[…]Itchmo: News For Dogs & Cats » Blog Archive » Denver Humane Society Admits To Dumping Dead Animals[…]

[…]Itchmo: News For Dogs & Cats » Blog Archive » Denver Humane Society Admits To Dumping Dead Animals[…]

Karla-The very people you want to be “be thrown in jail” are the ones that care deeply for dogs, fostering and finding homes for adoptable rescues, educating the public and being ambassadors for the various breeds. Stop pretending that any of this is the mission of animal rights. It is not. Now breed club members have to spend valuable resources fighting extinction legislation targeted at the wrong people. If you think this doesn’t take away from rescue efforts you are living in a dream world. No one with real ethics ever killed an animal, stuck it in a plastic bag and threw it in a dumpster. Peta and those influenced by them did. That is a fact!

Wayne Pacelle, President, Humane Society of the United States
“One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.”
— Animal People News, May 1993

Where do you get your information regarding the HSUS being against animals as pets? (”However, they are much like PETA in that they believe that animals cannot be happy as companions.”) I see nothing on their website stating such a philosophy, nor have I ever heard of any kind of communication from them which argues against people keeping pets as companion animals or that pets “cannot be happy as companions.” In fact, if one takes the time to peruse the hsus.org website you will find a grea deal of website real estate devoted to pets, their care and well-being, and a myriad of supportive and helpful information geared toward guardians of pets. If you are going to attack the reputation of an organization, then please be responsible enough to cite credible references which support your allegations.

“Remember, they are NOT a shelter, they care for no animals themselves, so I wouldn’t give much credence to what they say about the pet overpopulation issue.”

You’re right, 2catmom — the HSUS is not a shelter; they are an animal advocacy and protection organization which serves the interest of animals through “legislation, litigation, investigation, education, advocacy and field work.” That said, regarding your statement above (”they care for no animals themselves…”), the HSUS “operates its own network of sanctuaries, providing care and homes to more animals than any other national animal protection organization in the United States.” (quotes taken directly from www.hsus.org).

Criticize them if you will regarding the Vick dogs - they deserve it, but do not spread innuendo and falsehoods about an organization who has done more, legislatively and educationally, than perhaps any other animal advocacy group. Were it not for the HSUS, the Vick case would never have reached the heights of social consciousness that it has. It was the HSUS, in sending email blasts to its 7 million members and maintaining constant media pressure, that has made the Vick case what it is. PETA and the ASPCA jumped on the bandwagon well after the HSUS launched its push against Vick. Moreover, it is due to the HSUS’ legislative successes that any anti-dogfighting laws have been enacted at all, at both the state and federal levels. In fact, were it not for the HSUS, there would have been NO anti-dogfighting laws on the federal books for which to use against Vick, and the federal case which finally brought Vick down would never have materialized. (The local authorities — VA Atty. Gen. Poindexter and the local Surry County, VA sheriff — were too cozy with Vick to do the jobs they were hired and/or elected to do.)

About all I can say is you should spend some time studying the science of genetics. “Culling” is the correct term, whether you lop off the head, or lop off the testicles as part of a breeding program. Anyone who doesn’t know that isn’t a breeder, but a backyard hobbiest who likes to play with puppies and kittens.

Donna above describes a truly scientific breeding program where it may take years of pouring over genetic histories to identify those parts of the gene pool with clean charts.

Most of those who call themselves “responsible breeders” are like those who call themselves good drivers. 10 minutes on the highway will convince anyone that they can’t all be as good as they think they are. Most breeders will accept poor gene charts, with known lethal or debilitating defects, in order to play a crap shoot that some of the offspring will be free of bad dominants genes or not reinforce dangerous recessives.

There’s a Catch 22 involved though. If you don’t breed often enough, the numbers eventually decline to the point where it’s no longer possible to sustain the species. If you breed too often with poor stock, genetic defects become endemic to the point where there are no clean gene charts to pick from, and the species is no longer viable.

As a quick acid test, I’d say anyone who balks at the term “cull” is not a “responsible” breeder. A firm grounding in the science of genetics should be a prerequisite to engaging in a breeding program. Anyone who flips out at the term “cull” is quite obviously deficient in that area. Go to your local library and pick up a few books on the topic. You’ll find the term cull is used throughout any credible treatment of the subject.

They work past their burn-out point because there’s such great need. But they do burn out and have to move on, feeling like they’ve failed the animals.

Unknown> Mistakes were made

That’s what people said about Michael Vick, too. The thing is, when something goes on for years it’s more than just a mistake. It’s an ongoing wrong.

Unknown> the media’s spin on the shelter has compleatly gone overboard.

That’s impossible for someone on the inside to judge impartially.

Unknown> I work hard daily to care for the hundreds of unwanted animals here in Colorado.

There are tens of thousands every year, just in the Denver area alone. It’s more than all of us in animal rescue can handle, and you’re probably not the one that the story is blaming.

Unknown> Its a heartbreaking environment.

No argument. You work hard, it’s heartbreaking, and it’s your choice.

Unknown> All that news report did is hurt the animals.

You have it backwards - bad practices hurt the animals.

Okay, reporting that brings bad practices to light may well result in reduced donations. But suppose there were no blatant bad practices. Then reporting wouldn’t expose them, and donations wouldn’t go down as a result of bad practices.

If reporting gets the bad practices fixed, then it helps the animals. If that’s what it takes for the people at the top to do the right things, well, the exposure and examination will make it easier for people at the bottom to take care of the animals.

Unknown> As a non profit organization, we rely on donated food, blankets, toys, litter, etc.

(”Etc.” being the most important part - money.) And yet the shelter’s “license to collect charitable donations was suspended in April 2004.” Three delinquency notices and one suspension letter later, CHS still hadn’t fixed this but was still collecting money, food, blankets … all that stuff. Illegally.

This is fundamental. Basic. It’s like paying the water bill, only it’s fraud if you don’t take care of it. It’s okay for CHS to operate outside the law for years until a reporter stumbles over it? And then it’s the reporter’s fault?

The shelter where I volunteer relies heavily on donations from foundations set up by big companies like pet-store chains and food manufacturers. Maybe CHS does too.

But these donors definitely want to make sure that you’re operating correctly. So, assuming a charity is actually collecting donations legally, one of the things they look at is the Charity Navigator rating. Some donations are only available to charities given the top rating, four stars.

So what does CHS tell donors? The website says CHS has a four-star rating, but that hasn’t been true for more than two years. Anyone can verify this, it doesn’t have to be a case of “He’s lying,” “No, she’s lying.”

http://coloradohumane.org/services.html
http://www.charitynavigator.or.....orgid=8030

(Free registration is required to see previous years’ information.)

When a person can’t get the very basic steps right, or can’t get someone else to do it for them, then everything they touch is suspect. And when the person messing up is at the top - regardless whether the problem is carelessness, ignorance, incompetence, deceit - the message goes through the whole organization that doing things right just isn’t important.

Unknown> The animals that are in our care shouldn’t be punished because of pissed off ex employees.

The sources include current employees, too. But leaving CHS doesn’t make them liars. As to whether they’re angry … you don’t know that.

I know a couple of former insiders who have talked about problems that weren’t even mentioned here. One of them told me months ago, before this investigation was even planned. The other spoke up when the story broke.

There are just too many people saying that things are wrong. It can’t be a conspiracy. There must be things that are wrong. If you haven’t seen them, so be it. But that doesn’t make them impossible.

Unknown> The truth is we are a hard working, tiny shelter, doing our best to protect, care for, and love our animals.

That’s your truth. That’s okay. But it may not be true that everyone at the Colorado Humane Society is doing their best.

I think the likely truth is that there are things that have been wrong for a while, they’re spread through different parts of the operation, and they’ll be hard to fix without changes at the top.

Unknown> That is what the media forgot to include, people like me who stand by and love the amazing things our shelter works to do

And Madeline Duncan says right on CHS’ main page, the story “fails to note the immeasurable amount of good our organization has done.”

Please. Don’t whine. If you can’t take criticism straight up, then just read what they said:

“Those who volunteer their time to help homeless animals are deserving of immense praise and admiration and the mission of the Colorado Humane Society is one to be applauded, however….”

And, “Those who use their time, whether volunteer or paid employees, to help homeless animals are worthy of deep praise and admiration. Their job is not an easy one and on many days, heartbreaking.

“The mission of the Colorado Humane Society is also deserving of praise and admiration, however, current and former employees tell 7NEWS that they believe the management at Colorado Humane has lost sight of that mission.”