Shelter selling carcasses

This shelter is working on the second expansion to their adoption facility in recent years, and is expecting to be no-kill by 2010. So it's hard to think that this will increase the numbers of animals euthanized, although it could happen [] 

I think this is a good idea. The shelter is NOT going to start killing animals for a lousy $2.50 each and the death of the animals could actually do some good. The shelter will not have to pay to dispose of the bodies and the additional money could be used to improve the shelter or pay for a spay/neuter campaign or some other good thing.
 
This is taking a tragedy (animals being euthanized because of irresponsible humans) and making some good come out of it. If we were talking about human beings would anyone be concerned?
 
But what about the kid murdered by a drunk driver whose parents donate the organs? Or maybe they donate the whole body to a medical school/research facility? Most people would think his parents were being noble, wouldn't they?
 
Personally if I were forced to choose between dying a meaningless death and dying---but having some small bit of good come out of my death I would vote for the good.
 
I always vote for good.
 
[sm=banghead002.gif] What I don't understand is why the Humane Society isn't freaking out and running down to the shelter over the fact that  $8,750 a year divided by $2.50 equals 3,500 animals a year being euthanized at the shelter.
 
That number staggers me. What is the Humane Society's plan for putting a stop to this and finding homes for all these animals?[sm=angry.gif] 
 
 
 

Are you referring to the H$U$?
I have nothing good to say about that org. So I won't say anything lol.

I very much doubt that the shelter concerned is going to suddenly become a business for producing dead dogs for research....  To imply that is really just sensationalising IMO.  How long do they keep a dog before PTS?  How much does it cost to care for the dog for that long and how much does it cost to PTS?  Added together I imagine that comes to more than $2.50.... but I could be wrong.  I just think, if some good can come out of these animals having to be PTS - a better education for some students out there and a little cash back in the kitty for the shelter to care for the remaining living animals - then it must be a good thing.  Although I do believe most people who work in animal rescue don't do it for money it doesn't seem impossible that this may cause the number of animals PTS to increase - maybe this needs to be monitored by an obective outsider.....

March 27, 2007 SALAMONIA, Ind. - Officials are trying to figure out who dumped more than 250 animal carcasses along a creek bank in rural Jay County.
Dogs, cats, raccoons, calves and coyotes were among the dead animals found along the creek in eastern Indiana, about 50 miles south of Fort Wayne. Some of the animals had been skinned.
Conservation officers are investigating to determine where the animals might have come from.
They were found by two women who were walking along the creek last week.
Officials said the carcasses had not been scavenged by other animals and likely had not been there long.
County officials plan to clean up the dead animals starting today after the work was delayed by heavy rains.

See my first thought in reading the above article was those animals are worth $650!

I would rather have them using dead dogs than live ones...odd, but practical and useful.

If something is learned from doing this, then i would say the animals did not live/die in vain.  Through their death it is possible they can help much loved dogs/cats live a longer, healthier life.

If that money goes towards finding homes for other homeless animals, I have no problems with it.  However if there are kickbacks or other political moves associated with it, it is despicable.

If their bodies are going to train new vets and scientists who will save the lives of animals in the future, I really don't have a problem.  It's better than breeding animals simply to kill and disect them, at least they had a chance. 

I think it is a good idea - as Sandra said, at least in some way these poor animals' lives can have some purpose and meaning.

I am also an organ donor.

I am also an organ donor.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart!!! So many lives would be saved if everyone would be a donor. I have no problem using these poor pets to advance science or to train future vets, at least their death wasn't totally pointless. I do however have a huge problem with people not altering their pets and contributing to pet overpopulation.

I too am an organ donor.....hopefully not for a good long time yet tho!  I have one stipulation though.  They can take skin, organs, tissue, bones, whatever they want and whatever still has any use, BUT they can't have my eyes.  Something about going into the furnace without my eyes just really disturbs me.

I couldn't even imagine training a doctor without using real examples.  I would never trust a doctor who learned how to do surgery off of only plastic doll no matter how life-like they were.  In order to learn correctly you have to have real subjects.  Even with modern science we have still been unable to make synthetic body parts that function anywhere near to natural parts.  Even looking at a model is no where near the same as looking inside a real subject and seeing how everything fits and moves together. 
 
In order to learn what is abnormal one would have to study what is normal in order to diagnose an abnormality.  The most important subjects to learn from are the ones with the lest defects.

Your own personal pets can only be given to science with your permission, a vet can not do anything, even a nerocropsy, without your permission once the animal is dead.  I'd rather know the animals who are PTS in the shelters are being used for a good cause rather than being dumped in a land field.

My only question would be "who is going to oversee and monitor the activities of this shelter to make sure someone is not euthanizing more animals rather than less".  The purpose of selling the bodies is a worthy one, for advancements in veterinary medicine...as long as it is overseen by someone who is not just looking to make a shelter profitable, or worse, get their own kickbacks.

I live in an area with a horrible pound and humane society that is a breeding ground for disease and death and an SPCA that is barely starting again after a fire a few years ago and a great lack of support $$ wise and volunteer wise.  If there was any way for our shelters to get some more money in order to help more live animals, to prevent unwanted animals, etc. I would be for it...even if the thought of selling carcasses makes me ill.  It needs to be done as ethically and respectfully as is possible and it better be worth enough to make a difference to the animals that are still in need of care and help. 
 
Karla