Kimberlynne asked in PetsDogs · 1 decade ago

How would YOU decrease the over population of animals?

For some people who are not aware of the horrible positions most dogs are in at the county pounds...do some research on Google. Im assuming since we are all on the dog page, we love dogs...research "gas chambers" and "heartstick method", and see what you come up with...you'll be sickened if you love your dog or any dog at all.

So, I want to know what everyone's idea is on how to decrease the amount of animals being "dumped" daily at county pounds, to be put to "sleep" in a humane or even inhumane way?

I mean, it's horrible....absolutely insane, and I wanted to know some idea's of yours...I foster and volunteer for a rescue, and maybe some of your ideas can help us to become better at what we do..

So, tell me?

Update:

here's a link for those of you who dont want to be left in the dark anymore...its sad, but a real eye opener...Warning-it isnt very nice, so dont watch if you cant handle the truth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEk8947DzCI

Youtube thumbnail

Update 2:

And yes, the rescue I belong to is non-profit, pending our 501c3 status...we do spay/neuter prior to adoption and everything in between.

14 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    The video is nothing but a gas kill box? Whoa are you behind the times. They are already gone, at least 99% are.

    The answer is that pet shelter populations have declined 70-90 % across the entire US in the last 30 years. Even though the human population has increased there has been basically NO increase in government shelter funding. Instead private organizations collect money which people assume goes to shelters. IT DOES NOT because anti animal ownership Vegans have taken over the animal business. HSUS, the Humane Society of the US, takes in 100 million dollars a year BUT HAS NO SHELTER AT ALL!

    Want to put an end to more euthanasia pass a law that these collections be spent to open shelters as the people who give the money do so thinking that is what it is going to be used for. Instead HSUS uses it to pass legislation that will completley end all dogs and cats by making them exinct. They also pass legislation that made meat prices double in the last 4 years. Force HSUS to put the money into buildings and shelters and dog food not into the pockets of politicains to end all dogs. HSUS, you see, is Vegan they want to end dog ownership not keep them alive they want them dead! See Peta kills animals . com

    Vegan don't eat meat, dogs do. To Vegans dogs and cats should be gone because they eat other animals. They take the money allocated by donators who think it is going to take care of animals to KILL them and pass laws to make less people own them.

    Figure it out it is real simple.

    Animal Rightis Quotes including Wayne Pacelle president of HSUS:

    “I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 251.

    "In a perfect world, we would not keep animals for our benefit, including pets," Tom Regan, emeritus professor of philosophy at North Carolina State University and author of "Empty Cages" - speaking at University of Wisconsin-Madison campus, March 3, 2004

    "I don't use the word "pet." I think it's speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship ­ enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

    "It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership." Elliot Katz, President "In Defense of Animals," Spring 1997

    "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Harper's, August 1988, p. 50.

    "Liberating our language by eliminating the word 'pet' is the first step... In an ideal society where all exploitation and oppression has been eliminated, it will be NJARA's policy to oppose the keeping of animals as 'pets.'" New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance, "Should Dogs Be Kept As Pets? NO!" Good Dog! February 1991, p. 20.

    "Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it." John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, (PeTA), 1982, p. 15.

    "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982, p. 15.

    "As John Bryant has written in his book Fettered Kingdoms, they [pets] are like slaves, even if well-kept slaves." PeTA's Statement on Companion Animals.

    "In a perfect world, all other than human animals would be free of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the ecological scheme." PeTA's Statement on Companion Animals.

    "You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV," Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Animal Agriculture and Breeding Purebred Dogs and Pedigreed Cats

    "We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. . One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding." Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993

    When asked if he envisioned a future without pets, “If I had my personal view, perhaps that might take hold. In fact, I don’t want to see another dog or cat born.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 266.

    "[A]s the surplus of cats and dogs {artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship--enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, "Just Like Us? Toward a Notion of Animal Rights", Harper's, August 1988, p. 50.

    "[Animal] Fancies provide an escape from the real world, a sense of purpose in a lot of purposeless lives, a chance to play God by breeding animals, and a chance to play celebrity by showing them." Phil Maggitti, The Animals' Agenda, December 1991.

    "Breeders must be eliminated! As long as there is a surplus of companion animals in the concentration camps referred to as "shelters", and they are killing them because they are homeless, one should not be allowed to produce more for their own amusement and profit. If you know of a breeder in the Los Angeles area, whether commercial or private, legal or illegal, let us know and we will post their name, location, phone number so people can write them letters telling them 'Don't Breed or Buy, While Others DIE.'" "Breeders! Let's get rid of them too!" Campaign on Animal Defense League's website, September 2, 2003.

    "I'm not only uninterested in having children. I am opposed to having children. Having a purebred human baby is like having a purebred dog; it is nothing but vanity, human vanity." Ingrid Newkirk, PeTA's founder and president, New Yorker magazine, April 23, 2003

    "Our goal is to make [the public think of] breeding [dogs and cats] like drunk driving and smoking." Kim Sturla, former director of the Peninsula Humane Society and Western Director of Fund for Animals, stated during Kill the Crisis, not the Animals campaign and workshops, 1991

    "The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind," Ingrid Newkirk, founder, president and former national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Animals, May/June 1993

    "My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture." JP Goodwin, employed at the Humane Society of the US, formerly at Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade, as quoted on AR-Views, an animal rights Internet discussion group in 1996.

    (More at 1st link)

    What is ‘Animal Rights’

    ...and why should you care?

    Imagine that some people think we humans just aren’t good enough to own or use animals. In fact they’re so convinced of this that they have formed large organizations that work tirelessly around the clock and around the world to eliminate animal farming, eating of meat, use of animals in research, hunting, circuses, zoos, and yes, as pets.

    This isn’t just a bad dream -- it’s real. Those people are called the ‘animal rights’ movement. While there probably aren’t more than a thousand people in the U.S. who accept the whole idea -- that humans should be completely separated from our animals even if that means that many species become extinct -- they are supported by many more who support important parts of the movement.

    For example many believe that eating meat is wrong. Some think that medical research using animals is unnecessary and cruel. Other thousands believe most pet owners are irresponsible. And it is those people, the ones who support small parts of animal rights, who are carrying the movement forward.

    This is America: It is our right to believe whatever we want and to try to convince others of what we believe. However the AR movement goes beyond that. The biggest thing they do is pass laws that make animal use, breeding, and ownership steadily harder and more costly.

    This happens in several steps:

    1. They invent problems or magnify small ones. The real problems generally are much less than the good that comes from the same activity but what we are told about is only the problem.

    For example: “Hunting is cruel and unnecessary” -- never mind that for many species hunting is a main way of controlling population to prevent starvation and other problems.

    “‘Pet overpopulation’ leads to the tragedy of euthanasia” -- although the animal shelter euthanasia rate has been falling steadily for decades, is probably now only 10-15% of what it was 30 years ago and many areas of the country now actually have a shortage of dogs.

    “Pet breeders are just exploiting animals for money” -- although if there were no breeders there would be no pets, and it’s almost impossible to make money if you breed as a hobby.

    “Animals are dangerous and cause human health problems” -- though most of us have pets, serious problems are rare and study after study shows that pet owners are happier, have lower stress levels, and may live longer than other people.

    “Animal farming is cruelty” -- though cruelty is already illegal and the practices being attacked are ancient and often inspected and specifically approved by the government.

    The attack will always fall where most people will say “Oh -- that’s not something I do” or “That’s not important.” Only 7% of the population hunts, something like 2% farms, and much less than 1% breeds dogs at home. Because many important animal practices are unfamiliar to most of us, we may not see what’s wrong with these AR campaigns.

    2. The animal rightists batter public officials to ‘solve’ these problems. Although they are a small minority, they never stop complaining.

    Los Angeles, for example, is on its fourth well qualified animal control director in five years. Why? Because no director delivered the ‘no kill’ shelter they demand -- an unattainable goal for a properly run municipal shelter in a large city. The shelter’s statistics are not bad and they are improving rapidly -- but that’s not good enough.

    3. When officials say “Okay, tell us what to do,” the ARs are there with examples of laws passed in other places. They cite misleading or phoney statistics, even outright lies about the success of the law and if pressed on the issue, simply repeat their views.

    For example when they’re proclaiming “horrible pet overpopulation” they promote laws requiring all pets to be spayed or neutered and requirements for hobby breeders to get expensive licenses and permits. “This law was a big success in San Mateo County,” they say.

    If you tell them “This law did not work in San Mateo County” they say “This law was a big success in San Mateo.”

    If you answer “But the shelter euthanasia numbers went UP in San Mateo” they say “This law was a big success in San Mateo.”

    Surprisingly, when the subject is unfamilar, the bigger the lie, the more likely people are to believe it. This ‘big lie’ tactic isn't often encountered by lawmakers and since doing independent research is time-consuming for them, they usually end by accepting the lies.

    4. Since the new laws never solve the ‘problem,’ the ARs seek greater punishments and new laws that will help enforce the old ones, such as a requirement for all pets to be microchipped with the numbers in a government database. They talk only of the good effects -- “This will help more lost pets get home” -- although the real purpose is to catch people who are violating their other laws.

    They can nearly always find important organizations that will support the proposal because (for example) “Veterinarians can’t be against a law that just improves enforcement of something that’s already the law.” (Quote from legislative liaison of the Virginia Veterinary Medical Association when the VVMA supported an animal rights bill requiring veterinarians to report rabies vaccinations -- with owner's name and address, breed, spay/neuter status, etc to county treasurers.)

    5. As one law becomes common, the next step begins -- go back to #1, above.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here are some quotes from leaders in the AR movement:

    Ingrid Newkirk, president and co-founder of PETA: “I am not a morose person, but I would rather not be here. I don’t have any reverence for life, only for the entities themselves. I would rather see a blank space where I am. This will sound like fruitcake stuff again but at least I wouldn’t be harming anything.”

    Michael W. Fox, Scientific Director and former Vice President of HSUS: “Man is the most dangerous, destructive, selfish, and unethical animal on earth.”

    "Les U. Knight" (pseudonym), "Voluntary Human Extinction," Wild Earth, Vol. 1,

    No. 2 “If you haven’t given voluntary human extinction much thought before, the idea of a world with no people in it may seem strange. But, if you give it a chance, I think you might agree that the extinction of Homo sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species ... Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.”

    Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS: "One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding."

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is sick stuff: The truth is that animal rights is mental illness masquerading as philosophy.

    There are no longer any nationally known organizations that just want good care for animals; from 1980-on, they were all taken over by animal rights zealots who continue to operate them under the "animal welfare" banner.

    Today, HSUS, PETA, the ASPCA and dozens of less familiar organizations spend about $200 million a year sent by people who want to help animals, working against animal ownership. Never give money to any of these organizations! If you want to give to help animals, give directly to your local animal shelter: they nearly always use contributions to provide real care, and they always need more than they get.

    What’s going on is a quiet, mostly non-violent war for the future of America. The major battles are just starting and will be fought and won by one side or the other over the next five to 10 years. For example, between the end of 2005 and mid-2006, Long Beach California, Los Angeles County, and Albuquerque, New Mexico all passed new laws making it much more difficult to own and breed pets. Each of these new laws was in turn the worst ever seen in the U.S. and we are likely to see yet worse in the months ahead.

    If those who believe that humans and animals belong together don’t turn the tide, then 20 years from now our country will have many fewer good pets and will be less happy and less prosperous than it is today. None of us asked for this war, but if we do not fight and win, the losses to future generations won’t be undone in a century.

    Walt Hutchens

    Timbreblue Whippets

    Virginia

    ____________________________

    Redefining pet overpopulation: The no-kill movement and the new jet setters

    By Patti L. Strand

    Fewer and fewer dogs are entering shelters every year, and shelter deaths are down and continuing to fall. This steady decline in intakes and deaths pays tribute to the tireless efforts of shelter employees, responsible dog breeders and rescue volunteers who have worked, prayed, and bullied their way to a future when the demand for pets would equal or exceed the supply and they would no longer be forced to euthanize healthy, adoptable animals.

    That future is now! Nationwide, studies show that during the last 30 years shelter intakes and euthanasias have decreased by 70-90 percent or more in many cities, particularly those located on the east and west coasts. One consequence of this remarkable development is a steep decline in the number of shelter dogs available for adoption in many parts of the country. In order to deal with their newfound success, some shelters and rescue groups have had to realign their efforts, sometimes with surprising results.

    Faced with fewer small dogs and puppies to offer the public, a handful of shelters and organizations have swapped their traditional mission for a new bottom line strategy aimed at filling consumer demands. Simply stated, they have become pet stores. Some are importing stray dogs across state lines and from foreign countries to maintain an inventory of adoptable dogs. Other shelters are misapplying no-kill shelter principles by adopting out seriously ill and bad-tempered dogs. These practices might be well motivated but they create significant new problems for the responsible sheltering community and the public. To name a few, they sustain rather than solve the "overpopulation" issue; they effect an end run around responsible breeders; they open a door to potentially devastating diseases and parasites not currently found in our country; and they ensure a future in which the supply of healthy, well-bred dogs and cats will be severely limited.

    NAIA looked at the long road to success in overcoming America's surplus pet problem and observed some disturbing trends. ...

    More at 2nd link

    Early spay Neuter? Neuter every dog? How does that differ from genocide? If all dogs are spayed and neutered there will be NO dogs! Sounds like an idea stollen from a huy named Adof Hitler

    Easrly spay neter is UN healthy

    A study by Salmeri et al in 1991 found that bitches spayed at 7 weeks grew significantly taller than those spayed at 7 months, who were taller than those not spayed (or presumably spayed after the growth plates had closed).(1) A study of 1444 Golden Retrievers performed in 1998 and 1999 also found bitches and dogs spayed and neutered at less than a year of age were significantly taller than those spayed or neutered at more than a year of age.(2) The sex hormones, by communicating with a number of other growth-related hormones, promote the closure of the growth plates at puberty (3), so the bones of dogs or bitches neutered or spayed before puberty continue to grow. Dogs that have been spayed or neutered well before puberty can frequently be identified by their longer limbs, lighter bone structure, narrow chests and narrow skulls. This abnormal growth frequently results in significant alterations in body proportions and particularly the lengths (and therefore weights) of certain bones relative to others. For example, if the femur has achieved its genetically determined normal length at 8 months when a dog gets spayed or neutered, but the tibia, which normally stops growing at 12 to 14 months of age continues to grow, then an abnormal angle may develop at the stifle. In addition, with the extra growth, the lower leg below the stifle likely becomes heavier (because it is longer), and may cause increased stresses on the cranial cruciate ligament. In addition, sex hormones are critical for achieving peak bone density.(4) These structural and physiological alterations may be the reason why at least one recent study showed that spayed and neutered dogs had a higher incidence of CCL rupture.(5) Another recent study showed that dogs spayed or neutered before 5 1/2 months had a significantly higher incidence of hip dysplasia than those spayed or neutered after 5 1/2 months of age, although it should be noted that in this study there were no standard criteria for the diagnosis of hip dysplasia.(6) Nonetheless, breeders of purebred dogs should be cognizant of these studies and should consider whether or not pups they bred were spayed or neutered when considering breeding decisions.

    Cancer Considerations

    A retrospective study of cardiac tumors in dogs showed that there was a 5 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma, one of the three most common cancers in dogs, in spayed bitches than intact bitches and a 2.4 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma in neutered dogs as compared to intact males.(7) A study of 3218 dogs demonstrated that dogs that were neutered before a year of age had a significantly increased chance of developing bone cancer.(8) A separate study showed that neutered dogs had a two-fold higher risk of developing bone cancer.(9) Despite the common belief that neutering dogs helps prevent prostate cancer, at least one study suggests that neutering provides no benefit.(10) There certainly is evidence of a slightly increased risk of mammary cancer in female dogs after one heat cycle, and for increased risk with each subsequent heat. While about 30 % of mammary cancers are malignant, as in humans, when caught and surgically removed early the prognosis is very good.(12) Luckily, canine athletes are handled frequently and generally receive prompt veterinary care.

    Behavioral Considerations

    The study that identified a higher incidence of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in spayed or neutered dogs also identified an increased incidence of sexual behaviors in males and females that were neutered early.(5) Further, the study that identified a higher incidence of hip dysplasia in dogs neutered or spayed before 5 1/2 months also showed that early age gonadectomy was associated with an increased incidence of noise phobias and undesirable sexual behaviors.(6) A recent report of the American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation reported significantly more behavioral problems in spayed and neutered bitches and dogs. The most commonly observed behavioral problem in spayed females was fearful behavior and the most common problem in males was aggression.(12)

    Other Health Considerations

    A number of studies have shown that there is an increase in the incidence of female urinary incontinence in dogs spayed early (13), although this finding has not been universal. Certainly there is evidence that ovarian hormones are critical for maintenance of genital tissue structure and contractility.(14, 15) Neutering also has been associated with an increased likelihood of urethral sphincter incontinence in males.(16) This problem is an inconvenience, and not usually life-threatening, but nonetheless one that requires the dog to be medicated for life. A health survey of several thousand Golden Retrievers showed that spayed or neutered dogs were more likely to develop hypothyroidism.(2) This study is consistent with the results of another study in which neutering and spaying was determined to be the most significant gender-associated risk factor for development of hypothyroidism.(17) Infectious diseases were more common in dogs that were spayed or neutered at 24 weeks or less as opposed to those undergoing gonadectomy at more than 24 weeks.(18) Finally, the AKC-CHF report demonstrated a higher incidence of adverse reactions to vaccines in neutered dogs as compared to intact.(12)

    More at 3rd link

    Animal Rights? Or Vegan animal free world Agenda?

    Don't think of a White Elephant

    Interesting concept isn't it? "Don't think of a White Elephant"

    Now that you have read it are you envisioning a white elephant in your mind? How about a large gray one? If I tell you that the devil is the doughnut do you think that you might want to go out and get a doughnut? Will you be tempted? I bet Dunkin Doughnuts gets at least a few more visits this week considering that there are over 2000 people on this list. (Some of which I hope are reading today.)

    Back in the 80's a Vegan commented that boycotts don't work by saying "Don't think of a White Elephant" in response to the oncoming Burger King boycott. A similar name can be found as the title of a political book called "Don't think of an Elephant". In both instances the theory that man thinks in pictorial images is utilized as a marketing tool and such images or suggestions guide thought processes. Cognitive linguists study these things and it was one such Vegan cognitive linguist who said; "Don't Think of a White Elephant" to the Vegans discussing boycotting Burger King back in the 80's. In effect he was saying boycotts don't work people will hear about the boycott and want a Burger King hamburger and in effect he was more or less correct although they did get Burger King to stop selling veal.

    Now supposing I simply say "Animal Rights" An objector might respond by thinking or saying; "animals don't have rights." Which truthfully sounds rather politically incorrect to think, let alone verbalize. I agree though that animals do not necessarily have rights. However I am an animal and I supposedly do have rights. Further, if I were an ordinary non involved member of the general population I would envision an animal. Any animal that comes to mind. The last animal I saw perhaps; a dog, a squirrel, a cow or a sheep in an ad. I think of their cute little faces because being an average member of the public I don't necessarily think of squirrels as vermin that are potentially destructive. I don't think of shooting at a squirrel to rid my attic of them, rather I think of a squirrel with the same warm and fuzzy feelings that make squirrel shaped stuffed animals marketable.

    So now let's put the picture of my animal (or yours) together with the word "rights." A very sellable ideal animal rights. The more we say Animal Rights the more we sell it for the Vegan ideologists which are behind it. In other words, lets take the Vegan's advice, he said "Don't think of a White Elephant" Just like saying "the devil is the doughnut" sells doughnuts saying the Devil is "animal Rights sells the AR agenda. Vegans use animal rights to sell Veganism, not the other way around. People don't take forced personal change lightly. Warm fuzzy seemingly altruistic ideals might be accepted but forced Veganism?

    Now let's think about the word vegetarian. Vegetarian is rather mild, it actually has a nice soft appeal to it as in non carnivorous animals. Those animals are not threatening. I once had a salesman in my driveway who had never seen a deer. He was afraid the deer around the house would attack him. Of course when I explained that deer do not eat animals and would have no reason to be interested in him he relaxed. Subconsciously we humans attach the word vegetarian to gentler beings. Mine is only one example of how we see that word.

    Vegan is not a commonly spoken word, and it seems very misunderstood. I know what Veganism is because I have first hand experience with some of the hierarchy of the planned movement, not only of the Animal Rights agenda but in support of a Vegan movement in general from promoting the diet to absolutely no use of animal products, not even in the glues used to fasted rubber soles to nylon shoes. There is no doubt that those in this movement have been using every possible mind game they can to further their goal which is to eliminate man's symbiotic relationship with animal. Although some might argue that Vegans are not completely against man having a symbiotic relationship with all animals as Vegans might think it fine for insects to pollinate crops. However I have witnessed first hand such a debate in which two Vegans argued whether man's intervention, caused by planting an area concentrated with crops, was harmful to insects. Hmmm, I think. Man is by nature capable of farming and man is a natural element in the environment. Anything man does is natural including being a farmer or an omnivore.

    I think George Carlin may have been onto something in "The Planet is Fine" when he said: "…The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, "Why are we here?"

    So now I just sit and ponder, is man's use of animals so harmful, or is it all those plastic shoes and belts?

    Vegans will take the pet out of your bed and the meat off your plate while they fill the world with non biodegradable plastic. (lol, thank you George) Say VEGAN, not animal rights. It makes no difference what some individuals might think Vegan means right now. Just as the trade marks aspirin, cellophane, nylon, escalator and thermos, all started out as something less generic and now have morphed meanings, the word Vegan -which has already been linked to the real ideology by the Vegans themselves, must be exposed. It isn't fair for Vegans not to use their entire vision of the future when pushing only their warm and fuzzy AR sounding goals. Their vision will affect us all, animal lovers or not.

    The phrase Animal Rights furthers their goal. The word Vegan would be very scary for them to hear coming from "Omnis". The word Vegan tells the listener you will have to eat their way, if you allow them to make meat overly expensive until it disappears. You will have no pets because pets eat meat. Eventually everything and everyone will become Vegan. That is their agenda. The term is Vegan.

    Someone who used to be very anti AR (but unfortunately now sees it more important to collect AKC brownie points) once said AR to me. I had no idea what she was talking about at first, (this was several years ago). I had no idea!!! The minute she said they were Vegans (a minute after she said AR) I knew exactly what she was talking about. Well I have more exposure to Vegans than most people. That exposure makes me aware that having a Vegan write animal laws is like having the KKK write human rights laws.

    Last week I spoke to a woman whose husband ran for a pretty high office in a large parent dog club. I mentioned the HSUS is a Vegan run organization and she said "No. it isn't" I said Wayne Pacelle is a Vegan and she said "No he isn't"

    Wayne Pacelle has been "a Vegan for two decades."

    http://www.satyamag.com/jun05/pacelle.html (P3L1)

    He is very dedicated to the cause, "one generation and out" comes from somewhere. It comes from his Vegan indoctrination that's where. There is a Vegan writing law regarding your food and your pet. Educate your legislators, your public and yourselves as to what a Vegan is and what they believe. Identifying the complete meaning of being a Vegan is the first step to derailing their movement. No one is going to force any Vegans to eat meat. The result would simply be that we don't allow Vegans to force their ways upon the entire world.

    Take their advice when it comes to marketing and cognitive linguistics, they have been advancing for years. The Vegans repeated: "Don't think of a White Elephant," and "The Devil is the Doughnut"

    "Don't Think Animal Rights." say I, or "the devil is AR" Instead Say; "Vegan Agenda" and the devil is no domestic animals, no carnivorous pets, no animal protein or animal by products. The man said "one generation and out."

    Expose the true agenda and beliefs.

    Not Vegetarian, Say "Vegan Agenda". Mandating Veganism, by leaving the world with no other alternative. It is very different! Fascist Vegans who write laws to force Veganism onto the world one small step at a time. Fascist Vegans if you will, but Vegans nonetheless.

    More at last link

  • 1 decade ago

    First of all, everyone who is not a breeder should have their pet spayed and neutered. There are programs out there, such as the one in the county where I live in California. It is called POPCO and the county will fix your dog or cat at little or no cost (depending on the weight of your pet). Secondly, there needs to be more foster parents for those who are waiting for someone to adopt them. Last but not least, it should be illegal for people to just dump their animals off simply because they no longer want them. Animals are not disposable. Also in the county where I live, you are not allowed to bring in an animal that you simply no longer want. Also, people who have been convicted of cruelty to animals should be banned forever from owning a pet. It should be mandatory for people to have their pets microchipped, that way if they attempt to dump their animal off at a shelter, the owner can be found and prosecuted. Everyone should get their pet micro-chipped in case they get lost. It's very inexpensive- around $15.

    I have also fostered and rescued. I recently rescued a litter of 5 puppies that were literally going to die. I nursed them back to health and adopted them all out.

    Source(s): http://www.rcdas.org/spayclin.htm For anyone living in Riverside County, California click on the link above and then click on: Riverside County Department of Animal Services - Low-Cost Spay ...
  • 1 decade ago

    Require all adopting people to spay and neuter the pets they adopt, if possible have it done by a local vet that keeps in touch and gives a discount as we have here for animal rescue group. Require all animals be spayed and neutered unoless they are for breeding purposes and do that by having leash laws and fining any owner that does not comply. Use the fine money to pay for animal officers and spaying and neutering discounts. Have programs for elderly folks to have free neuter and spay for companion animals, and offer them services if they are worried about after care when they pass on, a contract with them to take the animal back and find it a good home. This way older people would become foster parents for their lives as long as they are able and it is shown to be healthy for them. Have free spay and neuter clinics by local vets donating their time, at least very reasonable fees for people that really can't afford it. Have fundraisers at all functions like fairs, carnivals, bake sales whatever. Get schools involved, give them ways to generate funds, selling products, fundraisers, carwashes. There is really a lot that can be done just have to motivate people. Also, advertise in the paper asking for donations and put pictures of pets that are ready for adoption, but make sure they are fixed. Set up pound animals in good weather in front of pet stores and other stores to adopt them out with fees paid and certificates given for a percentage off the fixing of the adopted pets by certain vets. They still make something but they can write it off their taxes, if it's done right. Good for all concerned, if it's non profit right?

    Source(s): animal lover former volunteer for SW Virginia PAWS association People for the Awareness, Wellness and Safety of animals.
  • 1 decade ago

    I didn't know about the heartstick method...i just searched it online and I read some horrible things. That is sick and not right. It is definitely inhumane and unacceptable. There are so many money hungry breeders who try to make cute little puppies and sell them as high as they can, and they contribute to the overpopulation the most. People need to start realizing that we have a problem with pet overpopulation, and start rescuing/adopting abandoned dogs instead of buying puppies from those breeders. Also, people can help by spaying and neutering their pets of course, to control the pet population. I guess we need more people to become educated about buying a pet, and realize the reality the animals go through everywhere.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I am no expert, i'm just an animal lover, especially dogs. Firstly i would ( if i were in a government position to implement this ). I would make backyard breeding totally illegal. All pets to be desexed. Only registered breeders can have a certain number of pets that are not desexed ( for breeding purposes ).

    You would have to be a registered breeder to be able to breed, and then only be able to breed a certain amount of puppies each year. There would only be a certain number of breeders allowable for each breed. No cross breeds either. No more pets stores, this is a big area where backyard breeders sell of their puppies.

    Anyone wanting to own a pet, must apply for a pet owners lisence and pay a yearly fee ( just like if you had a car ). Anyone who does backyard breeding will serve time in jail. A minimum of 3-5 years. Tough i know, but if you have tough rules in place, then genuine people who will take care of their pets and do the right thing will apply for a lisense to own one.

    Make it tough to sift out the dodgey scum who abuse animals for their own gain. I would also stop the Korean dog meat market. I don't know how, but it is appauling. Look it up. It will make you absolutely sick. Looking at the way people treat animals, it makes me feel that humans are the worst thing put on this planet.

    Like the police force, i would put into action an animal protection force who will investigate and arrest anyone abusing or breaking the animal laws. Like the RSPCA do, but make it a force to be afraid of. Make people do the right thing with their pets by making the answerable to tougher laws as stated above. Name and shame them too. Just a thought.

  • Chetco
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    First of all, determine WHY most dogs are in the shelters.

    Each dog WAS owned by someone, at one time.

    Each dog was dumped for some reason.

    The common reasons are:

    A family moving.

    Acquiring the wrong dog for their family.

    Lack of learning how to deal with training problems.

    Unable to afford the cost of keeping a dog.

    Unable to deal with caring for a dog.

    Unspayed, and having unwanted litter,

    Poor temperament of dog.

    Poor health of the dog.

    Allergies of family member.

    Abusive home (confiscation)

    ALL of these issues would/could be avoided, through education.

    Education beginning at very young ages, about responsible pet ownership. How to choose the right dog, how to train a dog in basics. and the availability of resources for whatever the problem.

    There is not a pet over-population, but a lack of responsible and educated pet owners..Not the same.

    What can an individual do? Volunteer::...to teach school children,

    to offer free obedience classes and puppy kindergarten, to raise funds for low-cost pet spay/neuter and vet care for elderly and low-income, and SHUT DOWN puppy mills, that are turning out sick and poor temperament dogs..( I think of them as counterfeiters) .

    It is not a quick fix, but there IS something that every cat and dog lover can do.

  • 1 decade ago

    OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I just watched your link and not only am I bawling my eyes out, but I have never EVER seen my own dog so distressed, just listening to the audio in the clip.

    I'm gonna have nightmares for weeks.

    If I won the lottery, I swear, I would start a shelter for abused and unwanted animals run with my own private funding. NO animals would ever be put to sleep. They would either live out their lives in happiness or be rehomed to pre-approved adopters.

    I think that anybody who owns ANY animal should have a license and premises inspection. Leave the breeding to the registered breeders (not the puppy mills or general public).

    Thank you for your insight.

    If just a few people read this and think twice about breeding because they want money or think that baby animals are cute, then we have achieved something.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Male or Female.... Get all the dogs sterilised.

    This is an effective and permanent form of contraception.

    The dogs will never breed, and over time they will naturally die.

    That way you will be able to decrease the population without resorting to killing the poor animals.

    This is practised in some countries to reduce the population of stray dogs.

  • 1 decade ago

    Ban commercial breeders (puppy famers/millers) and ban the sale of puppies from third party premises i.e. petshops brokers etc. That would cause a significant decrease in the dog population overnight!

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Encourage Spaying or Neutering your pets, educate owners on the benefits of sterilization - no spraying, live longer, etc.

    Lower fees for sterilizing pets - a traveling neutering/spaying van, etc.

  • 1 decade ago

    spay or neuter your pet. then after that i wouldnt know what else to do. It seems that once the population of dogs and cats goes down then its all going to start over again, people are just going to be breeding their pets and then we will have over population. i think its just one big circle

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.