JustOneMorePet

Every Pet Deserves A Good Home…

Military dogs euthanized as ‘equipment’ under cruel law

Screenshot of a soldier and his dog (© WSBTV, http://aka.ms/VtDg)

If roadside bombs and other hazards of war don’t kill military dogs, senseless government regulations and red tape might. The United States is breeding 100 puppies a year to train for bomb sniffing and other soldierly duties, but many aren’t making it back to happy homes because an obscure federal law classifies them as "equipment" rather than personnel — and makes adopting them a financial and bureaucratic nightmare.

A bill to require that the military ship the heroic dogs home and ease potential veterinarian costs for adopting families is currently bogged down in Congress, as dogs continue to be euthanized. In the meantime, at least there is an occasional happy ending.

Please contact Congress (the House and Senate) and tell them to pass this bill NOW! It should take 10-minutes to pass to save these canine Veterans! Just another example of Congressional stupidity and incompetence! And I guess with all the executive orders that have been signed by President Obama, signing one more to save these K-9 heroes until Congress acts isn’t an option when you come from a family and ideological background where you eat dogs or hate and kill dogs?

In Dreams from My Father, President Obama wrote, “With Lolo (Obama’s stepfather) I have learned how to eat small green chili peppers raw with dinner, plenty of rice, and away from the dinner people I was introduced to dog meat, tough, snake meat, tougher, and roasted grasshopper.”

h/t to MSN and to MJ – Cross-Posted at AskMarion

Related:

Slain Marine’s service dog dies.. (Sad story.. Pictures of Lex and Lee)

HEART-WRENCHING IMAGE: DOG KEEPS WATCH OVER FALLEN SEAL’S CASKET DURING FUNERAL

Help Save USMC Sergeant Rex – Updated

Senate Approves Bill that Legalizes Sodomy and Bestiality in U.S. Military

Dog Killers Convicted For Murdering Navy Seal Hero’s Beloved Companion

Heart-Wrenching Image: Dog Keeps Watch Over Fallen Seal’s Casket During Funeral

Update: Retired Disabled Military Dog Rocky Has Been Saved

The Dog that Cornered Osama Bin Laden

Arizona Worker Fired For Euthanizing War Hero Dog – Is It Enough?

‘Dogs Have The Intelligence of a Human Toddler’

“Tails of Love”

Military Punishment for Dog Killer, Abuser a Joke! No Justice! VIDEO

Humane Society of the U.S. finally changes its policy on fighting dogs

Father Arrested for Allegedly Killing Family Dog in Front of Children

Tucson: Pets, Vets, Veterans Day

Honoring Military Dogs on Veteran’s Day

And the Verdict is Guilty – YES!

Can the US Become a No-Kill Nation?

Tails of Love – Book

Lone Survivor – Book

Department of Islamic Justice Bows Down to Muslims Irrational Hatred of Dogs……. SHEER INSANITY !!!!

July 3, 2012 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, animal behavior, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rights And Awareness, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, If Animlas Could Talk..., Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Adoption, Pet and Animal Training, Political Change, Service and Military Animals, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, We Are All God's Creatures, Working and Military Dogs and Related | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

Wasau Wisconsin Pet Ordinance Limits Number of Pets Homeowners Can Keep | James and Melissa Lecker

Melissa and James Lecker

Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:03pm by Tiffany GabbayTiffany Gabbay to the Blaze

In a push many see as a gross infringement on one’s personal liberties, a small Wisconsin town is forcing homeowners who keep more than the town’s “permitted” allotment of pets a choice: Give up your animals, or give up your house.

takinglibertiesdog.jpgJames and Melissa Lecker take their dogs for a walk near their Wausau, Wis., home.

This is the dilemma currently being faced by one couple — James and Melissa Lecker — who, unbeknownst to them, moved to Wausau with four dogs.

For Melissa, there was no “choice.”

“These dogs are our family. They’re like our children,” she said.

In Wausau, homeowners are not permitted to have more than three cats, gerbils and rabbits or two dogs.

Melissa told Fox News she was in disbelief when a police officer showed up to her door to inform her that she was subject to a $100 per day fine for being over her dog “limit.”

“I had never heard of anything like that,” she said.

“They told us that the ordinance clearly states they [City council] cannot work with us… that it’s either two dogs or that you have to move, as you can’t have four dogs here.”

Meanwhile, the town’s officials said their hands are tied as the “ordinance doesn’t allow for variance.”

According to Fox, Jeff Gold, a municipal attorney from New Jersey, said the law makes sense when it comes to dogs:

“They smell. They bark. They have excrement,” said Gold.

“You’re not punishing [the Leckers], he explains. “You’re regulating society.” Wow!!  Progressive alert!

No one from Wausau, including Mayor James Tipple returned reporters calls for comment.

Melissa says she has put her house on the market and is prepared to take a $15,000 loss in order to keep her dogs.

“I hope we can work something out,” she told Fox. “But they are just being so mean. My dogs didn’t bother anyone.”

Watch the report HERE, courtesy of Fox

Melissa and James Lecker

Melissa and James Lecke

I too would fight for my pups and would take a $15,000 loss on my house.  Pets are part of your family… They are forever!  Good for James and Melissa Lecker.

These ordinances will become more and more prevalent if we do not stand-up.  They already are in towns, cities, and states with large Progressive populations like California and primarily San Francisco (who tell you who, what kind and how many), New York, large pockets of Wisconsin and the list goes on.  They are also prevalent Internationally, from China to Europe and even pockets of New Zealand, a wide open country where there are more sheep than people. Progressives hope to regulate every moment and action of everyone’s life for their idea of “the greater good”.  Every single day we are losing rights and liberties.  Time to take a stand for pets, for parental rights (of two and 4 legged kids), for individual liberties, for the inalienable rights we are all entitled to in all circumstances.

The Lecker’s situation is not an isolated case by any means.  I was personally involved in a situation in Leisure World in CA where they changed their restriction to 1 cat or 1 dog per unit (ridiculous in a community where pets are sometimes the only friends and love its residents have).  An elderly lady living there had promised her friend and neighbor that she would take her dog if anything ever happened to her because she had no family.  Right before her friend’s death LW initiated a policy of 1 pet and left a poor dying woman to fret over her beloved pet and companion in her last hours and then left her elderly friend in a position to either sell or rent out her home in Leisure World and move to keep her word and take care of her friend’s dog or try to find a home for the pup before it had to go to the shelter or rescue and probably be put down (senior dogs are hard to place).

Nobody is advocating hoarding (which is an illness and wouldn’t be stopped by laws) but good pet parents can and should be allowed to have 4 or 5 dogs, especially if they own a house, or a combination of 6 dogs and cats plus a bird, gerbils, turtles, fish etc.  Each case should be an individual matter and should only be of concern if there is a problem.  And then it should be based on ability to care for the pets in question and the circumstances.  For some people 1 pet is too much.  For most people 2 to 4 are plenty but for some 6 to 10 are perfect.  I have been to people’s houses that only have one pet (or one baby) and you can smell the litter box or diapers the second you walk in and there is a mess or fur/feathers (or dust) on the furniture. I have several friends with between 4 to 8 pets whose houses are no different than the ‘average house’; with either no pets, just kids or a just a couple of each.  And on the extreme, I had an acquaintance that was a vet tech and worked for the local vet that took in strays and hardship cases who had 23 pets, and probably fostered another 100 until permanent homes could be found, and her house was immaculate.  Today it is pets, tomorrow it will be children, activities, food, where you can live, what you can drive, how many vehicles you can own and the list will go on endlessly unless we stand up!

Our shelters are over-flowing because of the tough economic times added to by limit laws like in Wausau.  Everyone who can and wants to should be able to adopt just one or two more pets instead of continuing the flood of euthanization.

Please help the Leckers take a stand by calling, emailing and writing the City Council of Wausau as well as the Chamber of Commerce, Marathon County and state offices of Wisconsin.  I would suggest a call to Jeff Gold, the municipal attorney from New Jersey.  Today Wausau, tomorrow your town… your state… your neighborhood.

I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it." -Abraham Lincoln

Related:

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Shocking Report…Gov’t to decide what pets you can own – Episode 006

Adopt Just One More Pet… MV Shelter Reduces Cat and Kitten Adoption Fees Until Sept 27th – Good Job MV!

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

Declaration of the No Kill Movement in the United States

This is in America: No Mercy: Calf Farm Cruelty Exposed We Are Still Euthanizing 4 Million Dogs Plus Additional Pets in Shelters in America Every Year… And We Allow the Murder of 3,700 Unborn Human Babies Per Day Through Abortion

Again, please help the Leckers take a stand by calling, emailing and writing the City Council of Wausau as well as the Chamber of Commerce, Marathon County and state offices of Wisconsin. I would suggest a call to Jeff Gold, the Progressive municipal attorney from New Jersey as well. Today Wausau, tomorrow your town… your state… your neighborhood.

March 19, 2012 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Dogs, Help Familie Keep Their Pets, If Animlas Could Talk..., Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Retired disabled military dog Rocky dies if not adopted — Pets For Patriots Blog

Retired disabled military dog Rocky dies if not adopted — Pets For Patriots Blog
Pets For Patriots Blog ^

Posted on Wed Aug 17 2011 19:14:09 GMT-0600 (Mountain Daylight Time) by Pit1

SENT VIA EMAIL

Subject: Retired disabled military dog Rocky dies if not adopted — Pets For Patriots Blog

Three tours in Iraq and they want to kill this Marine.  Disgusting end for one of our veterans. Our military should stand by our K-9 soldiers or leave them alone.   I have forwarded this article on to my congressman.  Prayers up for someone to love and help Rocky.  Read comments after article. 

Carl

http://blog.petsforpatriots.org/retired-disabled-military-dog-rocky/

PLEASE CONGRESSMAN HULTGREN, HELP THIS VETERAN OUT.  THANK YOU. CARL SWENSEN

Retired disabled military dog Rocky dies if not adopted; served three tours in Iraq

Rocky lost the use of his hind legs during his service as a military working dog. To assist his chances for adoption, he has been outfitted with a dog wheelchair.

Gloria Hillard/NPR

Rocky lost the use of his hind legs during his service as a military working dog. To assist his chances for adoption, he has been outfitted with a dog wheelchair.

Rocky is a retired military dog who will be put down on August 24 if he’s not adopted. He served three tours in Iraq and desperately needs a loving home to enjoy his final years. Pets for Patriots is responding to a request to help create awareness of this veteran’s plight. We have spoken to authorities at Camp Pendleton in San Diego and confirmed this story.

Rocky currently lives at Camp Pendleton, his home base since entering the Marine Corps in 2004. He served three tours in Iraq between 2004 and 2007 as a patrol and explosives dog, and returned to the states after his last handler was killed in theater. Since then, he has not had a steady handler, but has continued to serve on base until March of this year. By that time, a degenerative condition rendered him unable to work and he was retired. Typically an ex-military K9 will be adopted by his handler, but Rocky has no handler to call his own.

The base kennels are not suitable to provide the type of ongoing care and attention that Rocky needs and deserves. And without an individual or family to adopt him, he will be put down. He was recently featured in an article about military dogs enjoying a bright future after service, but that’s not the case for him.

Because Rocky is a retired patrol dog, military protocol does not permit him to be surrendered to a shelter.

Like most military working dogs, Rocky is independent, but he has a sweet temperament and enjoys relaxing in the sun. As a result of his disability, he uses a canine wheelchair and needs assistance to do “his business.” He would do best in a family that can devote a lot of time to him, and that has no small children or other animals. As with many military canines, Rocky shows slight dog aggression. More than anything, Rocky needs someone who honors his service, and who will love and accept him.

Rocky’s known medical conditions:

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia/Enlarged prostate
Mild hip dysplasia L coxofemoral joint, grade I
Bilateral coxofemoral DJD (mild)
Bilateral neurologic defecits rear legs – degenerative myelopathy
Pressure/kennel sores

If you or someone you know has a big heart for this dog who put his life on the line for our country, please contact Camp Pendleton directly and immediately if you have questions about Rocky:

Spc. Joseph Ramsey: (760) 725-5527; email: joseph.t.ramsey@us.army.mil

Spc. Jade Clarke: (760) 725-5527; email: jade.clarke@us.army.mil

If you’d like to adopt Rocky, please fill out an application online. This will take you to Lackland AFB, which processes all requests for military dog adoptions across the United States armed forces.

P.S.: Our thanks to Military.com for sharing Rocky’s story in a hot rush!  And please share this information with anyone who might be able to help Rocky find a forever home… for his service!!

C’mon dog lovers, retired Vets, or anyone with a big heart… putting this dog down is just not right!!

August 18, 2011 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Friendship and Love, Pets, Service and Military Animals, Stop Animal Cruelty, Unusual Stories, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , | 2 Comments

San Francisco City Gov Bans Pet Fish? Hello?

First the bay city decided we American’s just shouldn’t be able to decide matters such as circumcision.

A Ryukin goldfish from The 6th "Pramong N...

We shouldn’t have to worry about decisions like that since we have a brilliant and all knowing government to think for us.

Now San Francisco is taking things a step further by possibly relieving the American’s that live within its limits of the terrible right to purchase a pet goldfish.

San Francisco’s Animal Control and Welfare Commission is recommending that the City ban the sale of goldfish, tropical fish and guppies in its borders, according to Matier and Ross.

The recommendation to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is part of the commission’s ongoing efforts to discourage “impulse buys” of animals.

The commission’s ban would cover pet stores and breeders in the City. It comes after more than a year of study and findings that aquarium fish are often mass bred under inhumane conditions or stripped from the wild.

It almost seems as if these idiots read Atlas Shrugs and instead of learning lessons from it, they got ideas.

I mean, San Francisco has managed to chase off most parents with children, cutting off future generations of workers, business and tax dollars. They kicked a medical industry to the curb and now Pet Smart and many other pet stores are likely to notice little value of sticking around.

Good going liberals… way to succeed as a city.

-Eric Odom

Source: Eric Dom

Related:

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it." -Abraham Lincoln

June 17, 2011 Posted by | Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Just One More Pet, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change | , , , , , | 3 Comments

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners – Fighting Shariah

By Azadeh Moaveni

z

Iranian officials find themselves in a cultural war with the West and see what they’re offering as an ‘Islamic lifestyle’ failing measurably.”

For much of the past decade, the Iranian government has tolerated what it considers a particularly depraved and un-Islamic vice: the keeping of pet dogs.

During periodic crackdowns, police have confiscated dogs from their owners right off the street; and state media has lectured Iranians on the diseases spread by canines. The cleric Gholamreza Hassani, from the city of Urmia, has been satirized for his sermons railing against "short-legged" and "holdable" dogs. But as with the policing of many other practices (like imbibing alcoholic drinks) that are deemed impure by the mullahs but perfectly fine to many Iranians, the state has eventually relaxed and let dog lovers be.

Those days of tacit acceptance may soon be over, however. Lawmakers in Tehran have recently proposed a bill in parliament that would criminalize dog ownership, formally enshrining its punishment within the country’s Islamic penal code. The bill warns that that in addition to posing public health hazards, the popularity of dog ownership "also poses a cultural problem, a blind imitation of the vulgar culture of the West." The proposed legislation for the first time outlines specific punishments for "the walking and keeping" of "impure and dangerous animals," a definition that could feasibly include cats but for the time being seems targeted at dogs. The law would see the offending animal confiscated, the leveling of a $100-to-$500 fine on the owner, but leaves the fate of confiscated dogs uncertain. "Considering the several thousand dogs [that are kept] in Tehran alone, the problem arises as to what is going to happen to these animals," Hooman Malekpour, a veterinarian in Tehran, said to the BBC’s Persian service. If passed, the law would ultimately energize police and volunteer militias to enforce the ban systematically.

In past years, animal-rights activists in Iran have persuasively argued that sporadic campaigns against dog ownership are politically motivated and unlawful, since the prohibition surfaces in neither the country’s civil laws nor its Islamic criminal codes. But if Iran’s laws were silent for decades on the question of dogs, that is because the animals — in the capacity of pet — were as irrelevant to daily life as dinosaurs. Islam, by custom, considers dogs najes, or unclean, and for the past century cultural mores kept dog ownership down to minuscule numbers. In rural areas, dogs have traditionally aided shepherds and farmers, but as Iranians got urbanized in the past century, their dogs did not come along. In cities, aristocrats kept dogs for hunting and French-speaking dowagers kept lap dogs for company, but the vast majority of traditional Iranians, following the advice of the clergy, were leery of dogs and considered them best avoided.

That has changed in the past 15 years with the rise of an urban middle class plugged into and eager to mimic Western culture. Satellite television and Western movies opened up a world where happy children frolicked with dogs in parks and affluent families treated them like adorable children. These days, lap dogs rival designer sunglasses as the upper-middle-class Iranian’s accessory of choice. "Global norms and values capture the heart of people all around the world, and Iran is no exception," says Omid Memarian, a prominent Iranian journalist specializing in human rights. "This is very frightening for Iranian officials, who find themselves in a cultural war with the West and see what they’re offering as an ‘Islamic lifestyle’ failing measurably."

The widening acceptability of dog ownership, and its popularity among a specific slice of Iran’s population — young, urban, educated and frustrated with the Islamic government — partly explains why dogs are now generating more official hostility. In 2007, two years into the tenure of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, security forces targeted dog owners alongside a crackdown on women’s attire and men’s "Westernized" hairstyles. In the regime’s eyes, owning a dog had become on par with wearing capri pants or sporting a mullet — a rebellious act.

The government’s tolerance for this low-level lifestyle dissidence fizzled after Ahmadinejad’s contested electoral victory in 2009, which sparked massive demonstrations and the most serious challenge to Islamic rule since the 1979 revolution. In the aftermath of that upheaval, the state has moved to tighten its control over a wide range of Iranians’ private activities, from establishing NGOs to accessing the Internet, to individual lifestyle decisions, according to Hadi Ghaemi, the director for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. "No doubt such attempts are motivated by a desire to squash acts of criticism and protests, even if through symbolic individual decisions that simply don’t conform to officially sanctioned lifestyles," Ghaemi says.

The criminalizing of dogs, in this context, helps the government address the legal gray areas concerning lifestyle behavior. When authorities found it difficult to police what it termed Westernized hairstyles worn by young men, it solved the problem last year by releasing a poster of specifically banned styles.

For many young people, these measures are a firm reminder that the government will brook no disobedience, whether it be chanting antigovernment slogans in the streets or sporting excessively long sideburns. Dog owners in Iran, like much of the population, are mostly preoccupied these days with inflation, joblessness and the parlous state of the country’s economy. But they will soon need to consider whether keeping their shih tzu or poodle is worth the added worry. Their dogs may face the same fate as the hundreds of street dogs that the government regularly sweeps from the streets of Tehran. "Many in Tehran and other big cities find the killing of street dogs offensive and cruel," says Memarian. "It’s like the Iranian people and officials live in two different worlds."

Source:  Time Magazine

Related: 

Dog/Pet Ownership Under Attack… Stand Up Now and Help!

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

And then there are the Fanatical “Green People”…

Greenies Gone Wild Again… for Earth Day  -  Back to Americans Doing More, Including Eating Our Dogs

Ditch Your Family Pet to Save the Planet… I think NOT!!

“The greatness of a nation, a people, and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated!” …Mahatma Gandhi

And When You Look at the Pet and Animal Abuse and Cruelty Around the World… Including in the United States… You Wonder if We Have Made Any Progress at All

This is in America:  No Mercy:  Calf Farm Cruelty Exposed Plus We Are Still Euthanizing 4 Million Dogs Plus Additional Pets in Shelters in America Every Year…  Join the No Kill Movement and Become Part of the Solution.  There is a Better Way!

April 28, 2011 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, animal abuse, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rights And Awareness, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Help Familie Keep Their Pets, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Outreach for Pets, Pet Abuse, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

These Will Melt Your Heart…

FOR ALL THE DOG LOVERS. AND IF YOU ARE NOT A DOG LOVER I THINK YOU WILL ENJOY THESE PHOTOS ANYWAY…

This is a good way to start your day!!!!
clip_image001
clip_image002
clip_image003
clip_image004
clip_image005
clip_image006
clip_image007
clip_image008
clip_image009
clip_image010
clip_image011
clip_image012
clip_image013
clip_image014
clip_image015
clip_image016clip_image017
clip_image018
clip_image019
clip_image020
clip_image021
clip_image022
clip_image023
clip_image024
clip_image025
clip_image026
clip_image027
clip_image028
clip_image029
clip_image030
NEVER MAKE SOMEONE A PRIORITY IN YOUR LIFE,
WHEN YOU ARE AN OPTION IN THEIRS!

March 5, 2011 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal and Pet Photos, animal behavior, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Outreach for Pets, Pet Friendship and Love, pet fun, Pets | | Leave a comment

The earth is flat, pet overpopulation exists and other myths we’ve been told

For years, most people in the United States have been told that that there are “too many pets and not enough homes”.  We have been told that there is a pet “overpopulation” problem.  We have been told that the reason that America’s animal shelters are killing millions of pets every year is because of this “overpopulation”.   We’ve heard this over and over and we have accepted this as truth without question.

Until a few years ago, I too believed that there was a pet overpopulation problem.  After all, I have seen the large numbers of animals at shelters, and who would believe that an animal shelter would kill thousands of animals every year if there actually were enough homes for all of them?  The caring and rational people who work at animal shelters would not do such a thing……. would they?

The truth is that pet “overpopulation” is actually a myth.  It does not exist.  I know this sounds heretical to many people especially to those who have fostered many animals, or to the people who watch animals being killed by the thousands at shelters every year. The first time that I read that pet overpopulation was a myth on a book cover, I thought it was crazy.  I am sure that people felt the same way the first time someone suggested that the earth might actually be round, not flat.  It is hard to change our belief system when we’ve been taught one thing our entire lives.  But, people finally realized that the earth really was not flat after all, that people were not sailing off the edge of the earth and people will soon realize that pet overpopulation is a myth as well.

But, let’s look at the numbers to make some sense of what the true facts are.   According to a national study done by Maddie’s Fund and the Humane Society of the United States, 23.5 million people in the US will get a new pet each year.  Some of those people have already decided where they will get that pet i.e.  they will adopt from a shelter, go to a breeder or get a pet from free to good home ad etc.   However, 17 million of those people have not yet decided where they will get their new pet.  So these “undecideds” are the homes that are up for grabs.  These 17 million people could be convinced to adopt.*

Today, between 3 and 4 million animals are being killed in “shelters”.   So it’s pretty clear that the “demand” for pets each year (17 million) far outnumbers the “supply” of animals being killed in shelters (3-4 million).

And the supply of adoptable shelter pets each year is actually even less because a large portion of that 3-4 million being killed are actually lost pets that should be reunited with their owners.   For example, Washoe Co., NV animal control returns 65% of pets to their owners.  Conversely, most shelters in the US average a return of only about 5%.  If Houston’s animal control i.e. BARC would utilized the same Return to Owner program as Washoe Co. with the same success, it would save the lives 8,100 more animals every year; that’s 8,100 animals that BARC would not need to adopt out or put in foster care and 8,100 empty kennels for the animals that truly are homeless.  It is also a savings of $972,000 every year which could then be directed to programs like free spay/neuter or a Help Desk to keep animals from being relinquished by their owners.

In addition, that 3-4 million “supply” could be further reduced if all shelters TNR’d (trap, neuter, released) feral cats instead of killing all of them, as many shelters do.

That 3-4 million “supply” could be reduced further still if shelters had pet retention programs that kept many of those animals out of the shelter in the first place, as mentioned above.

So we can see that adopting out all animals entering shelters is doable.  And the fact is that it is already being done in many communities.  If pet overpopulation really existed, there would be no open admission, No Kill shelters.  They could not exist. But, they do exist.

So let’s break these numbers down and get a perspective on what it means for Houston.

According to the U.S. census, there are 310,895,000+ people in the U.S.  As we discussed above, 17 million people who will get a new pet each year, have not yet decided where they will get that pet.  Those “undecided” new pet owners equal about 5.4% of the U.S. population.

The latest census shows that Houston has just under 2.2 million people.  The “undecided” new pet owners in Houston would equal about 118,800 people.  That is 118,800 people who could be convinced to adopt their next pet.

We also know that approximately 80,000 pets are being killed in Houston’s five kill shelters each year.   Again, we can see that the “demand” for pets by the “undecideds” in Houston (118,800) far outnumbers the “supply” of pets being killed in Houston’s shelters (80,000).

This means that there is no pet “overpopulation”.  It just means that the 80,000 pets being killed in Houston shelters each year could be saved if they were better introduced to the people who would be willing to adopt them.

And the numbers above are a worst case scenario because again this does not take into consideration the feral cats that should be TNR’d; it doesn’t take into consideration the number of pets that “should” be returned to their owners but who are not (see above); it does not take into consideration the number of animals that could be kept out of the shelter entirely with a proactive “help desk”.

I’m not saying that there aren’t a lot of pets entering Houston’s shelters each year.  Of course there are.  And I’m not saying that there aren’t irresponsible people in Houston.  Of course there are.  I am saying that just because 80,000 pets are being killed in Houston shelters each year does not equate to “too many pets and not enough homes”.  The numbers prove that this is false.  It is myth and propaganda perpetuated by kill shelters.

I’m also not saying it is easy to save all healthy and treatable pets entering shelters.  To the contrary, it is hard work.  But therein lies the true heart of problem ….. saving all healthy and treatable pets is hard work and most shelter directors in the U.S. still refuse to do everything necessary to save them.  Continuing on the same path of “save a few and kill the rest” is easier.  Continuing to blame the public for pet “overpopulation” is easier.

So while I will admit there is an overpopulation problem, it is not a pet overpopulation problem.  The problem is an overpopulation of ineffective shelter directors who refuse to join the 21st century and put into place the programs and services that we know will save all healthy and treatable pets.

That overpopulation problem could be solved fairly quickly…. with a pink slip.

*****************************************************************************************************************************************************

If you would like to learn how every shelter can transform themselves into No Kill shelters, please join us at our Building a No Kill Community workshop on April 30th.   Learn how we can stop the killing in our shelters.

Stay up to date on this topic and others by receiving No Kill Houston’s e-newsletter.

To receive an email notice each time I post a new article on Examiner.com, click the “Subscribe” button at the top of this page.

Become a fan of No Kill Houston and No Kill Texas on Facebook.

Follow No Kill Houston on Twitter.

Continue reading on Examiner.com: The earth is flat, pet overpopulation exists and other myths we’ve been told – Houston animal shelters | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/animal-shelters-in-houston/the-earth-is-flat-pet-overpopulation-exists-and-other-myths-we-ve-been-told#ixzz1FIiv7ENF

Source: Bett Sundermeyer – Houston Examiner  – Reposted:  Just One More Pet

March 1, 2011 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, We Are All God's Creatures | , , | 10 Comments

‘Until One Has Loved an Animal, Part of Their Soul Remains Unawakened’

Our pups are now 3,4 and 6-years old…  Yes 4, pretty amazing for people who never had or really wanted pets.  I always liked animals, but really didn’t want one of my own.  Perhaps I just realized that I wasn’t in a place or ready to take care of them yet and my husband was allergic to everything with fur and feathers.   So when our daughter was young we gave in starting with hamsters, mice, rats, geckos, lizards, fish, turtles… and then birds.  Then our daughter came home with a dog while she was working part-time at a pet store, the summer after her first year of college.  She was supposed to be earning a little pocket money for the next year. Instead she pretty much spent all she earned and came home with a papered Chihuahua… who became our Angel.

clip_image001clip_image002

Baby Angel

My husband said, “no way!” Our daughter was going back to the dorms and he was allergic, so took Angel right back to the store.  They wouldn’t take her back because our daughter had signed the contract and they had given up a full paid sale to let her buy Angel at the employee discount, less than half of what they had had an actual customer for.  And of course, our daughter went back to school and the dorms, with Angel in tow insisting she could sneak her in and keep her there. Less than an hour after her arrival at school with her 4-legged roommate, we were on our way to pick Angel up.  My husband went through 18-months of allergy shots after that so we could keep her.

A year later our daughter was off sailing around the world with Semester at Sea.  When she got back mid-year, she was assigned a lulu bell for a roommate and bargained with us to get an off-campus apartment a semester early. She wasn’t there a month… when she brought home a Chiweenie puppy, Apachi, who was being given away outside the pet store, near school, where she had just gotten a part-time job after returning from her sail.  A pet store job is never a good idea for her.  Major Problem… it was a no pet apartment and we had signed a year’s lease.

clip_image003clip_image004

Baby Apachi

Not long after getting Apachi, our daughter’s colitis flared up to an extreme level (I tend to think some vaccines that they got overseas might have exacerbated her condition adding to some stress in her life at the time and too much drinking and partying during that period and trip). After a week at an alternative care facility in an attempt to avoid radical surgery, she unfortunately ended up having to have 2 major surgeries and I spent a total of 54-days (24/7) in the hospital sleeping on a cot in her room, with her.  My husband was home with Angel and Apachi and visited daily.  With all that was going on we really didn’t think about the fact that neither 6 month old Apachi nor Angel had been fixed.  Angel is a half long-hair half short-hair fawn face Chihuahua with a really easy going disposition and everyone had said, if we could breed her with a like-type male, they’d love to have a puppy, so I was looking for a mate for her and Apachi was just a baby and taking him in just got lost in all the goings on.

Next thing we knew… we had 4 puppies: Angelina, Magnum, Princess and Goji

clip_image005

Angel was a natural and great Mom and Apachi watched over them from somewhat of a distance… until they were weaned, at which point he took over.

The boys (Magnum and Goji) and Angelina went to new homes at 10-weeks of age and we decided to keep Princess.  Then a few weeks later Angelina came back to us, because her new family couldn’t keep her and we had requested that if anyone who took a puppy had problems that we would get the puppy back.  Long story short… we kept her too and that is how we went from birds, turtles and rats, at the time, to 4-dogs and a fish who survived being fed to our turtles.

Pups 39 Days Old 002

Goji and Magnum

Uh Oh

Princess and Angelina

We have been very blessed to have found homes for Magnum and Goji with wonderful families who keep in touch and let us know how the boys are doing at least a couple times a year…

Goji at 2

Goji and Magnum above… Angelina and Princess below at age 2

image Pets and River Visiting - Mar 2009 008

Usually at the holidays or the pups’ birthday

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Our 4 Sing Happy Birthday

The Fam thumb in Frame

The puppies were about 6-months old here

clip_image008

And this is them now…  Angel 6, Apachi 4 and the pups 3

It has been an amazing experience to watch this little family grow and interact.  An experience that most people and even animals don’t get to have unless you live in the country.  People ask, “Wow, aren’t they a lot of work?”.  I can honestly say that the joy so out-weighs any work, that I never even notice… and I cook for our four for all their meals.

As for our daughter… she went on to get  more furkids…

Precious

Precious (a Pomeranian), Merlin (a Papillion) and Annabelle (a Chorkie)

By Marion Algier/Ask Marion – Just One More Pet

Photos by the UCLA Shutterbug

  • Critter for Christmas Gift… Not Best Idea!
  • Pet owners cut back on gifts… but not for their cuddly dogs and cats
  • Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?
  • August 3, 2010 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal and Pet Photos, Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Fostering and Rescue, Just One More Pet, On The Lighter Side, Pet Blog, Pets, Success Stories, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 50 Comments

    Fur and Feathers Fly As San Francisco Weighs Pet Sales Ban

    What began as a proposal to ban sales of dogs and cats quickly grew to include birds, hamsters, rats and other small mammals. Shelters and rescue groups could still offer adoptions…

    San Francisco weighs ban on pet sales

    Jennifer Grafelman, general manager of the Animal Connection pet store in San Francisco, displays a fuzzy chinchilla. She and others are fighting a proposal that would ban sales of any animal with fur or feathers. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times / July 23, 2010)

    By Maria L. La Ganga, Los Angeles Times  -  July 25, 2010 | 8:54 p.m.

    Reporting from San Francisco —

    Here in the land of animal companions and their faithful guardians — do not call them pets and owners — a battle is raging over just what it means to be creature-friendly.

    In true San Francisco fashion, city officials are considering a ban on sales of almost all pets. If the prohibition passes, it would mean no cats for sale here, no dogs, no hamsters, no rats, no guinea pigs, no macaws, no parakeets, no cockatiels, no finches. If Junior wanted a snake, Mom could probably still buy him one within the city’s precious 47 square miles. But forget about those mice for Drago’s dinner.

    The proposal started out small: prohibit commerce in cats and dogs as a way to discourage puppy mills and kitten factories. South Lake Tahoe and West Hollywood passed such laws within the last 18 months; in Texas, Austin and El Paso are considering similar ones.

    But this being San Francisco, the discussion didn’t stop there.

    After multiple meetings of the Animal Control & Welfare Commission and hours of impassioned testimony — peppered with the word “symbolic” — the narrow proposition blossomed to include most creatures great and small. The commission is set to vote on a ban in August. If it passes, the Board of Supervisors will weigh in.

    Jennifer Grafelman, general manager of the Animal Connection pet store and an enthusiastic rat breeder, says she hates puppy mills. But the proposal “has so easily snowballed into small animals and birds. … Where’s it going to end? Reptiles and fish could be next.”

    But Rebecca Katz, head of San Francisco’s animal control department, says the prohibition could help solve one of her shelter’s biggest little problems: Hamsters, she said, are euthanized at a greater rate than any other animal. Banning their sale could curtail such deaths.
    Humans on both sides of the pet-sales debate cloak their arguments in terms of what’s best for the critters involved. The pro-pet-store faction launched a group called Protect Our Precious Animals. But the issue really bubbles up at the nexus of lives and livelihoods.
    Nationally, pets are a $40-billion to $45-billion-a-year business, and trade groups have gotten involved in the fight. The Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council has a plea on its website “urging those who support the right to have pets” to contact San Francisco officials “in opposition to this blatant anti-pet proposal.”

    Even Fox News pundit Bill O’Reilly has joined the fray. San Franciscans, he blustered recently, are “kooks!” “Insane!” The proposal is “fascistic!” “You’re basically taking away people’s freedoms for this kind of far-left vision of Nirvana!”

    This tempest in a water bowl began in April, when Philip Gerrie, backyard beekeeper and member of the animal commission, suggested that San Francisco go the way of West Hollywood and South Lake Tahoe.

    Although the city has only one store that regularly sells puppies and about half a dozen that sell any animals or birds, Gerrie said, “large pet stores were considering moving into the city that do sell puppies.” A ban on puppy sales, he thought, was “preemptive” and “doable.”
    But at the April animal commission meeting, the discussion turned to other animals that are euthanized, Gerrie said, “and that’s when we started thinking about what we call the smalls — hamsters, rats, guinea pigs, chinchillas, mice, five little furry things sold in pet stores.”
    The matter came up again in May and June when bird activist Elizabeth Young begged commission members to add her feathered friends to the list of protected species.

    “Birds are extremely intelligent and emotional,” Young, a volunteer with Mickaboo Companion Bird Rescue, told the panel. “All kept birds, no matter what kind, suffer horribly when not taken care of well.”

    In July, a couple dozen heated speakers from both sides piped up during the meeting, which stretched to four hours, “but it felt like five,” Gerrie said.

    Rick French, owner of the Animal Company in the swank Noe Valley neighborhood, said that during the meeting he rattled off a list of obscure San Francisco laws he’d found on the Internet. It’s illegal here “to wipe your windshield with dirty underwear…you can add to those, pet stores without pets.”

    “It didn’t go over too well,” said French, who sells pet supplies and birds and is a cofounder of Protect Our Precious Animals.

    The actual proposal has yet to be written, Gerrie said, and he’s a little cagey about just how far he plans to push the prohibition.

    But this is his thinking so far: Cats and dogs would be out because of puppy mills and kitten factories. Birds would be out because of “their sensitivity and inappropriateness as pets; they are wild animals.” Hamsters, mice, rats, chinchillas and guinea pigs would be out because of high euthanasia rates. Sales of bunnies and chicks were axed in San Francisco more than 30 years ago; you can thank Easter excesses and pint-sized attention spans for that.

    That would pretty much leave the least cuddly creatures on pet store shelves — reptiles, amphibians, fish. The bottom line: If you want anything furry or feathered, go to a shelter or rescue group and adopt.

    Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, said he is “not aware” of any other jurisdiction considering such a widespread ban. And he’s not sold on the San Francisco effort.

    “I think the best thing would be to start with [banning] the sale of dogs and cats from these pet stores,” he said. With a broader ban, “I think you attract a set of additional opponents that sink an otherwise achievable goal.”

    French, the longtime retailer, says he does not believe that banning animal sales would keep abandoned creatures out of harm’s way. What he does know is that it would imperil his business.

    “If I don’t have a bird to sell,” said French, “I don’t sell a cage. I don’t sell bird toys. I don’t sell seed. But it’s about freedom of choice. If someone wants a bird, they’ll go to Berkeley. This will solve none of the problems the commission sees.”

    maria.laganga@latimes.comSource:  The Los Angeles Times Copyright © 2010,

    July 28, 2010 Posted by | Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Just One More Pet, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change | , , | Leave a comment

    San Francisco Wants to Ban Pet Sales?

    San Francisco Wants to Ban Pet Sales?

    If you sell a bird or a snake in San Francisco, you could wind up in jail.

    The city’s Commission of Animal Control and Welfare will consider an ordinance tonight that would make it a crime to sell pets – including dogs, cats, hamsters, mice, rats — everything except for fish.

    If the ordinance is passed, San Francisco could become the first city in the nation to ban the sale of all pets.

    “People buy small animals all the time as an impulse buy, don’t know what they’re getting into, and the animals end up at the shelter and often are euthanized,” Chairwoman Sally Stephens told the San Francisco Chronicle. “That’s what we’d like to stop.”

    Pet store owners are fighting mad.

    “It’s terrible,” pet store manager John Chan told the newspaper. “A pet store that can’t sell pets? It’s ridiculous.”

    The Board of Supervisors would have final say on the issue.

    by Todd Starnes is a FOX News Radio reporter and author.

    July 9, 2010 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Fostering and Rescue, Just One More Pet, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pets, Political Change, Unusual Stories, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 234 other followers