Trending
Dear Editor:
At their Aug. 18 regular meeting, Hancock County commissioners quietly accepted, under “correspondence” on the agenda, an unsolicited letter from PETA expressing support for the commission in taking over direct operation of the county animal shelter.
They shouldn’t have been so quiet.
PETA – those animal rights activists who throw paint on women wearing fur coats – is saying the Hancock County Animal Shelter Foundation has it wrong and the commission has it right.
Wow.
“So-called ‘no-kill’ and ‘low-kill’ policies slam the door on at-risk animals,” stated Teresa Chagrin in the PETA letter, dated Aug. 8.
She identified herself as an Animal Care and Control Specialist in the Cruelty Investigations Department of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). She stated she learned of the Hancock County situation from a news story.
Chagrin wrote, in part, “No one wants to euthanize animals, but for many animals who were born as a result of irresponsible owners and for whom there simply are no homes, a peaceful death is often the most humane and merciful outcome. Leaving these animals out of shelter statistics may make some people feel better – but only at the animals’ expense. Homeless animals on the streets endure prolonged deaths after being hit by cars, succumbing to the elements or disease, or sustaining injuries inflicted by cruel people who consider them a nuisance, resulting in the birth of even more animals in the community, only to suffer and die. …
“We also wholeheartedly agree that forcing animals to languish in kennels and cages for months or years on end is cruel. ‘No-kill’ policies don’t address the root cause of the animal-overpopulation crisis and instead cause animals to endure fates that are far worse than a peaceful end in the arms of caring professionals.”
Foundation spokespersons have repeatedly stated their policy that euthanasia of a companion animal is never justified except to end incurable medical pain and suffering. The practical application of that policy means that aggressive dogs, feral cats, continually barking dogs, cats that destroy furniture, animals with chronic or treatable illnesses or injuries (possibly requiring expensive medical care), and pets generally unwanted or unadoptable, will be treated and kept alive, caged and cared for, indefinitely, while potentially adoptable animals are turned away at the door because of overcrowding.
Foundation supporters have asked over and over again why the commission would offer them a contract whose terms they knew would be absolutely unacceptable. The answer is contained in the question: the commission obviously does not trust the foundation leadership to run the shelter anymore.
At one commission meeting, I heard a foundation supporter (one of 10 regulars who berate the commission at every meeting) said that every animal shelter in the region uses waiting lists when full. If those shelters are taxpayer-supported, as in Hancock County, I suggest those counties or municipalities take their shelters back like our commissioners did.
Bravo for them.
Fred Miller
New Cumberland