Dog Community

Umm...what about the pets here?

Posted : 9/26/2006 1:29:42 PM

[linkhttp://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-9/1159158973301090.xml&coll=1&thispage=1]http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-9/1159158973301090.xml&coll=1&thispage=1[/link]

I think there are probably about 300 pets here in the US that would have liked to be taken to this refuge?
*shaking head*

denise_m

Posted : 9/26/2006 2:07:03 PM

Wow, it's really hard to comment on this story. I am torn thinking how wonderful to rescue dogs from these war inflicted areas and sad to think of all the dogs already in US shelters that no one wants. It seems they are saving these poor dogs at the expense of others.

When I began reading the article the first thing that came to mind was the fact that a big part of Muslim culture is not exactly dog friendly. I am surprised that these dogs were not evaluated prior to the airlift. If they are generally mistreated in their country of origin, I wonder how sound their temperaments will prove to be. It would be an interesting story to follow for sure.

It is estimated that almost half of the Labanese who were evacuated to Canada during the conflict have returned home. I wonder if they are now trying to find their dogs that are on a plane back to North America?

jetty

Posted : 9/26/2006 2:23:24 PM

I read a similar article in my local paper as well. My first thought was shouldn't we be taking care of our own first? If we can't help our own how can we help others?
They are still saving lives which is of utmost importance but I think we need to take care of our

et overpopulation problem before trying to take on more!

fuzzy_dogs_mom

Posted : 9/26/2006 2:32:03 PM

I agree. It's nice that someone is thinking about the pets, but it's not like our shelters are empty. Maybe they could spread some of these abandoned pets around Europe a bit.

Joyce

Julitza

Posted : 9/26/2006 2:55:55 PM

Its like my mom says "To help others you need to first help yourself"

We should work on getting our overpopulated shelters empty first, and then spread the good deeds to other countries. Why take in more than we can chew? Try to adopt out dogs from other countries and take away the homes of our own dogs. Who are we helping?

Pwca

Posted : 9/26/2006 8:23:47 PM

Grrr... this story makes me so angry. $250,000 would have gone a very long way towards saving a LOT more than 300 dogs here in the US. Heck, that's enogh to build and RUN a small county shelter in some parts of the rural US that don't have them.

This is the last straw for me- I've donated to Best Friends in the past (not much, but usually at least something every year) but they've really done a lot of things in recent years that I've disagreed with. Wrote them a letter this morning asking to be taken OFF their mailing list and explaining why my donation dollars will be going elsewhere from now on. My money can be better used to help dogs here in the US.

pofi_pasquale

Posted : 9/26/2006 8:32:46 PM

I'm going to have to buck the trend on this. Best Friends is a favorite of mine and they go to extraordinary lengths to help animals during Katrina and in every day peril in this country. The funds for this effort were donated specifically for this cause. If they can leverage their networking and organizing to help make something happen for suffering animals beyond our borders and they are doing so with donations from like minded individuals, I cannot fault them.

Please read this FAQ at their website for all the details before drawing your conclusions.

[linkhttp://network.bestfriends.org/Campaigns/MiddleEast/MiddleEastFAQ.aspx?g=df6f6a971a5a40ffa6505b6863ee9bd1]http://network.bestfriends.org/Campaigns/MiddleEast/MiddleEastFAQ.aspx?g=df6f6a971a5a40ffa6505b6863ee9bd1[/link]

rwbeagles

Posted : 9/26/2006 8:49:42 PM

Pofi I didn't read it. I don't need to.

However you slice it...there are animals in need HERE that could've been helped with that kind of money and those kinds of rescources. It's everyone's choice what they do with their money...and obviously if they collected the money for this then they did a good job selling the "need' in Lebanon. As far as I am concerned the money would have been better spent stateside...period.

It's not JUST this group either, many other shelters or org's have trucked in or flown in animals from other countries while those here are apparently not as important or there's too much cooperation required or forms to fill out for shelters to 'share animals'...I ain't buying it. This and the other things were done to garner the adoring eye of the media...note the news story. How many non disaster or non sensational animal rescues make the news? Not nearly enough...

rwbeagles

Posted : 9/26/2006 8:56:06 PM

Is it possible with org's like this to state plainly on your donation USA USE ONLY.....perhaps that is an option? I guess anything's possible lol, just have to depend on them to respect your wishes.

(I think the letter is a great idea...esp if more than a few folks who have donated do the same...)

pofi_pasquale

Posted : 9/26/2006 10:20:20 PM

We'll have to agree to disagree, then, Gina, respectfully. To me this is no different then any aid organization having a membership interested in addressing a specific need and since the funds are entirely given by those who want to render that aid, I don't have a problem. It's no different then my specifically donating to the Red Cross Tsunami funds or Katrina funds.

I feel they responded to an interest their members had; since the vast majority of their work is in the US and they have been a leading force in the no kill movement in this country, I don't see any conflict. I contribute to their US efforts; when a crisis happens, natural or man made, I might dig deeper and give up something extra to reach beyond the borders and offer compassion. It's not a contribution made at the expense of animals here.

inne

Posted : 9/26/2006 11:53:52 PM

I think this is wonderful. In Lebanon, there aren't widespread shelters and rescue organisations like in the US and people who have had their entire lives and livelihoods destroyed are not the best population to target for adopting. What matters is that these animals are being taken care of; I don't see why it has to be an either/or issue.

tina robinson

Posted : 9/27/2006 2:37:45 AM

I am sorry I agree with almost everyone else, until the shelters here are empty there is no need ton import more to fill them. I thought the same thing when 7 or so years ago people were trying to raise 10,000 dollars to bring 1! dog form some country. Why??? Just so some person can go adopt and have a great story with their adoption?? It is wrong I agree that 250,000 could have go to much much much better uses for animals in the US.

Pwca

Posted : 9/27/2006 5:34:34 AM

Oh- my other problem with BF?

They're anti-purebred and anti-responsible breeder. Apparently we're all terrible people for not adopting when there are still dogs in shelters, and breed resce is just one step down from breed specific legislation, we should all just be happy with any random dog that fits our exercise and coat requirements.*grumble*

Forget it. I love my collie kiddo, and I don't WANT a collie-sized labrador mix.

pofi_pasquale

Posted : 9/27/2006 8:05:32 AM

I have to say I'd not noticed the prejudice you are attributing to BF, Pwca. I'm not challenging you on it, I may not have noticed as I'm not a pure bred owner or breeder. I'll try to read with more discernment on this issue.

Lena (Penny Forever)

Posted : 9/27/2006 8:14:42 AM

Lisa Marie

[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]

You've got one heck of a good heart Lady