The Decline Of The Breeder-Veterinarian Relationship

My elder cat is declawed. People frequently give me hell for having that surgery done. The same kind of people who don't think twice about having their pet's uterus removed. I always ask them if they got their dog or cat's consent before such a violation.

RG

". I always ask them if they got their dog or cat's consent before such a violation."

At which point they blurt out something about "pet overpopulation" - as though dogs and cats have the capacity to reproduce asexually if you don't remove those gonads as early as medically possible.

The primary reason for sexual sterilization of pets is behavior modification and the related owner convenience - and that's reason enough. The long term health risk-benefits ratio is a mixed bag that few will admit to.

Both my cats are neutered.Why? Because I can't afford more then two.But as RG points out,it's okay to remove their uterus,or testicles,but not their claws.Now I'm confuzzed.

The worst hypocrites are the ones who condemn tail docking and ear cropping then turn around and pierce the ears of infants.

What we really need to do is just stop interfering with the animals. Leave them alone and they will thrive. Don’t crop their tails or their ears, don’t sterilize them, and don’t feed them, and for sure, don’t eat them. Just leave them alone.

It’s like the climate…

I live in the tropics most of the time, in Quebec part of the time.

At my home in the tropics, I have two large dogs, very much members of the family.

Recently, while in Quebec, I was informed that one of our dogs, still in the tropics, was barking during the night disturbing the neighbors.

My wife went to the local pet store in search of a collar that emits a mild shock when its wearer barks, and give her - in this case - the opportunity to reconsider the wisdom of shooting one's mouth off.

The pet store clerk said,"We consider this device cruel and do not sell them."

to POK above:

I live in Quebec and can tell you those shock collars are still available! *groan*

If you're going to bash Quebec - bash it for its puppy mill craziness.

Preach it! A growing number of vets have become complicit at least and co-conspirators with the entire PETA/HSUS movement. They're also usually the ones who have upped the prices of their services while trying to foist every unneccessary and frivolous procedure off on their clientele. I know because the vet I used has gone this way -- and she's so bloody caring that she won't come out for an emergency (large animal), because it cuts into her "time with her family" (I'm all for family, but when you're a large animal vet and a paying client of no few years calls and says she has a horse colicking; you as a vet should get your fanny out there or at least give said client someone else as a back up for you...not a "well, I don't know what you should do about it; if the horse isn't dead by tomorrow afternoon I can try to make it out" -- that's what the cow said). This is the same "vet" who now pressures any dog breeders that go to her to have their breeding animals neutered "for their health", refuses to do crops and docks on show animals and refuses to refer to anohter vet because "you really should reconsider wanting to propagate a breed standard that contributes to such a practice", and she works for the local Humane Society doing all of their work, which means all the county mandated microchipping, which means you have to become her client in order to be in compliance, which means you have to go there and have your animals checked out and given shots, flea treatment, wormer, and whatever else her examination comes up with to get the bloody microchip (because our state law requires a doctor/client relationship for vets now) -- unless you go and get all of your animals from our county humane society (which would be the source of an entire novella of rants in and of itself).

I know of a carriage company that's getting driven out of business due to a combination of politics, pandering, greed and PETA -- and some money grubbing vets who want some mention on the tv or in the paper (and have bilked said carriage company out of a sack of dough for services rendered and not rendered but still charged). Of course, the goal is to shut the company down -- what happens to the actual horses that all the self rightous hand wringing and gnashing of teeth is over is not mentioned (although some of the moonbats have publicly wished that all horses were just allowed some land where they could eat grass and play and run free with their other horse friends and not be enslaved by humans -- that's pretty close to the actual comment; you just can't make $#%% like that up).

One wonders sometimes if there isn't some big conspiracy to finally force all but the mega wealthy or corporations from even having animals, and then only the ones that are politically correct and multi culti socially approved.

Ok, I'll quite with my rant for now.

I don't buy the comparison. A docked tail is a purely cosmetic change to satisfy the aesthetic sense of the owner, kind of like botox. Spaying on the other hand does real good in preventing kittens and puppies from being abandoned on the streets to, in most cases, die.

I think vets become vets because they want to reduce suffering, not do a doggie version of a boob job on a pet going to a beauty contest.

Personally, I don't care either way. A docked tail is probably sign of an owner who cares about their pet. But I can see where the objections from the vet comes from.

Plus you have municipal governments bank rolling these zealots. For example, the City of Calgary has pumped hundres of thousands of dollars in the Calgary Humane Society (which is more or less a front for PeTa).

The Alderman who pushes for the funding for this organisation also joined the call to stop the Moscow Circus from performing because of the Hockey Playing Bears. He said that the bears would have to be beaten to perform and would be in pain to skate on the ice.

An animal will not repeat an act that causes it pain. No amount of beating will change that. These bears would not be skating if it hurt. The problem is that these booger eating morons with PeTa suffer from too much cerebral necrosis to comprehend this.

I point out to them that no one is pushing them to eat meat, go fishing or hunting, own livestock (including pets), participate in horse or dog racing, or watch a circus or rodeo. But through their position in government and the MSM they are attempting to push their idiotic way of life on the rest of us.

Mike T: "For example, the City of Calgary has pumped hundres of thousands of dollars in the Calgary Humane Society (which is more or less a front for PeTa)."

Do you have a reference for that, Mike?

The terms with my now deceased fat cat of 11 years was that he be de-clawed otherwise as he wasn't paying towards my furniture or Oriental rugs which he couldn't resist destroying was that he faced life on the streets where we first met. Trust me, it was a good deal for him. And, I'm not fearing going to pet abuse purgatory.

It's amusing that the liberal oracles of vanity, they themselves collectively have more stitches from cosmetic surgery than any pet, are hyperventilating over the sin of cropping useless tail parts and ears.

I'm saddened when I see an elegant breed like a Boxer with a rat tail and floppy ears. You might as well let the breed perish.

Chip - "Spaying on the other hand does real good in preventing kittens and puppies from being abandoned on the streets to, in most cases, die."
Kittens and puppies do not get abandoned on the street because their parents are not neutered. They get abandoned on the street because some sonofab... human abandoned them!
You look after your animals as you see fit, (and don't abandon the babies)and let others do the same without your editorializing. Cheers. Eric

jr wrote:

"If you're going to bash Quebec - bash it for its puppy mill craziness."

I'm sorry you misinterpreted my dislike of a pet store clerk's protective stance as Quebec bashing.

I love Quebec, its official foolishness notwithstanding.

The Humane Society Of The United States

Sounds to me like there just another death cult dedicated to the eradication of mankind. Earth worshippers dressed as angels while advancing the devils agenda of social & cultural suicide. Another one we know doubt pay for.
JMO

Mike T: "For example, the City of Calgary has pumped hundres of thousands of dollars in the Calgary Humane Society (which is more or less a front for PeTa)."

umm... not so on either account - and yes I know this from first hand account.

Now the Toronto Humane Society... definately! (on the second count), and as a former employee of that hell hole, I could write a book about the horrors of the place and how the thousands of people who donate almost $10m/year are having their money used for things they could never imagine. Scary place. Calgary Humane is sane and well run, no PETA zealots there.

Yorkies traditionally have docked tails, and for a very good reason. I can't imagine what a mess that tail with hair that grows like a yorkie's hair grows. Nobody would allow the animal in their house. It would be like a dog do paintbrush.

You can call it "cosmetic", I call is hygenic. Without it, the breed would vanish, I think.

I went to the vet some time ago and requested the cost to have my cat declawed. I had leather furniture and my cat loved to scratch.
The nurse said that the vet couldn't do the procedure in good conscience and spent some time explaining the cruelty I would be inflicting etc. I then asked much to euthanize a cat...
They did the declawing and the cat is fat, lazy and happy.

In truth, this has been a old argument and an old fight. There were vets that would not do breed cosmetics back when I was at OVC in the '70s. We used to do most procedures at our clinic but there were some that wouldn't be done. The issue of small animal breeders is a whole 'nother fight. Present company excepted, most should be closed down. Humane societies have taken off in a completely different direction. From a breed perspective however, the AKC and CKC have much to answer for. Most of the working dogs are now biological trash. Some well known and well loved breeds are on life support.

moptop said: "You can call it "cosmetic", I call is hygenic."

Kind of like circumcision eh?

The idiots across the highway that let their dog breed at every heat had their 3rd batch of puppies running redneck around the neighborhood. The mom got taken by wolves so the runt latched on to my dog and after they left said 6 week old puppy outdoors all week end (it was a deep freeze January) while they went to a ringette tourny I brought the thing in and fed it before it died of hypothermia. Since then I had to pay for its spaying (sorry but wasn't planning on another dog, let alone 5 or 6), shots, and a mound of dog food. She had 2 bouts of puppy mange before they figured out she had cancer. After spending near a grand on her we knew it was inevitable and with a last meal of homemade deer sausage in her belly she was humanely put down with the family .22. No tremors and fear going to the vets, but lovingly cared for right to the end. But I'm being inhumane because we didn't euthanize her with the needle at the vet's? Meanwhile the yahoo's who used to own the dog dropped in the other day to visit the little pooch and were devastated (sarc) when we told them of her fate. The dog had been half bald for months and gone for even longer and they never even noticed. Can we neuter these owners?

An old shepherd showed me how to dock a lamb with a specially made rubber band would that be banned now?

Its a good thing my cat is declawed or else it would be dead. I don't need an animal ruining my furniture etc.

You're comparing cosmetic surgery to spaying animals so as to reduce the number of abandoned cats and dogs?

Seriously?

That's pretty f'd up, Kate.

Maybe we should instead be questioning the whole show animal circus and what THAT stupidity has done to otherwise healthy breeds over the years.

I mean, you're in favour of manipulating animal genetics solely so humans can feel good about how those animals look, and then you have to resort to surgery so you can feel even better about how you haven't been able to manipulate the genetics enough?

That's so sad, on so many levels.

djb:~Maybe we should instead be questioning the whole show animal circus and what THAT stupidity has done to otherwise healthy breeds over the years.

OK djb, what has the "stupidity" done to those breeds, and without the human intervention, where do you purport they'd be now? Masters of the universe, masters of the race... give me a break. I've respected, cared for, and loved every animal that I've "owned", but...enough said.

"In the new way of thinking, it is OK to do surgical sterilization of an animal with all the far reaching impact this may have due to the change in hormones this causes"

Silly me. I thought this was the whole point in neutering male dogs, cats and horses.

"From a breed perspective however, the AKC and CKC have much to answer for. Most of the working dogs are now biological trash. Some well known and well loved breeds are on life support."

"Maybe we should instead be questioning the whole show animal circus and what THAT stupidity has done to otherwise healthy breeds over the years."

Both of these comments reveal a profound lack of knowledge about purebred dog "demographics".

First of all, the AKC and CKC are registries - they also manage dog shows, but their first responsiblity is to maintain registration records. The majority of animals registered are many generations removed from any show ring ancestors. They're commercially bred for the pet market.

Secondly, for all the criticism that the show dog fancy receives, there's precious little support by way of statistical data. The reason for that?

The percentage of breeders who breed to compete in the show ring is miniscule in the popular breeds. In my own (miniature schnauzers), perhaps 5% of the dogs born each year are brought into the world by show breeders - the remainder are produced by backyarders and puppymills.

As far as "life support" goes, if it were not for the show ring, a good number of rare breeds would be extinct by now - the rarer, ancient sighthound breeds (Saluki, Ibizian), many of the terrier breeds (Sealyham, Norfolk) and heritage sporting breeds like the Sussex Spaniel would be long gone. There is no market for pet puppies, and they only survive by virtue of a handful of dedicated hobbiests who try to keep their gene pools diverse and healthy as possible, sometimes at great personal expense.

And a last note on this "life support" canard.... the published lists of OFA elbow and hip cleared dogs, CERF'd normal eyes, skin biopsies, cardio exams, etc. etc. are nearly exclusively those same handful of show bred animals who are credited with "destroying" entire breeds.

You know, I've been asked a lot of questions by veterinarians over the years - diet, age, health history... but none ever asked about their championship status or inbreeding coefficient. Yet, if you read the criticisms of purebred dogs from some of these self-described experts, you'd think that info was part and parcel of the health history of every dog that ever walked into their clinics.

You can say what you like about the climate alarmists, but at least they have the decency to take a few temperatures.

Well, the sleek little professors of this and that wanted to politicise everything, and it looks as though they have succeeded. Even pets!

I did like the post about just leaving animals alone - not even feeding them. Ye Gods!

We have two cats (brother and sister, almost 16 years old) and two dogs (brother and sister, just over 2 years old), all of whom have been neutered. I did a fair amount of research before having the dogs done, and even considered a vasectomy for the male. I don't recall anybody suggesting that the procedures amounted to "cruelty" or "mutilation". In terms of health, most of the information seemed to indicate that there were more than a few benefits in favor of sterilization. Even though we live on an acreage, we have no desire to accept the lifetime responsibility for the offspring of every horny stray male dog or cat that manages to get past the page wire perimeter fence, nor would we want to impose the same on any of our neighbors.

I have made a donation to PETA (I guess that makes me a member) after years of marginalizing and even ridiculing them. And I guess there are a few areas where I still think they get a little carried away. But one thing really grabbed me where I live.

First a little background: I grew up on a farm south of Calgary and raised a few calves knowing they would end up on our dinner table. It didn't bother me because we just "knew" they would be dispatched humanely, after all NOBODY would be deliberately cruel to an animal, would they? To me the Stampede was and always will be all about the rodeo and I still love watching the events.

But the day before Thanksgiving '08, my wife and I decided to quit eating meat and buying leather or fur products. The clincher for me was watching a PETA video showing a worker in a Chinese fur farm deliberately skinning a living animal. The frantic, agonized struggles must have made the job far more difficult than skinning a dead animal, yet the worker was obviously enjoying himself.

I suddenly realized that any job attracts people who enjoy doing it, and there are people who enjoy inflicting the maximum amount of violence and pain on a defenseless animal (remember Daisy Duke?). These people are attracted to slaughterhouses, fur farms, seal hunts, etc. where they actually get paid to act out their sickest fantasies every day. THAT'S cruelty!

Bob, while I understand the emotions of someone who detests cruelty and can agree that no animal deserves to be treated poorly, I think it might be a very good idea to read up on PETA, HSUS, and the background ideology that spawned them -- Peter Singer. Makes for an enlightening read.

The statistics and reportage on PETA's history of dog and cat "rescue" makes for some pretty interesting information as well. Seems now they're getting into horses as well -- things don't look good for the horses if they get treated teh same as the cats and dogs.

I don't really think they're much about the welfare of animals as another agenda entirely, but that's my take on it.

And there is a bit of difference between encouraging the average pet owner to neuter their pets, discouraging puppy mills, and trying to put pressure on experienced, ethical, responsible breeders to alter their breeding stock (and hence have no breeding of anything whatsoever).

I would also say that while the docking and cropping or the declawing of a pet is a personal choice, for certain breeds of dogs docking/cropping can make the difference in what their future lives hold in store -- certain breeds may face extinction if not cropped/docked (the numbers of Dobes in Europe dropped dramatically when docking/cropping became illegal, and the same with some other breeds); just as some cats may face personal extinction if they aren't declawed. Also, some undocked tails split and never heal (and docking an older dog is more complicated than a puppy), come uncropped ears get chronic infections (again, cropping is something that must be done to a puppy for any real success in the procedure), dewclaws can be a source of infection and irritation. and then we also get into the realm of an uncropped/undocked or undeclawed cat having fewer potential home possiblities (because no matter how much those procedures are railed against, people seem to prefer a declawed housecat and a Boxer with a docked tail) -- so what really is the best for the animal then?

In relation to, “What is best for the animal?” I’ve also noticed, just as an ordinary pet owner, that, with the advent of advanced—technologically—procedures, when one takes in a sick pet, even one ready to be euthanized, the vets seem to become sales[wo]men, offering a dizzying array of therapies, procedures, and meds. One friend of mine was even told that her severely sick older cat, which was hemorhhaging, could be sent to the US for treatment. (When she asked, “What about the real and immediate NEEDS of my cat?” she was “accused” of being an “advocate”: you bet!)

I find I don’t trust vets these days as they seem more intent on selling services—at huge cost—than levelling with the client. Once, I told a vet that I would be paying only $200 more for my old cat as my budget had nearly run out. She looked shocked. I explained that we loved our cat but that, in fact, he was a PET and our resources were finite. She continued to treat me as if I were a deviant from Mars. I’d quite made up my mind and stood my ground—actually, her intransigence only made my resolve greater. (My cat lived—very happily—another month and the $200 just about covered his last trip to the vet!)

Recently, when her parents were away, I had to take a minor (under 18!) family member and her cat to the after hours—help!—vet. The parents gave me “power of attorney” so to speak—and it WAS my VISA! This teenager was visibly upset and the cat—an old one—was very sick. The first thing the vet did, while the cat was being “stabilised” with oxygen and other therapies (expensive), was explain to us a large number of extremely expensive possibilities, meaning overnights and all kinds of therapy and procedures. I asked, “How much?” It would have cost $3000 in the next two days just to get a clear diagnosis and an idea of how to spend another few thousand to “treat” this cat at death’s door. The teenager was all in favour of the immediate $3000. I was sympathetic.

Then I made a simple proposal, “At this point, I think that putting ___ down would be a reasonable option, considering his age and very serious problems. The vet agreed. It still cost well over $700 for our hour at the vet’s!

IMO, the vet should have suggested euthanasia as a first option. But, while the cat was being “treated” with expensive procedures, the vet was discussing all kinds of unlikely options, which many well off clients—many with no kids—are willing to try. (Apparently, Canadians now spend more on their pets than on child care: ’anything wrong with this picture?)

I truly think vets exploit this misplaced anthropomorphism. Is this often bleeding heart soft headedness in the best interests of our animals? I don’t think so. Is it in the best interests of big bucks for the vets? You bet. I don’t have pets anymore, but I’d say to anyone who does, “Go to the vet with a hard head, a reasonable plan that fits your and your pet’s needs, and a VERY tight hand on your wallet!” I’m sure the breeders here already do that.

I’m sad that a relationship—between me and a vet—which used to be based on trust has soured: now I usually see a vet as an adversary. ’Sad.

If you see your vet as an adversary, you are definitely going to the wrong vet.

I'm a vet in Ontario. I do not see farm animals, so I don't have to go out in -25 weather to attend to emergencies. If I did see farm animals by day, I would have an obligation to see them by night or arrange emergency coverage. If a horse vet was your vet and refused to see an emergency on an existing patient or to have an alternate for emergency care, that is against the law in Ontario.

I routinely dock tails and dewclaws. I do not crop ears, as I feel it requires a certain amount of artistry. There is a vet in my city that I refer ear cropping to.

Breeders in my area, those known to me, are not reasonable intelligent people like Kate. They usually are very demanding and completely clueless.

One woman wanted me to be on 24/7 emergency call for her dachshunds. I was never to leave town or attend a movie or plan an evening with my family, or drink a beer lest she might require my services. She demanded this as a condition of becoming my client, plus she would pay no emergency fees and wanted a 25% breeder's discount. That would have made each of her visits cost money from my pocket.

Can you imagine, I had the audacity to turn her away at the door.

Dr Kyla, good to hear from you. I'm totally with you on this one!

My cats were very seldom sick and I only had to go to the vet few a times—other than for vaccines and nail clipping—when they were quite old and quite ill: at that point, one gets the vet on duty. The two, last case scenarios—a broken leg and a stroke—which both happened unexpectedly in the evening, meant we had to go to the after hours vet: again, no choice.

Re unnecessary procedures: we were actually sent home, with saline solution (we paid for it), with a long line and a big needle, to hydrate our two and a half pound, 18 year old cat: and this was after it took the technician half a dozen tries to insert the needle into our tiny cat’s tinier leg. A few days later, my husband and I set up everything in the kitchen. I picked up our dear little cat and then said, “We are NOT doing this! It’s ludicrous of the vet to have set us up for such a ridiculous failure, which will totally traumatize ______—and us!” Our little sweetie’s last weeks were comfortable and then she had a stroke (we think) and that was that. We wrote the practice, saying how irresponsible it was of them to expect us to do procedures at home that their own technician had trouble doing. We never had a response.

I’m afraid that technology, greed, entitlement, fear of litigation, pet insurance schemes, money to burn and pets as surrogate children, and, at times, too much pandering to emotionalism (among many other factors I’m sure you could mention) have complicated vets doing their job tremendously. What a shame.

If I should have another pet, I believe I’d choose the clinic I’d use much more carefully. I’d have a talk with the “top dog” and lay out my expectations very clearly to see if we shared the same philosophy. If not, I’d keep looking. (Though, from what people are saying here, the graduates of vet college—like teachers and other professions—have often been ideologically brainwashed. Most unfortunate.)

Five days before Christmas (three weeks ago) I was told the only humane choice for my rambunctious 8 week old kitten (farm born) was a $2500 pin and plate knee replacement after she had taken a corner too closely and cracked her knee on the wall. I asked for amputation as the kitten will never be an outdoor cat and was called (in front of my five crying children) inhumane, and then told that if I could not afford the surgery before Christmas to sign a piece of paper surrendering the kitten to the SPCA. I would never again be able to adopt an animal from the SPCA again.

When I said I wanted to take the kitten home with pain killers to think about it the vet informed me she would be compelled to report me for animal cruelty and they would have the SPCA along with the police come seize the kitten (again said in front of my now bawling kids).

I requested euthanization at that point, and was told the SPCA would be able to afford the pin and plate surgery as the organization would only be charged the cost of surgery materials, the vet would donate the time.

I left the kitten overnight and the next morning my husband took his best friend and best litigator in town to the vet at eight am sharp and read the vet the riot act, threatened long and nasty professional complaints and mostlikely publicity, then brought the kitten home.

We found a new vet, who said that at eight weeks old bed rest, pain killers, and wait and see were perfectly acceptable.

Right this moment the kitten is attacking my curtains with pure glee and has no sign of any trouble, not even a slight limp. Follow up xrays are later this week.

I've currently got 3 young cats (2 girls and a boy) tearing around my home. One was a runt, born on a farm owned by a vet whom I knew through a friend from high school. The other two were strays which were caught by friends (the female of these two was pitch black, and black cats tend to suffer inhumane treatment more than any other cat). Of these three, the little farm kitten was the only one that was abused, for months she cringed away from hands and cried if she was picked up. The vet in question lied to me about her age (I was told 3 months by this vet, less than 6 weeks by my own vet when I took her in to be checked out) lied to me about her being gently handled and used to people and lied to me about her health (I have maxed out my credit card paying for an emergency for my little girl).
I would never trust that vet as far as I could kick her, however my own is living proof that there are good vetrenarians out there. I have been taught how to feed medicine to a cat that doesnt like banana flavoring, have learned why its always banana flavor, have learned how to give insulin and have had it explained that neutering a male cat when he is younger could change his male tendency to pee on my Christmas tree (he does still climb it though) . Best of all, I have been given numbers for other vets who work 24 hours or can take walk ins when my own can't.

Not all vets are -insert a derogatory term here- because mine is proof of that, like a good vet, she understands and explains the pros and cons to her clients (while their cats steal honeysuckle cat toys from a giant pail) and lets the client make informed decisions. If she cant help, she forwards us to people who can. THAT is what a good, decent Vet does.

Bobbi's story is bone chilling: Big Brother/Sister is more than watching. (Irene's story provides some reassurance. I'll bet Kyla's a "good" vet!)

But I fear that Bobbi's experience is perhaps more indicative of the direction in which we're headed. (E.g., Teachers are required to report certain situations: believe me, it's more of a nightmare if one does. In most cases, I'd rather leave the kids to the mercies of their less than perfect parents than to the degradation and political correctness of the looney-toon Children's Aid [sic] Societies. And the person who is often abused at the centre of the mess is the teacher.)

We're living in deranged times: that's what one gets when ideologies and bureaucracies team up.

I'll say one more thing. My clients trust me when it comes to spending money, because I will give them all the options and many times I will ask if they would like to wait a day or two on an expensive option if I believe I have the answer without it. That builds enough trust that when I tell them we have to spend money, they know we really do.

I wouldn't go to a mechanic without references and I definitely wouldn't go to a vet without references. My usual advice is for people to call every vet in their area and ask the receptionist to ask the vet, "If I wasn't able to come to your clinic, who would you recommend?"

Then go to whomever got the most votes from their colleagues as a starting point.

Jane:

I have heard disparaging comments regarding PETA before, and even did some further research after reading your comment. The worst accusations I could find in an admittedly hasty search were hotly debated, so I won't add my opinion there.

But I won't ignore the message I received on the grounds that the messenger may not be "squeaky clean". I was just defending my choice to have our dogs and cats neutered and objecting to be labeled "cruel" for doing so when there are so many examples of real cruelty in the world.

Do a search on PETA and dying animals in dumpsters.

One particular story I remember was of PETA members picking up a mama cat and her litter from a vet clinic, assuring the vet they would find homes for them.

Within the hour, the cats were found, not quite dead from lethal injections done improperly, in a dumpster close to the vet clinic.

Had PETA not said they for sure had homes for the cat and kittens, the vet's wife would have taken the mother.

The reality is that PETA euthanizes >90% of any animals they take in. They do not believe that life with humans is good for animals.

Dr Kyla--thanks--writes, "The reality is that PETA euthanizes >90% of any animals they take in. They do not believe that life with humans is good for animals."

Heck, PETA doesn't believe that life FOR humans is good for animals, including, of course, the humans!

Glasnost, My apoligies for the late response.

The funding towards the new Humane Society premises was provided about two years ago. From the news reports, Joe Cici's name was mentioned as the alderman in support of it. It stood out in my memory since it was done while the City was - as usual - complaining about the shortfall of money it was suffering.

The Calgary Humane Society is big booster in having the Criminal Code amended to move the cruelty to animals provision from crimes of property to crimes of morality. At first glance it does not seem like a big deal unless you look at how the law works. The "colour of right" provision would be removed once amendment received royal ascent. Far from being a neutral amendment, this would open the floodgates for for prosecution.

All the amendment would achieve is add more activities, that are otherwise legitimate, to the list of crimes and do nothing about the sick types who commit actual cruelty.

The sick types who commit the atrocities that make the headlines do not care or believe they will be caught. Thus, only legitimate users will be hurt without doing anything about real cruelty.

Dave Taylor, when he was still just a left of centre radio host, had the then director of the Calgary Humane Society on his programme. She was definitely pushing for the amendment. They might not be as whacked out in Calgary as in Toronto but they are working on it.

Jane, Dr yla:

Thanks for the eye-opener. Dang, another trust betrayed.