Topnav

PETA’s Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

Alisa Manzelli, Global Animal

article 0 18D0B5CA000005DC 389 634x399 580x365 PETAs Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

PETA’s headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia. Photo Credit: whypetaeuthanizes.org

Who can dismiss the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ countless victories for animals and their welfare? Since their start in 1980, PETA has actively changed society by standing up for the lives of millions of animals.

Whether they are promoting a healthy vegan diet, curbing the fur trade, influencing cruelty-free product marketing, or working to implement non-animal testing methods, PETA has been the driving force behind many groundbreaking advances in animal rights.

However, the question behind PETA’s euthanization policy remains in the center of hot debate as many activists believe it is wrong and even hypocritical for one of the world’s leading animal rights organizations to support the practice.

The organization is once again under attack following a scathing blog post published in the Huffington Post in April. In the detailed article, Nathan Winograd, executive director of the No Kill Advocacy Center, unveils the numbers behind PETA’s “kill rate,” positing shelters should only euthanize animals who are essentially unadoptable and cannot be rehabilitated due to aggression or health reasons.

Winograd writes, “PETA is an organization that publicly claims to represent the best interest of animals — indeed their ‘ethical treatment.’ Yet approximately 2,000 animals pass through PETA’s front door every year and very few make it out alive.”

PETA’s euthanasia statistics are available to the public on on the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) website in accordance with Virginia’s Sunshine Law, which requires animal shelters to report the number of dogs and cats brought in each year—including how many are euthanized and how many are adopted.

The data reveals nearly 90 percent of the animals—1,647 cats and dogs—sheltered at PETA’s headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia in 2012 were euthanized, and only 19 animals were adopted into new homes.

Further figures indicate PETA has euthanized a total of over 29,000 animals (mostly dogs and cats) at their headquarters, and the organization’s euthanasia rates have only been increasing.

In addition, out of the 31,815 animals admitted to PETA shelters since 1998, only 3,159 were adopted—signifying a 9.7 percent adoption rate and an 87.2 percent kill rate.

2013 03 29 dumpster 400x252 PETAs Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

A 2005 photo of a supermarket dumpster full of garbage bags. When police officers looked inside, they found the bodies of animals who are said to have been euthanized by PETA. Photo Credit: whypetaeuthanizes.org

These numbers are in stark contrast to those of other nearby shelters. For instance, in the same city, in 2009, the Norfolk City Pound euthanized 54.7 percent of its dogs and cats. And in 2008, the Norfolk SPCA found homes for 86 percent of its dogs and cats and euthanized only 5.3 percent.

Yet most can agree PETA’s euthanasia statistics are just a small fraction of the total animals euthanized across the U.S. annually. According to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), around six to eight million cats and dogs enter shelters every year, and while three to four million animals are adopted, approximately 2.7 million healthy, adoptable dogs and cats are euthanized.

Winograd along with many others who are staunchly opposed to PETA’s practices believe PETA euthanizes such a large number of animals due to financial reasons.

Despite the fact that the organization reported an annual revenue of more than $34 million in 2009, Daphna Nachminovitch, senior vice president of cruelty investigations at PETA, has dismissed the idea that there is a financial motive behind PETA’s practice. She says shelters don’t cost much money to build or maintain, but when they are jam-packed with homeless pets, the caged animals suffer.

“Money can’t buy a good home, so it’s not a matter of money,” she said. “You could build the nicest shelter in the world, but if you don’t have homes for them, they’re still going to sit in a cage.”

But according to further inspection reports by the VDACS, the PETA facility “does not contain sufficient animal enclosures to routinely house the number of animals annually reported as taken into custody…The shelter is not accessible to the public, promoted, or engaged in efforts to facilitate the adoption of animals taken into custody.” However, PETA still met the legal requirements, and following a full legal analysis of PETA’s shelter operations, the VDACS renewed PETA’s shelter license.

In addition, routine inspections often found “no animals to be housed in the facility” or, at best “few animals in custody,” despite thousands of them impounded by PETA annually.

“90% [of the animals] were euthanized within the first 24 hours of custody,” according to the Virginia Department of Agriculture inspector.

Winograd asks, “How can people adopt animals from PETA when they kill the animals they acquire within minutes without ever making them available for adoption? How can people adopt animals when they have no adoption hours, do no adoption promotion, and do not show animals for adoption, choosing to kill them without doing so? In fact, when asked by a reporter what efforts they make to find animals homes, PETA had no comment.”

There is no doubt PETA adopts out animals, as anyone can see by looking through PETA’s website. However, the real question is how many?

President and co-founder of PETA Ingrid Newkirk’s rebuttle entitled Euthanasia: We Won’t Run From What Needs To Be Done! claims, “PETA’s statistics are also often used, as they are being used now, in a truly perverted way by some ‘no-kill’ evangelists to try to turn people away from the ‘evil’ of what is actually a dignified, merciful release from suffering.”

2013 04 08 ingrid1111 PETAs Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

One dog at PETA’s shelter, Santana, had facial injuries so serious that his right eye was swollen completely shut and his jaw was broken. Photo Credit: Huffington Post

Newkirk’s article—also published in the Huffington Post—features numerous graphic photos of animals who are obviously suffering from extreme health issues.

“They never give a complete picture, and they always use inflammatory language and labels like ‘puppies’ and ‘kittens,’ even if the animal was a 17-year-old dog who was unable to breathe properly because of a heart condition,” Newkirk continued.

Newkirk claims these figures are “deliberately chosen” and “do not include perspective.” She emphasizes how critics of the no-kill movement overlook PETA’s work with no- and low-cost spaying/neutering and other veterinary services, and claims that many of the no-kill shelters in the surrounding area often refuse admission to animals because they are constantly overpopulated with homeless pets.

In addition, Newkirk affirms these shelters often reject “undesirable animals” who are injured, sick, or dying, and subsequently bring them to PETA’s headquarters, which then “bears the veterinary or euthanasia costs.”

Newkirk turns our attention to the underlying problems behind pet overpopulation as she urges the public to “ask themselves if they are spaying and neutering their own animal companions, helping people with a low income ‘fix’ theirs, adopting from shelters instead of buying from breeders and pet stores, funding education campaigns about proper animal care and adoption (among other things), and demanding higher animal-protection standards in their own communities.”

Newkirk maintains, “PETA is proud to continue to stand tall and roll up its sleeves to help animals.”

PETA has been a long-time critic of the no-kill movement, claiming many no-kill shelters are unable to provide proper care for the flood of animals entering their systems.

For instance, the Cattaraugus County SPCA has been under scrutiny for a number of years, with countless former volunteers and board members calling the rural New York shelter a “perversion of the no-kill movement.”

A PETA blog post entitled Why We Euthanize reads, “I always wonder how anyone cannot recognize that there is a world of difference between painlessly euthanizing animals out of compassion—aged, injured, sick, and dying animals whose guardians can’t afford euthanasia, for instance—as PETA does, and causing them to suffer terror, pain, and a prolonged death while struggling to survive on the streets, at the hands of untrained and uncaring ‘technicians,’ or animal abusers.”

PETA writes, “It’s easy to point the finger at those who are forced to do the ‘dirty work’ caused by a throwaway society’s casual acquisition and breeding of dogs and cats who end up homeless and unwanted, but at PETA, we will never turn our backs on neglected, unloved, and homeless animals—even if the best we can offer them is a painless release from a world that doesn’t have enough heart or homes with room for them.”

petapostcard 400x288 PETAs Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

A postcard sent to Nathan Winograd by Ingrid Newkirk admitting that PETA does not believe all animals have a right to live. Photo Credit: whypetaeuthanizes.org

Although many no-kill advocates claim PETA needlessly kills puppies and kittens, the organization stands firm in their statement that the animals they take in at the center are unadoptable.

‘We have a small division that does hands-on work with animals, and most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable,” Jane Dollinger, a PETA spokeswoman, said.

However, the label “unadoptable” can be viewed as a subjective term. After all, even the dogs rescued from Michael Vick’s Bad Newz Kennels—who many believed were “abused beyond resocialization”—were compassionately given another chance and “have gone on to earn impressive accolades, and all have proven themselves to be cherished family companions,” according to BadRap director Donna Reynolds.

PETA is said to refer animals labeled as adoptable to nearby, open-admission shelters like the Virginia Beach Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, where they have the best chance of being seen and finding a new home.

“Euthanasia is not a solution to overpopulation but rather a tragic necessity given the present crisis. PETA is proud to be a ‘shelter of last resort,’ where animals who have no place to go or who are unwanted or suffering are welcomed with love and open arms,” PETA said.

While many argue the no-kill movement is redefining what an animal shelter is nowadays and succeeding in saving 90 percent of homeless animals, the Association of Shelter Veterinarians recognizes shelters have differing philosophies and methods and does not provide any strict rules or guidelines on euthanasia.

“Our philosophy is that whenever euthanasia is performed, it should be done compassionately and humanely. The decision to euthanize an animal rests with a shelter’s staff and should be based on their policies and knowledge of the animal’s health and behavior status,” according to Dr. Jeanette O’Quin, President of the Association of Shelter Veterinarians.

Yet one Norfolk-area veterinarian, Dr. Ronald Hallstrom, claims euthanasia is a philosophical issue. He recalled a time when animal control brought him a dog with three severely injured legs, leading him to decide to put her to sleep. But when he put the needle into her leg, she looked up at him and he changed his mind. Daisy, he says, is now a “wonderful, wonderful pet.” But not every animal brought to him is like Daisy.

“If you put a value on the life of an animal, you have an obligation to make the best decision,” Hallstrom said. “Euthanasia of the animals that don’t have owners should be performed by people that are rational and are using sound judgment.”

Although PETA has done stellar work over the past 25 years, many have some fundamental disagreements when it comes to the organization’s stance on companion animals.

PETA writes on their website, “We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals’ best interests if the institution of “pet keeping”—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as ‘pets’—never existed.”

However, many argue that having a pet is some people’s only connection to the animal kingdom as animal companionship builds compassion and promotes peace amongst all living beings.

Others claim it seems crazy for PETA not to differentiate between wild animals and domestic pets who have been living among humans for thousands of years. After all, dogs and men have lived together and shared a mutually beneficial coexistence that has developed over approximately 130,000 years.

“In my book, the only time it’s acceptable to kill animals is the same as the only time it’s acceptable to kill people: when their illness is painful and terminal. Anything else is a speciesist double standard. As soon as I hear of a campaign to kill homeless people because it’s ‘more humane’ then I might consider it an acceptable option for homeless animals too,” one reader said.

The nation’s largest sanctuary for abused and abandoned animals, Best Friends Animal Society (BFAS), writes, “Newkirk once said, ‘PETA believes euthanasia is the kindest gift to a dog or cat unwanted and unloved.’ We simply couldn’t disagree more. The kindest gift to a homeless animal is a good home…Any organization that’s aspiring to a leadership role in relation to companion animals needs to be encouraging people to save more lives, rather than to go on repeating the failed policies and practices that helped create the problem in the first place.”

A pioneer of the no-kill movement, BFAS works nationwide to promote pet adoption, spay-and-neuter services, and humane education programs, and has played a large role in helping the Vick dogs overcome their violent pasts. Home to Dogtown, a gated community for rescued dogs, BFAS writes on their website, “Along with top-of-the-line medical care, these dogs get all of the love and training they need to recover from their pasts so that they can move on to permanent, loving homes, which most do. For the rest, Dogtown is home for as long as they need it to be.”

BFAS continued, “While PETA is in the forefront of many animal-related issues, they are way behind the times when it comes to companion animals. We would hope that they will continue to lead in the areas where they do well, and to stay out of areas in which, by their own words and deeds, they have no positive contribution to make.”

Where do you stand on PETA’s so-called “deadly practice” and the no-kill movement? Do you feel PETA should redirect their efforts to emphasize pet adoption and rehabilitation? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS:

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

17 Responses to PETA’s Euthanasia Policy: Excessive Or Humane?

  1. Anonymous October 27, 2013 at 6:54 am #

    Thanks for the great post! I think it is good to put animals to sleep if you see them suffering through pain. Euthanizing is a great technique but you need to sensible enough to decide when to euthanize your pet. I found some really good information on a pet euthanasia related website(Lastlovingdecision.com) which can be helpful to you people as well which talks about when to euthanize your pet by Dr. Carr Kelsey.

  2. Rose Bauman May 25, 2013 at 2:03 pm #

    NO! PeTA should NOT redirect their efforts to emphasize pet adoption and rehabilitation! The arrogance of this No Kill "movement" to assert that adoption is the solution to a society's dysfunctional relationship with its "companion" animals, that it produces in surplus numbers, abuses, loses, abandons and barely KEEPS, is outrageous! This "No Kill movement" exploits and perpetuates homelessness and inflicts suffering! PeTA does community outreach, s/n tens of thousand dogs/cats for poor pet owners. Their efforts are consistent with studies in the professional animal welfare literature which identify risk factors related to homelessness and how to achieve no kill communities realistically. Why would anyone promote adoption and rehabilitation as "the solution", when millions are born only to suffer the same fate, and when hundreds of thousands of adopted "pets" are returned to shelters, get lost and die each year? Enough already with this exploitation and insanity!

  3. Harve Morgan May 23, 2013 at 3:37 pm #

    Oh please. You are talking with a man, Winograd, who deliberately allowed a cruel puppy mill to continue in Groton while Winograd was head of the SPCA in Tompkins County. According to the Ithaca Journal, Winograd was quoted as saying he knew about the puppy mill for a year and a half and did nothing. He was called on it by the Ag Dept. Question things like why the Lynchburg No Kill shelter is allowing more animals to die in their cages than the three surrounding shelters put together. You are taking the word of a man whose hand picked management staff in Philly were on the verge of cruelty charges for implementing the No Kill program which failed miserably. Next time pick a more credible person to use as a source, Winograd is far from credible. BTW PeTA always has my support, I took the time to research your accusations and found they are BS.

  4. anon May 23, 2013 at 5:22 am #

    Auto correct needs to die. Bett*

  5. anon May 23, 2013 at 5:12 am #

    I could really careless how many dogs you have Randy. I’ve been responsible for 150 cats, including seniors’ diabetic, crippled animals, big deal.

    You calling anyone a liar is pretty rich considering how many crap and lies you spew. Your flagrant disregard for the well-being of your dogs by continuing your illegal libel and breaking of a court order against you is getting old.

    And it all still doesn’t change the fact that neither Better, nor Winograd have claimed you were convicted. If the facts about your arrest are false than maybe you should attack the news articles about it and not people that are just repeating them. Your evidence against everyone you foam at the mouth about is nonexistent.

    • Sherlock Canthunt May 23, 2013 at 10:45 am #

      Did you like my last blog? Most people who read it understand the connections Winograd has with the breeding community. Did you know that Winograd charges between $20,000 to $120,000 for doing a shelter evaluation?

      So let me get this straight. In order to silence any opposition no kill nuts like Debi Day need only invest six figures in attorneys to win a default judgment therefore allowing the court to deprive me of my first amenment right to free speech? If that doesn’t work, since my constitutional rights aren’t for sale, the no kill nuts will up the anti by threatening people with jail?

      Thats fine, the judge knows where i live. Have her send the U.S, Marshalls with their warrant. We can all watch it on C.N.N. – personally i don’t think the judge is prepared to take that step.

      As for No KIll Nation’s braindead leader Debi Day please explain where her resume shows any previous success in reforming any shelters let alone build a no kill community. She and her organization are FRAUDS. Its all about the money and glory with that nut case.

      There, take that to Debi’s equally brain dead attorney Ryan Lehrer. The last time i checked the constitution still allows me to hold any opinion I want. We are not a country where the super wealthy can simply purchase political rhetoric with us common people tossed in prison if we disagree.

      When are YOU going to grow some balls and sign your posts? Only a coward hides behind ANON with their signature.

      LOVE DRATS

      • Anon May 24, 2013 at 11:00 am #

        “Did you like my last blog?”

        It was terrible, just like all of your blogs.

        “Most people who read it understand the connections Winograd has with the breeding community.”

        The only people that read your god awful blogs are limited to the cesspool, so I wouldn’t use that as a bragging point if I were you. They’re the same cat/dog haters that think we should shoot and poison cats and that chickens, pigs, and cows are more important than cats and dogs.

        “ Did you know that Winograd charges between $20,000 to $120,000 for doing a shelter evaluation?”

        Proof? Oh wait, you have none. Though I have seen proof from others showing he charges a plane ticket and his lodgings for his stay only. And even if he did charge that much, it is a hell of a lot less than HSUS charges and the only thing HSUS does is tell the shelter to kill more animals.

        “So let me get this straight. In order to silence any opposition no kill nuts like Debi Day need only invest six figures in attorneys to win a default judgment therefore allowing the court to deprive me of my first amenment right to free speech? If that doesn’t work, since my constitutional rights aren’t for sale, the no kill nuts will up the anti by threatening people with jail?”

        Lying about people is not opinion, it is libel. If you cannot prove your lies as fact (which you couldn’t in a court of law) than you are committing an illegal action and your victims have every right to defend themselves and have it stopped. Your constitutional rights, end when it infringes upon someone else’s constitutional rights. Your being threatened with jail because you’re in violation of a court order to shut up and stop lying about Debi and NKN. Heck, I’ve caught some of your libel in action concerning NKN vice president and claiming she is a dog breeder… when she is not and has never been a dog breeder. Maybe you should stick to proven facts instead of lies and stop stalking people on the internet.

        “Thats fine, the judge knows where i live. Have her send the U.S, Marshalls with their warrant. We can all watch it on C.N.N. – personally i don’t think the judge is prepared to take that step.”

        And you know where the judge lives. Does this judge know you have posted elsewhere that you have been doing drive- bys of their house. That’s really kinda creepy Randy.

        “As for No KIll Nation’s braindead leader Debi Day please explain where her resume shows any previous success in reforming any shelters let alone build a no kill community. She and her organization are FRAUDS. Its all about the money and glory with that nut case.”

        Considering the staff of NKN are not paid and it’s all voluntary I can’t see how they are in it for the money. And it’s libel like this that’s getting you into trouble.

        “There, take that to Debi’s equally brain dead attorney Ryan Lehrer. The last time i checked the constitution still allows me to hold any opinion I want. We are not a country where the super wealthy can simply purchase political rhetoric with us common people tossed in prison if we disagree.”

        Once again, unproven lies are not opinion, they are lies. You seem to have an issue knowing the difference.

        “When are YOU going to grow some balls and sign your posts? Only a coward hides behind ANON with their signature.”

        That’s rich coming from a man going by the alias Sherlock Canthunt (named after one of his dogs come to find out), who has on many occasions lied about his identity.

        Your singular screenshot proves nothing and your supposed copy/paste of Jackie’s running at the mouth and assuming crap about NK means nothing. As someone who has personally been chewed out by Jackie for non-issues in the past, I cannot and will not take anything she says seriously anymore. I really don’t think she actually cares about animals being abused and killed in kill shelters around the country. I also find it amusing that many of those people support organizations such as Humane Watch and yet you and your friends are always going on about how Nathan supports HW. They have never supported each other. You’re alittle slow catching onto that Randy. Winograd’s personal opinions about breeders are old news and his personal opinion about dog breeds does not change the fact that the NKE works.

        • Randy DeCarlo May 25, 2013 at 5:57 am #

          Anon, you wrote “Lying about people is not opinion, it is libel. If you cannot prove your lies as fact (which you couldn’t in a court of law) than you are committing an illegal action and your victims have every right to defend themselves and have it stopped.” and “And you know where the judge lives. Does this judge know you have posted elsewhere that you have been doing drive- bys of their house. That’s really kinda creepy Randy.”

          I what is more than creepy is you would make such a comment up. Just to be clear this case is based out of Broward County Florida. I live in the Atlanta Georgia area. I haven’t visited Florida since the spring of 2011 – well before this case was ever filed. For you to suggest otherwise WITHOUT any factual proof only shows your willing to lie whenever it fits your needs. That is a nutshell is the problem with YOUR whole no kill movement. You no kill nuts have no boundaries. You want to cast a negative light on everyone else when in reality all your movement is good for is shooting off your mouths.

          Debi Day is a loser. Her only claim to fame is she slept her way into wealth. She is a thug and a bully. NO ONE will follow her into battle except for minions who themselves have never accomplished change either. Her followers are simply that – people incapable of reforming their own shelters who have become infatuated with a chubby cheek moron who thinks he invented no kill.

          The facts on Winograd’s movement are simple. It has now been over six years since Redemption was released and to date there are only FOUR public open admission shelters with intake numbers greater than 4,000 dogs and/or cats a year that have succeeded in saving 90% as no kill suggests. Those shelters include Austin which openly transferred dogs to abusive “sanctuaries like Spindletop – transfers thousands of cats every year into “foster” programs with little accountability on the quality of life afforded these “saved cats” and a budget that continues to climb to over $8 million a year. Compare that budget to our shelter in Gwinnett with similar demographics and you will see our intake number being a third of Austin’s with a yearly budget of $2.3 million. Last year alone whereas Austin still killed close to 2,000 dogs and cats (along with those who died in transfer programs) while Gwinnett killed slightly more than 3,000 mostly cats and pit bulls. For the additional $5 million spent as part of Austin’s “no kill” program 1,000 dogs and/or cats were saved at a cost of close to $5,000 for each dog or cat not killed. That money should have been invested in programs that address Austin’s out of control pet overpopulation issues.

          Those issues include passing strict breeder licensing laws and enforcing those laws to work towards reducing shelter intake rather than expecting the taxpayers to clean up a mess create by all of Winograd’s breeder pals who provide him his support.

          Don’t bother answering me since you have clearly demonstrated your motive isn’t about the truth but regurgiating more from the breeder friendly agenda you call “no kill”. You want to stop the kill – stop the irresponsible breeding first.

  6. Anon May 22, 2013 at 9:40 am #

    Bett, nor Nathan have claimed you were convicted Randy. They stated (truthfully and accurately I might add) that you were arrested for them. No retractions needed Bett, Reading comprehension seems to allude him.

    • Randy DECarlo May 22, 2013 at 11:56 am #

      The fact that I sell pipes doesn';t mean that there is anything illegal involved. Nice try, but Winograd made at least ten references to illegal drug use. The fact is the story wasn’t even accurate. I voluntary surrendered the herbal products becuase I knew at the time it was legal in gwinnett County. The GPD didn’t dare take any of the 10,000 pipes for those too are legal. In fact, I wasn’t actually arrested until three months later when at fate would have it I was pushing for removal of the GPD Chief of Police from running animal control and pushing for the animal task force. Teh arrest was purely political meant to embarress me in front of the board of commissioners.

      I spent thirteen days in jail for that offense even though I had been a resident of gwinnett for 15 years and wasn’t a flight risk. While incarerated GPD arrested a pewrson from Greenville SC and for 100 pounds of marijuana and he was offered bail the next morning. For anyone to think as advocates you don’t place yourself in harms way my guess is YOU have never stood for anything except your own selfish needs.

      I won’t apopogize for for being in the pipe business. There is a much larger problem with teens who drink and drive and drinking in general. You might also want to read Winograd’s blog again and explain to me how he drew the drew the conclusion I was “cooking something in my garage”? Winograd is nothing but a punk and a liar. He got the issue with dog barking entirely wrong as well. It wasn’t my neighbors who complained about the hounds – he would have found that out had he bothered seeking the truth. The person who complained was a realtor wanting to flip a house next to me and make a quick $50,000. The only thing that stood in her way was 21 of my hounds she needed out of the way. I live in a county with NO PET LIMIT law. Have had over 20 hounds living with me since 2001. NEVER have I been issued a care or nuisance violation until GAIL LABERGE of the AKC in her infinite wisdom passed a dog barking law that allowed the county AC to threaten people with jail in exchnge unless they surrendered thier pets. I REFUSED as I would hope YOU would too. I went to jail rather than surrender even ONE dog even though I knew one was terminally ill. I stand on principle – whether that principle involves allowing consenting adults to make their own choices for how they behave in the privacy of their own homes or whether it involves the principle that in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. all this shit about me being under the influence and irrepsonible is just that.

      I maintain the reponsibilty of caring for 28 mostly senior hounds,. my own health issues and write three different blogs, maintain a number of other facebook pages and have been actively involved in reforming our own shelter in gwinnett for years. You can attack me all you want – I really don’t care. I know what my contribution is and I know that NATHAN WINOGRAD is nothing more than a LIAR. He took his best shot and missed. There are a whole lot more people who know the TRUTH about Winograd nand his breeder connections thanks to my DRATS BLOG.

      Here’s the latest – read and weep

      There is no redemption in sitting down with the devil, a man responsible for exploiting the suffering of people and their companion friends, using him to promote the sale of your books to breeders. It’s simply blood money flowing from the hands of the exploiters to your bank account.

      Now those breeders are jumping ship as they too discover the ugliness of Winograd’s movement once you peel away that no kill mask.

      http://squirrelsnnuts.blogspot.com/2013/05/even-breeder-rats-will-abandon-sinking.html

  7. Jordan Kasteler May 22, 2013 at 7:14 am #

    Don’t be mislead but Nathan Winograd. Learn the truth at whypetaeuthanizes.com and petasaves.com.

  8. Susan Christie May 21, 2013 at 4:36 pm #

    I get so tired of this ‘no-kill’ vs ‘humanely euthanized unwanted animals’ issues…which has also affected the operation of the City Shelters too, so that no animal seems to have any other recourse than to wander the streets alone and starving. I don’t have much experience with dogs, as I’ve only been a cat owner (but I’m sure the statistics are about the same when it comes to finding homes, and how little a lot of these ‘no-kill’ places really care when they don’t have the ‘room’..which they ‘never’ do have room! -even if you are a regular donor to their cause), leaving the finder of a stray with no recourse whatsoever…& with the shelter making the ‘assumption’ that you should care for the stray you found yourself (whether you are able to or not).

    I’ve moved a great deal in my life, and it never fails that no matter where I live starving stray (or feral) cats wind up at my door (sometimes begging for food and to be let in)…I even had a cat crawl around on my roof going from window to window crying to want in for two full nights! I was in no position to let a stray cat enter and bring fleas and any viruses in to infect my ‘indoor only’ cats (who never get shots anymore since I adopted them as kittens only to find out later that they had all these problems for life all linked to those deadly vaccinations all vets and shelters force on the animals before they even arrive at your home). My apt. was also small and not set up for having even a single separate area that would let me temporarily keep a stray, especially if I couldn’t find it a home (& also being a renter, I wasn’t allowed more than 2 cats or I could be kicked out). It took me forever to locate a person who was able to find this poor abandoned cat a home (while I fed it outside my door so it wouldn’t die on me). Then as soon as I was so relieved that the ‘problem’ was resolved, two more strays appeared only a month later.

    It was non stop -people moving away and leaving their pets, foreclosures with pets locked up inside 1/2 starved, until the landlord found them and instead of turning them into a shelter the landlord would just toss them outside (because they weren’t going to pay the high fees to turn the cat in), but that just would leave an already starved cat to just roam until it finally died. It doesn’t end, and neither does the misery for these poor animals.

    I’m now in a new location and (again) faced with a starving (but this time, also pregnant!) cat who showed up at my door searching for food. I thought if I could trap it to get it fixed ‘before’ it was too far along being pregnant, that would end the cycle and I figured if I had no other choice, I could ‘manage’ to feed ‘one’ additional cat (only being wild it would end up having to remain an outdoor cat only). Well I couldn’t find anyone to help me catch it in time, as I am limited with no transportation, no job…and cage rental rates were outrageous, plus thru the city, you’d have to take the animal to them and pay for the service (vouchers are ‘very limiting’ here), because they now see it as ‘your’ cat and therefore ‘you’ should foot the bill!

    Well of course she had her litter and now there are 4 kittens roaming around (and ‘very’ difficult to catch since no one from the city wants to come out to help), and the rescue shelters won’t help either, with doing the ‘humane’ thing of euthanizing them. Instead they say ‘oh they’ll be fine’. I’ve seen ‘their’ definition of ‘fine’ in this area….a large tabby that should have weighed at least 15 lbs. showed up to lick the remains of the food left behind by the pregnant cat, and I could see every bone in his body. This poor animal obviously was ‘discarded’ (since he showed up in the middle of the day, he was more likely a stray than a feral cat), roaming around for who knows how long, in hopes of finding just ‘one’ decent meal to keep him going. He had the marks of many cat (or other animal) fights on him. I put out extra food whenever I saw him, but after a month he never came back (too little too late), so I would have to assume his body finally gave out. Can you call that a ‘humane life’!? Where were these ‘no-kill’ shelters for him when he needed someone?…where was ANY shelter (even one that could put him out of his misery!). He just spent his life in complete misery until he died.

    No wonder there are so many cats on the street. In this city the city shelter won’t even pick up strays at all, when you call and say you’ve seen one (even if you could afford to offer to pay them). Instead, they tell you to rent a trap from them, catch it yourself, drive it to them, so they can kill it (so THAT is what we are suppose to PAY them to do…of course who’s going to do that?…and who can afford to do that either!…plus they don’t even put them to sleep first when they kill them, they just jab them with the needle that has the poison and let them feel everything until they finally die). Perhaps the $$ focus of these ‘treat animals humanely’ places should focus instead on raising the money to have any abandoned, hurting, diseased, ill, etc. animals, who have no home, put down painlessly (without charging concerned citizens who find them but are broke themselves or limited in what they are able to do for strays)…so they are not roaming the streets day after day dying a slow death from starvation (or worse). Then the money spent on trying to cage and fix an animal with long term problems, who rarely finds a home anyway, and spends months to years locked up in a cage (if it’s not left to roam the streets and die alone), well that money can instead be applied to helping take in the healthy animals and spend the time to immediately find them a home and keep those cages empty!

    Also, for the time spent at any shelter, animals should be housed in rooms together where they can be ‘integrated’ in with the current animals and have room to interact, play, move around, etc. until someone is found to give them a home. There ARE ‘cageless’ shelters (I’ve adopted from some) and they work just fine (and if they cost more, well if the money wasn’t spent trying to save ‘every’ animal that is sick, instead of letting it die a decent painless death, then you’d have the money to ‘properly’ take care of the healthier ones until they find a home (like keeping them in a ‘cage free shelter’ environment).

    There is no reason any animal needs to be ‘caged’ in a shelter (longer than is needed for an ‘adjustment’ period to being with other animals). If it is sick (but easily healed), or is unsocial in any way (where it just requires some time to adjust to the other animals, by slowly being introduced to them), then cage time should be minimal. If an animal is extremely ill, or is either wild (unadoptable) or has some other long term problem that would ‘always’ expose it to constant vet visits (which is extremely stressful on any animal), then it shouldn’t be kept caged up in a shelter in the hopes of someone coming along who can afford taking care of a life-long ill pet. Life in a cage, or constantly being ‘worked’ on to get healthy, or refusal of entry to a shelter because it is wild so ends up back on the street, is no life for ANY animal, THAT is INHUMANE, compared to putting it out of it’s misery (by putting it to sleep first, and then down, so it truly is painless – I’m not referring to the torturous methods of just shooting it up with poison or being gassed…like some ‘cruel’ city shelters etc. still do, just to save $!).

    Most people who believe in ‘no kill’ also believe in God (which is why the ‘no kill’ is such an issue for them…as it is for me too), but believing in God also means that you just KNOW this world is not our ‘ultimate’ life, and therefore dying only takes us to a better place…so why on earth wouldn’t you want that for animals versus their being abandoned, suffering, tortured, or starving, due to no home and no room in shelters? That is what HUMANE means …no more suffering! …and because of this ONLY WAY option of ‘no-kill’ shelters and that ‘limited’ way of thinking (where they don’t want to put ‘any’ animal down, no matter what condition, but then there is never any space for healthier adoptable others), that way of thinking only leads to MORE animals suffering by being turned away, from not only the ‘no-kill’ shelters, but also from what ‘use’ to be a ‘free service’ offered up by cities to get animals off the streets (city shelters started becoming overwhelmed and then underfunded to do their jobs…because of the sheer number of animals now (as well as massive ‘sickly’ animals too), because of this ‘no kill’ policy. Most now tend to not want to cover the cost or do the job of bringing ‘any’ stray or sick animal in to get them off the streets.

    Years ago (when I was a kid) the city shelters’ job was to pick up ALL strays roaming the streets, & if animals were found or brought in that had no home, (& unless they were extremely sick…where they had to automatically be put down), they use to only hold the animal a short time until either their owner was found, or a shelter took it in because they could adopt it out (living months out of a cage was unheard of!).

    Now, in today’s society, the city shelters don’t even offer that free service anymore or bother to pick up strays at all (when it comes to cats, anyway). Today the ‘finder’ of the animal is suppose to do it all and pay for it to boot (whether its a stray or not), and of course in today’s economy no one can afford these costs, so people either turn their backs when they see strays, hoping it will just go away (a naive way of thinking…because they only go away once they die from starvation!), or those who decide they no longer want their pet (for whatever reason, financial or otherwise..something I don’t advocate ….because you adopt a pet for life, you don’t just ‘change your mind’ when the going gets rough) ..well, they just dump it on the street to let it become someone else’s responsibility, all because they can’t ‘afford’ to turn it in (even if they don’t mind knowing it might be put down).

    Street life for ANY animal is NO LIFE…it’s a day to day exposure to starvation, loneliness, struggle, exposure to extreme weather, possible torture, and danger (of other animals as well as sick people!). Until the overpopulation drops, trap/neuter/return programs will only make a ‘small dent’ (as long as pet owners keep abandoning their ‘non-fixed’ pets out onto the streets turning them into wild strays that reproduce, because there is no other option in their minds (that’s free, that is)..unfortunately they don’t consider ‘keeping’ their pet and being a ‘responsible pet owner’ an option! So, because of people like that, as well as this strict ‘no kill only’ thinking (without ‘exceptions’), & as long as each city doesn’t take on the responsibility of controlling the animals within their community (even if it means licensing the cats, and instilling fines, etc., but also if it means having to put down the sickly and non-adoptable strays, if it comes down to that….and not expecting whoever ‘finds’ a stray to automatically have to ‘foot the bill’ either)…. there will continue to be those who just thoughtlessly ‘dump’ their pets (whether they are fixed or not), and the cycle of breeding will continue, as will the inhumanity of letting animals starve to death (along with all the other dangers they face day to day).

    Putting an animal down (in comparison) to move onto a better life than what ‘humans’ care to give them, is the MOST HUMANE thing you can do if no home can take them. Animals rely on us for their safety (as the bible states: ‘man has been given dominion over the animals’…that passage doesn’t say ‘man has been given the right to mistreat or expose them to a life of cruelty’!) If you can’t properly take care of God’s creatures, than return them to God and end their suffering!

  9. LucyP May 15, 2013 at 6:34 am #

    Everyone agrees that “The kindest gift to a homeless animal is a good home,” but the problem is that these “good homes” simply don’t exist for the millions of animals who end up euthanized in our country’s shelters year after year.

    There is not a shred of doubt that euthanasia is a mercy for the terribly suffering animals PETA takes in (such as these poor souls: http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2013/04/05/euthanasia-we-wont-run-from-what-needs-to-be-done.aspx), but I also have to agree that giving an animal a painless release is much kinder than the alternative when no home can be found for him or her. Sitting in a shelter cage day after day, month after month, year after year, is no life for an animal—nor is being left on the streets to starve, freeze, be killed by cars, or die slowly and painfully from diseases, as happens to many animals who are turned away by “no-kill” shelters.

    We can reach the day when we can give the gift of a loving home to every homeless animal, but the way to get there is by reducing the animal population through spaying and neutering—as PETA does for thousands of animals for free or cheap every year—not by simply enforcing “no-kill” policies to make ourselves feel better while animals suffer for it.

  10. Sherlock Canthunt May 15, 2013 at 6:10 am #

    Great job linking Winograd to pro puppy mill suppor group Center for Consumer Freedom. You missed adding in Winograd’s obsession with selling books to breeders or taking cash from Texas puppy mill support group Responsible Pet Owners Alliance to sponsor his 2009 No Kill Conference in Houston. Of course you missed the fact that No Kill Houston has family ties to running a puppy mill as well. Of course puppy millers hate and spin stories about the animal protection community – how else can they keep that money train chugging along.

    • Bett Sundermeyer May 21, 2013 at 3:39 pm #

      “Sherlock Canthunt” has posted complete lies about Nathan Winograd and No Kill Houston.
      1) Winograd took no money from RPOA. No Kill Houston organized large “Building a No Kill Community” seminars in both 2009 and 2011. Nathan Winograd was the speaker at both seminars, teaching others how exactly how to stop shelter killing. People who attended the seminar have taken Winograd’s advice, implemented the programs he taught and are ending sheltering killing in their communities. RPOA was one of many sponsors of the 2009 seminar. It is beyond me how you can criticize a group whose intent was to help stop shelter killing.

      2) No Kill Houston has NO family ties to puppy mills. There is a huge difference in raising a litter of puppies in your home, and a puppy mill. This same person has spent thousands of dollars taking in stray/homeless dogs and cats and rehoming them, and has spent thousands TNRing (Trap, Neuter, Return) and feeding local feral colonies.

      These lies are just attempts to slander the people who are working to end shelter killing. Instead of having a logical conversation about the issues, they resort to lies, slander, name calling and personal threats. It is pathetic.

      3) We know who “Sherlock Canthunt” is, despite his attempt to hide his identity. It is the same guy who was arrested with ONE THOUSAND drug pipes and designer marijuana. You can read all about him here: http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=5978

      No one takes him seriously, so he resorts to lying about those people who are working to end shelter killing. He has already been sued once for slander. Apparently, he did not learn his lesson.

      Perhaps if he would put down the drug pipe, he could get his facts straight.

      • Sherlock Canthunt May 21, 2013 at 5:55 pm #

        Bett, unless you have proof that any of those products were indeed illegal inwould suggest you print a retraction. I have never been convicted on any of those charges. Fact is there are several commercial customers i sell in Houston, Austin and even right around the corner to Nathan in Oakland california.

        Now that the court case has been resolved with the state dropping charges for something called LACK OF EVIDENCE i am not embarresed to admit the synthetic product involved was legally purchased for personal use. As a long time chron’s sufferer Inhad found this to be a much more effective solution for mybchron’s flare ups than the pharmaceuticals prescribed. Do YOU have a problem with that?

        Fact is, like an overwhelming number of Americans I support passage of the medical marijuana laws. What are YOU in favor of? Locking upmour senior citizens with chronic oftentimes fatal illnesses simply because they get relief from their illness smoking a herbal product they can grow in their own house?

        None of those are ANIMAL ISSUES, since yiu brought it upmInjust finished a Drats blog that offers proof contradicting your claim that Winograd didn’t accept cash. From RPOA and that your mother Vivian has been a commericial breeder for years.

        I’ll let my readers dtermine fir themselves why you are so intent on burying the truth about your family business.. The title to that blog us “Even the breeder rats are jumping ship” – catchy title don’t you think?

        love Drats

      • Sherlock Canthunt May 21, 2013 at 6:03 pm #

        As far as what Nathan wrote about me, we all know Nathan tells the truth. After all, he used to be an attorney and we know attorneys don’t lie or spin stories ( lol ).

Quantcast