An Article about PETA that should be read and shared

Veterinary Science Graduate Programs from U. of I.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Smilezz

Smilezz

VMRCVM Class of 2016
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2012
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
Members don't see this ad.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html

I know that it's expected that some animals will die and have to be euthanized. Truly, I understand there isn't space to accomadate them all, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. If we're going to be in the business of helping animals, we should know about the organizations that are helping or hurting the cause...and PETA definitely is not a side we should be on. Neither is the National Humane Society, but I don't have an article to back on my opinion on them, unfortunately.

Please take the time to read and share this and recommend people not donate to them, and that they can/should donate to local humane societies, shelters, and rescues instead.
 
I read this article earlier this morning. While I'm glad that people are being exposed to what PETA does with their donations, some of the language in this article bothers me, especially when they try to make euthanasia via sodium pentobarbital seem inhumane as seen in this quote: "as long as the killing is done "humanely," which PETA interprets to mean poisoning them with an overdose of barbiturates". Considering that sodium pentobarbital is probably the most used/most accepted form of euthanasia today, I hope laypeople don't read that and think that their vet isn't using a humane form of euthanasia.
 
Lissarae06 said:
I read this article earlier this morning. While I'm glad that people are being exposed to what PETA does with their donations, some of the language in this article bothers me, especially when they try to make euthanasia via sodium pentobarbital seem inhumane as seen in this quote: "as long as the killing is done "humanely," which PETA interprets to mean poisoning them with an overdose of barbiturates". Considering that sodium pentobarbital is probably the most used/most accepted form of euthanasia today, I hope laypeople don't read that and think that their vet isn't using a humane form of euthanasia.
Click to expand...

I had the same reaction as you. A lot of this article makes euthanasia in general seem evil, and that is a very dangerous view to be propagating.

The point should be the hypocrisy of an animal rights group that thinks killing is better than adopting as a general rule for healthy animals. That is pretty hard to fathom.
 
Lissarae06 said:
I read this article earlier this morning. While I'm glad that people are being exposed to what PETA does with their donations, some of the language in this article bothers me, especially when they try to make euthanasia via sodium pentobarbital seem inhumane as seen in this quote: "as long as the killing is done "humanely," which PETA interprets to mean poisoning them with an overdose of barbiturates". Considering that sodium pentobarbital is probably the most used/most accepted form of euthanasia today, I hope laypeople don't read that and think that their vet isn't using a humane form of euthanasia.
Click to expand...

That was my reaction as well when I read the article.
 
I sincerely doubt the common pet-owner is going to remember the term 'sodium pentobarbital' and then apply that to their veterinarian. I think the rest of the article speaks greater volumes and makes many more impacting points than that.
 
Smilezz said:
I sincerely doubt the common pet-owner is going to remember the term 'sodium pentobarbital' and then apply that to their veterinarian. I think the rest of the article speaks greater volumes and makes many more impacting points than that.
Click to expand...

It's not just the words sodium pentobarbital. It is the negativity about euthanasia period. Euthanasia is such a great service that we can provide to clients when needed. I just don't like how sensationalized the writer portrayed it.
 
PETA is an absolutely awful organization, with INSANE members. I have show dogs, and my dogs are some of the most pampered, spoiled canines in the world. Most show dogs are, they live lives better than most humans. Last year at a dog show, we had PETA members show up and add anit-freeze into the water buckets in the dog kennels at the show site when the owners would walk away. At another large show, they would go around opening crate doors because "keeping dogs in crates is inhumane".....yeah, that's why mine voluntarily go sleep in their crates, even when the door is wide open and they have the whole house to run in...

I did a 50 page research paper on PETA for an ethics class once....They are HORRIBLY hypocrytical (are completely against animal testing for human medical research, yet one of the higher ups is diabetic, and takes treatments for it....guess how those treatments were discovered?). They have an unbelievably high euthanasia rate (I want to say like 98% of all intake animals are euthanized, etc.).

They are a HORRID institution, the HSUS (humane society of the united states) isn't much better....

There are plenty of great ones though, such as the SPCA, etc. 😀
 
HowIMetYourPet said:
PETA is an absolutely awful organization, with INSANE members. I have show dogs, and my dogs are some of the most pampered, spoiled canines in the world. Most show dogs are, they live lives better than most humans. Last year at a dog show, we had PETA members show up and add anit-freeze into the water buckets in the dog kennels at the show site when the owners would walk away. At another large show, they would go around opening crate doors because "keeping dogs in crates is inhumane".....yeah, that's why mine voluntarily go sleep in their crates, even when the door is wide open and they have the whole house to run in...
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Putting antifreeze in water buckets is supposed to help animals how? 🙄 Their ads also are often extremely degrading to women. Because nothing protects animal rights like good old-fashioned sexism! But seriously, they're known more for the stuff they do to get attention than for their actual cause.
 
Lissarae06 said:
It's not just the words sodium pentobarbital. It is the negativity about euthanasia period. Euthanasia is such a great service that we can provide to clients when needed. I just don't like how sensationalized the writer portrayed it.
Click to expand...

👍 +1

He makes it seem as though the euthanasia of any animal by a rescue organisation is wrong - something I strongly disagree with, personally. Things like claiming that a vet can just look at a dead body and deem an animal "healthy and rehomeable"? Yeah sure, whatever 🙄

I would personally always discourage people from donating to PETA - but that goes back many years and much deeper than just this article.
 
Smilezz said:
I sincerely doubt the common pet-owner is going to remember the term 'sodium pentobarbital' and then apply that to their veterinarian. I think the rest of the article speaks greater volumes and makes many more impacting points than that.
Click to expand...

Like Lissa said, its the idea the article instills that euthanasia is "poisoning" your animal. The technical words may not stay with people, but the idea of their animals being poisoned to death will.
 
Umm, wow. I'm pretty horrified by the accusations made in this op ed piece. Horrified if they are true, which many of y'all don't seem to be denying. I'm generally pretty confident about the well informed-ness of the SDN vet community, and tend to put some weight in most of opinions expressed here. However, this "article" certainly has an agenda. I'm no fan of PETA, but mass killings of puppies and kittens? I need to see some more evidence.

Regarding the way euthanasia is referenced, I think it sets the tone for what the author is trying to say. Most involved in serious animal rescue, much less the veterinary community, understand the (admittedly unfortunate) role euthanasia plays in a legitimate animal shelter. The author seems to be unaware of that completely, which highlights his agenda, and in my opinion makes his stance even more suspect.
 
I don't know if it's the same vet they're talking about in the article but I've seen a report somewhere where a vet brought animals to PETA that he said were healthy and adoptable and that PETA agreed and would try to find a home for them. Later when police found the bodies, it was the same vet that identified those animals.

Also, CanHardlyWait, there should be a report somewhere that exactly talks about how many animals are PTS and how many are adopted out, I think.
 
I agree that this could make a bigger impact if the person's agenda wasn't so clear, but that's exactly how PETA operates as well. Show the worst of the worst for the largest effect possible.
My biggest issue is that people donate and donate, but do they ever stop to think about what the money is being used for? Crazy commercials and falsified documentaries? Do the people donating to these place not think to themselves... "How is this money actively helping animals?" Silliness.
 
PetPony said:
Also, CanHardlyWait, there should be a report somewhere that exactly talks about how many animals are PTS and how many are adopted out, I think.
Click to expand...

There definitely is a full report, I just read it relatively recently too. I'll see if I can find it again when I'm not on my phone.

I also remember reading the police report when the number of adoptable animals PETA kills first came to light. Someone saw a PETA van drive up and dump dozens of heavy trash bags into the dumpster behind a local grocery store (illegal, both because the dumpster wasn't theirs and because this is not the correct way to dispose of animal remains). Police were called, and they found the bags were filled with bodies of animals PETA had killed. A few were necropsied and found to be completely healthy and adoptable. IIRC, this particular incident was also when the vet that gave a few cats to PETA (mentioned in the article) discovered they'd never even tried to adopt them out.

I honestly don't know how anyone can donate to PETA. At least HSUS has those sad caged animals in their commercials which makes it look like they're actually doing something to help. I can understand how people who can't be bothered to do any research would be tricked by that. But PETA? They make no effort to hide the fact that they're essentially a terrorist organization and when you get right down to it, there's absolutely nothing that they do that truly helps animals. It sickens me that this group continues to exist.
 
All I learned from this tedious article is that the the author is as clueless, naive, and propagandistic as the PETA organization is, possibly even more so.
👎
Huff Post never ceases to give nutjobs a podium and a veil of false legitimacy
 
BlackDog17 said:
A few were necropsied and found to be completely healthy and adoptable.
Click to expand...

Here's my gripe. If we're going to bash on PETA (which I'm all in favor of) we need to make sure that we're making sense.

I can think of absolutely no way to necropsy an animal and determine how adoptable it is. None. How would you ever evaluate its behavioral status on necropsy? Just plain not possible. It might appear to be the healthiest animal in the world, but how do you guarantee on necropsy that it wasn't a severely aggressive dog just looking for a kid's arm to bite? Mayyyyyybe with a young enough animal you could be confident. Maybe. I guess. But for most? No way.

Not to distract from the main point, which is that PETA shouldn't be killing animals and dumping them in dumpsters ... but I don't think we should add something to the story that isn't correct.

Or am I wrong? Are there necropsy findings that correlate with aggression? WTFrequency?
 
LetItSnow said:
Here's my gripe. If we're going to bash on PETA (which I'm all in favor of) we need to make sure that we're making sense.

I can think of absolutely no way to necropsy an animal and determine how adoptable it is. None. How would you ever evaluate its behavioral status on necropsy? Just plain not possible. It might appear to be the healthiest animal in the world, but how do you guarantee on necropsy that it wasn't a severely aggressive dog just looking for a kid's arm to bite? Mayyyyyybe with a young enough animal you could be confident. Maybe. I guess. But for most? No way.

Not to distract from the main point, which is that PETA shouldn't be killing animals and dumping them in dumpsters ... but I don't think we should add something to the story that isn't correct.

Or am I wrong? Are there necropsy findings that correlate with aggression? WTFrequency?
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, LIS.
 
LetItSnow said:
Here's my gripe. If we're going to bash on PETA (which I'm all in favor of) we need to make sure that we're making sense.

I can think of absolutely no way to necropsy an animal and determine how adoptable it is. None. How would you ever evaluate its behavioral status on necropsy? Just plain not possible. It might appear to be the healthiest animal in the world, but how do you guarantee on necropsy that it wasn't a severely aggressive dog just looking for a kid's arm to bite? Mayyyyyybe with a young enough animal you could be confident. Maybe. I guess. But for most? No way.

Not to distract from the main point, which is that PETA shouldn't be killing animals and dumping them in dumpsters ... but I don't think we should add something to the story that isn't correct.

Or am I wrong? Are there necropsy findings that correlate with aggression? WTFrequency?
Click to expand...

I agree, except for the case of the mother and kittens. The vet had seen the mother and her kittens when they were alive (and had determined then they were healthy and adoptable), he handed them over to PETA who agreed to find them homes (why, I don't know), then the mother cat and kittens were found with all these other animals in the dumpsters later on. So those animals were deemed adoptable by a vet while alive. As far as determining adoptability of the other animals off necropsy, no.. I don't see how that is possible, but I also highly doubt that the number of animals they do end up killing that were all healthy were aggressive animals that could not be adopted out... do I have proof of that, no. Not really.

I agree with the others though, I don't like how euthanasia was portrayed in this article. Euthanasia in vet med is a good thing and the way it was portrayed in this article is off. He could have still made a strong argument without making euthanasia to seem like some horrible, evil event of "poisoning" the animal.
 
DVMDream said:
I agree, except for the case of the mother and kittens. The vet had seen the mother and her kittens when they were alive (and had determined then they were healthy and adoptable), he handed them over to PETA who agreed to find them homes (why, I don't know), then the mother cat and kittens were found with all these other animals in the dumpsters later on. So those animals were deemed adoptable by a vet while alive. As far as determining adoptability of the other animals off necropsy, no.. I don't see how that is possible, but I also highly doubt that the number of animals they do end up killing that were all healthy were aggressive animals that could not be adopted out... do I have proof of that, no. Not really.
Click to expand...

Oh, I missed the part where a vet documented working with them while alive. Thanks.

I think we ought to have proof in general when we push back against groups like PETA. Or at least reasonable evidence. Otherwise it just says more about us than them. It's the same way with any highly charged argument - I'm always disinclined to give much credibility to the group that is willing to stretch the truth with hyperbole because it tells me that they feel they have to manipulate my emotions to convince me (this is also why the classic PETA naked-chicks-in-streets-covered-in-stage-blood type of thing just annoys me).
 
Anyone understand the purpose of all the rest of that business in there about other shelters and what a crap job they were doing that PETA was supporting? I mean, I guess I get the point, PETA has some bizarro views, but it just seemed a little off topic. Maybe I'm just missing something.

I've know about PETA's kill rates for a long time, so that's nothing new. But I didn't know about how many they euthanized w/in 24 hours. My thing is, if you're going to be totally against people having pets and believe that they are better off euthanized, I can respect that. I might not agree with it, but I can respect that. They do advertise that they don't think animals should be pets, but they certainly don't advertise that that 96% of the animals that come in their doors are euthanized. They shouldn't be listed as an "animal shelter" if they have no intentions of adopting out the animals that are brought to them.
 
Those of you talking about the tone of the article - Nathan J. Winograd is a bit of a controversial figure in animal sheltering world. He has done a lot of good at times (working with organizations to reduce their kill rates) but also tends to be extremely over the top in his moral castigation of ALL shelters that euthanize for space reasons. I haven't read his stuff for a little while but last I heard he was basically denying that there was a pet overpopulation problem in the US. So his views on this are going to reflect that too.

I just thought I'd give a little bit of background.
 
nyanko said:
Those of you talking about the tone of the article - Nathan J. Winograd is a bit of a controversial figure in animal sheltering world. He has done a lot of good at times (working with organizations to reduce their kill rates) but also tends to be extremely over the top in his moral castigation of ALL shelters that euthanize for space reasons. I haven't read his stuff for a little while but last I heard he was basically denying that there was a pet overpopulation problem in the US. So his views on this are going to reflect that too.

I just thought I'd give a little bit of background.
Click to expand...

I got this feeling from him just from the tone of the article.. he seemed a bit extreme to me. I think he has some good points, a couple of decent facts in the article, but he seems to have a large personal bias in there especially when it comes to euthanasia and animal shelters.
 
HowIMetYourPet said:
They are a HORRID institution, the HSUS (humane society of the united states) isn't much better....

There are plenty of great ones though, such as the SPCA, etc. 😀
Click to expand...
Whats wrong with HSUS? (Pardon my ignorance if that was a dumb question)
 
futurehealervet said:
Whats wrong with HSUS? (Pardon my ignorance if that was a dumb question)
Click to expand...

It is an animal rights organization not too far from PETA. They also get a lot of funds in donations and for the most part, they do not go to shelters, as people seem to think they do.
 
How do you get this information? I'd like to learn more about this topic but I'm not sure where to find reliable sources. I heard about PETA but I thought HSUS was the good guys.
 
futurehealervet said:
How do you get this information? I'd like to learn more about this topic but I'm not sure where to find reliable sources. I heard about PETA but I thought HSUS was the good guys.
Click to expand...

that's one of the reasons they aren't really well regarded. People hear humane society and think of their local shelter. They are NOT the same. HSUS is based in animal rights activism. I'm not saying that everything they do is bad. But they are certainly not benign.
 
This article came up in my local vegetarian/vegan forum (because of the stereotype that someone who doesn't eat meat = PETA supporter)

I am happy some of you have some background information on the author and situation because the commentary is kind of the same: this PETA things stuff but it sounds incredibly biased.
 
CanHardlyWait said:
I'm no fan of PETA, but mass killings of puppies and kittens? I need to see some more evidence.
Click to expand...

Evidence is very easy to find. Here's one:

http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald.com/2005/06/18/peta-duo-charged-with-62-felonies/

Excerpt: "Detective Sgt. Ed Pittman of the Bertie Sheriff’s Office confirmed, through the county’s Animal Control Officer, that Cook and Hinkle identified themselves as PETA representatives from Norfolk, Va.

"According to Barry (Anderson, Bertie’s Animal Officer), the man and woman told him they were picking up the dogs to take them back to Norfolk where they would find them good homes," Pittman said.

"Pittman added that as far as he knew, persons identifying themselves as PETA representatives had picked-up live dogs at the Bertie Animal Shelter for at least the last two months.

"Anderson, also involved in Wednesday’s surveillance and subsequent arrest, was able to positively identify nearly all of the dogs found in the dumpster as the ones picked-up just a few hours earlier on Wednesday by Cook and Hinkle."
 
Some response. If you search the VA newspapers you'll find photos of the dead dumped dogs. There's nothing wrong with them. All were healthy adoptable animals. There's quotes from a veterinarian there, too, who recognized healthy dogs he'd allowed PETA volunteers to take because he was assured they'd be rehomed.

PETA is full of so many lies. The vast majority of the animals they euthanize are perfectly healthy and adoptable and were obtained with lies and false pretenses. These are bad people. Even back when they were "liberating" rabbits and other animals from research facilities they simply killed them, Alex Pacheco of PETA giving as the reason that they "had no room" to house them.

As for HSUS, definitely bad news. Research. Talk with farmers. HSUS' own words:

"We don't want any of these animals to be raised and killed [for food] ... unfortunately we don't have the luxury of waiting until we have the opportunity to get rid of the entire industry." Miyun Park, former HSUS Vice President for Farm Animal Welfare.

"[Raising animals] for food is simply not a sensible plan of action. The science is clear that a diet that is primarily plant-based is better for our personal health, and it's obviously better for animals and the environment." Wayne Pacelle. A Humane Nation blog October 8, 2009

If any of you were on the Chronicle of the Horse message boards in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, you'll recall updates from COH members who were volunteering in animal rescue down there. One of the members posted photos of HSUS workers filling dumpsters with brand new dog crates that had been donated to save the animals. HSUS didn't want them. They wanted only cash. The folks in Texas begged for the crates to be sent to them because they knew they were going to soon be hit with a hurricane themselves, but HSUS is not about the animals. They're about wearing their HSUS t-shirts, giving interviews, and collecting the money. Of course they took the HSUS shirts off to dump the donations but the other volunteers knew who the individuals were.
 
Trilt said:
Just be aware of your sources, too.
Click to expand...

This is why I hate topics like this. Who knows what parts of the article are true, false and exaggerated?

I have tried to do research on subjects such as aspartame and industrialized farming and all I get are websites with strong agendas who quote other websites with strong agendas. I typically resort to google scholar for scientific matters, but that won't help in this case.
 
Which is why I listed the newspaper articles. And with any source, use that to begin your researches. It is a fact that PETA kills almost every single one of the healthy, young, adoptable animals it takes in. It is a fact that PETA kills them within hours of picking them up and dumps their bodies in trash bags in dumpsters. It is also a fact that PETA has obtained hundreds of animals by lying that they are going to adopt them to people and then kills them. Whether you like CCF or not doesn't change the facts about what PETA does.

Also when you have direct quotes from people like Wayne Pacelle, Alex Pacheco, Ingrid Newkirk, Miyun Park, and many more, it doesn't matter if CCF or Fox News or CNN or the Pope repeats the quote. It's PETA and HSUS speaking for themselves.
 
Angelus9 said:
Evidence is very easy to find. Here's one:

http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald.com/2005/06/18/peta-duo-charged-with-62-felonies/
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link to an actual news article on the issue. I'm new to VA and was unaware PETA ran a shelter here (or anywhere for that matter-I generally ignore them and their business).
I will agree that good, reliable info is hard to find. When I have some spare time, which frankly will be this summer, I'm going to investigate this further. Arrests and allegations reported in a newspaper are not a conviction and do not always tell the whole story. Not saying that I don't think this is happening, not saying I do, just saying I need more info.

I will agree (GASP!) with one thing the PETA response said. No kill shelters are all well and good, except that they don't take in all animals. A county run shelter has to be able to humanely euthanize some animals, for medical and extreme behavioral issues, because they can't be selective on who they accept. County shelters are the last refuge for the discarded and abused animals in our society, some of which humane euthanasia is the only thing that can be done to help them.
 
CanHardlyWait said:
I will agree (GASP!) with one thing the PETA response said. No kill shelters are all well and good, except that they don't take in all animals. A county run shelter has to be able to humanely euthanize some animals, for medical and extreme behavioral issues, because they can't be selective on who they accept. County shelters are the last refuge for the discarded and abused animals in our society, some of which humane euthanasia is the only thing that can be done to help them.
Click to expand...

I talked about this in one of my speeches this semester. 👍
 
CanHardlyWait said:
Thanks for the link to an actual news article on the issue. I'm new to VA and was unaware PETA ran a shelter here (or anywhere for that matter-I generally ignore them and their business).
I will agree that good, reliable info is hard to find. When I have some spare time, which frankly will be this summer, I'm going to investigate this further. Arrests and allegations reported in a newspaper are not a conviction and do not always tell the whole story. Not saying that I don't think this is happening, not saying I do, just saying I need more info.

I will agree (GASP!) with one thing the PETA response said. No kill shelters are all well and good, except that they don't take in all animals. A county run shelter has to be able to humanely euthanize some animals, for medical and extreme behavioral issues, because they can't be selective on who they accept. County shelters are the last refuge for the discarded and abused animals in our society, some of which humane euthanasia is the only thing that can be done to help them.
Click to expand...


I agree with many of the comments in this thread!.. But at the same time, no organization is perfect. Even the SPCA has its setbacks. I visited the SPCA a few months ago and putting a limit on adoptable animals is not a bad thing. I mean, yes, you've got animals suffering but it does increase the overall health of the shelter if it's not overpopulated, and it does increase the adoption rate. . At the same time, you've got animals suffering outside that are just going to be pushed to another organization (such as PETA in this case....)

you can't expect an organization to absorb all the costs from the irresponsibility of various owners. Please do correct me, I don't exactly see a problem with PETA euthanizing the animals.. what I seem to be seeing is that PETA isn't allocating any resources on the adoptions themselves. As veterinarians, our main job is to reduce pain and suffering for animals.. which euthanasia does accomplish.
I do agree with everyone else though, if you're not gonna adopt out animals then might as well not call yourself a shelter.
I mean yes, feral animals may live okay quality lives, but how else are we going to deal with the population? Are we assigning PETA the responsibility to provide neutering/spaying services as well? You've also got to consider the fact that the basic animal function is to reproduce, eventually you'll just be overpopulated with cats/dogs.. the more stray animals you've got.. the lower the quality of life. Millions of native wildlife are being preyed on by cats as well, what about their welfare? Given PETA's circumstances, I accept euthanasia as an okay alternative.. certainly not the best but hey society expects them to do everything.

what really needs to be changed is the legislation on owner responsibility.
on the other hand... PETA is quite over the top with these animal right things. I agree that many don't have a scientific basis or whatnot, I've heard some pretty garbage claims. BUT.. you've' got to give them credit for being responsible in raising awareness.
 
ducktoller said:
you can't expect an organization to absorb all the costs from the irresponsibility of various owners. Please do correct me, I don't exactly see a problem with PETA euthanizing the animals.. what I seem to be seeing is that PETA isn't allocating any resources on the adoptions themselves. As veterinarians, our main job is to reduce pain and suffering for animals.. which euthanasia does accomplish.
I do agree with everyone else though, if you're not gonna adopt out animals then might as well not call yourself a shelter.
I mean yes, feral animals may live okay quality lives, but how else are we going to deal with the population? Are we assigning PETA the responsibility to provide neutering/spaying services as well? You've also got to consider the fact that the basic animal function is to reproduce, eventually you'll just be overpopulated with cats/dogs.. the more stray animals you've got.. the lower the quality of life. Millions of native wildlife are being preyed on by cats as well, what about their welfare? Given PETA's circumstances, I accept euthanasia as an okay alternative.. certainly not the best but hey society expects them to do everything.

what really needs to be changed is the legislation on owner responsibility.
on the other hand... PETA is quite over the top with these animal right things. I agree that many don't have a scientific basis or whatnot, I've heard some pretty garbage claims. BUT.. you've' got to give them credit for being responsible in raising awareness.
Click to expand...

You don't have a problem with PETA euthanizing perfectly adoptable animals (as far as we can tell), and not giving them a chance of adoption? How else are we going to deal with the "feral" population? I can think of a bunch of ways, in which many counties take part, where euthanasia isn't necessarily the go-to option. Euthanizing a perfectly healthy animal, in any circumstance, is not something to ever be taken lightly. Regardless, PETA has boundless resources, which you seem to not realize, especially when compared to other local animal shelters. The point of this article is to question how they spend these resources.

While I'm sure most of us here wish/pray/curse for more responsible pet owners, I don't see any form of legislation to be a realistic option. What really needs to be changed is the PETA organization and the awareness of individuals that donate to them.
 
deli said:
You don't have a problem with PETA euthanizing perfectly adoptable animals (as far as we can tell), and not giving them a chance of adoption? How else are we going to deal with the "feral" population? I can think of a bunch of ways, in which many counties take part, where euthanasia isn't necessarily the go-to option. Euthanizing a perfectly healthy animal, in any circumstance, is not something to ever be taken lightly. Regardless, PETA has boundless resources, which you seem to not realize, especially when compared to other local animal shelters. The point of this article is to question how they spend these resources.
Click to expand...

When there is no room at the inn, euthanization is the best option IMO.

I was actually quite shocked a few months ago when the topic of euthanizing a healthy animal came up in the Rant Here thread. Most, if not all, people said something along the lines of "I could never do it. It would hurt my conscience too much." I felt like the only person who saw it the other way. If an owner comes to you asking to have their healthy animal put down, I would rather do it than turn them away and sit around wondering if they found another clinic, abandoned their animal, pawned it off on a worse home or put the animal down themselves.


I was stuck with a skinny old stray for a few weeks. I was volunteering at the only shelter and they told me my best option was to vet the cat and adopt her out myself because they didn't have the room or resources. I did finally get her into a rescue far away and she ended up almost dying from disease and declawed by a nasty woman who went against the adoption contract.

I still wonder if going through all of that was best for the cat. I also refuse to believe that most people would take the road I chose and not give up when given little to no other options. There are lots of stupid people out there. Just look on Craigslist or Kijiji. It's where the stupid gather in hoards.
 
This isn't an argument on the pros/cons of euthanizing in a shelter environment, this is a discussion on how PETA conducts their "shelters". I think anyone who has spent time in a shelter understands that euthanasia is a necessity, but PETA seems to use it as their only option (based on this article and previous experience).
 
Trematode said:
I was actually quite shocked a few months ago when the topic of euthanizing a healthy animal came up in the Rant Here thread. Most, if not all, people said something along the lines of "I could never do it. It would hurt my conscience too much." I felt like the only person who saw it the other way. If an owner comes to you asking to have their healthy animal put down, I would rather do it than turn them away and sit around wondering if they found another clinic, abandoned their animal, pawned it off on a worse home or put the animal down themselves.
Click to expand...

Your not alone, this is how I feel about convince euthanasias as well.

I think if PETA had no intention on making a gallant effort at finding the animals they took in a home, then they should of refereed the animals to a near by shelter.

But like previously stated, my biggest peeve with the article is the negative light the author cast euthanasia in.
 
ducktoller said:
Please do correct me, I don't exactly see a problem with PETA euthanizing the animals..
Click to expand...

PETA requested dogs from both animal shelters and veterinarians specifically stating that they would find homes for these healthy animals all the time knowing those dogs would literally never leave the PETA truck alive and would be euthanized within hours and you have no problem with that?

The vets & shelters gave the animals to PETA specifically to save these healthy animals from euthanization because PETA promised to rehome them and the animals were not, as PETA claims, in horrible condition but fine, healthy, young animals.

ducktoller said:
what really needs to be changed is the legislation on owner responsibility. .
Click to expand...
There are already plenty of laws. We already have plenty of legislation declaring it illegal to abuse an animal, starve it, abandon it, hurt it, fight it, dump it, let it roam free, etc. etc. Responsible people obey all these laws. Irresponsible people do not. If they don't obey the laws already on the books, why on earth would they magically begin to obey any new legislation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
SDN Article: Ten Free Resources That You Need to Succeed As A Veterinarian
Replies
0
Views
397
Student Doctor Network
S
Mr.Smile12
AAVMC statement on HR 1 BBB (sent to applicants, shared with advisors)
Replies
0
Views
390
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
C
Schools that do GPA cut offs?
Replies
18
Views
1K
indysadventures
indysadventures
Mr.Smile12
Vet/PhD: Anyone want to help write an SDN article?
Replies
7
Views
1K
supershorty
supershorty
A
About to graduate with MS and no DVM acceptance yet
Replies
3
Views
1K
dancingvet_loading
D
Top