Lokipups Posted April 6, 2005 Share Posted April 6, 2005 Holy sh*#, has anyone else seen this :o ? And this is ok by Colorado law? What is wrong with these people :( :x ?! [url]http://www.wftv.com/news/4343579/detail.html[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin the musher Posted April 6, 2005 Share Posted April 6, 2005 Yeah, I heard about it. There is a bit more to the story than meets the eye, apparently there is some "bad blood" issues here between owner/employees. At least that's what I heard. Still doesn't excuse what has allegedly happened. :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShatteringGlass Posted April 6, 2005 Share Posted April 6, 2005 that's awful :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowie-the-Pooh Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 :(... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddysMom Posted April 9, 2005 Share Posted April 9, 2005 I read the Denver Post articles. Absolutely sickening. It seems to be not only legal but actually common practice. And the scumbag's vet vouched for him. $$$$$. In a follow up he said he'd consider doing his "culling" via injection "as a PR measure." Somehow these operations need to be put out of business, but the law has no teeth. The rich tourists need to know what they are paying for and stop it. BTW I don't think Colorado is the only state where this goes on legally. Anyone know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtnek Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 ok I'm going to pay devils advocate..what are the odds of these dogs being adopted? and if they are extremely high, and the dogs will have to live in cages, in a shelter, which is better? what they are doing is wrong, I agree with that, but whats best for the dogs? really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddysMom Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='courtnek']ok I'm going to pay devils advocate..what are the odds of these dogs being adopted? and if they are extremely high, and the dogs will have to live in cages, in a shelter, which is better? what they are doing is wrong, I agree with that, but whats best for the dogs? really...[/quote] OK I think I know where you're going and will try to answer. I don't know what the chances are for being adopted (probably pretty good) or whether they would work out in most adoptive homes (probably pretty bad). To me the point is not just, what about these 250 dogs but, what about the hundreds, maybe thousands to follow if he is allowed to remain in business? I believe he is breeding them himself ... they are a commodity. So I guess the answer as to what's best for the dogs is ... that they are not born to begin with? I personally don't have a problem with the shooting versus injection part. It is the fact that they are disposable when not money makers, that makes me sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtnek Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='desertlady'][quote name='courtnek']ok I'm going to pay devils advocate..what are the odds of these dogs being adopted? and if they are extremely high, and the dogs will have to live in cages, in a shelter, which is better? what they are doing is wrong, I agree with that, but whats best for the dogs? really...[/quote] OK I think I know where you're going and will try to answer. I don't know what the chances are for being adopted (probably pretty good) or whether they would work out in most adoptive homes (probably pretty bad). To me the point is not just, what about these 250 dogs but, what about the hundreds, maybe thousands to follow if he is allowed to remain in business? I believe he is breeding them himself ... they are a commodity. So I guess the answer as to what's best for the dogs is ... that they are not born to begin with? I personally don't have a problem with the shooting versus injection part. It is the fact that they are disposable when not money makers, that makes me sick.[/quote] I agree 100% with that. the breeding should be stopped. but the dogs already born, used, what of them? should they live their lives in cages, never being adopted, or should they be allowed to go quietly, without pain? I have a lot of issues with rescues. if the dogs have to live their lives (years and years) in a cage, in a shelter, is that good? or is it better to let them go where there is no pain. no suffering, no hurt? what kind of life is it to spend years in a cage? where do we draw the line??? :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddysMom Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='courtnek']but the dogs already born, used, what of them? should they live their lives in cages, never being adopted, or should they be allowed to go quietly, without pain? I have a lot of issues with rescues. if the dogs have to live their lives (years and years) in a cage, in a shelter, is that good? or is it better to let them go where there is no pain. no suffering, no hurt? what kind of life is it to spend years in a cage? where do we draw the line???[/quote] OK now I really know what you're saying ... and totally agree. It's like, here in my city we have the no kill HS and the county animal shelter. The county euthanizes dogs they can't adopt while the HS keeps them for years on end, in cages. After much inner debate I have decided the county shelter way is better. On another note there is a third rescue society here that has foster volunteers only. But I have always wondered how this works. (Isn't fostering then, in essence adoption?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtnek Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 fostering is "pre-adoption"...people keep the dogs in their homes to assess them as to how they react to children, other animals, loud noises, etc. a properly assessed dog(hard to do in a shelter because its not the same environment as a home) is much easier to place. the foster parents can tell the adopter what needs this dog has, how it reacts to situations, etc. it makes for a much better adoption when the people know how the dog will react in a home setting. of course, sometimes it backfires, and the fosters end up keeping the dog, but I still think its better. Laurel was fostered, and her foster mom was able to tell me all her isues, fears, problems, so I knew what I was getting into going in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsgalore Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 I agree with Courtnek, and why are they still breeding more when they kill so many a year?!. Our Humane Society is a no-kill shelter however the dogs are not kept in cages most of the time. One dog has been there for 6 years and another for 4. The six year old dog has free run in a few rooms almost all the time. When someone is at the shelter, which is fairly often, the dogs are out of the kennels, playing outside, being walked by the volunteers, etc. Not that all shelters are like this unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin the musher Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 I'll help Courtnek out here. If these are true working sled dogs, either racing or running tours, they were probably running 1500 miles a season at leasr. The majority would not do well if suddenly asked to be couch potatos. Even Huskies who are not sled trained can be destructive if not given something to do. There is a shelter in Alaska ( Second Chance League, I think) that places retired sled dogs. There was a team (90% shelter dogs) that ran and finished the Yukon Quest this year. Longer and tougher than the Iditarod. There are people who care. If I can find the addy for the site I will post it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lokipups Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 Pumpkin, are you talking about SCAMPS? I've got their site right here :) [url]http://members.petfinder.org/~AK17/index.php[/url] And, yes, I definitely agree with the comments about the drive of a Sibe or working Husky, but what chafes my arse about this whole mess is that the dogs are used to pull tourists, that's it. Not racing dogs, not going great distances that are hard on the body, they pull for people's amusement only (and after dinner rides :roll: ). Professional mushers treat their animals better than this guy does I'll bet. And if they're being used in this manner, then he needs to rethink his "breeding" program a bit better. Not to mention the fact that this jackass is charging $225. for an adult, $175. for kids, for a two hour run. Just thinking about the math and the profit margin makes me ill. I have no problems with humane euthanasia, I'd rather see a dog put down quietly than spin in a crate for years on end, but shooting them in the head is not humane, and then to keep contributing to the existing problem by overbreeding is downright nauseating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin the musher Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I agree- the posts about this on a sled dog forum I go to have been locked for some time- lots of strong feelings. . The rescue site that I saw was associated with John Schandelmeier, a long time Alaska musher. Not only did his shelter dogs finish the race, they finished very respectably. If I remember right is was simply called AK Shelter Team. Found it! [url]http://members.petfinder.org/~AK17/index.php[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.