Friday, May 30, 2008

National coverage, related to folks losing their homes

Things were looking rally ugly for me and mine last year – my husband had lost his job and mine was eliminated from the shelter where I was working, both within a few weeks time. I was making worse case scenario plans for the just in case…

Rio would not be an easy foster and really can’t be re-homed. He needs his companion dog Moon with him to continue to resemble a sane dog; so that means those two must stay together and with us. Our two orange boys (red tabby dudes) are easy going but I don’t know anyone in town looking for fosters. I settled on old friends up in eastern Oregon who simply adore one of our cats and would be willing to take on two in the bargain.

Looking into rentals that would welcome two over 40 pounds dogs, at something vaguely similar to reasonable rents was shocking. There were few and far between.

This unpleasant exercise made the crisis starkly real to me.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-29-pets-foreclosure_N.htm

“STOCKTON, Calif. (AP) — The house was ravaged — its floors ripped, walls busted and lights smashed by owners who trashed their home before a bank foreclosed on it. Hidden in the wreckage was an abandoned member of the family: a malnourished, starving pit bull.”

“The San Joaquin Animal Shelter in Stockton is fielding more desperate calls from animal owners about to be evicted. Many call as a last resort after being turned down by various rescue groups with no room for more animals.

"They're usually breaking down on the phone," said Kathy Potter, a shelter dispatcher. "I'm quite direct with them that there's a 50-50 chance the animals might be put down."

Still, shelter operators say, half a chance is better than none.

"They may be euthanized at a shelter," said Stephanie Shain of the Humane Society of the United States. "But they'll be fed and have water and have a humane euthanization, as opposed to spending the last days of their lives eating carpet or wallboard."

http://www.catchannel.com/News/foreclosure-pets-program-selects-first-10-shelters.aspx?cm_sp=InternalClicks-_-RelatedArticles-_-news/foreclosure-pets-program-selects-first-10-shelters

“The first 10 shelters have been selected to receive grants, pending verification of their nonprofit status, Peterson said. The money will help create or expand programs such as cat and dog food banks or a veterinary fund to help people who can’t afford medical care for their pets.”

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

g'day
Having read more of your posts,threads, and links...and having some awareness of the issues in my own country. It is quite clear that owners of dogs need to be registered, as well as their dogs.
The responsibility of owning a pet of any description is taken so lightly by so many...often the pet is like a new toy..once the novelty wears of its discarded.
Whilst the economic woes world wide are having a negative impact on pet ownership...world wide there probably should be a cull of animals for hundreds of reasons (I'd like to include some homo sapiens in the cull too but...)

Standing back from the emotional attachments we have for our pets...many pets have more privileged lives than many humans on the planet.
Many millions in the third world are vegetarian and have a quite small footprint on the planet.
In one of your links I think it was quoted that there are 75 million dogs in America...most of them are carnivorous. Admittedly the quality of processed pet foods is questionable, non the less the footprint required to grow meat is huge.
So I guess my point is this, the planet is under stress, and things we use to take for granted need to be reassessed.
Pet owner ship should be a privilege a not right, and therefore owners need to be registered.
No system is perfect, but if it was made more difficult to just go and get a pet...the crisis of caring for abandoned pets would be somewhat alleviated and more importantly animals would be less prone to being victims of abuse and abandonment in the first place.

Happy Camper said...

There should be more restrictions to pet ownership, but we are doing the reverse. As shelter become more crowded we lower the adoption fees and standards and many dogs/cats are not taken by good people. So, 3 dsays later they are back at the shelter. I know some wacko bloggers really believe they should just be allowed to roam, as if they would have a kind life. Feral life is not good for a former domestic animal. Of course there are people who believe anything is better than a shelter. I am not one of them. If you cannot keep your pet, take it to a shelter, any shelter....