If the AWL chooses to sell animals to a lab, should they not ask the owners to sign an agreement stating that their animal may not have the chance of finding a suitable home, as it may in other rescues and shelters, and this could be the final disposition of their animal.
There are other alternatives to selling these animals to companies such as Nasco. Studies also suggest that exposing younger people to animal dissection as "science" can foster a callousness towards animals and nature.
There is a surplus of dogs and cats for which there are not, and probably never will be, suitable homes. Twenty-five percent of all dogs and cats in America will pass through a shelter each year. And as many as 90 percent of them will be put to death. And whose fault is this?
The animals suffer because of us. I worked hard at helping put the mandatory spay/neuter program into effect and am proud to say that during my time as medical technician at the shelter, no animal was released to it's new owners until it was altered. What took years to put into place (and a generous beginning grant from Betty, Janet and Lucy Morgan), was destroyed by the current AWL Board.
The shelter is back to using vouchers, which were proven not to work. Only responsible people will use them. It only takes a few minutes for that animal to breed, and continue the AWL's own problem of too many unwanted animals. I am furious that a veterinarian on the AWL Board wanted this stopped because he was not the one doing the surgeries, even though he was given the opportunity.
And, yes, pregnant animals are euthanized because of the cost and health issues of being raised in the shelter. When a pregnant animal is euthanized it does not kill the fetus. The fetuses die of suffocation.
I am so tired of being called a disgruntled ex-employee. I was more disgruntled when I worked there because of the lack of the board standing up for what was right. Nice to see that nothing has changed. Also, the letter about animals being happy to give their life for another animal cracked me up.
Animals' only instinct is survival. Animals kill animals to survive. They don't will their organs to each other. How many in the community are aware that if you surrender your pet to the AWL, their policy is that they can do with that animal as they wish within one day, strays three days? How upset would you get if your pet escaped from you on Friday and even though you did everything you were suppose to do to find it, you discovered on Tuesday that your pet had been at the AWL, but because they didn't think it was there and it passed the 3-day mark, it was euthanized on Monday but you could not get there because the shelter is closed on Monday?
Or because it was pregnant, it was immediately euthanized? Once again, I am not disgruntled. I want the public to open their eyes and start asking hard questions of the AWL Board. Oh, I forgot. They will not open their meetings or financial records to anyone.
Even though, until the new board president took over, they were open to anyone. Now, instead they throw out statements such as the one we saw in the Employees Letter to the Editor.
"Only a few cats are euthanized, and only when necessary". Yet, Darla McCammon, in her presentation at the City of Warsaw's Budget meeting, said that the AWL took in over 3,000 animals last year and is on track to bring in 4,000 this year.
Now, I am no math wizard, and Darla may claim to have one of the highest adoption rates in the state (but again, this is all heresay as Ms. McCammon and the board will not make any of their records available for inspection), but I find it a little far-fetched to say that "few" are euthanized. I have nothing to gain from this but I do hope that everyone will be concerned for the animals sake.
