Practical - Index > To Do - Index > Activism > Essays

Page 3 ... Look Within ...  Page 1  Page 2

Then, this article in the report from the Public Citizen Foundation's Newsletter From The Center For Consumer Freedom Comes............

.........Better Business Bureau says charities should retain about 65 percent of the funds they raise........

.........The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which disguises its animal rights activism in the cloak of animal welfare, lost $173,726 this year as it continued its pattern of dubious fundraising practices..........

The Money Pit, Charity Edition

A new report from New York's attorney general notes that several food activist groups actually lost money during fundraising efforts in the Big Apple. The state's top law enforcement official warned: "This report is a reminder to make informed decisions before contributing hard-earned dollars to charity."

Keeping in mind that the Better Business Bureau says charities should retain about 65 percent of the funds they raise, consider these financially unsound donations from New York:

The anti-biotech activists at Friends of the Earth kept less than 11 percent of the money raised in its name.
The Ralph Nader-founded Public Citizen Foundation lost $86,853 with one fundraiser company (a negative 243 percent return on investment).

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which disguises its animal rights activism in the cloak of animal welfare, lost $173,726 this year as it continued its pattern of dubious fundraising practices. According to previous reports from New York's attorney general, fundraising company Share Group Inc. kept $2.18 million between 1999 and 2000, and passed on only $273,560 to HSUS -- a return rate of only 11 percent. In New York, Share Group only gave HSUS $16,543 of the $1.08 million it raised during the year 2000 -- a return of only 1.53 percent. This dismal record probably did not surprise HSUS: in 1996, Share raised $60,045 for the group and returned nothing.

A 2001 Letter of Agreement between the two groups shows that HSUS agreed to a minimum guarantee of only 1 percent of the gross receipts. The Illinois Attorney General's office reports that HSUS paid Share Group over $1.87 million for 2001 fundraising that netted less than $750,000 to the animal-rights group in that state -- a negative 150 percent return.

It's too much to hope that these groups will fundraise themselves right out of business, but there are steps individuals can take. Sign our petition to the IRS commissioner seeking to revoke the tax-exempt status of the violence-promoting "charity" People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. And be sure to tell your friends and family to avoid throwing hard-earned wages into a money pit.

Source: http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/2714

Considering The HSUS Dubious Fundraising Practices, shouldn't the Attorney General's Office Hold The HSUS To A Higher Standard?
=======================

More Battles of 'Words' while animals continue to suffer

More than a half-century ago, noted science fiction author Isaac Asimov began his acclaimed series of Robot novels, examining increasingly complex interactions between humans and robots in a future world. Asimov's underlying premise for the books was that robots had advanced sufficiently to become sentient beings. Questions raised by this development include whether robots should be granted legal rights, and if so, what those rights should be.

Less fanciful, but no less complicated, is the current national debate about animal rights, the resolution of which could result in a comprehensive restructuring of the legal relationship between humans and animals. The controversy is centered on the question of whether humans should be allowed to own animals as property, or whether humans should be legally defined as guardians of the animals in their care.

There are no easy answers to the question, and the intuitive response might lead to unintended consequences.

The Status Quo

With few exceptions, animals are, and always have been, treated as the personal property of their owners by courts and lawmakers. The Uniform Commercial Code (a code of laws governing commercial transactions that has been adopted in nearly all states), for example, includes animals (and unborn young) among the "goods" that can be the subject of business contracts. Kentucky statutes, for example, specifically define a licensed dog as the "property" of the owner, and other jurisdictions have similar laws.

This well-established property status means that animals legally can be raised for profit or pleasure; bought, sold, or leased; exchanged or given away; put on exhibition or used in races, sports, and other competitions; and disposed of when appropriate or necessary. Status as property does not mean that an animal is nothing more than the legal equivalent of a refrigerator, an automobile, or a computer, however.

While generally defining animals as personal property, the law also recognizes that animals represent a particular class of property and imposes attendant obligations on an animal's owner. In recognition of the fact that animals are living creatures generally dependent on their owners for care, a legal niche is carved out to provide them with additional legal protection.

Kentucky law in this regard is typical of the laws in most states. The owner of an animal is guilty of cruelty in the first degree if he or she uses the animal for fighting, a felony with a maximum punishment of five years in prison. There also is a legal obligation to provide adequate food, water, and shelter for animals, and a legal prohibition against torture, mutilation, neglect, and other mistreatment. There are numerous exceptions, including hunting and fishing, food processing, veterinary care, and bona fide medical research, for example, and most cruelty offenses that do not involve animal fights are charged as misdemeanors. (A recent change in Kentucky state law elevates the punishment for second and subsequent convictions of torturing a dog or cat to a felony.)

In a majority of states, as in Kentucky, at least some instances of cruelty to animals are punished as felonies. It probably is fair to say, however, that animal cruelty offenses generally are classified as misdemeanors, with a penalty of no more than 12 months in jail or, more likely, only a fine.

Another consequence of animals' status as personal property is a general limitation on an owner's potential monetary recovery when an animal is killed. If the death of an animal results from an intentional act, or through the negligence of another person, the owner generally must seek compensation in a civil lawsuit for the destruction of property, rather than for wrongful death, which is the usual legal remedy for the death of a person. If the lawsuit alleging destruction of property succeeds in court, recovery generally is limited to the fair market value, or the replacement value, of the animal.

Non-Economic Damages

In a few states, however, statutes specifically allow recovery for so-called non-economic damages following the death of an animal. A recently enacted Tennessee law, for example, allows the owner of a pet to recover up to $4,000 beyond the economic value of the animal if certain conditions are met. To recover, the owner must establish that the animal's death was the result of another person's actions that were both unlawful and intentional or negligent, and that the death occurred while the animal was on the owner's property or under his or her supervision.

Illinois also allows pet owners to recover for non-economic damages, including emotional distress, for the death of an animal in certain limited circumstances. Similar legislation has passed or is pending in a small number of other jurisdictions.

Against this legal framework, in which animals are considered personal property and protected primarily through anti-cruelty laws, several different approaches to animal protection have emerged.

Redefining the Status of Animals

There can be no genuine controversy surrounding the proposition that animals deserve proper care and that they should be protected from mistreatment and abuse. The dispute arises over how the interests and well-being of animals can be best served. For the traditionalist, the road to protection of animals is paved with better owner education, more well-equipped and well-funded shelters, harsher penalties for animal cruelty convictions, and vigorous enforcement of existing anti-cruelty laws.

At the other end of the spectrum, extreme animal rights activists launch violent attacks on commercial animal operations and facilities where animals are used in research, destroying property and releasing animals. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), for example, are considered part of a "serious terrorist threat," according to James F. Jarboe, Domestic Terrorism Section Chief of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division. Testifying before Congress in February 2002, Jarboe reported that ALF and ELF members committed some 600 criminal acts in this country during the preceding six years, with damages in excess of $43 million.

A third approach, certainly more middle-of-the-road than the actions of ALF and ELF, but still well outside the mainstream, is a legal restructuring of the traditional owner-property relationship between humans and animals. Advocates are urging state and municipal lawmakers to rewrite their rules, substituting the word "guardian" for "owner" wherever possible in laws that affect animals. The purpose of the wording change, according to its advocates, is to instill a greater sense of respect and compassion for animals. This, in turn, could lead to a reduction in animal abuse.

The guardian movement had its genesis in 1995 at the 11th annual Summit for the Animals held in St. Louis, Mo. Representatives from 47 national organizations approved several resolutions there, including one styled "Adopting Language that Recognizes Animals as Individuals and Not as Property or Things." This resolution put forward the proposition that "animals are not property to be used for the benefit or whim of humans." In Defense of Animals, a Mill Valley, California-based, non-profit animal rights advocacy organization headed by veterinarian Elliot Katz, DVM, soon took up the cause with its nationwide Guardian campaign: "They are not our property...we are not their owners."

The first serious attempt to effect a regulatory change from "owner" to "guardian" failed in San Francisco, but a similar measure was adopted shortly thereafter, in July 2000, by the City Council in Boulder, Colo. Since then, a half-dozen other cities have revamped their municipal codes to include references to animal "guardians." Rhode Island followed suit in 2001, becoming the first state to amend its laws to recognize human guardianship of animals.

Rhode Island General Law Section 4-1-1(4) now states that a "Guardian shall mean a person(s) having the same rights and responsibilities of an owner, and both terms shall be used interchangeably. A guardian shall also mean a person who possesses, has title to or an interest in, harbors or has control, custody or possession of an animal and who is responsible for an animal's safety and well-being."

Adding the word "guardian" to a state or municipal law, especially when the law allows "guardian" and "owner" to be used interchangeably, sounds innocent enough. After all, many animal owners already treat their animals more like members of the family than as property, and being called guardians rather than owners is not likely to make them more responsive to the animals' needs.

Some activists also argue that the change in language will reduce the incidence of animal abuse, by making owners feel more responsible for their animals. This might be wishful thinking, however, considering that child abuse continues at an alarming rate despite the unquestioned responsibility parents and guardians have for the welfare of their children.

Strong criticism of the policy shift has emerged from seemingly unlikely sources. In May 2003, for example, the Executive Board of the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) approved a position statement opposing guardianship language. The official AVMA position reads:

"Ownership vs. Guardianship:

"The American Veterinary Medical Association promotes the optimal health and well-being of animals. Further, the AVMA recognizes the role of responsible owners in providing for their animals' care. Any change in terminology describing the relationship between animals and owners does not strengthen this relationship and may, in fact, diminish it. Such changes in terminology may decrease the ability of veterinarians to provide services and, ultimately, result in animal suffering."

The Board of Directors of the American Kennel Club (AKC) adopted a similar resolution in 2003, stating in part that, the "AKC believes that the term guardian may in fact reduce the legal status and value of dogs and thereby restrict the rights of owners, veterinarians, and government agencies to protect and care for dogs. It may also subject them to frivolous and expensive litigation. The term guardian does nothing to promote more responsible treatment of dogs."

Similar opposition has been voiced by groups including the Cat Fancier's Association, the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, the National Animal Interest Alliance, the Responsible Pet Owners Alliance, and the American Veterinary Medical Law Association. Equine organizations appear to have remained silent to this point.

"What's the problem?" you might reasonably ask at this point. Anything that makes people more conscious of the fact that animals are not a disposable commodity and should not be abused must be a good thing. What could go wrong? So far, nothing.

Laws in Rhode Island and in the cities that have adopted guardianship language appear to allow "owner" and "guardian" to be used interchangeably, with the same rights and obligations attached to each. None of the revised laws have been in force long enough to know for certain whether the change is cosmetic or substantive. There is no doubt, however, that such mixed usage fails to recognize that owner and guardian have legally distinct, and very different, meanings.

The owner of property, according to Black's Law Dictionary and an enormous body of legal precedent, has the right to "enjoy" the property, and to "do with it as he pleases, even to spoil or destroy it, as far as the law permits." It is this bundle of rights, and the potential for harm, that make necessary laws that recognize the unique status of animals and that protect them from cruelty, abuse, and neglect.

A guardian, on the other hand, is a horse of an entirely different color. Strictly speaking, again according to Black's Law Dictionary and the courts, a guardian is a person who has both the legal right and legal responsibility to take care of another person who is incapable of taking care of himself or herself. Adults who are incompetent for some reason and minor children are examples of individuals who require guardians. The subject of a guardian's care is the guardian's "ward."

A guardian also might have a fiduciary duty to the ward, which simply means a legal responsibility to act in the ward's best interest, even at the expense of the guardian's interests. Guardians and owners, in other words, are fundamentally different, mutually exclusive entities. Owners own property, guardians protect the rights of incompetent individuals, and a law that uses the terms interchangeably is a legal contradiction.

The potential ramifications of this clear legal distinction between "owner" and "guardian" are enormous. Assume, for a moment, that "guardian" is not merely another name for "owner," and that a person actually can become the guardian of an animal in the strict legal sense. Implicit in this assumption must be the fact that the object of the guardian's care and responsibility, an animal, now becomes the guardian's ward, with associated legal rights that must be protected.

Any meaningful change in status from an animal owner to an animal guardian must, at some point, also encompass a change in the status of the animal from property to ward. Under the current state of the law, which recognizes only property and persons, the animal thus would assume the same legal rights as a child or incompetent adult.

If an animal is someone's property, the animal can be bought and sold, a simple legal transaction that results in a change of owner. If, on the other hand, the animal has the legal status of a ward with rights that must be protected, it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the animal legally could be sold (or even given away) by its guardian. Animal adoptions also would become far more complicated and expensive.

Under current law it is possible, in some situations, to justify the euthanasia of an animal for economic reasons, such as an illness requiring lengthy and expensive veterinary care. Euthanasia in this circumstance no longer would be an option if the caretaker is a guardian and the animal enjoys the legal status of a ward.

It also is easy to imagine an argument that it is not in the best interest of a Thoroughbred to be raced as a 2-year-old, or at all, or that dogs should not be exhibited at shows or used in field trial competitions, or that zoos violate the rights of their inhabitants. Commercial animal breeding in any form certainly would violate the legal rights of an animal ward, as would human consumption of animals for food and the use of animals in medical research.

These scenarios might sound quite far-fetched, and the possible outcomes might not be obvious consequences of the seemingly innocuous substitution of one word for another in a few laws. Nevertheless, a dramatic restructuring of the human-animal relationship is the stated agenda of some animal rights activists. Whatever your opinion on the status of animals, your support of, or opposition to, the guardian movement should be an informed choice, based on fact rather than supposition.

Courts frequently use the phrase "slippery slope" to describe a course of action that, once it is started, cannot easily be halted. Depending on how lawmakers and courts eventually interpret the true meaning of an animal guardian, the movement toward animal guardianship might be such a slope.


THE HONESTY AND INTEGRITY OF TOO MANY ANIMAL CONTROL AGENCIES IS BEING BROUGHT INTO QUESTION FINALLY!!

Originally this was a topic I was not going to discuss. But in order to show a clear overall picture of all that needs changing, it must be included for review. I have a difficult time believing that Animal Pounds all over the U.S. kill the dogs/puppies/cats/kittens and other animals simply due to LACK OF space within their buildings. Much of my findings on several agencies such as Riverside County CA for example, along with many others as well, is that the remains of the animals are sold for FOOD CONSUMPTION AND OTHER USES. There's big money to BE made from all of this. It's called greed and power over those who cannot defend themselves. So, when I SEE OR HEAR THAT:::

1.) POUNDS DO NOT Want to have proper hours for the public to see/observe/have time with the animal IN ORDER TO RESCUE/ADOPT

2.) POUNDS SETTING forth RIDICULOUS HOURS for deadline toward the animal's rescue or adoption.

3.) DOG WARDENS/MANAGERS REFUSING TO ADMIT how many dogs have been killed on their kill days

4.) POUNDS/DOG WARDEN Specifically stating that THEY WEREN'T present when the dogs die in the gas chambers, are shot or Lord knows how they are killed.

5.) POUNDS/PERSONNEL PEOPLE/LEADERS OF ANIMAL ORGANIZATIONS using manipulation to sway the public and out right lie---THEN MY ANTENNAS GO UP THAT SOMETHING IS VERY DANGEROUSLY WRONG. AS ANIMAL ADVOCATES AND ACTIVISTS, WE HAVE TO KNOW THE TRUTH FROM THE ROTTEN LIES. THE ANIMAL'S LIFE DEPENDS ON IT.

6.) POLITICAL POSITIONING must be kept out if animals are to be saved from the continuous atrocities at the hands of HUMANS.

I've known this for years. I actually (my attorney) got into the records of Riverside County, CA and were able to prove that they did these things for those very reasons. They would adopt SPOT for $48, but if the dog didn't get adopted, the taxpayers were charged $109 to kill it. That is why they avoid working during hours that are accessible to the public, why they never try to drum up more adoptees, why they are always so vague when asked about their numbers and business plans.

They do everything possible to hassle good, caring and responsible rescuers with laws and fees and fines. But who ever wishes to have a litter or two are simply allowed to continue without any rules, restrictions or even reading materials.

They were even able to get around the mandatory spay and neuter laws in place in several states by offering 'certificates'' for the people to do it themselves, knowing full well that the majority would never take the time or make the effort.

We also must keep in mind that they are treated like crap by everyone in the community INCLUDING THEIR BOSSES which is usually the county board of supervisors. They are underpaid, overworked and frequently hire people right out of jail, or off the street with no education and are expected to handle the incredible numbers of animals that irresponsible humans relinquish into their care.

Now, here we are four and a half years later and they finally got a grand jury to investigate the operation and staff in Riverside, CA. and recently came up with 28 felony charges on how they ran and misappropriated funds and lied to the county council. So, the public was outraged and spoke their minds for a couple weeks until the county announced plans for a bigger and newer facility to be built for $75 million within the next 5years. NO MENTION AT ALL OF ANY HUMANE EDUCATION to be implemented. When questioned about the humane education, the response was, that it costs too much. But it only took them 4 weeks to come up with $75 million to build a new dog pound.

Now I live in Northern Arizona and the animal control up in Las Vegas is asking for an additional $60 million in next contract negotiations per year. They have no humane education anywhere in the proposal at all. When questioned they replied on their hind legs 'We were at a school for the retarded for three whole days last year - don't tell us we have no humane education program!! I was afraid to ask about the other 750,000 students in the Vegas School System who did NOT have a visit from them last year.

The local animal control agency in Kingman is still running on a card system. No computers what so ever. I found someone to donate a decent computer and another to donate two years worth of dialup service - all the animal control had to do was to call and verify it was for them. Over the first year, I had to remind them to simply make that call therefore four times. Now, three years later, still nothing has been done. hey all have Internet at home and are familiar with computers. Something is very fishy.

Tradition Animal Welfare Versus Progressive Animal Welfare
Traditional Shelter Programs
Progressive Animal Welfare Programs

Open Admission Policy Limited admission policy with transfers from animal control

Nonprofit animal welfare agencies assume government animal control contract Renounce animal control contracts -- Changes mission to more proactive activity

License programs that use visual tags as primary identification, microchips as optional. (As a mean of returning lost dogs home this program is a failure.) License programs that use microchips as primary identification and visual tags as secondary identification
Only 14% of lost dogs and 2% of lost cats are return to owner nationally Use microchips as primary system to increase RTO rate and reduce stress on shelter capacity. Goal 50% RTO
No "bad owner" traceability Microchips used to foster responsible animal ownership
Annual license fee Free lifetime license upon proof of microchip and s/n
No feral cat trap/vaccinate/alter/release programs Coordinated aggressive community-wide TVAR programs
Spay/neuter deposit then refund upon compliance All animals spay/neutered prior to adoption release
A few mobile spay/neuter programs Every county has a Mobile spay/neuter class A or C van and services low income areas ONLY
Dog Training Classes that cost $50 to $200 Community Wide (Low Cost, $10 to $20) Dog Training Program or training vouchers
No Pre-Adoption Testing Test future adopters for pet care knowledge and bonding potential (Offer low-cost remedial training)
Sporadic Low Cost Spay/Neuter Vouchers County government sponsored spay/neutered vouchers
Low Demand for Dogs and Cats Over 1 year of age Change image of adult dogs and cats with cable excess TV show, obedience fun match, etc.
No spay/neuter in low income areas Target low income areas with mobile s/n vans
Individual 4 x 6 dog kennels Larger group kennels which house 4 to 6 dogs (reduces kennel stress)
Small cat cages Open cat rooms with isolation period to guard against disease
Low volume animal control adoptions Free transfer of animals to animal welfare organizations
Limited funds and staff for ac adoption and lost pet programs Humane organizations handle adoptions and lost/found program in animal control facility
Limited lost and found programs Computerized, networked countywide alerts w/ pictures
No sliding scale for low-income fees and fines Reduced fines for low income animal ordinance violations
No program for people who feed feral free-roaming cats Government sponsored reduced-rate vouchers
No breed club certification Certify according to breed club standard and kennel inspection
No animal shelter referrals to pure bred breeders Everyone in community coalition refer to certified breeders
No central pet acquisition place Coalition sponsored pet adoption referral agency (in mall or downtown storefront) Alternative to classified ads in paper. Have opportunity to educate and direct to responsible source.
Nonprofit animal welfare organizations that house animal's, keep them for about 7 to 10 days and then kill them for space. Animal welfare organizations that uphold the humane ethic and keep an animal until it is adopted. Configuring their shelter to reduce animal stress.
5% of nonprofit budget spent on proactive programs 40% of budget spent on proactive programs
Wait for adopters to come in door. Aggressive marketing of animals.
Animals displayed for adoption in kennels and cages (sometimes noisy, dark and smelly) Adopters left on their own. Positive showcase for all animals up for adoption (clean, free of smells, minimum barking, well lit with play toys and colorful, descriptive signage)
Less than 5% of ac budget spent on proactive programs Government funding for spay/neuter and microchip programs.
Anti-breeding ordinances with heavy fines and fees No disincentive anti-breeding ordinances that produce heavy fee and fines
Very little health care and rehabilitation programs for sick animals. Develop fund for the health care treatment and rehab of indigent animals.
Isolated activity between organizations Community coalitions
No regional goals Regional goals to reduce impoundment, euthanasia and increase spay/neuter rates especially in low income areas
No scientific study of regional pet demographics Survey and study the problem.
Undefined veterinarian participation Survey veterinarians for early age and low cost spay/neuter and training programs. Offer recognition and appreciation rewards. Free advertisements.
Low per capita funding for animal control (less than $2) Funding of at least $5 to $6 per capita
No city official lobby efforts to increase animal program funding. Create coalition and direct lobby efforts at local government officials who control budgets.
Humane education directed at children in classrooms Humane education (low-cost) directed at adult pet owners before they get a pet, during the first year of ownership and crisis intervention.
Teachers curriculum on animal welfare topics.
No rental assistance programs for people with pets Rental assistance and referrals for people with pets (insurance)

Many organizations both large and small won't make a move in any direction until and unless sanctioned by the HSUS, ignoring the fact that this organization is highly unlikely to dole out funds even if they were aware of your existance.  The fear that the HSUS has placed into many groups around the nation through threats of lawsuits, etc. is quite daunting for those who simply don't know better.

The following is a letter I wrote to the large national animal groups in 2003.

TO THE LARGE NATIONAL ANIMAL RIGHTS, ANIMAL WELFARE
AND ANIMAL PROTECT ORGANIZATIONS

For 20 years that I've worked and lived, Americans have spent $1billion annually on animal control efforts in their communities.
That is $20 Billion

For 20 years, Americans have pleasured you with $1billion annually in charitable donations under the misguided assumptions that you are there to help the animals.
That is another $20 Billion - Total of $40 billion!

Over the same period of time more than 3,000 non profit organizations dedicated to their own idea of animal protection has logged nearly 25 Billion man hours - many struggling to survive when they are the ones who are putting in the time, money and efforts to actually save the animals that are considered 'excess' - something that after 20 years and $40 billion, we should no longer be burdened with had you done even half of what you suggest you do. You offered little or no real substantial support to any of them from your air conditioned offices or your luxury homes.

That is a D minus report card and if this is offensive to those who are employed by you or support you, I do not apologize. Regardless of your highly paid public relations department who will no doubt put a very different spin on this letter, the facts are in and they are not very complimentary to your efforts.

You are large organizations. You are not THAT large. You are no longer respectable or the nationally revered organization you once were. You are really no longer a big deal to those of us who see the light at the end of the tunnel - the light you shield from your supporters in order to continue receiving their financial donations even though you have no intention of ever solving any of these problems. Like our fanatical minority and religious leaders, our large animal protection organizations need their victims to survive. Absent crimes and imaginary situations against their people and teachings, these organizations disappear. This means jobs. As long as they can convince those who don't know better, they will survive.
Let me explain this to you: We are not afraid of any of your size and will no longer view you as the respectable ''God-Like" entities you would like us to. To give you that reference, to even call you respectable, gives you far too much stature.

It is politics that prevents most of the good and compassionate efforts to help the animals, not be implemented, as well as envy, jealousy and all the human foibles that haunt us. Yet we think our mission noble and righteous. You know honor and good conscience would have handled many things differently, that would have helped us all to enjoy a happier, safer place for all to exist The animals who lost their lives over the past years only wish you had a little more honor and conscience.

There is all too much talk here, with a tremendous lack of action. And I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. We are dealing with actual lives here - lives that are no less important than ours in the eyes of those up above. We are not your enemy or combatant, but the ones who will make the truth known in order to save our society the agony, the billions of dollars and the embarrassment of assuming these problems just can't be solved, when in reality, they can be. The citizens of this great nation have been lead down the wrong path by your rhetoric. We will come and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged - to mold and shape and refine our sense of compassion and responsibility

We now know they can be.

What was it that led me to this outburst? When confronting the larger organizations with questions, I have been lied to when looking for the delicate answers. When approaching the same with some very worthy ideas to bring more people to our level of understanding the importance of appropriate education to raise the level of compassion, I've been told that for political reasons, your organizations could not support our efforts. That for reasons of ego, could not be associated with 'that' organization. And for reasons of anger would not work with 'those people' and still claiming to be devoting your lives to the animals.

I have listened respectfully to what you have to say over the years. And I asked you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable morals have led you to do what you are guilty of doing. Promising to so many to help the animals by deceiving the public for so many years. We remained ignorant due to the spewing of your gruesome statistics and confusing programs and simply lead to believe that any solution was simply out of reach and that not much could be done, ''but that you were certainly the entity that would trust with this effort."

Do you really wish to be viewed with respect - even in heroic light?

Then, I have an answer for you..

It may not satisfy you. But as I search this entire record it comes as close to understanding as I know. It seems to me you fear the one thing that is most precious - TRUTH. Be honest. Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom based on truth from coast to coast. We can speak out and we aren't arrested for being stupid or wrong. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are allowed to do what you do. So, it is this I suggest in order to hold your heads up high and prove once and for all that the 'animal rights' fanatics have finally scored one for the sane.

Alert the public that NEXT year you will be dissolving a major portion of your fictitious store front of an operation and will donate the necessary costs to fund spay/neuter programs nationwide for one year. NATIONWIDE. That includes Tuscaloosa, Fremont, Boise and even Mason City. So that everyone can see, truly see, that solutions to these problems are known, can be attained and are even more cost effective than the follow-up, clean - up rat race we burden ourselves with now - simply by default. THEN your organization and efforts will be remembered, revered, respected and will even be able to continue your foundation, although at a lower level. But your 'come-back' or regrowth would be astronomical and historic in magnitude simply for doing something that the world could witness and to prove that you are not a false, hollow body of cold hearted money grabbers, but truly see that this is the right thing to do. The truth will surface with or without you and if that means that you must relinquish your exorbitant salaries, so be it. It will be your decision.

We are Americans. We are a noble society - proud of most everything we stand for and certainly about truth. We have been through the fire before with other elected politicians and large corporations who defrauded their clients and supporters as well. We've watched as politics have ruined the respectable and seen that hatred and egos have brought down the mighty. It will happen to you as well. As politics is a way of life in almost every other area of our society, it is also politics that is certain death to the animals you pledge your very existence to.. Americans put a man on the moon, can cure diseases, win wars in under 100 days and have the marketing prowess to change mankind's behavior on a global scale, but are told that we cannot convey the important message to the public of the subsequent consequences that result from how we treat and care for our companion animals - the very information that would grant us the solitude of compassion and honor.

Though we've been mislead, misguided and shaded from any truths in these matters by the large animal organizations for all these years we still need your involvement in this battle. We need everyone to possess the knowledge and put forth a unified effort. We are becoming more uneasy, less respectful and feel betrayed by your warring factors as well as the greed to keep yourselves funded as opposed to actually solving these problems. Because we all know that the way we treat our animals - those we share this blessed earth with, is a true reflection of the level of civilization we boast of, we will not give up, but push harder for the answers and efforts necessary to weed out the unnecessary and revere that what is dear to us, as it is the measure of our own liberties as well as pride.

Make no mistake though: It is true that we will bear any burden, pay any price, to see that these problems can find resolve and without the political wrangling that the larger animal protection organizations seem to embroil themselves in. So, if you should decide to scoff at this letter in the uncanny assumption that it means nothing, then I suggest you look around this nation. Remember it well. For in the near future, the animal protection movement will finally take the effort to see that changes be made. For if you are not a part of that, you will most assuredly not be a part of any high, medium or low level efforts to help the animals. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. We know now that the solution to pet overpopulation and even most animal abuse is more easily within reach, less expensive than holding onto you and will give us the pride we deserve once it is solved without your involvement. Here, and all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, justice for all - including the animals - justice is in fact being done. With or without you.

Randy N. Warner
President
21st Century C.A.R.E.S.

===============

Educational Benefits on so many levels.

I'm a 51 year old college educated male who's primary goal in life is to see humane education programs in each and every classroom in the nation through dedicated volunteer efforts. It is proven that consequence is not nearly as effective as conscience. With the appropriate instruction and guidance to young people, this type program provides young people as well as troubled and at risk teens, the moral structure necessary to give them higher academic achievement scores, improved attendance rates and they also tend to adopt a less violent conflict resolution technique.

My 501c3 organization proudly boasts the largest and most comprehensive website available for humane education materials (over 900 pages).

We have been graced with TONS of media coverage in People Magazine, LA Times, NY Post, Letterman show, Rosie, Arsenio Hall, Leeza Gibbons and much more. See these and the video documentary by George Lucas at http://www.21stcenturycares.org/history.htm

We also have 9 books on the topic available at http://www.21stcenturycares.org/products.htmalong with some t shirts, hats and sweatshirts with cool humane education logos on them.

In my opinion, the failure of society to fully value and protect our companion animals is its most extreme example of utter and abject failure. Kids today literally jump at the chance to try and solve a problem such as this - a problem that their parents and others just couldn't seem to 'deal with'!

A solid humane education program helps kids to use their "CREATIVITY, IMAGINATION, COMPASSION and INTELLECT. There are ideals which have to be broken through and overcome before we can address them; primarily the "attitudes toward animals. Students can speak OUT on behalf of all the innocent lives lost across this country each year and they actually rise to occasion when given the challenge of correcting the tragic situation their parents and others have gotten our society into.

Education
Why it is necessary and the benefits to healthier humans, as well as animals, saving on vet bills, fines and taxes while eliminating the need for killing due to sheer ignorance by the public.

"Why is humane education needed? We never needed it before…."
In nearly 20 years of listening to thousands of adults explain why they ‘had to’ dump their pets, it became so clear that most of them honestly didn’t have a clue as to how easy it would have been for them to have done the right thing in the first place. Instead, they end up assuming there are no options. They feel this is an acceptable solution.

But most horrifying is the fact they rarely feel true remorse. Many still think dog pounds will find their pets a new home. Many feel finding a good home for their pets is merely finding someone with a backyard and a smile promising to love it, with no background check or agreement at all. In as much as I’ve grown weary and disheartened with today’s adults,

The basis of the relationship between people and pets is attachment. Attachment is a firmly accepted component of human evolutionary behavior. Attachment is the behavior of the young. Its complimentary behavior in the adult is care-giving or nurturing.

Psychiatrists in the 1970s began studying the nature of the attachment between people and pets. They were quoted as saying: "Pets are less threatening and more controllable than human attachment figures. At the same time, the combined qualities of warmth, touch, non-threatening movement and sound produce a simple analogue of human attachment behavior. Animals bolster the pet owner's morale and remind him that he is, in fact, a special and unique individual."

So we must accept that the basis of pet ownership is not a quirky eccentricity but has a sound behavioral explanation. This information has been used extensively in a variety of pets-as-therapy programs around the world. Whether dealing with socially inept children, emotionally disturbed adolescents, adults recovering from severe illness or the elderly and alone, companion animals have played a significant role in reducing stress and increasing the feeling of self-worth.

In our everyday "normal" lives pets play an important role also. Despite the trend towards urban consolidation, more and more people tend to lead isolated lives. The number of single person households is increasing rapidly, as is the number of crimes against women and the elderly. The role of pets becomes increasing important in these situations.

Herein lies the dilemma. While there is probably a greater need for pet companionship than ever before, the changing urban landscape is creating an environment that makes pet ownership more difficult.

Urban consolidation decreased size of private open space (backyards) and increasing competition for public open space (parks) places enormous pressures on dog owners in particular. Similarly for the non-pet owner, closer proximity and increased contact with other peoples' pets seems inevitable.

Urban planning, education programs for pet owners and non-pet owners alike, and the development of realistic and enforceable animal control laws are the key to maintaining the balance between the needs of the majority of our community i.e. the pet owners, and the welfare and rights of others.

The benefits derived from pet ownership have been researched extensively. There is no doubt that a close relationship with companion animals is of benefit to the emotional and psychological development of children, provides much needed companionship and support to the elderly, assists in the recovery rate of patients suffering from serious illness and decreases the rate of minor illness, and may substantially reduce the risk of heart disease. Pets-as-therapy programs around the world have highlighted the benefits of assistance dogs, horse riding for sufferers of cerebral palsy and other disabilities, and the use of companion animals with mentally disturbed children and adolescents. With such strong support for the benefits of pets it could be suggested that pet ownership should in fact be actively encouraged by governments and health authorities, and it is not inconceivable that pets may be prescribed for the sick or disturbed in the future.


Evaluation of Solutions

EDUCATION                              

Children
Children must obtain a basic grounding in the care and management of companion animals. They must be taught to respect all animals and to realize they have a responsibility to care for pets. In schools this can be effectively achieved through the Pet Pep program which should be in every Australian primary school by the end of 1993. Younger children however must also be targeted from as early as possible through their parents and preschool classes.

Adults - pet owners
The expectations of pet ownership and the associated responsibilities have changed rapidly. In the past two decades it has become unacceptable to allow a dog to roam the streets or defecate in public areas. Pet owners often ignore these attitudinal changes in the community. Educational material aimed at pet owners must aim at raising the awareness of these changes and assist them in being able to meet the more demanding expectations of a far more vocal non-pet owning group.
This education process can occur through:
I. media
- advertising
- human interest/current affair programs
- regular stories in print.
ii. seminars
Highly successful community seminars can be held at local venues with speakers like the local vets and the animal control officer (ACO). Incentive to attend such seminars can be generated by pre-publicity, free gift or bonus eg decreased dog registration fee for attendance.
iii. information booths
This popular concept can access the general public in shopping centers, local festivals and other community activities. The booths must be approachable and staffed by trained personnel who can answer queries.
iv. videos
There are a number of pet education videos available for all age groups. Local libraries could stock these as could veterinary
surgeries and council offices.

The community
The status of pets in the community must be promoted. It should be unacceptable to denigrate the importance of the people/pet relationship or stipulate areas that are exempt to pet owners. The education of the community to accept pet ownership as an integral and important right of its members must be achieved in conjunction with raising the consciousness and concern of pet owners for others.

Recommendations

Companion animals must not be regarded as a luxury, but as an integral part of every household. The benefits and advantages of pet ownership to the community overall, as well as to individuals, are enormous.

Because companion animals are so important we must be supportive of responsible pet ownership and innovative in the ways we approach the problems encountered in urban animal management.

I stand firm in my belief that if they had knowledge of the resulting consequences of their actions, or been informed of just how simple and easy it is to do the right thing in the first place, almost all of them would have done the right thing. These ‘options’ not only save money, but they save lives. Ignorance and apathy, (the lack of understanding the entire picture) are undoubtedly the biggest part of the problems nowadays and are overwhelming in today’s adults. The good news is, both are easily correctable

I have used my experiences of rescuing abandoned and abused dogs for the past 18 years to show students 'cause and affect' and to teach them compassionate means of avoiding the unnecessary continuation of these deadly acts Since my mission is to do whatever possible to see some form of humane education program in our nation's schools, it is difficult to walk away from a meeting with me without feeling my undying passion to spread this universal message to the next generation. It is hoped that they will benefit from the love and compassion that all animals can offer us and stop the abuse and overpopulation.

The more people we can involve in and educate on these matters, the more that they will all understand the seriousness and magnitude of the atrocities being committed every day in this country and around the world. It can only be a good thing. It is proven that it does NOT take money to solve these problems! It takes the sharing of information and community involvement. Adult Americans are currently responsible for the sad legacy we leave to the younger generation in regards to the animals - their abuse, overpopulation and subsequent convenient and unnecessary euthanasia. So, it is only logical that if the general public is causing these problems, then we can't depend on THEM to teach their children how to correct the situation. They obviously don't know.

Nobody has a litter of puppies or kittens just so they can be abused or later put to sleep. Most of those directly involved simply do the things they do out of ignorance, over inflated ego and apathy. We adults simply never had an opportunity to be involved in a comprehensive or successful humane education program. We simply learned a lot of the things we did through talking to our family at the dinner table, etc. Now that our families are more pseudo-assembled than ever, the topic of how best to care for Spot and Muffy, is simply lost in the shuffle. These things simply need some explaining in order to correct them. What used to be very simple, still is. We just need to begin where we obviously left off - with the kids.

I've been given thousands of reasons why the 'owners' had to get rid of their beloved pets. "They no longer match the interior of my living room," or she gained too much weight and we don't want a fat dog, or it's not housebroken, it barks. All are the fault of the caregiver / guardian, or in this case the pet's 'owner'. In almost all cases, had the person or family adopting the pet had checked out the given breed's qualities or taken some time in properly caring for the pet, it would have become a wonderful addition to the family and it's lifestyle.

We provide information obtained from various national animal welfare groups and show proven means of avoiding he re-occurrences of these mistakes. They all provide good solid research with variety of solutions to all the big problems. We will discuss various ways in which they can become more active in their community by gaining knowledge and acting according to what is the best for all souls who surround them.

This program, and many others like it, could easily change the way most people today think about their pets as well as how they are cared for. Many people simply begin by adopting the wrong type pet for the family and lifestyle they have. People will spend more time researching a new automobile than looking into the type of living soul they wish to spend the next 15 years with. A large number of those will just as easily take a puppy over an adult dog because 'they want to train it to be like they want it to be" only to give up on it and take it to the pound.

Ignorantly, a lot of people seem to think that their pet will certainly find a good home. The reality is obviously quite different. Then there is the thought that only 'bad' dogs and cats are found at the pound; therefore they would rather not go there. In reality, the majority of the animals who are awaiting adoption at the local dog pound are only there due to an ignorant and impatient 'owner'. So, ignorance of the adults, in general will also be the main cause of these animals never having a fair shot at a second chance for life.

The most important focus of this program is to teach the younger generation that if they have a litter of puppies or kitties, then they immediately become the biggest problem we have in solving the situation of overpopulation. "But, I found good homes for my litter" is only an excuse for ignorance. If you are part of a company who makes widgets and you have an overstock of more than 8 million widgets that can't be sold and must be destroyed, the ONLY solution to preventing additional and costly losses is to stop manufacturing widgets.

When asked why so many normal, well-educated and loving families had a litter of puppies or kittens, two responses kept coming up. "Oh, we PLAN to have our pets spayed or neutered, but we wanted to have a couple litters first." In other words, they just missed the whole point of the spay and neuter campaign. The second one is "we just wanted to show the children the miracle of birth" Then the only fair thing to do in this situation is to take them to the local dog pound to volunteer for a couple days as well. After all, you've just become one of the biggest contributing factors to the problems we see at our animal facilities!!

Overcrowding. BACKYARD BREEDERS are not educated, they are not providing quality dogs and cats and they DON'T have you or your new pet's best interest at hand. See the page marked "Backyard Breeders".

One thing that is very upsetting is when the school administrators feel this is NOT a necessary or appropriate educational program for their students. It is very disheartening to hear a superintendent or principal downplay these programs that affect each and every student and faculty member in their reach. Excuses like "All of our students already have dogs or cats" to "we don't feel that we need an outsider into our schools to tell us we need to learn about how to be responsible for our pets and their needs'. We are aware that most of their students have or will have pets of their own. We just don't particularly wish for them to simply follow in the footsteps of those adults or caregivers they learn live with. After all, it's today's adults - all of us, to a certain extent - who are creating this problem.

THE EDUCATION PROGRAM OUR MAIN GOAL IS TO PREVENT THE UNNECESSARY KILLING OF INNOCENT, ADOPTABLE PETS DUE TO IGNORANCE AND IRRESPONSIBILITY BY HUMANs What follows is an outline or an abbreviated version of the program that usually lasts about 45 minutes or more, depending on questions coming from the students and adults in attendance The discussion involving the possible formation of their local humane education club or helping them to launch a project to help their community would be following this short program and could last an hour or more.

. This could take place at another time and place with an adult advisor, so as not to prevent the students from missing additional class time.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE STUDENTS:
1. The benefits of community involvement. Do not stand idly by and allow abuse, neglect or other ignorance by humans. Help the community to learn to better through information sharing.
2. The need for everyone with a pet to have some form of access to proper training and guidance.
3. The importance of becoming the 'guardian' of the proper pet for you and your family and the lifestyle you live.
4. The absolute evils of having a litter of puppies or kittens along with the importance of timely spaying and neutering of said pet.
5. The importance of providing the appropriate needs for your pet, not necessarily what your ego decides is best for them.
6. How everyone can become involved on an individual basis by helping senior citizens and low income families by providing occasional vet trips or a few bags of dog food to prevent their pets from being relinquished to the animal facility unnecessarily.
7. The benefits of beginning with an adult dog from the dog pound as opposed to 'assuming' that they have the knowledge or understanding of how to properly train a new young puppy to meet their needs. (Having my five dogs in the classroom that are obviously very lovable and worthwhile, helps bring this point home with some foundation) Each one was an adult from the pound when I adopted him or her. The fact that one has kept a puppy, only means they were lucky, not necessarily a skilled or knowledgeable trainer. An adult dog from the pound is already spayed and neutered, vaccinated; past it's digging and chewing stage and will respond with love and affection as it has just come from a family who obviously didn't care.
8. The proven benefits for humans as well as their pets of providing 'indoor' sleeping arrangements for their pets. Reduced allergies for children, improved allergenic reactions for adults who already have them, as well as a longer and healthier life for the pets as well. After all, if a dog is to protect its most important family members, it can't do so from the back yard if it has no access to the inside areas. (Reference: Press article by Justin Pritchard in San Francisco)

9. A 'guard dog' is one who has been properly trained for the job and understands its boundaries. It is NOT a dog someone throws into the back yard with no guidance or training. The latter will only prove to annoy your neighbors and cause your family undue troubles with barking, biting or destruction of property.
10. Why the perfect family should consider a second compatible dog or cat as a companion for the first one. (Too many deserving and loving animals will die if not, and dogs and cats are social animals and enjoy the company of other compatible dogs and cats) They play with and train each other and offer much needed exercise for each other.
11. The absolute necessity for having proper identification on your pet at ALL TIMES. (I.e. 4th of July, New Years Eve, tornadoes, earthquakes and various events that frighten your pet to where they will escape out of fear.)
12. To discuss the proven links between animal abuse and future criminal activity as adults. (Reference Houston Chronicle Story Nov 29, 2000 by Jo Ann Zuiga: "Animal Abuse May Be Warning Sign)
13. IF you are forced to part with your beloved pet, remember to never take it to the local pound, but to a local rescue org. and NEVER place a "FREE TO GOOD HOME" ad in the paper. The 'whys' and the options. Rethink your decision to relinquish the pet. It has already given everything it has to try and please you and would certainly give it's life to protect you if need be. Don't dump it off for silly self-centered reasons, which could be rectified through some training tips or a few sacrifices on your part.

 
SUGGESTED PROJECTS FOR THOSE INTERESTED
1. To hopefully prepare a program in which the members will visit other schools in and around the local area to share this information and hopefully help others to form these humane education clubs in their schools as well.
2. The first several meetings of this group can be enhanced through additional speakers from their local humane organizations, vets, dog trainers and animal control officers who will share their local problems with the students.
3. Offers to assist senior citizens and low income families with donated food and vet visits as well as training tips to improve the quality of the pets' lives as well as their own.
4. How to convince the public to obtain appropriate identification for all pets either through a simple engraved tag on the collar or micro-chipping.
5. To tackle the project of holding an OFF SITE adoption program for those pets who would otherwise face certain death at the local facility. After all, the public rarely goes to the pound, as it is a very sad and depressing place. They will, however attend an event at a local city park where each animal is leashed and accompanied by a volunteer with a card containing the autobiography of that given pet.
6. Try to tackle a project such as opening a local dog park where the dogs and their guardians come to socialize, run and play with each other in a securely fenced area.
7. Obtaining much needed coverage in their school newspaper to help other students to learn proper care-giving procedures and responsibilities for their pets. Not to mention the benefits to their org. as well as the local community of having nice coverage within their local papers and t. v. news.
8. Letter writing campaigns, neighborhood 'reach' programs and other means of truly helping the local population as well as local government officials to provide improved care for their pets.

9. The need to speak out and get involved in issues that surround your family and those you care about. To take action and vote on issues and for candidates who strongly support and stand by ideals that help your local area to grow and improve the quality of life for all souls who reside there. Do not sit idly by while a neighbor neglects or abuses an animal by tying it up to a post or allowing it to go without food or water. Do not sit idly by while an important initiative gets defeated in your local elections.

IF YOU OR SOMEONE YOU KNOW, THINKS THEY WOULD LIKE TO GO TO SCHOOLS AND VOLUNTEER SOME TIME AND INFORMATION IN AN ATTEMPT TO HELP THE NEXT GENERATION BECOME MORE INFORMED AND COMPASSIONATE, PLEASE EMAIL OR CALL 21ST CENTURY CARES. YOU WILL BE PROVIDED WITH INFORMATION ON HOW TO APPROACH THE SCHOOLS, MATERIALS FOR VARIOUS GRADE LEVELS, PROJECT IDEAS AND MORE.

A simple, yet unified message to the public is the missing ingredient.  Many people still are unaware of the concept surrounding humane education and have little understanding of the benefits it would bring with it. Two years ago, I had an idea, with the participants of the coalition I had recently formed, to make an attempt at introducing the concept of humane education in the  schools by asking every animal protection organization to write a simple letter. Herein is the information that caused such an uproar:

I was more than a little amazed when the representative of Tony LaRussa's Animal Rescue Foundation, along with the Director of the ASPCA in New York, as well as Grey2k all insisted that the letter be re worded.   I assured them that the remaining portion of the letter could say anything that they pleased and that would fit the wording of their organization, but that the simplicity of the letter was the key to seeing that everyone would be saying the same thing while having the opportunity to work together and still confirm the beliefs of their individual messages.  Each one became angrier and angrier until they, along with several thousand other groups decided against it all together. 

The humane education director at Best Friends was so threatened by the fact that the idea was not going to be attributed to her organization, she began a smear campaign to many other smaller groups which look to them for guidance.

The end result was still impressive, as we were able to continue with the project and included 874 non profit organizations from all 50 states who simply mailed us their simple letter supporting humane education in the nation's schools.  Not unlike the one shown above in the letter introducing the project initially.   That was a sad end result to such a minor and simple effort which could have truly made a statement had each and every one of them taken two minutes and joined in with the unified message.

Now, here we are all the way to the year 2005.

This is now how I spend my time. Working for no pay, but feeling like I'm literally changing the whole world for the better. It's an incredible feeling, I'll tell you.

70 children in a middle school auditorium in Sante Fe, New Mexico or possibly Monterey, California, erupt in happy squeals as I lead five dogs into the classroom. All jerking tails and wiggling bodies, these furry educational aids – or aides, if you will – are just as thrilled to see the students, as the students are to see them.
Amid the excited chatter, I hold up my hand for silence.

If you’ll give me 15 minutes to talk,” I tell the rapt audience, “I’ll give you five minutes to pet the dogs.” The children quickly grow still. I immediately launch into my favorite subject – homeless pets and how to help prevent them.
However, as the minutes tick by, these students begin to squirm, reach out to pet one of the dogs and whisper. Finally, sensing they can’t stand another minute away from his furry troupe, I cave in and invite the children forward. In a split second, they besiege the dogs in a flutter of petting, scratching hands. The canines thump their legs in ecstasy. ( 2 deaf Dalmatians, one pit bull, one coyote/dingo and a beagle/basset mix)
I must admit, it always ends up going in reverse – I talk for five minutes, and the kids get 15 minutes with the dogs, but it’s worth it.

At the end of the 45 minutes, everyone can see the eyes lighting up with questions, ideas, thoughts of 'why'. They really 'get it'.
I have but one goal for the rest of my life. That is to change the status quo by helping to raise a kinder, gentler next generation. I plan to continue my travels through 40 states - over 12,000 miles - with my five dogs as navigators in the next two years, charging NO fees to groups I address.

I let it all out. I don't cover up the truth with sweet words or phrases that make a horrific situation sound more gentle and less important. It’s not a shelter, but a dog pound. We don’t ‘euithanise’ and ‘put to sleep’ we kill these animals - needlessly.
The six of is will appear before more than 1 million youth in schools across the United States, urging students everywhere to form Humane Education Clubs in their schools.

In my opinion, the failure of society to fully value and protect our companion animals is its most extreme example of utter and abject failure. Kids today literally jump at the chance to try and solve a problem such as this - a problem that their parents and others just couldn't seem to 'deal with'!

Humane Education clubs are already forming at schools nationwide. The 8 western states that we have visited with this program are already experiencing a profound impact on the lives of the animals. These students involve and immerse themselves in finding new creative ways to become the new frontier of the animal welfare movement.
Studies show that by offering humane education to our youth, they develop a more sophisticated and solid moral structure and they will come to enjoy education more, resulting in higher attendance, more participation in the field of science, lower drop-out rates, improved achievement scores and the adoption of a less violent conflict resolution technique.

As the founder and president of 21st Century Animal Resource & Education Services, Inc. as well as an outspoken advocate of education and enlightenment on animal protection issues, I firmly believe we have failed as a society when it comes to how we view our companion animals. We still have those self-serving, uninformed folks who have litters of puppies and kittens, convincing themselves that they aren't part of the problem, It's always those who refuse to play by the rules, that assures that their team will loose the game. But in this game, the animals die from these stubborn humans.

This program helps kids to use their "CREATIVITY, IMAGINATION, COMPASSION and INTELLECT. There are ideals which have to be broken through and overcome before we can address them; primarily the "attitudes toward animals. Students can speak OUT on behalf of all the innocent lives lost across this country each year and they actually rise to occasion when given the challenge of correcting the tragic situation their parents and others have gotten our society into.

We Americans pay billions of dollars in taxes to reduce the volume of unwanted animals, then turn around and donate another Billion dollars for animal welfare and animal rights and to local and area rescuers. But, shelters and pounds are still overwhelmed by the thousands of lonely, homeless pets who come in every day because of a simple problem: there are many more folks who wish to have litters and that is what this is all about.

It's important that we share the valid and proven ways to solve these problems with those who will govern our nation in the future. We are responsible for their learning and have an obligation to show them it's our problem - its' up to all of us to make the correct decisions.

We are so far behind other countries in this battle. In order to become a the "no-kill’ society that many other industrialized nations of the world are presently finding success with, we MUST think first in terms of ‘no excessive birth. Humane Education will create a world where each child vows to spay or neuter their own pets, give their pets what’s best for the pet and, not just what the human ‘wants’ them to have,…and, of course to educate others to do the same.” The informed person will always surpass those who ‘only assume’ and just continue on ‘because we’ve always done it this way.”

As seen in this article from Animal News Center, education sometimes needs to be 'In Your Face' in order to wake up a slumbering giant of ignorance.
HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT AN 'IN YOUR FACE' CAMPAIGN CAN DO IF DONE CORRECTLY. THESE PEOPLE ACTUALLY SAID THEY WERE UNAWARE OF THESE PETS BEING KILLED UNTIL THIS SERIES OF EVENTS. SOMETIMES YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO MAKE THEM SEE WITH THEIR OWN EYES. This is not ‘scare tactics’, exaggerated figures or limited affects type journalism, but simple facts that do have an impact on each and every citizen.


Dog Euthanization to be Shown LIVE on Television
by Ellen Murray

This should be a mandatory topic for all communities to feature at least once a year.
Video footage of a dog being euthanized at the Guilford County Animal Shelter (GCAS) in Durham, North Carolina will be shown on Saturday during a public access television program produced by the county sheriff. The same footage was featured on a major network news program several years ago and the effects were immediately noticeable. It is a powerful tool to make those who ‘think’ they understand what goes on with the overpopulation, actually face the truth – to make them wake up quickly.
B.J. Barnes said he intends to show the footage in order to let people know what happens to the thousands of area animals that are not adopted.
The sheriff's weekly program, which is broadcast by WGHP on channel 8, begins at 7 PM.
WGHP also airs a weekly segment featuring one of the animals available for adoption at the GCAS.
The sheriff said that after he showed the footage on local network primetime program five years ago, the initial reaction was outrage as people lined up at the county facility to adopt the dogs and cats and show their distain for what they assumed was a callous and uncaring sheriff, they learned quickly that these had been going on long before his arrival and that he only showed this to ‘shock’ the residents into a reality check. It must have worked as well here in North Carolina as this ‘In Your Face’ style campaign has also worked in various other communities over the past 10 years. Within 6 months of the first showing in 1996, ads for litters in the papers were greatly reduced, adoptions increased and the number of people surrendering animals went down substantially.

© 2002 Animal News Center, Inc.

Please be sure to provide proper credit to Animal News Center when publishing the article. Once you have published it, please either send the URL at which the piece may found to webmaster@anc.org or mail a copy of the article to Animal News Center, Suite 6E, 153 East 57th Street, New York, NY 10022.


Local and area Government funded efforts could also learn:

Take this example of North Carolina's efforts to improve. In most North Carolina communities, animal welfare is a concept rooted in 19th century practices and programs. It goes like this: Let them breed, scoop up the strays, cage them in foul, unhealthy kennels, then kill them. Nearly a quarter of a million North Carolina dogs and cats met that fate last year. This is a true reflection of any given community and/or state across the nation.

Ironically, the state has offered help for low-cost spaying and neutering programs for years. Most communities (including this one) ignored it. Just as they ignore the foundation grants out there that would help cut down on the unwanted animal population. Easier to rely on the old scoop 'em, cage 'em, kill 'em plan.

After a winter of hearings, a House study committee has proposed some advances into the 21st century, key among them a well-financed spay-neuter program. The money would come from a small tax on animal food. The plan would add 10 cents to a 20-pound bag of dry food and 2 cents to every can. In my household, with two largish dogs and one slightly plump cat, that might amount to an extra buck a month, at most.

Those pennies would add up to an $8 million-a-year fund that would help animal shelters meet the new law's requirement that dogs and cats released from shelters must first be sterilized.

That is a far better answer to our pet overpopulation than the present system, which either kills the extras or warehouses them in no-kill shelters that are hardly the optimum life for what we lovingly call our "companion animals."

Here is the problem that our animal gurus have yet to face and handle. Once a problem is labeled and blame placed, many people feel their work is completed. The belief that the problem is caused by the blamed party is continually reaffirmed with rhetoric. Attention is now focused on a simple, one-step solution: changing the behavior of the blamed party. The development of alternative approaches is ignored. But most problems are not amenable to simple, one-step solutions.

If the U.S. auto industry had succeeded in placing the blame for its woes squarely enough on Japanese imports to obtain a trade embargo, I suspect I would now be driving a piece of crap from G.M. that cost me $50,000. Instead, the U.S. auto industry gradually recognized that the problems it faced were multifaceted, complex, and influenced by the larger context of economics. Reviving sales of U.S.-made cars required responses to many issues, not just one, among them high interest rates, the strength of the dollar, government regulation, poor labor/management relations, outmoded technology, lack of touch with consumer needs, a centralized decision process, and awkward work design.

Much as the auto industry initially focused upon simply placing blame, I feel many humane organizations have focused too intently upon purebred breeding per se as the cause of pet overpopulation, and consequently have promoted legislative action to halt breeding before fully understanding which animals are surplus, where they come from, and what approaches are most likely to effectively reach the people responsible for their existence.

Our movement's purpose is affirming the sanctity of life and Earth, and in many years of assisting non-profit organizations, we have yet to encounter a group that has a comprehensive performance assessment program to ensure that stringent quality standards are met.

Nothing illustrates this more vividly than the historical record of the oldest and largest segment of our movement -the animal shelter community. We single them out for many reasons, not the least being that in most smaller cities and counties throughout the country, they represent the only voice for other beings, a voice that is often inaudible. The conclusions drawn from the review of shelters are distressing, but the lessons to be derived apply equally to all of us.

Much of what occurs in shelters is so bizarre that it almost defies comprehension, much less vivid description. Let's begin with the statistical nightmare one finds when examining shelters. Although shelters have existed in this country for well over a century, there is simply no reliable statistical base from which even the most basic information can be derived. One does not have to be an applied statistician to understand the gravity of not having accurate information, for without the existence of reliable historical and contemporary data, it's literally impossible to draw any conclusions that would be able to support any real findings. Surrounded by the deaths of millions of precious beings, this industry has demonstrated neither the concern nor competency to even validate the information upon which it bases life and death decisions.

How is it possible that this multi-billion dollar industry never formed an effective national association, funded and administered by shelter members, to properly gather and validate critical information? Nor has the shelter community established a coordinated national effort to protect the interests of the companion animals they profess to serve.

Compounding this statistical farce, the shelter community, has to undertake a reasonably accurate count of how many shelters exist or even explicitly define what constitutes a shelter. Sadly, due to this limitation, the best a recent national survey could do was estimate a range of between 3,000-5,000 shelters. Using the mean figure, this indicates that much of widely utilized national shelter statistics carry an astounding 25 percent margin of error-and that assumes accurate sampling and reporting!

Given the unreliability of national population and shelter statistics, some shelters have taken local surveys to compile their own data. animal protection advocates greatly applauds their initiative, but we have spent wakeful nights reviewing surveys that illustrate good intentions but sorrowful execution. Instead of seeking the pro bono assistance of qualified market research analysts, shelters often develop surveys that are so flawed in construction and sampling methods as to be all but worthless.

It's evident that the shelter community either doesn't know enough or care enough to meet even the most marginal professional standards. We intend no disrespect, but from the perspective of the vulnerable shelter animals, one is sadly reminded of the old adage: I can take care of my adversaries, but God save me from my friends.

The following is my version of a 'lesson plan' to be used by anyone passionate about changing the way in which our society truly views and respects the animals.

OBJECTIVE: This information will clearly teach the students that there are so many aspects to providing pets with the proper thoughts, care and treatment. It outlines all major points of why so many pets are relinquished or lost each year as well as proving that this can be STOPPED if only people have the correct information to work from. Throughout this program, it will also instill within the students, that compassion and understanding for 'other than themselves' is critical in thinking and acting throughout life and provides many benefits towards character development. See IMPORTANCE OF HUMANE EDUCATION

TIME: 3-4 class periods per school year (average class period 45 min each)

MATERIALS NEEDED: Are listed throughout this outline. A Complete listing of materials that are applicable are listed at HUMANE EDUCATION page.

Everyone must recognize that I am not a teacher by trade. I've been asked for a Lesson Plan by many and I didn't even know what that was for the longest time. The reason I am so comfortable and do such a good job with students, regardless of age, is that I know I'm sharing information with them that they have not heard before and that will change their lives.

Humane Education, as it is known to be, is the whole idea of environment, compassion for all animals and so forth. I am only dealing with responsibility and education regarding our companion animals. For those who provide me with an audience, I believe they will be more likely to look into some form of further humane education later on. It's my opinion, but I feel that trying to discuss more angles or topics involved, would dilute the message and the students would not retain the info we hope regarding the animals. The entire package is for those who have an actual curriculum where time allows this.

You can visit any grade level you choose. I never go to those below 5th grade as I don't feel they can quite grasp what they should in order to follow the program. You must realize that the high school students are sometimes more difficult to speak to, but they are also the ones who will be out on their own in 1-3 years and NEED to hear this at least once before they begin to make the same mistakes so many others have before them. So, do everything possible to see that the higher grades are included in your efforts. (not unlike drunk driving and criminal activities, the majority of abuse and neglect cases are from males ages 18 - 30)

The average class period is approximately 45 minutes. Therefore, that is likely the time you will be allotted. Of course, you can always take advantage of additional time with questions and answers. Even with the 45 minutes, there are interruptions and the delay in starting by at least 5 min also. I usually begin with some humor or something funny or silly to get their attention. I 'apologize' for misleading the students with my appearance, but contrary to rumors, I am not Brittany Spears' double. (I'm 50, short, somewhat weighty, practically bald) and that gets a chuckle from any age group.

To let the older students know that I am here to give them information and I expect them to pay attention, I usually begin by asking 'How many of you feel that the info I'm about to give you is something you already know? You already know all there is to know about how to keep a pet." You'll have a couple smarties that will raise their hands. I have some chairs available and ask them to come up front. I place the chairs right where I plan to stand and tell them, 'if you know all there is to know, then I'm going to ask you to sit here to keep me honest and correct me when I make mistakes, OK?

Personally, I wouldn't dream of visiting a school or group meeting for this, without having a rescue animal that is safe with everyone, to have a real time visual they can touch and experience during my speaking. It brings the presentation's message to a whole different and meaningful level. Of the 70+ schools I've visited in 8 western states, I believe all but two made it very clear they would not allow any dogs. I took them along anyway, since the van was our daytime home and without fail, they were welcomed into each and every school and became instant celebrities.

It helps that I look confident and do nothing to bring attention to the dogs - they bring enough to themselves by being so diversified in size, shape and color, plus being well behaved ladies and gentlemen. Mine don't bark, won't leave my site, don't jump, but absolutely can hardly contain their excitement - anticipating all those hands that want to pet them. See the article from Chicagoland Tails and Monterey, CA newspaper.

I will still only provide suggestions and outlines for those who wish to go into the schools. I could give you a 'word for word presentation, but, you would have to re work it to be comfortable with the way you naturally speak, plus, what I speak of in my presentations may not be applicable or relevant in your specific community.

OK. I hope you have a list of the pages from my "I CAN HELP" page. I feel strongly that anyone visiting a school or youth group should read all the pages in the first category listing. It is 36 pages of a wide variety of things you can and should discuss with the audience. As I say in my intro to that page, we don't use terms like 'shelters' or euthanasia and putting to sleep.

Those are inappropriate for such a horrific and neglectful situation that is occurring. You will be surprised at the number of people - even adults - who are unaware of the statistics and the irresponsibility of humans with their pets. To soften the horror to make it sound nicer is simply doing one thing: it makes the audience see that it's not nearly as bad as it really is. They go to dog pounds or county facilities and there, they are killed. Some with injections, some with the gas chamber, and even some with bullets from high school boys who are making extra money.

The only page that I use in its' entirety is  the Spay and Neuter Story for Kids. This is how I begin every presentation. You'll see that it starts out very blunt, but immediately changes to how they can do their part to stop this by listening and then making different decisions than previous generations have made. They will do that with knowledge of the facts. They may or may not do this with a softened and politically correct means of using the more accepted words. I just don't see it.

Some other pages that are 'musts' in their content, are 'Backyard Breeders' 'I died today" the 'Real World' "In or Out' and 'Your Next Pet" If you could read these pages enough times to be familiar with their content, you could present a decent program in your own words. After doing rescue for so many years, the 'pregnancy' and 'allergies' pages have strong substantial impacts with those I speak to. It is amazing to realize the number of animals which are relinquished due to the woman's first pregnancy or their unjust fears and incorrect assumptions of allergies.

There is no doubt, it will seem overwhelming and frightening at first. But anyone who has the sense and compassion to recognize the importance of humane education, certainly has the information through their experiences to speak for 45 minutes. MAKE SURE YOU TAKE A WRITTEN LIST OF TOPICS. keep them with you and don't be afraid to look at them. I always do. My outline is this:

1. The absolute evils of having a litter of puppies or kittens along with the importance to the health of the pets to provide spaying and neutering at a young age. See Spay and Neuter Story for Kids.
2. The need for everyone with a pet to have some form of access to proper training and guidance. It's very clear that most people assume they have the talent to train a dog, but the likelihood is that they were just lucky. Most likely is that they won't take the appropriate time to do what is necessary to bring the puppy to the level of behavior they wish to have and will end up getting rid of the dog unfortunately.
3. The importance of becoming the 'guardian' of the proper pet for you and your family and the lifestyle you live. Definition of 'owner': One who has possession of an object, thing or piece of real estate. Definition of 'guardian' One who adopts a child or pet for the sole purpose of providing necessary care, compassion, guidance, love, exercise, food, water and shelter for a safe healthy existence.
4. The benefits of community involvement. Do not stand idly by and allow abuse, neglect or other ignorance by humans. Help the community to learn to better through information sharing.' If you don't tell them, who will?" Many ideas can be located here.
5. The importance of providing the appropriate needs for your pet, not necessarily what your ego decides is best for them. Dogs tied to a post, tethered to a fence, kept in a small pen, etc. That is what the human wants for them and is not at all healthy for the pet.
6. How everyone can become involved on an individual basis by helping senior citizens and low income families by providing occasional vet trips or a few bags of dog food to prevent their pets from being relinquished to the animal facility unnecessarily.
7. The benefits of beginning with an adult dog from the dog pound as opposed to 'assuming' that they have the knowledge or understanding of how to properly train a new young puppy to meet their needs. (Having my five dogs in the classroom that are obviously very lovable and worthwhile, helps bring this point home with some foundation) Each one was an adult from the pound when I adopted him or her. The fact that one has kept a puppy, only means they were lucky, not necessarily a skilled or knowledgeable trainer. An adult dog from the pound is already spayed and neutered, vaccinated; past it's digging and chewing stage and will respond with love and affection as it has just come from a family who obviously didn't care. See 'Your Next Pet' for full argument.
8. The proven benefits for humans as well as their pets of providing 'indoor' sleeping arrangements for their pets. Reduced allergies for children, improved allergenic reactions for adults who already have them, as well as a longer and healthier life for the pets as well. After all, if a dog is to protect its most important family members, it can't do so from the back yard if it has no access to the inside areas. (Reference: Press article by Justin Pritchard in San Francisco) See 'Inside or Outside' pets for full story.
9. A 'guard dog' is one who has been properly trained for the job and understands its boundaries. It is NOT a dog someone throws into the back yard with no guidance or training. The latter will only prove to annoy your neighbors and cause your family undue troubles with barking, biting or destruction of property. This is a lazy mans' way of making excuses for not providing the pet with the proper care, socialization and compassion required by all pets.
10. Why the perfect family should consider a second compatible dog or cat as a companion for the first one. (Too many deserving and loving animals will die if not, and dogs and cats are social animals and enjoy the company of other compatible dogs and cats) They play with and train each other and offer much needed exercise for each other.
11. The absolute necessity for having proper identification on your pet at ALL TIMES. (I.e. 4th of July, New Years Eve, tornadoes, earthquakes and various events that frighten your pet to where they will escape out of fear.)
12. To discuss the proven links between animal abuse and future criminal activity as adults. (Reference Houston Chronicle Story Nov 29, 2000 by Jo Ann Zuiga: "Animal Abuse May Be Warning Sign) Also see this page.
13. IF you are forced to part with your beloved pet, remember to never take it to the local pound, but to a local rescue org. and NEVER place a "FREE TO GOOD HOME" ad in the paper. The 'whys' and the options. Rethink your decision to relinquish the pet. It has already given everything it has to try and please you and would certainly give it's life to protect you if need be. Don't dump it off for silly self-centered reasons, which could be rectified through some training tips or a few sacrifices on your part.
14. Make sure you select the appropriate pet for your family's lifestyle. If you live in a large high rise, you don't want a dog that needs to run 20 miles a day (Dalmatian) If you are less active family or one who is always on the run, you don't want to get a highly active dog. However, a Great Dane, as well as a German shepherd are good dogs for apartment living as they do not require the high energy exercise nor the volume of walks that many others do. Smaller dogs are usually NOT best for condo or apt living due to their excessive barking that disturbs the neighbors.

SUGGESTED PROJECTS FOR THOSE INTERESTED
1. To hopefully prepare a program in which the members will visit other schools in and around the local area to share this information and hopefully help others to form these humane
education clubs in their schools as well. ***This helps the students with business planning, public speaking, speech preparations and much more. See Forming clubs
2. The first several meetings of this group can be enhanced through additional speakers from their local humane organizations, vets, dog trainers and animal control officers who will share their local problems with the students.
3. Offers to assist senior citizens and low income families with donated food and vet visits as well as training tips to improve the quality of the pets' lives as well as their own. Also see this.
4. How to convince the public to obtain appropriate identification for all pets either through a simple engraved tag on the collar or micro-chipping. ***The excuse for not having proper I.D. is that their pets never leave their home. On the fifth of July for example, pounds and other animal control facilities are flooded with pets with no I.D. from fear of the fireworks the previous night. Nearly 150,000 are killed just due to this one annual event. So, if they had ID or had been placed inside the home as they should, this would not occur.
5. To tackle the project of holding an OFF SITE adoption program for those pets who would otherwise face certain death at the local facility. After all, the public rarely goes to the pound, as it is a very sad and depressing place. They will, however attend an event at a local city park where each animal is leashed and accompanied by a volunteer with a card containing the autobiography of that given pet. *** People do NOT want to go to the dog pound or county facility due to it's gruesome smells, sights, sounds, etc. This allows people to experience these dogs in a happy, playful atmosphere of adoptability.  For each volunteer, there is one dog on a leash. That volunteer has a 3X5 card with all the details of said pet and will allow prospective adopting families to walk the dog and get to know it. This all takes place with the volunteer right at their side at all times and inside an enclosed, fenced area.
6. Try to tackle a project such as opening a local dog park where the dogs and their guardians come to socialize, run and play with each other in a securely fenced area or help adopt some older 'un adoptable' dogs to senior citizens who live alone - a win win situation. *** Creative thinking is the true success story in all this.
7. Obtaining much needed coverage in their school newspaper to help other students to learn proper care-giving procedures and responsibilities for their pets. Not to mention the benefits to their org. as well as the local community of having nice coverage within their local papers and TV. news. *** This will help them see how networking, publicity and the sharing of knowledge can truly make the difference in this tragedy that is really so very easy to stop.
8. The need to speak out and get involved in issues that surround your family and those you care about. To take action and vote on issues and for candidates who strongly support and stand by ideals that help your local area to grow and improve the quality of life for all souls who reside there. Do not sit idly by while a neighbor neglects or abuses an animal by tying it up to a post or allowing it to go without food or water. Do not sit idly by while an important initiative gets defeated in your local elections. ***This will assist students to understand their government. They will learn how their local government works, ways to lobby their government, and increase awareness and appreciation for how the system works in which they live.
9. Letter writing campaigns, neighborhood 'reach' programs and other means of truly helping the local population as well as local government officials to provide improved care for their pets. ****This will help students' writing abilities, vocabulary, English skills, and grammar.

I would strongly advise that you take along a half dozen additional printed pages i.e. Jim Willis' written pieces. I have four of them on my site. "How Could You?", ''True Story" and "Free Kittenz" are my two favorites. Then some additional pages that you will leave with the teacher. Hopefully at a later date, in an effort to re mind them of all they learned today, they will either discuss one of these - each at different times, or do an essay on them, etc. You really don't' want to just leave and not have them discuss this topic again or they will not retain the information provided. Remember, the compassion and understanding they will learn from this program can and will change the world in which we live.

There is no doubt that education in one form or another is absolutely the ONLY means of our society ever seeing resolve to these problems.

=====================

THE VERY FINAL STATEMENTS:

I am convinced that we can make the necessary changes to police our industry and to be acutely aware of what others do as well.  I am also certain that, once more people recognize the need for change, that the changes will come easily and quickly.  The difficulty is for people to realize that I'm not just a nay sayer or trouble maker, but one who truly wants to see some forward movement and to solve some of the 'simple' problems that we face.  But, there are still things we need to accomplish and problems to tackle before we can begin a good, strong march towards our mutual goals.   These final pages will review some of them.

The crucial historical process for humane leaders was moving from compassionate oversight of governmental agencies to directly operating the majority of kill shelters. Motivated by the best of intentions, they sought to improve conditions and provide gentler ends to tragic lives by assuming the traditional animal control functions. They didn't foresee the damaging long-term effects of devoting most of their energy to collection, processing, and killing, leaving sparse resources for bold preventive measures; nor did they realize the devastating consequences of the mixed-message they were sending to society about the value of non-human life; and, most significant to this analysis, they couldn't have known what they were doing to themselves — and to all who followed them in subsequent years.

It is often stated that the public is indifferent to this tragedy, but that is precisely what was said about drunk driving, cigarette smoking, and a myriad of other social issues before intense and unremitting pressure was brought to bear. People are initially unresponsive to most issues that fail to touch them personally, not simply because they lack adequate information, but because they either disagree with the position stated or just don't care. It is our responsibility to make them care. We have reached the public with "cute and cuddly" spay/ neuter messages for decades, but, without the necessary stigma to fundamentally alter entrenched behavior patterns. With no price to pay in terms of social censure, people continue having litters of animals with little regard for the devastating consequences. We must sharply raise the price, stigmatizing irresponsibility to such a degree that social condemnation is its constant companion.
====================

Humane Religion and the failure of today's organized religion to provide the occasional sermon that brings these tragic situations to light. After all, when the community experiences a rash of rapes or murders, the clergy are quick to include that into their sermons. So why is it that in every community as well as all congregations, there are those who, simply out of ignorance or lack of compassion, are failing to provide the necessary care and treatment of their very own companion animals - many resulting in unnecessary deaths, would they fail to include this in one way or another.

Humane Education, at its roots, has benefits that are felt far and wide in improved behavior of students, increased attendance, much more awareness of others, a noticeably raised level of achievement scores, more respectful nature of addressing adults and others around them and gaining a less violent resolution technique when challenged - not to mention the obvious - the lives that are spared and provided with the proper treatment that will extend their lives in a healthier, happier way.

So, if the above reasons do not spur the preachers and priests on to a more compassionate style of ministries or simple common sense isn't enough for the local or national ministries to take notice and begin giving more appropriate sermons to their listeners, maybe some of the following articles can convince them to give a humane style sermon at least once a year. If their followers are truly respectful of God and his teachings, they will learn how to improve their pets existence as well - giving the pets a noticeably improved chance of living out a healthy life in a manner pleasing the man above.

It is patently absurd and maddening to partake in religious services and witness this
disgraceful neglect and ironic distortion of the base fundamental taught in virtually
all major religions, the Golden Rule. Surely if there is a blueprint for human behavior
whether you're religious or irreligious, it's the Golden Rule! "Do Unto Others as You
Would Have Them Do Unto You!" A child could see that this applies a thousand-fold to innocent, defenseless animals!

Perhaps too, the major religions should consider the words of Socrates, who, although an atheist, surpassed hypocrisy with his dictum: "There is but one good, knowledge; there is but one evil, ignorance." The more you consider that, the more profoundly it affects you.

"I looked at all the caged animals in the shelter....the castoffs of human society. I saw in their eyes love and hope, fear and dread, sadness and betrayal. And I was angry. "God" I said, 'this is terrible! Why don't you do something?" God was silent for a moment and then He spoke softly. "I have done something'' He replied. "I created you. "
By Jim Willis

=====================

Industry Failure
Nothing illustrates this more vividly than the historical record of the oldest and largest segment of our movement -the animal shelter community. We single them out for many reasons, not the least being that in most smaller cities and counties throughout the country, they represent the only voice for other beings, a voice that is often inaudible.

Today's shelter community is seen a slumbering giant, not in a derisive sense, but to accurately portray the present state of this "industry." Much of what occurs in shelters is so bizarre that it almost defies comprehension, much less vivid description. Let's begin with the statistical nightmare one finds when examining shelters. Although shelters have existed in this country for well over a century, there is simply no reliable statistical base from which even the most basic information can be derived. One does not have to be an applied statistician to understand the gravity of not having accurate information, for without the existence of reliable historical and contemporary data, it's literally impossible to draw any conclusions that stand the test of empirical scrutiny. Surrounded by the deaths of millions of precious beings, this industry has demonstrated neither the concern nor competency to even validate the information upon which it bases life and death decisions.

How is it possible that this multi-billion dollar industry never formed an effective national association, funded and administered by shelter members, to properly gather and validate critical information? Nor has the shelter community established a coordinated national effort to protect the interests of the companion animals they profess to serve. Without any organized pressure from shelters, it's no wonder the U.S. Census Bureau refuses to include household animals, and the lack of this vital demographic data is devastating in terms of effective program formulation and assessment. As a result, a hodgepodge of crude formulas are used to estimate companion animal population, all of which possess a statistical margin of error so staggering as to render population estimates virtually useless.

People just do not realize the potential we have by giving just a bit of our day to doing something different in lieu of the same or related thing. It actually opens up various avenues that leads to the same goals. Some of these newly discovered venues will be noticeable improvements from the road taken by everyone else. We just have to be open to change, smart enough to recognize when change is necessary and determined enough to make a few of these changes in spite of the conflicts from others. Ignoring these new avenues is the simple largest factor in the animal movement not moving forward in a more productive manner.

I find the today that the politicians do not look at things the way we do. Even one of the county commissioners in Clark County, Nevada told me straight up "we do not have time for animal problems - we have human problems which are more important. At least that is all we hear from our constituents. I hear that from my working partners in politics all around the nation as well. Because the animal people are so busy working on today's animals which stem from yesterday's problems, they don't take the time to recognize that it is actually tomorrow that can and will make the changes that everyone really wants."

It's not through the large animal organizations that anything of any measurable amount can be achieved. I believe that has been proven substantially over the decades.. With the ever growing number of communities across the nation who are killing 80% of the animals that come into the city or county run pounds, how many of them have actually been approached by one of the larger animal orgs offering guidelines or financial assistance to make the necessary changes in local laws, implementing a humane education program or changing the elected officials to garner the necessary support required for these plans to work?

Politicians forget who out they in office - the people - and the people have concerns (when they learn about them) in which they are interested. They really do listen to the voters - it is, after all, how they secure re election votes. If enough people around the nation had suddenly begun to believe that the color red has negative properties and that blue was the better alternative, you better bet your last dollar that any and every candidate across this nation would be seen with blue in their outfit - completely void of any red.

Politicians need to be educated as well. They are always looking for ways to save money. So, it's up to us to show them the facts. In New Hampshire, a statewide program cut the cost of neutering pets to $10 for poor residents. The state saved $3 in animal control costs for every $1 spent on the program. And it saved animals' lives. Over an eight-year period between 1993 and 2001, the state recorded a nearly 75 percent drop in the number of dogs and cats killed. Cities that manage to stem their animal kill rates don't stop with sterilization. They often pair those services with extensive public education. Those efforts let the public know the size of the problem and what happens to thousands of unwanted pets every year. Cities have taken out billboards, allowed euthanasia to be recorded and shown by news media, and walked shelter dogs wearing the dates they'll be killed if they aren't adopted.

2004 was an election year. The question I heard most was "are you pro life or pro choice?" This is a good question for people running for national office, our U.S. Senates and U.S. Congressman. It has nothing to do with state, county and local government. Why were we not asking the state, county and local politicians if they were in favor of humane education in our schools and if they favored adoption programs as opposed to euthanasia of animals?.

These are issues that state, county and local politicians have say over. Clearly, if these two topics were hammered into their heads now, they would appear in their platforms for election campaigns later on. "We don't think we need to shock the community by showing them 50 dead animals," The city of Charlotte, then took on a more gentle approach and it was a downright pure undeniable failure. $4 million a year to catch, house and kill animals, it has done little to address the cause of the problem. When a local group convinced one of the network TV stations to air live euthanasia during their eve news each night for a full week, the message was clear and they experienced a drastic decrease of 50% in the following weeks that continued until a new program could be implemented.

Elected officials do everything in their power not to upset any voter or offend any one of their constituents. It may cost them votes. So, it will become very clear as to which ones are actually 'on board' with saving the animals by their actions.

Clearly stated by a county commissioner in Mohave County Arizona, if everyone in rescue and/or animal rights would ask these questions of their local politicians, we would change the face of local government. Clearly, there are millions and millions of people involved in rescue and rights across the nation. If we all voted for candidates who are in tune with our issues, we could change the face of local government. His brother is in government in another state as well as his brother in law. They would both tell everyone the same thing.

People do not realize the power that is within their grasp. This is what I think would do more that anything else. If the animal people would just simply assert themselves to the elected officials and state two things clearly, not only would they have a say in the government's decisions since the politicians want to be re-elected, they would actually see those changes come about. They (the animal people ) would actually have more of a voice in the government than any lobbying effort known today - including the NRA and others combined.

The two things would be to enforce and clean up existing animal protection laws and the implementation of a mandatory humane education curriculum in our schools. There is no other way to start the ball rolling. If the next generation grows up with the same ignorance that this generation has grown up with, then not only are rescuers going to be facing the same level of unwanted animals in the shelters around the nation and on the streets, they will likely be facing even more since the population is growing.

Example: From 1992 to 2002, Americans spent over $20billion on animal protection related taxes and donations to various organizations to protect and solve. We are talking about millions and millions of people involved here. How much can you honestly point to on a nationwide scale that is a noticeable change resulting from these tremendous figures? Reason? Each effort is singular in nature, non communicative of other efforts, many times duplicated in corruptive overlaps and many times this combination simply fails to fill in the gaps that would make these efforts more cohesive and successful.

Cities and counties which have seen successful results and saved tax-payers dollars as well have all implemented the following programs:

* Increase sterilizations and public education, especially in low-income areas.
• Increase the number of animals adopted from the shelter.
• Embed microchips in animals who leave the shelter so, if they're picked up as strays, the owners can be identified.
• Trap and neuter feral cats.
• Help pet owners train their adopted animals so they don't develop behavioral problems and get returned to the shelter.

Lets not forget the issue of pet limit laws.  This has been a hot button issue recently with over 1,000 communnities across the nation, including PA, GA and IA eliminating their mandatory pet limit laws for reasons of unconstitutional groundings.  . 

Pet Limit Laws:
Closing the Door to Loving Homes          by San Fransisco SPCA
April 10, 2000
Proponents of pet limit laws argue that these ordinances are necessary to stop animal neglect and abuse caused by people who take in more animals than they can adequately care for. Others claim that pet limits are necessary to ensure sanitary conditions, or to maintain safe and pleasant neighborhoods. But are pet limit laws necessary to address abuse, neglect, unreasonable noise, and lack of sanitation? Or, do they end up limiting the availability of loving homes and putting the lives of dogs and cats at risk? The San Francisco SPCA has considered the various claims made for strict pet limit laws and found little in the way of evidence, or common sense, to support them. What we found was that pet limit laws:
• are unnecessary to protect the well-being of people and animals
• are arbitrary and intrusive
• penalize responsible pet owners
• force many caregivers to stop providing care to homeless animals
• put the lives of even well cared-for animals at risk
At the same time that household limits discourage responsible individuals from
providing a good home for more needy animals, they do not prevent an irresponsible one from acquiring unlimited animals. Unfortunately, caring can’t be mandated, and a pet limit law will only end up punishing those who care.  Millions of compassionate people provide dogs and cats with food, love, and shelter in their homes. Others may even put aside their own needs in order to care for beloved pets. Still others work tirelessly to feed, foster, and rehabilitate strays and unwanted abandoned animals, all at their own expense. For every one of these caregivers, a pet limit law may exact a heavy toll. Each of these individuals may face citations, fines, other penalties, and even confiscation of the animals they love. For these reasons, The San Francisco SPCA opposes legislation arbitrarily limiting the number of pets a person can care for in their home.
 
PET LIMIT LAWS ARE UNNECESSARY
Are pet limit laws necessary to address abuse, neglect, unreasonable noise, and lack of sanitation? Do pet limit laws protect the well-being of people and animals? In our view, they do not. Whereas one individual may be able to responsibly care for and nurture several animals, another may be unable to care for even one. And if problems arise, enforcement agencies already have ample ammunition at their disposal in terms of animal welfare, health and property rights laws. In fact, unsanitary conditions, excessive noise, and interference with property are all unlawful in virtually every community—regardless of whether pets inhabit the premises or not.

PET LIMIT LAWS ARE INTRUSIVE AND ARBITRARY
Just how are pet limits determined? In one community, the limit might be two pets. In others, four, five, eight, even twenty pets might be allowed. More often than not, the number is arbitrarily chosen. Enforcement is also arbitrary. In response to concerns about pet limit laws, some communities have admitted that these ordinances “will be enforced on a complaint basis, and pets which are maintained indoors or do not raise the ire of neighbors will not generate enforcement.” While it may sound reassuring to some, this justification leaves the door wide open for pet limit laws to be used as a weapon of retribution in neighbor disputes over concerns totally unrelated to pets.

Laws that regulate a person’s behavior inside their home should seek an appropriate balance between the public's safety and welfare and the individual's right to privacy. But while pet limit laws are highly intrusive, there is little, if any, corresponding benefit to public safety. What good is gained from an uncompromising prohibition against more than a limited number of pets, particularly if they are confined to an owner's property and create no problems? Certainly, if neighbors are totally unaware of their presence, prohibiting pets does not in any way protect or maintain anyone's health, happiness or peace of mind. And what about multi-pet households where neighbors do not mind or even enjoy the presence of these animals? In fact, there is no benefit gained from such a prohibition—nor is there likely to be any enforcement.

Should government pass laws that are not going to be enforced? Should communities outlaw behavior that does not impact neighbors or interfere with the rights of others? Local governments have embraced the position that because responsible multi-pet households will not generate enforcement, these residents need not fear violating the law. In essence, local governments are making outlaws out of normally law-abiding citizens and telling them it is OK to break the law as long as they don’t get caught! Passing laws that aren’t enforced or are enforced sporadically is unfair and counterproductive. Few people are likely to comply with a pet limit law that isn’t enforced. And those who voluntarily comply can probably be counted among the most responsible pet owners in the community. There is little equity or sense in enacting a law that only ends up penalizing the very people whose behavior is already exemplary. And such a view undermines our respect for the law.

Needless to say, truly irresponsible pet owners will not be affected. If the law is not enforced, they are free to ignore it. If it is selectively enforced against them, they are likely to surrender their animals, adding to the numbers of dogs and cats killed, or abandon them, adding to some of the perceived problems the law was intended to solve.

PET LIMIT EXEMPTION PERMITS ARE ALSO INTRUSIVE AND RISKY
Many local jurisdictions enacting pet limit laws allow caretakers who have more than the allowable number of pets to apply for an “exemption” permit. Therefore, these jurisdictions claim, “responsible” pet owners need not fear the law. This view is shortsighted and would put multi-pet households in a Catch-22: choosing between not seeking a permit and violating the law on the one hand; or, applying for a permit, but risking exposure and confiscation of their pets if they are denied. In other words, multipet households would fear applying for a permit, because to do so would expose them to penalties and possible loss of their beloved companions if denied a permit. And, in some jurisdictions, the exemption permit requires a “kennel” license—which cannot be granted in many neighborhoods due to zoning restrictions, no matter how "responsible” the caretaker. In short, no exemption at all!

PET LIMIT LAWS PUT THE LIVES OF ANIMALS AT RISK
It is not uncommon for rescued animals, particularly those who are hard-to-place by virtue of abandonment or abuse, to be in a “foster” environment for long periods of time. Foster homes are in critically short supply in almost every community and it is common for such homes to temporarily house more animals than the average pet owner. In addition, there are countless Good Samaritans who feed and care for neighborhood strays and feral cats. Many pet limit laws define these individuals as "owners” for purposes of enforcing local ordinances. It is ironic that groups and individuals rescuing and caring for homeless and unwanted dogs and cats (often at personal expense) should be targeted for restrictive and punitive legislation.

Of greater concern, caregivers and rescue groups may be forced to stop caring for foster pets or homeless cats, because to do so would violate the local pet limit law, resulting in needy animals being denied care, and also leading to increased euthanasia at taxpayer expense. By contrast, the maintenance of multi-pet households or the feeding of homeless cats—including sterilization, food, and veterinary care—is uniformly accomplished by private citizens at no cost to local government or taxpayers. And pet owners targeted for enforcement may be forced to surrender their well caredfor animals to local shelters where they, too, are at risk for euthanasia and where taxpayers will have to foot the bill.

PET LIMIT LAWS CLOSE THE DOOR TO LOVING HOMES
A town council on the East Coast recently expanded its animal control law to include a provision making it illegal for any resident to own more than five cats. One resident, a 69-year old woman who cared for homeless neighborhood cats, was threatened with fines for violating the law despite the fact that she had sterilized and vaccinated all the cats. She was given two options by local authorities: turn away the cats who came to her back door looking for food and water; or trap them and turn them over to the animal control facility where they would likely be killed. For someone who very much loved animals, this was no choice at all. Distraught by the threat of legal sanctions, however, she was forced to comply.

And in a county neighboring our own, an elderly couple who cared for several
sterilized and well-cared for cats at their private residence were threatened with
citations and fines because of a pet limit law that allowed for the caring of only four cats. Under threat, the cats had to be relocated to avoid the risk that they would be impounded and killed at the local animal control facility. The cats lost the only home and caregivers they had ever known, and the couple lost their beloved companions. Just as pets already in homes may be threatened by limit laws, homeless pets awaiting the chance for a loving new home are also at risk as potential adopters are discouraged from adopting a stray or visiting the local shelter and saving a life.

For much of history, animals were considered mere commodities who pulled our wagons, provided the products for our farms, herded our sheep, and kept our barns free of mice. During the last century, however, socio-economic and moral changes in society at large have produced changes in the status of animals as well. Many animals—dogs and cats in particular—are now overwhelmingly companions instead of servants. In addition, government laws and services have evolved from promoting animals as property to protecting them as cherished pets.

At the same time, pets do so much good for the community: people of all ages, but particularly the elderly and the young, enjoy their companionship. For single people, dogs and cats can offer a welcome relief from loneliness. For children, an animal in the home provides warmth and unconditional love, and teaches responsibility and consideration for the needs of another creature. Those who suffer from disease or injury often experience a therapeutic benefit from their presence. For the lonely, a pet can provide an incentive to get up in the morning. Animals can also provide a sense of safety and security, allowing many people freedom they would not otherwise have. While pet ownership may not be a fundamental right, it is unquestionably an integral aspect of our daily life—which cannot be dismissed lightly and should not suffer unwarranted limits. In our view, there is little justification for targeting well-cared for animals and putting them at risk for impoundment and euthanasia.
 

Ignorance, Greed, Ego, Fear of change
Pet limit laws were proposed and defeated in large and small cities throughout the U.S. in 2001, including Fort Thomas, KY, Richmond, VA, Cherry Hill, NJ, Gwinett Co., GA, and Springfield, IL. Along with nearly one thousand cities, counties and three states over the past five years alone. This success can be attributed to the efforts of concerned cat/dog owners and breeders, rescue groups and feral cat caretakers who spoke out strongly to their lawmakers.

The only reasons why pet limits still exist.  The present means have proven across the country  not to work at all.  The present means of limiting to 3 or 4 cannot be enforced because the licensing approach has been a total failure.  Then when good people end up with more pets and are willing and able to furnish the care and attention the pets need, they are faced with large fines, court dates and even watching as the city or county removes them   JUST TO WATCH THEM DIE ALONG WITH THE OTHERS.

Presently, the law will only allow compassionate, responsible homes to even become a recognized rescue by paying exhorbitant fees to the county or city, (sometimes up to $10,000 before being issued a ‘kennel permit’) assuring that the kill rate remain unchanged in that area. Thus, forcing good people to go underground  or take on another hobby or cause – again, leaving the numberofanimals who die to go unchanged.
CARE, COMPASSION, HEALTH, SAFETY AND LACK OF DANGER OR NUISANCE TO SURROUNDING RESIDENTS SHOULD BE THE FOUNDATION FOR NEW LAWS IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

The simple fact that ‘’That’s the way it’s been done for years’’ is not an argument you need to listen to. If your community deems them ‘property’ then they cannot impose the limits per our constitution. If, however, they should change their wording to use the term ‘guardian’ for the human caretaker and ‘companion’ for the pet, then you bring in another beneficial means of handling those humans who do not provide the proper and necessary care for the animals they are responsible for.

Over 1,000 communities and counties and three states have now rendered pet limitation laws to either be unlawful for constitutional reasons or raised the limits to more favorable levels to the residents, while changing the responsibilities of those who care for them. (i.e. not allowing pets to be chained as a sole means of containment, no breeding without a substantial breeders permit – regulating this by enforcing all papers to display this license in all ads for puppies and kitties and a severe penalty for any human who’s dog has bitten or attacked any other human or dog.)

Once we elect governments in tune with the issues, we can confront them and educate them that spending millions of dollars in shelter contract and euthanasia projects is money should be use for public education and no-kill shelter facilities. Maybe a little expensive at first but will pay for itself in the near future.

Example Clark County, Nevada is spending 1.2 million a year to run the current shelter. The new contact for 2005 (20 year contract) is 1.6 million per year. Multiply that by every shelter or pound in this nation. Yes, some have smaller budgets but the major cities are spending a lot more just to kill the animals. 2002 the city of Las Vegas and Clark County euthanized 24,500 animals. This county has no humane education in the schools at any level. So they will always be facing this same problem.

This county also has no plan to attempt to adopt out more dogs and cats through programs that other cities have successfully implemented, so they are not operating anything less than a facility to kill animals. Clark County is Las Vegas. To spend this amount of funding on nothing more than killing animals is an unconscionable waste of life and a needless drain on public money." Not one of the animal orgs came forward with an offer to help or any real life suggestions. They are all worried about yesterday's problems today and securing funding to stay afloat.

Local and national projects of educating the children is very important. Neither of these ideas takes money. They only take communication and persistence to educate those who can and will make these issues become laws that are sensible and enforceable. These ideas then become law at the voting booth. Plain and simple.

Then, with many thanks to WWW.PET-ABUSE.COMwe now see that there will be a much needed registry of animal abusers available to law enforcement across the nation. With the overwhelming research confirming the strong links between young people who abuse animals and the likelihood that they will grow into a life of more violent crimes if not recognized and corrected, this is going to become much more prevalent in our society. All for the good of every living being.


==========================SURVEY

The following is a survey we used throughout 7 states with 391 participants from 18-61 years of age who had pets. This survey can be used to find out much information regarding your local area and see what is really needed most. Just below are the findings from this particular application.

This survey is to be filled out completely anonymously. NO one will ever know who filled out what survey or how that particular participant answered any question, so in order for us to obtain reliable information, we simply ask that you answer the questions to your best ability and to select the answer that comes the closest to the answer which reflects your current situation and opinions. Some of the questions will not have the answer that adequately fits your personal situation. PLEASE USE ONLY THE OPTIONS PROVIDED. No write-in answers or additional comments. Simply use the one that is closest to your belief or situation. Our hopes are to receive honest and unbiased answers to the questions to follow.

The survey is to be taken by those families and households who presently have at least one dog as a current pet. The answers you provide should reflect this pet or pets. Other pets such as birds, cats, ferrets, reptiles, etc. should not be reflected in the answers you give on this questionnaire.

To see the results of a previous survey results & many options of tallying scores., please click here.

Please see that only one person from each household participate in this survey. Circle one.

I am UNDER THE AGE OF 18 I AM OVER THE AGE OF 19

All surveys must be filled out during the given classroom period or time frame allotted and NOT to be taken home or shared with others.

This survey is NOT meant to be judgmental or critical of any person who is giving of their time to help us to gather the information requested, so we do urge honesty in providing the information we are seeking. Each question must be answered or the entire questionnaire will be void.

Make NO CHANGES, alterations or additions to the questions as they are posed. If they do not apply to you at the present, please answer as you would if you were in that situation.

Answer ALL questions.

Please Circle the answer that best describes your present situation with regards to your pet dog.

1. Does your dog sleep inside your house at nighttime? (garage does not count as ‘inside’ for this particular question.

A. Every night

B. Occasionally, depending on weather

C. Never

2. Do you have more than one dog presently? Yes No

3. My dog is A. 5-20 # B. 25 – 50# C. 55-80# D. Huge

4. I/We originally adopted our dog as a companion animal. Yes No

5. The dog was intended for our child/children but they soon lost interest and did not follow up on their promise of responsibilities in caring for or playing with the dog. Therefore, the poor dog just sits alone in the back yard now. Yes No

6. Do you bathe your dog(s)

A. weekly

B. monthly

C. annually

D. never

7. How often do you take your dog to the vet?

A. Every six moths

B. Once per year

C. Once every 3 years

E. Only when obvious medical attention is required

8. Is your dog currently up to date on vaccinations? Yes No

9. Is your dog currently displaying some form of identification or microchip? Yes No

9a. If your answer is no, please circle one or more of the following.

A. My dog never leaves the property and doesn’t need ID

B. My dog always chews it off or looses his collars or tags

C. I’ve just not gotten around to getting it done for him/her yet, but intend to.

10. Is your dog friendly with other people when they come to your house? Yes No

11. Is your dog friendly with other dogs if they should wander into your yard or come with a friend to visit? Yes No

12. I walk my dog A. Daily B. Once per week C. Never

Keeping in mind this survey is completely anonymous and will never reveal the participant and is not meant to be judgmental to those who help us obtain this information, we remind you to do your best to select the appropriate answer that most closely reflects your present situation with your dog.

13. In the past two years, with the fast paced lifestyle Americans now face on a daily basis, divorces and extra curricular activities of the youngsters and teens in your household, have you ever accidentally forgotten to provide your dog with water or food on a given day? Yes No.

14. Do you socialize your dog with other dogs for play and exercise? Yes No

15. I try to get my dog to a dog park or play with other dogs

A. Frequently

B. Rarely

C. Never

16. Do you ever socialize your dog with other people outside your household members? Yes No

17. Is your dog likely to bite a stranger who comes to the house? Yes No

18. Is your dog apt to become excited and seem vicious when approaching anther dog while on a walk? Yes No

19. Have your ever relinquished a dog to a dog pound, rescue organization or another family? Yes, No

20. If a seemingly nice couple with a 13 year old daughter approached your family and said they love your dog and offered you $100, would you consider letting the dog go with them? Yes No

21. Does your dog bark a lot at night? Yes No

22. Have your neighbors ever complained to your or your local animal regulations about the barking? Yes No

22a. If the answer is YES, please circle one of the following that best describes the steps

You took to correct the problem.

A. We paid a fine

B. We sought professional training for the dog to curb this action

C. We did nothing, as the complaining party is being unreasonable

D. We made the decision to give the dog away or take him to the dog pound to avoid further problems with the neighbors or complaining parties

E. We brought the dog inside the house at nighttime.

23. Does your dog jump on people when approached? Yes No

24. Has your dog been to the vet within the past 18 months for a regular check up? Yes No

25. Is your dog happy around children? Yes No

26. Is your dog safe to be around children with proper supervision? Yes No

27 Is your dog spayed or neutered? Yes No

27a. If the answer is Yes, at what age was the dog altered?

A. About 6 months of age

B. 18 months to 2 years of age

C. Before we adopted him/her

If the answer is no, please circle the closest description of your reasoning or circumstances which have prevented this from taking place.

A. I/We have not had the funds to do so.

B. I/We wish to look into the possibility of having a litter of puppies

C. I don’t feel it is necessary or normal to do this surgery

28. My opinion on having a litter of puppies is that it is

A. Good for the dog to have at least one litter

B. Ok for some people to do

C. Not a good idea at all

29. When going on vacation for 3-4 day weekend, we usually

A Try to take the dog along with us whenever possible

B Take the dog to a boarding facility or pay a licensed pet sitter to care for him/her during our absence.

C Leave it at home and ask a neighbor to check in on it once a day

D Leave it outside and let the water run and provide plenty of food for the period we intend to be gone.

30. There have been occasions where I have hit or spanked my dog to enforce the ‘rules’ of the household. Yes No

31. On the occasion that I hit or spanked the dog, I made him/her cry from the action Yes No

32. My feeling is that is the only way to enforce the power structure when training a dog to understand who is in charge by using physical force. Yes No

33 When my present dog dies, I will get another dog. Yes No

34. When searching for a pet dog, I only consider puppies. Yes No

35. When adopting a dog, I usually consult some form of professional advice in regards to the proper care for this particular type dog and it’s needs and future training tips. Yes No

36. The thought of adopting an adult dog from the pound or rescue organization just does not appeal to me. Yes No

37. Dogs who have been turned in to the pound or rescue groups must have something wrong with it and that is why I would not consider one of these dogs. Yes No

37. I have adopted a dog from a pound or rescue group in the past. Yes No

38. For your lifestyle, the thought of having TWO dogs that are compatible in size and energy is simply not appealing to me at all for the following reason

A Can’t afford to feed two

B I feel I can provide all the dogs needs myself

C It simply never works well in my opinion

D. I don’t feel my dog would tolerate another in his/her territory

39. My feeling on having two dogs at once in regards to the dog’s happiness and socialization is

A If you can afford it and have the room, it would be ok.

B Don’t really see the need or any benefits

40. If your dog was found to have an ear infection which the vet quoted as costing $500 - $600 to correct, would you make the decision to have it treated immediately? Yes No

If your answer is no, the reason would be

A Don’t have the money

B Don’t feel it is necessary or worth it

C Other

41. Providing that you somewhat agree to the following definitions of the two words provided, Please read the following two definitions before answering the remaining questions.



"OWNER" is some one who takes or has possession of a piece of property such as car, house, bicycle etc and has the right to do whatever he/she pleases with this property.

"GUARDIAN’ is someone who has adopted or is given custody of a child or pet and is responsible for providing the necessary elements for a safe and happy existence such as nurturing, food, water, shelter, love and appropriate guidance in life.

42. I feel I am the owner of my pet. Yes No

43. I feel I am the guardian of my pet. Yes No.

44. I feel that the appropriate definition of which I am to and for my pet is decided by how I care for and treat my pet. Yes No

45. I feel that is a good way to view the human pet relationship and will try to be

more like a guardian to my pet in the future. Yes No

46. The age of my last pet upon his/her death was A Young B. Middle aged C. Very Old

(if pet did not die in your care, circle the one that would most closely match an educated guess)

47. The age of the oldest pet I’ve ever been responsible for was

A 5-10 years

B 11-15 years

C Older

48. I’ve used paid professional dog training for at least one of my dogs in the past. Yes No

49. I plan to seek some form of professional guidance for the next dog I adopt. Yes No

50 When I transport my dog to and from various destinations, I allow him/her to ride in the back of the pick up truck. Yes No

51. When my dog accompanies me in the car, he/she is restrained with appropriate safety measures to assure his/her safe arrival. Yes No.

52 My dog(s) rarely even go outside the house except to use the bathroom. Yes No

53 My dog has a doggy door or other means of coming in and out of the house as he/she wishes. Yes No

54. My dog sleeps outside always, because I/we

A. We want a guard dog for protection of our property

B. We simply believe he is happier outside rather than inside

C. We intend to allow some ‘inside’ time for the dog, but have just not gotten around to doing any training yet.

54a For those who circled ‘A" on the previous question, have you ever obtained any professional guidance or training for the ‘guard dog’ responsibilities.

A Yes the dog is trained by a professional guard dog trainer

B No, we just allow him/her to bark to notify us of any visitors

55. My dog is chained up most of the time, as he/she will

A. Jump the fence and escape without restraints

B. We simply have no fencing and is thought to be our only option.

C. We don't want our dog to tear up the yard.

D. Our dog is never tied up.

56. . My dog does not have his/her current vaccinations due to the following reason

A. Not enough money at this time

B. Not enough time to make the visit to the vet

C. It is my belief that it is just not that important.

D. Does not apply - my pets are current.

57. I would probably consider allowing my dog to sleep inside the house at night time if he/she Was appropriately behaved and compatible to my home and lifestyle. Yes No

58. I have had dogs who escaped my care and were never again seen or heard from. Yes No

59. When training a new dog in the home, there have been members of the household who have hit or kicked the dog during a strong reprimanding. Yes No

60. I am really happy when I have a dog at my side. Yes No

Please respond to only one of the following questions from 61 to 63. Please locate the age appropriate question for yourself.

1. I am still in school and so far I’ve had ___________ dogs in my lifetime.

2. I am between the ages of 25 and 40 and have had __________ dogs in my lifetime.

3. I am between the ages of 45 and 65 and have had __________ dogs in my lifetime.

64. My dog is just too stupid to be trained like I would like, so I just never sought any professional help. Yes No

65. Although I’ve never taken a dog training course or read an entire dog training guide book, I still feel I am qualified to train a dog. Yes No

66. For a successful results in dog training efforts, pretty much anyone CAN do a good job providing they have the following 3 important traits: (circle the three you feel are the most important and bring the most success)

A. love for the animal you are working with

B. a definite plan in which to follow

C. Patience of a saint and then some

D. Knowledge of just how a dog absorbs the various forms of communications that we are providing regularly.

E. Talent to combine the love, patience, ability to work with the dog and to know when to reward the dog and how.

F. Understanding of what you are realistically trying to accomplish with this dog at this time

G. It would be best for anyone who wishes to try and train a dog, to refer to a book or web site which offers tips, ideas and suggestions from a professional who has had considerable successes and experience in training jobs.

H. The initial selection of the dog was actually thought out and discussed prior to our acquisition, so as to assure the family that the new member would blend nicely with our lifestyle.

67. I personally feel very strongly against families having a litter of puppies in their homes. Yes No.

68. I do not fault those who had an accidental litter, such as a dog escaping or getting lost or an intruding dog. True False

69. My family had a litter of puppies at one time. Please circle the one that HONESTLY reflects the steps you took when adopting out the puppies. (this really applies to all)

A. All the adoptive parties seemed to love their new puppies, promised to take good care of him or her and we felt satisfied.

B. I had presented each potential adoptee with an adoption agreement which included mandates for feeding, sleeping and altering arrangements, dates, etc. If the adoption did NOT work out with this particular party, the dog could only be brought back to me and upon visiting the new home during the firs year, it also allowed for my removal of the puppy if the situation was not what was agreed to.

C. does not apply as we've never had a litter at all.

70. Regarding my answers to the previous 68 questions, I could be persuaded to make changes if it were shown to me that my actions and/or current treatment of my pets could help reduce the number of unwanted animals in the US.. YES NO

71. Knowing that he United States will kill approximately 8 million adoptable pets this year, I certainly feel very strongly that this and many other problems could be substantially improved with some form of humane education in our nation’s schools. Yes No

==================

That completes the survey and questionnaire. 21st Century Animal Resource and Education Services appreciates the time you’ve given to fill out the questionnaire and to provide us some information for our study. Randy Warner, founder of 21st Century Cares is on a mission to help schools in 40 states to form their own humane education clubs for the students. Please visit our website at http://www.21stcenturycares.org to see his tour schedule, guidelines and missions for the clubs, along with the information he’ll deliver to the schools he and his dogs visit. If you live in one of the cities he is planning to visit, or know of someone who does, please let Randy know. Local contacts make a world of difference when attempting to gain access to our public schools in today’s world.

If you participated in this study and questionnaire and would like to see the results and score tallies, please send an email to21stcares@citlink.net to request the results at no charge. If you do not have email, please send a self addressed, stamped envelope to Randy Warner PO Box 373 Dolan Springs, AZ 86441.


NOW FOR THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY WE DID THROUGHOUT 7 STATES WITH 391 PARTICIPANTS.

Summarizing Differences Between “Owners” & “Guardians” Very telling results.

{This survey is set up to provide a wide variety of information from your participants. In this particular completion, we asked 391 individuals in 7 western states to fill in their choices with total anonymity. We were looking for the difference between those who keep their pets inside at night (referred to as GUARDIANS) vs. those who keep them outside at night (referred to as “OWNERS”) and the additional degree of care provided to their pets. This clearly shows the variables from those two schools of thought. Your local vets will likely confirm these findings as what they see in daily practice as well.}

The dog who sleeps inside the home at night clearly lives a happier, healthier and longer life. It is more sociable, able to protect against harm and becomes an appreciated member of the family – ‘’mans’ best friend’’.

The original survey is also shown on this site and was developed by Randy Warner of 21st Century Cares.

The results were tallied and reviewed by Dr. Jeanette Shutay Ph.d

In comparing those who consider themselves “owners” of their dogs and those who consider themselves “guardians” of their dogs, the following was found:

100% of the “guardians” keep their dogs inside the house at night while 0% of the “owners” do the same.
55% of the “owners” stated that their dog just sits alone in the back yard while 0% of the “guardians” reported that to be true of their dogs.
83% of the “guardians” take their dog to the vet every six months versus 0% of the “owners”. Furthermore 30% of the “owners” take their dogs once every three years while only 4% of the “guardians” report the same to be true.
100% of the “guardians” stated that their dog is current on vaccinations while only 8% of the “owners” stated the same to be true.
89% of the “guardians” are currently displaying some form of identification or microchip for their dog versus only 18% of “owners”.
82% of the “owners” stated that they never walk their dog while only 26% of the “guardians” report the same to be true.
42% of “owners” stated that they have accidentally forgotten to provide their dog with water or food on a given day while 0% of the “guardians” report the same to be true.
86% of “owners” stated that they have relinquished a dog to a dog pound, rescue organization or another family while 0% of the “guardians” report the same to be true.
Only 14% of “owners” report that they have taken their dog to the vet within the last 18 months for a regular check-up while 100% of the “guardians” report having done so.
100% of “guardians” report that their dog is spayed or neutered while only 18% of the “owners” report the same to be true.
80% of “owners” believe that dogs who have been turned in to the pound or rescue groups must have something wrong with it and that is why they would not consider one of these dogs. However, 0% of the “guardians” believe the same to be true.
100% of “guardians” stated that if their dog had an ear infection that would cost $500-$600 to correct, they would have it treated immediately. However, only 42% of “owners” stated that they would have it treated immediately.
80% of “owners” stated that they have had a dog who escaped their care and was never again seen or heard from while only 32% of the “guardians” reported the same to be true.
58% of “owners” stated that when training a new dog in the home, there have been members of the household who have hit or kicked the dog during a strong reprimanding. However, only 9% of “guardians” report the same to be true.
92% of “owners” reported that their dog is just too stupid to be trained like they would like, so they just never sought any professional help. 0% of “guardians” reported the same to be true.

=======================

In closing, I believe I've shown some solid information here as to the amount of hard work being dedicated to protecting the animals and how much work - much of it through change - that is still ahead of us.

The final verdict is that humans may  not geared to solving these problems because they are usually mis guided and stumbling over hurdles of greed, ego and political agendas. Therefore, they never work together for a common goal: the only way to accomplish a task of this magnitude.

I am not suggesting that any of the large national groups should be closed down, nor boycotted, but see that the only means of ever regaining the basis of responsibility in the way we care for and protect our animals should be clearly placed back into the hands of the individual citizens. We already have the laws that we either won't, or can't enforce. And since it is well known that conscience has a much greater end result that consequence, it is humane education that I would support and promote for our youth - tomorrow's decision makers.

The world is demanding more and more from each generation. Our daily routines are a tightly woven, carefully assembled collection of information that we all need to survive. In knowledge, patience responsibility and compassion, humane education provides the foundation necessary to provide for a better life for all those with whom we share this planet.

Conscience has proven to be a much more effective tool than consequence. H. E. is the most important thing that nobody's ever heard of. Things need to change.

Nearing an end to this picture I'm trying to paint, would be my final colors:

It does not take millions and billions to solve these problems. OBVIOUSLY NOT. It only takes knowledge.

Everyone agrees that humane education would be beneficial. To what degree is up for discussion.

Everyone agrees that we could and should do more to protect the animals. To what degree is up for discussion.

Everyone agrees that our animal control efforts need to improve, the officers receive better training, the citizens receive better services, the public bear more responsibility and the large orgs could have done more with the money they've been given. To what degree is up for discussion.

We need to rejoice at our common goals, and begin to speak on these issues that we all support, with one voice. With a unified front and for the good of all people and animals.

21st Century Animal Resource and Education Services has a staff of professional humane educators and college professors who can also provide a customized program upon request. We must not lose perspective of our collective goals. We must expand our horizons to choose those campaigns that will help us to accomplish the most and save more animals in the long run. The animals who exist today are a very tiny percentage of the animals who will be killed and tortured in the coming centuries and millennia. Paying excessive attention to those who suffer today is condemning millions more to suffer the same fate. That is simply born from the ignorance of humans - providing yet another blow to animal protection’s ultimate goals. We can’t begin to win the game if only half of our team understands the rules.

The primary function of 21st Century Animal Resource and Education Services and staff, is to promote humane education through character development, project suggestions, community service, lesson plans and other outreach programs. By expanding the parameters of what people THINK they know and showing what many refuse to see, we CAN see an end to these and other problems in our lifetime by thinking outside the box. We provide all the necessary resources to implement these & to begin making changes at the community level. This program takes special interest in Humane Religion as well. We have programs for grades 5-12, troubled and at risk teens, for volunteer teachers including lesson plans, research articles & study programs.

We've now made available a complete set of handbooks - a series of 'how-to' guides with over 900 pages to help humane educators around the world to become the best possible humane educators. See http://www.21stcenturycares.org/products.htm

That being said, all we ask from the American People is to know all that you can about what surrounds you. The best way to do this is to allow others to help as well as to learn from you. Please step up and join T.H.E. T.E.A.M. Today's Humane Education That Educates And Motivates.

The Animal Protection Advocate's Version of OPUS ONE (non musical)
By Randy N. Warner
politics, agendas, egos and all the things the animal protection movement is riddled with.  all we need is some unity and intellect.  divisiveness is killing our efforts, not to mention all the lives lost.   the time has come.
OK. We hope to show that individual as you may be, you are part of a society that has a HUGE problem.  This problem of overpopulation takes every person to realize this so we are all singing the same song - no exceptions!
OK, We have 3,000  people in this conference hall - each to speak about their general views on animal care and their level of responsibility to correct the problems that plague our society. NO POLITICS.  NO EGOS.  NO APATHY.

As the microphones are turned on, each one of the 3,000 people begins singing their own song SIMULTANEOUSLY with no regard for any other song. Some sing of 'responsible breeding', some sing of ''the other person's lack of responsibility' some sing of mandatory spay and neutering'   some sing of killing dogs as the only way while others see many options to the same.

The sounds are deafening and just not at all pleasant - most importantly none are even  remotely distinguishable.  But the most obvious are the likes of those who claim "I'm only one person and can have litters that won't make a difference at all."  (these are the most uninformed and problematic of all) 
Now, lets' take the same 3,000 people in the same hall an hour later. When someone steps to the front and tries to organize some unity, they all  began to approach and listen. We'll make the animal rights
people  baritones,  the animal welfare people sopranos and animal protection people altos and anyone else who is just there to be good animal people the basses.
Now, for only  one  chorus of one little song, we all sing together.  It may not be the Mormon choir, but is so much more beautiful AND LEGIBLE than what was done before.  

Shortly thereafter, people of all walks of life begin to talk about  how much better it was when everyone at least tried to get along and sing the same song - even if for only one  chorus. They now realize that unity is important for most all projects - in order to send a clearer message and well as accomplish better results. The public now 'gets it' and the media can finally print a good solid outline of what we all agree needs to be done.  We CAN convince those who think  ''But I'm only one person" or those who feel ''their way is the only real way'' just how much they really do matter.  Remember, we can never expect to win the game unless all the team members play by the same rules.
Politics, egos nor apathy have a place in animal protection, animal welfare or animal rights movement.  We should ALL be ashamed of ourselves for all the animals who lost their lives this year that MAY HAVE been saved had we been more adult about our efforts.  We only need to convince our society that the results of each persons efforts have far reaching consequences for everyone. THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!
Politics are responsible for this report card.
** In 20 years, Americans have spent $1billiion annually on community based animal control efforts = $20 Billion
** In 20 years Americans have spent $1Billion annually on donations to their favorite national or local org dedicated to the same. + $20 billion
** In 20 years 3,000 non profit orgs dedicated to helping animals have logged an absolute minimum of 25 billion man hours.
Our report card after 20 years?  A lousy 15% reduction in unwanted deaths.  That's about a D-  Thanks to our inability to convince so many that the ''I'm only one person'' is no credible justification, but an ignorant persons excuse for lousing things up