Conference misery::feline_v1

    Elaine - I received the articles you sent me in the mail and read
    them word for word.  They were simply awful!
    
    All I can say is that I brought 4 stray kittens and 1 cat (adopted
    by a fellow Deccie) to the Sterling Shelter last year after all
    other area shelters turned me away due to overcrowding.  Like you,
    they required a cash-only donation which I considered odd because
    the Framingham Animal Humane Society accepted a check for Nikki.
    
    I found Sterling to have beautiful, clean and roomy accommodations
    for the animals.  Although I was not impressed with the woman who
    runs the shelter, the animals appeared healthy and well cared for.
    What I find odd is that they never turn an animal away and never
    seem overcrowded.  What tactics they are using to achieve this,
    I don't know; however, I would like to believe that this shelter
    has only the best intentions of the animals.
    
    Thank you for sharing the articles with me.
    
    
    /Roberta
    

    
    
    	Please keep us posted on this situation.  How horrible to think
    	you leave an animal in these shelter to be cared for and find
    	out this horror story.  I have never dealt with either shelter,
    	but I have relatives in the area, and I would like to warn them
    	if these stories are true.  
    
    	Thanks so much for your deligence in running down as much info
    	as you can.  People like you make a difference.
    
    	-Dee
    

    On the advice of a concerned individual I have delete my previous
    response.  In 1977 I worked at the Pepperell Shelter.  If anyone
    suspects animal abuse PLEASE contact the authorities.  The Mass.
    SPCA has been very helpful to me in the past.
    
    MaryAnne

    I think I'm going to be sick......
    
    I called them on the recommendation of two people I work with
    and Jack was going to take Tym out yesterday.  Fortunately
    I happened to mention it to someone who works for another
    humane society and she told me not to take Tym there under
    any circumstances and she told me why.  Thank God I
    was warned.
    
    I have one issue with the rules in this notesfile.  While
    you guys were hassling over how to handle this situation, I
    was calling Sterling Animal shelter to get information on
    taking Tym there.  If I hadn't just happened to mention it
    to the right person, Tym would be there now as I didn't see
    this note until today, Thursday morning.

          I think that where something like this is involved a warning
    should be posted immediately even if its against the rules
    to print all the reasons.  I would have been FURIOUS if Tym
    ended up there because of these rules!
    
      And please don't give me a list of reasons for them either.
    I know there are good reasons and we must figure out a way to
    handle this situation that fits within the established guidelines
    of the notes files.
      Thanks
       Nancy

    I want to clarify something about my previous reply. 
    
    > I think that where something like this is involved a warning
    > should be posted immediately even if its against the rules
    > to print all the reasons.  

    I'm hoping folks are reading the entire sentence here and not
    just to the word 'rules'.  I am not advocating that we do something
    that is clearly against the rules.  As I said, I'm sure they
    exist for a very good reason and even if i didn't think that
    it would be useless to suggest that we violate them. That is
    not my intent.
    
    My intent is to point out a potential danger and to suggest we
    take a good look at that particular rule and determine a way
    to satisfy the rule and still get the important information
    across ASAP.  Sometimes a few days can make a difference.
      Nancy DC
    

    I agree with the last note. After all, we are all animal
    lovers in this notesfile. If all that's been reported
    is true about this particular animal shelter operator
    (Mr. Elliot) is there anything that we the citizens
    of this state (and surrounding area) can do to stop
    him from ever operating a "shelter" again? From what
    has been written here, it sounds like something from a
    Nazi death camp. I just can't sit here thinking that
    animals are being so cruelly treated.
    
    The Ethoxyquin note was written out of concern for
    our dear animals. Name brands were mentioned. This
    note really helped a lot of us out, and I have since
    taken action to benefit my pets. I am thankful for
    that. What is the difference in these two notes?
    Their sole aim was to protect animals. The originator
    of this note on Mr. Elliott quotes articles from 
    newspaper sources - read by the public.
    
    What can be done in this case? I'm very upset by this.
    
    lp
                                                          

I think there is a very basic misunderstanding here.  

Yes, we all love animals in this file and want what is best for them.
And we all think we know what is best for them and how to influence
others to that point of view.  And we are using DEC resources to do
so.  That's the problem.

You can do whatever you want outside of work in this arena.  You can
suggest boycotts and write letters and make libelous or slanderous
statements about people or organizations you perceive to be wrong
(within the bounds of what's legal in your country).  I wouldn't
dream of stopping anyone from doing that.

But when you do this using DEC resources (DEC machines, DEC phones,
DEC interoffice mail, etc.) then DEC can be construed as supporting
your position and can be sued.  You might ask how information that
is in a DEC notesfile can get out of the company to someone who
might sue DEC.  All I can say is that things like this have happened
before and will probably happen again.  There's really no way to stop
it.  DEC is a huge company and most employees have access to the network
and you don't know who is reading your notes or what their point
of view is and how scrupulous or unscrupulous they might be.

As such, we have instituted rules to allow you to discuss problems
with products, people, or other issues regarding cats without
involving DEC legally.  Those rules are stated in 1.18.  All you
have to do is abide by those rules.

There is a big difference between this note and the one on ethoxyquin.
The one on ethoxyquin consists of mostly substantiated facts and there
is nothing slanderous going on there that I have seen.  The note last
week that was hidden on the subject of the Sterling Shelter made
allegations about the person running that shelter.  I asked the
author of the note to print facts, not allegations, and to quote
primary sources (eg newspaper articles) when possible.  She re-wrote
her note to do so and included the caveat that the note reflects her
opinion and not DEC's.  Therefore, the note is now OK (altho one noter
has expressed doubts about whether that is even good enough).

Does this make it clearer?

Pam                                                          

    
    I can understand the concern of something being written that may
    be open to a lawsuit.
    
    Yet, this note has the disclaimer, the statements from newspapers
    state from where, and the author is very clear about what is her
    opinion.
    
    There really must be someway of alerting people that there is a note
    that may contain information of vital importance.  Not necessarily
    a warning but something that says such and such a note should be 
    read as soon as possible.
    
    I seem to remember reading about the Pepperell situation.  I think
    the Worcester paper carried an article that included pictures.  
    Unless I'm remembering the place in NH.  The pictures showed half-
    starved, skin and bones animals in total filth.  I can't remember
    which situation the pictures went with.
    

    RE: 8. 
    
    What ever happened to the animals in the Pepperill 
    "shelter" that were pictured in the newspaper you
    saw. Did they get rescued, or were they beyond
    care? I'm curious. (How long ago was all this?)
    
    lp
    
    

    re .8
    
    The articles regarding the Pepperell situation were from
    many, many years ago if I read the base note correctly.
    If you're remembering something recent I think it might
    be the Animals Farm Home in NH run by Justin (?) that was
    recently shut down by authorities.

    I DIDN'T REALIZE THIS WOULD CAUSE SO MUCH TROUBLE.  I JUST WANTED
    PEOPLE WHO WHERE THINKING OF BRINGING THERE CATS TO THE STERLING
    SHELTER TO BE AWARE OF GUS IS LIKE.  I DON'T REMEBER HER FIRST
    NAME BUT MISS MACDONALD WHO WORKED AT THE PEPERELL SHELTER WHEN
    GUS RAN THAT WROTE A VERY INTERESTING REPLY, BUT SHE CHOSE TO REMOVE
    IT. 
    
    PERSONALLY I AM AFRAID THAT IF GUS IS TOLD ABOUT THIS HE MAY TRY
    TO HARRASE ME WITH PHONE CALLS.  SINCE HE HAS A HISTORY OF IT.
    
    
    I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I AM ACTING ONLY AS A MEDIUM IN THIS
    CASE.  I HAVE TAKEN TEXT FROM NEWSPAPER ARTICLES, I DID NOT WRITE
    THE ARTICLES.  I ALSO HAVE INCLUDED MY EXPERIENCE AS A PET ADOPTER
    WITH THEM.  
    
    IF YOU DOUBT THE CORRECTNESS OF THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES FINE, I
    DIDN'T WRITE THEM.  IF YOU DOUBT THAT THE ARTICLES EXIST FINE SEND
    ME YOUR NAME TO LEVERS::E_MCDONALD AND I WILL SEND YOU COPIES.
                  
    IF YOU FEEL THAT I HAVE DONE A SERIOUS INJUSTICE TO THE STERLING
    SHELTER, I WILL REMOVE THE NOTE.  JUST TELL ME.  I HAVE NO
    PERSONAL GRUDGE WITH THESE PEOPLE.  I JUST DON'T THINK THAT ITS
    A GOOD PLACE.  I HAVE SPENT ABOUT 40 HRS OF MY TIME TALKING TO PEOPLE
    FROM STERLING, PEPERELL AS WELL AS OTHER SHELTERS IN THE LOCAL AREA.
    
    FYI: I DID REPORT THE INCIDENT TO THE MSPCA HOTLINE.  THIS WAS A
    YEAR AGO AND I NEVER SAW ANY RESULTS AND WAS NEVER CONTACTED AGAIN.
    
    SO I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE CONTACT ME AND ASK FOR THE ARTICLES OR
    ASK ME TO REMOVE THE NOTE IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.  I WOULD
    RATHER REMOVE THE NOTE THAN BE HARRASSED BY GUS BUT I WOULD ADD
    ANOTHER NOTE SUGGESTING THAT CAT OWNERS CALL A SECOND SHELTER OR
    THE MSPCA BEFORE THEY GIVE UP A CAT TO ANY SHELTER.
    
    I MAY END UP REMOVING THE NOTE SIMPLY TO AVOID THE POSSIBILITY OF
    BEING HARRASSED.
    
    ELAINE

    re. 9
    
    As I said, I'm not certain that was Pepperill.  Whichever it was,
    the pictures were taken as the animals were being removed by ASPCA
    people.  If I'm remembering this correctly, some animals were found
    dead, others in advanced states of malnutrition.  I don't think I
    ever saw a follow-up story.
    
    The pictures were heart-wrenching.  That anyone could do such things
    to defenseless animals hurt and made me angry as h*ll.  If I had
    been near that person, I'm not sure what I would have done.  Wish
    the person could have had to live the same life (like the story
    about the guy in the garbage dump)!
    
    It is possible my husband saved the articles.  I'll check tonight.
    If so, I'll let people know tomorrow.
    

    Are there organizations that oversee animal shelters to
    prevent this kind of cruelty?
    
    
    Re. .11
    
    I am GLAD you put this article in. I applaud you. I hope
    you did not interpret any of my messages negative towards
    you. On the contrary! But, I hope it does not get you into
    any difficulties.
    
    
    Thanks!
    
    lp
    
                                 

    
    Elaine,
    
    	I'm not certain what has upset you in the responses.  I know
    I didn't doubt that what you quoted from the newspapers was anything
    other than what was there.
    
    	I for one appreciate the fact that you put the warning in this
    file.  I haven't had cause to use the Sterling Shelter.  However, I
    do live in Worcester and should the Worcester Shelter ever be full,
    the closest for me would probably be the Sterling Shelter.  After
    reading your note, I will go to any lengths to avoid using Sterling.
    
    	I believe the person that responded about the pictures is correct.
    It very likely that the article and pictures I was remembering was
    NH.  It hasn't been long since I saw the article.
    
    	Once again, I thank you for writing your note.
    
    Faith
    

    I for one was glad to see the base note! This is the kind of thing
    that goes on too often, and for too long before anyone dares to
    step forward and inform the public.
    
    Thanks for sharing the information.
    
    Kirk

    Sorry for being so touchy.  I have a reason to be.  I have mentioned
    the reason to Pat Murphy who sent me seperate mail.  I won't mention
    the reason here because someone mentioned earlier that these notes
    may get to unscrupulous people outside of DEC and I dont want to
    make my own fears come true.
    
    By the way, I have sent the articles and note to Pat who will forward
    them to some orginizations she knows that may be helpful.
    
    Elaine

    Elaine -
      I am extreemly appreciative that you put this note in.  I too
    get sick when i think about animal abuse and don't know what I
    would do if I ever came across someone torturing an animal.
    My concern was strictly over the delay - and I don't blame you
    at all for it - and the emotional reaction was to the thought
    of Tym being abused.
      Perhaps what is called for here is better understanding on
    the part of all of us regarding the rules for this notesfile.
    I for one intend to spend some more time getting really familiar
    with the rules.
       I applaud you for speaking up and hope you don't feel that
    I was attacking you.
      Nancy DC
    

    Uh....so where IS the base note?????
    
    kim

    Not to get into a rat hole, but I'm curious - are all the folks
    who are lamenting such terrible animal abuse in the shelters and
    other places vegetarians?

    	This is all very interesting reading, however those of us that
    never had a chance to read the base note have no idea what it is
    all about. I realise there may be many reasons for the base note
    being deleted, and I do not question that. But it would be great
    if someone could put a short reply in here giving us a hint of what
    was said. If it is going to open up a line of attack on someone,
    please disregard this note, .......but if it contained information
    that may be valuable to others, please tell us......
     
    
    
    One last thing--- re.19
    
    
    	I am confused with your question? Are you insinuating that those
    who are concerned with animal abuse have no claim if they are not
    vegitarians? Or are you coming across with the idea that only
    vegitarians fight these issues? Please (if only for my understanding-
    because at times I do read too much into statements) go into a little
    more depth with your question.
     
                                  curt
    

    re: .19 - I don't want to get into a discussion about the 
    meat industry.  It needs work!
    
    To answer your question - I don't eat red meat.  I'll eat poultry
    and fish, but nothing else.  If you want to continue the discussion
    we should probably use mail.
      Nancy DC

    
    I'm as curious as Curt is regarding the vegetarian question.  I have
    trouble seeing a relationship at all.
    
    Faith
    

    re: abuse & being vegetarian
    
    I assumed that the connection had to do with the meat industry in
    this country and the abuses connected to that.  It could be construed
    as hypocrital to speak out against animal abuse while continuing
    to eat meat thereby supporting a particular type of animal abuse.
    That's why I didn't want to get into a discussion of the topic.
    I suspect its a "rathole".
      Nancy DC
    

    Nancy is correct.  I do think it is hypocritical to speak out against
    animal abuse when the animal in question is a pet, but to ignore
    the terrible suffering that most farm/meat industry animals go through.
    
    Re: a few back:I think it's sad that you couldn't see the connection.  
    Maybe now  you will.  Animal suffering and abuse isn't limited only
    to cats, dogs or horses.  Think about the cows, baby calves, chickens
    and fish the next time you eat one.  Death is about as abusive as
    you can get. 

    I know this is a rathole, as I indicated in my original comment.
    So - I won't say more.

    RE24
    
     	I feel a very strong urge to comment in length on this subject,
    but will refrain from doing so only because it seems this has been
    discussed before, and many would rather not rehash it.
    
    	I do however have a few things to say. 
    <re: a few back. I think it's sad you could not see the connection.
    < maybe you will now.
    
    	I think this was referring to my past reply asking for further
    explaination.. (Under Tplvax::Whiteway) If so..............
    Slow down please. I (believe me) did make the connection.... I just
    have a very hard time understanding why people make these kind of
    statements. I personally do think about the cows, chickens, etc
    that you have mentioned. But because I do eat meat DOES NOT exempt
    me from feeling..... I agree that death is as abusive as you can
    get, and I personally congratulate those that do not eat meat. 
    
    BUT..............................
                                              
    please press next unseen if you are bored, because this is going
    to be longer than I originally thought.
    
    	Do not judge everyone so harshly... I suppose because I eat
    meat, I should not ever even think about animal abuse? Am I to assume
    then that I should disregard the stray kittens in my back yard and
    let them fend for themselves? Should I just turn my back on a nearby
    neighbor that has over 150 cats in cages and five dogs in small
    boxes not big enough to turn around in?    
    
    	I am sorry, but this way of thinking borders on the same lines
    as the next statement: " If you have in the past been divorsed,
    you should have your children taken away because you are unfit."
    I have eaten meat. Because I do so does not make me any less caring,
    or any less emotional. As a matter of fact, I think at times quite
    the opposite is true. Do not generalize; whether it be hypocracy
    or any other topic, you will offend those that do not border the
    standards you set up. 
    
    	I am sorry if I rambled..... One last thing. I would hate to
    see this world right now if only vegitarians were able to participate
    in animal rights affairs. (***I do not mean this to be sarcastic****)
    There are too many animal abuse issues out there, and with all the
     vegitarians and non vegitarians out there we still can not solve
    them all.
                 

    Sorry you got offended.  I was not referring to your initial inquiry
    to expand on my statement, but rather to note 2599.22 in which the
    person said she had "trouble seeing a relationship at all."

    Curt, I can tell by your past notes that you are a caring and
    compassionate person.  My question is this:  what is your neighbor
    doing with all those animals and why haven't the authorities been
    contacted?  That sentence hit me the hardest and I am still thinking
    about those poor animals all cooped up.  Those people MUST be turned
    in!  Please don't think I am directing this next statment at you,
    it is merely a generalization:
    
    So many times we hear of people knowing about an abuse/neglect case
    but afraid to speak up because the person owning the animals would
    surely know who turned them in and seek revenge.  Hence, the animals
    continue to suffer, and in my opinion, this is just as bad as watching
    a person get raped and not doing anything because of fear of getting
    involved and being found out.
    
    Curt, I will be thinking about those poor animals for a long time
    now, just as I do everytime I pass a pet shop and see the animals
    in small, crowded cages barely able to move.  Can we help you turn
    these people in?  Surely they are guilty of abuse!
    
    Regards,
    Roberta
    

    re 26
    	Hi ya.... I was not offended by you. (Not by any means).  And
    thank you for clarifying .22 as the note you were referring to.
    But then again, I feel the same way as .22. I do not undestand the
    correlation between the two.
    
    re last
    
    	The instance I brought up about the (person) with 150 cats,etc.
    bothers the hell out of me too. I am working this issue, and will
    continue to do so. I heard quite a while ago (Thru the grapevine)
    about the situation. Since then have done a little research myself.
    I realise now the person does not look at it as an abusive situation.
    Actually how this person cares has got to be applauded.(He/she really
    does seem to care for animals). But it borders the eccentric and hints
    of abuse in my eyes. I have contacted two agencies so far and I
    am waiting to hear from them. If Nothing pans out I will contact
    as many agencies, groups, persons, etc...as I possible can to resolve
    the present situation.         
    
    curt
    

    
    .22 responding here
    
    What I meant by seeing the relationship is the relationship between
    vegetarians and the base note.  I had read the base note.  I can 
    understand and accept a vegetarians rights to their feelings, whether
    I agree with them or not.
    
    I was curious why this particular issue was brought up in this note and
    not some of the other notes that discuss abuse.
    
    Just because I eat meat does not mean I cannot be concerned about
    animal abuse.  I believe it was Tim's recent note regarding this.  I
    agree wholeheartedly with him.
    
    I also don't feel that this is the place to get into the "rathole"
    (thank you Nancy for that word) regarding vegetarianism vs meat-eating.
    That is an argument that has been going on for many years and as far as
    I can tell, has no solution except to agree to disagree.
    
    Faith
    

    
    	I'm not convinced meat-eating has to be cruel; it is natural (our
    pets do it).  You could say death is abusive (someone did), but meat
    animals probably have worse lives than deaths, if you know what I mean. 
    I'm so confused sometimes--most Americans would consider it an act of
    cruelty to eat a dog or cat except in extreme circumstances, and eat
    cows regularly.  In other countries eating a cow is the terrible act. 
    The only consistency I can figure out is that the animal is entitled to
    the best possible quality of LIFE no matter how it dies.
    
    	This is an observation of what I feel to be a generality.  The last
    statement is the one I wholeheartedly agree with.  I will not discuss
    adequate reasons for death because that's more subjective (that's the
    rathole part).  And I am an American, a comment above may suggest to
    the contrary.  Meat-eaters would not necessarily be inconsistent to
    improve the life of any animal (IMHO).

    I just wanted to make two comments.  
    1.  I agree with .30 that meat-eating does not have to be cruel.
    I personally restrict my diet (as does my husband) to fish and poultry
    for a number of reasons.  My belief is that any animal deserves
    a comfortable life and a painless death.  That's where the abuse
    part comes in.  
    
    2. We are all concerned about animal welfare and we all do our best.
    The animal abuse issue is so overwhelming that one person could
    not possible hope to contribute to a solution for every single issue.
    Everytime one of us changes his/her life style or helps out an animal
    or even just sends a check into one of the agencies or groups, it
    takes some effort.  Just consider trying to purchase products that
    are not animal tested.
      We are creatures of limited energies.  We all have to work, to
    care for our loved ones and to have some time to ourselves to replenish
    the stores.  If we tried to go off in 50 directions at the same
    time we would do little good if any for any of those 50 causes we
    try to help.  
      Between all of us, tho, as a group we CAN make an impact in every
    area of animal abuse.  So each of us has to pick his/her opportunities
    and use them.  
      Selective perception is a protection mechanism.  We have to screen
    out certain things to survive.  That may mean that we eat all meats
    and do not think about how the animal was raised while volunteering
    10 hrs a week at a local shelter.  That's NOT Hypocritical, that's
    realistic and human.
      I'm not advocating a complacent attitude, I'm pointing out that
    as humans we have limitations on how much we can realistically expect
    of ourselves in day to day life.  We shouldn't have to feel guilty
    about it.
    
      Thanks for reading....
        Nancy DC
    
    
    

    
    re 31.
    
    	Great note.... Says all that needs be said.
    

    I'm sorry to be so late on this note but I am trying to catch up
    on notes after a long break...I do not want to enter the vegetarian
    issue but I would like to know what the original base note said.
    
    If it cannot be printed here can someone please mail me on what
    it said to    SHAPES::TAYLORS  or  FIELD::TAYLOR
    
    Surely there is no rule against that!!!
    
    Sharon