latest movie or on TV.
“101 Dalmatians” created such a demand for the breed that breeders could not meet it. What pet owners failed to do was research the breed. If they had they would have discovered that they are high energy. They do in fact have inheritable health problems and they are not the dog for every household. Yet people could not get enough of them. One year later they were dumping them on shelters and breed specific rescue groups.
This has happened with many breeds and will continue until pet owners take responsibility for picking out the proper pet for their situation. You can’t blame dog breeders for a pet owner’s bad decision.
I have read the actual verbiage of Prop. B many times and have torn it apart in this newspaper. Many parts are redundant and maybe Ruth Elledge should read the animal welfare book available at Missouri Department of Agriculture if she thinks their rules are vague. I have.
Many of Prop. B’s rules are not based on common sense or science either. They are based solely on emotion.
Prop. B is causing dogs to be put down and has already failed to fulfill its promise.
Marry Me
Comments
shelleyp 2 years, 2 months ago
It's difficult to read this writing, since it meanders all over the place.
There is no Humane Society of St. Louis. There is a Humane Society of Missouri, but it is not responsible for coming out and capturing loose dogs in people's neighborhood.
It is the animal control in the county and/or town that is responsible for picking up loose dogs. It is also the local animal control who is responsible if you see dogs being mistreated.
Remember: HSMO is a non-profit organization, not a law enforcement organization. It CANNOT go into people's yards and take dogs. The only time it's involved in a rescue is when it is called in by law enforcement.
And then the person goes into 101 Dalmations!? Seriously?
I particularly like the touch about being dogs being put down and how Proposition B, which has not gone into effect yet, has not fulfilled its promises yet.
What, is the bill clairvoyant or something?
This person is attempting to make all rescues and shelters look bad in order to undercut Proposition B. The writing lacks both credibility and coherence.
Sad, shameful, but not surprising. It is what we've come to expect.
annette8 2 years, 2 months ago
Your letter is good, especially the opening paragraphs. You have said many true things. Let's not be discouraged by the rudeness and contempt hurled at us by Prop B supporters. They disrespect everybody who doesn't agree with them, and they are not conducive to learning anything.
usmc00 2 years, 2 months ago
Did you all know that one of the reps or senators trying to change the new bill, has family that owns a puppy mill and has been sited even before the bill for problems at the breeding mill they own. I am trying to confirm his name.
shelleyp 2 years, 2 months ago
Jason Smith, the Majority Whip
burgs 2 years, 2 months ago
PropB was written by a person that has no clue how to raise animals of any sort. They did not bother to research how their proposals would impact dog or the breeders. It was solely done for political clout and to feed the Radical Animal Rights Extremists agenda. Name calling, insults and loud screaming are their tactics, along with bullying in order to circumvent rules of law, the constitution and human rights and liberties,
spayandnueter 2 years, 2 months ago
They knew exactly how to raise animals, some of the things were just targeted to be cost prohibitive.
spayandnueter 2 years, 2 months ago
I am a dog rescuer and former vet assistant who is against prop B. If you read all the language it sounds good on the surface, but some of the requirments don't use common sense. examples: 1. Requiring rest between breeding cycles- This can actually increase the risk of infection for the female dog. A better idea would have been to put an age limit on how long a female can be bred. 2. Unfettered access to the outdoors AND maintain a temperature range- A female whelping puppies should not be allowed constant access outdoors or you don't want the puppies wondering out, especially in temperature extremes. 3. Limiting the number of breeding dogs- This should have been done on a staff to dog ratio because one person can't take care of 100 dogs, but what if they have several employees? And additinally the could have limited the number of facility licenses the Department of Ag hands out. There are some things I agree with, like they have to see a vet once a year and that they should not be kept on wire cages. There are some good breeders out there, but none of them do it on a large scale. I would love for all the large scale breeders to be shut down because the supply far exceeds the demand. BUT I believe in individuals rights as well and as long as they are providing good care for the dogs they should be allowed to keep on doing what they are doing. (even as much as it pains me to say so)
spayandnueter 2 years, 2 months ago
Until people realize that a pet is not a disposable item the problem will continue. The public needs to realize that having a pet is a big decision and they need to research the breed to make sure it is compatable with their family and find a good, knowledgeable breeder or rescue to get the pet from.
They then are responsible to feed, water, house, and train that animal. You can't just give an animal up because you are bored with it, your kids don't play with it anymore, you move, get a different job, or have a baby. If the animal developes bad habbits it is probably because you didn't provide adequate training. This list of excuses people give a rescue group for surrendering a dog just goes on and on. What it really comes down to is that people are irresponsible and lazy.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.