Petfinder.com forums :: View topic

Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:25 pm Post subject:

Even if a rescues practices are widely considered to be wrong the animals in their care still deserve a chance to be saved. They could be taken in and evaluated by another agency. The animals come first regardless of where they are unlucky/lucky enough to reside. You might want to change wherever you post this opinion information to "do not surrender or turn in animals" to these organizations. Do not adopt to be a death sentence for a pet that could be magic in the life of the right person. People have said that they come to the shelter where we volunteer because they know we do everything we can to save every animal instead of testing before they can even adjust to a crazy shelter atmosphere and then putting them down because they didn't do well on test day. I tell them that I always want to save all of ours but not to avoid other shelters because those animals deserve a chance, too and they didn't get to choose which bars they ended up behind.

Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 3:56 pm Post subject:

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:05 am Post subject:

I think you may put yourself at risk for litigation if you "slander" someone and they find out about it. If you have something in print in a public forum with your name attached to it, they may be able to go after you. Does anyone know if this is the case?

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:27 pm Post subject: slander?

For years now Iams has been publicly accused of cruelty to the dogs and cats owned by Iams and/or used in Iamsâ€™ contract laboratories. If there were any valid libel or slander issues, donâ€™t you think Proctor & Gamble, the mega giant corporation that owns Iams, would have filed a lawsuit a long time ago?

They canâ€™t because in order to prove slander P&G would have to prove that the allegations are untrue. Additionally, P&G would have to prove that the accusatory statements were made with â€œactual maliceâ€? which means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth.

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 7:52 am Post subject:

I posted one yesterday that appears to have been deleted. It was legitimate and the man tried to get another pit who he might have gotten without the DNA. I did not post the name and told people to PM or write to me for it. As a rescue I believe that I have the responsibility to pass along ACCURATE information about people seeking dogs for purposes other than being a pet.

I didn't know that DNAs weren't allowed here as this is pretty much the only forum I read and nothing was posted. Most forums allow them if no name and address is posted. I'm saddened that PF does not allow them at all, even if posted in a way that does not identify the person, but does alert people who need to know, with contact info for more details available.

Posting nonsense ones happens, but you can usually pick them out by their tone, lack of specifics and the source. I hope that PF will reconsider their position especially since Katrina dogs are ending up as fighting and bait dogs and there is one toxicology testing lab who is specifically looking for them, feeling that making them "useful" is better than putting them to sleep.

Sincerely,
Jane Walbridge Hole in the Wall Rescue

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 9:32 am Post subject: DNA

Concerning not posting DNA's, it is & has been posted in the PF rules for a long time. Sounds like you have not read the rules.

Do you have actual PROOF of Katrina dogs being used as bait? I know you are correct about the lab offering $$ for Katrina dogs, I've seen the ad.

Your DNA post is still there - in Urgent, but it was reported

Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:30 am Post subject: there is a database

http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/

may be of use but I think it is only confirmed cases

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 4:16 pm Post subject:

Ok, maybe I'm not understanding this rule. I posted something that was NOT a DNA post. I think people should continue to rescue animals, regardless of the rudness/politeness of the rescue or shelter. I was stating that this particular rescue had a trick question on their form that was very misleading and wanted to make people aware of it. I suppose the post might have been worded in a way to make it sound like I was saying not to adopt from them, but I later clarified that that was NOT my intention. However, the thread was still deleted. Is my intention breaking the DNA rule?

Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:53 pm Post subject: WHY.....

i think peaple who post DNA are blind to what the problem is .maybe they dont see the same as everyone else here dose . Or they are mad at a group for some reason. i have been tring to find a new member of my family for 3 weeks now with no luck and i still would like to see everyone looking for a new family member do it this way .........(GREAT THINGS TAKE TIME )

ADOTION SAVES LIVE'S

Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:09 pm Post subject:

Unfortunatly, there are very cruel people out there to both animals and people. I totally agree with no DNA posts because some 'animal people' can be jelous of what someone else is doing or has done. Unless it can be confirmed somehow I'm ok with no DNA list
Just my thoughts on it

Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:59 pm Post subject: DNA

Go to Yahoo groups. There are groups devoted to posting DNA.

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:26 pm Post subject:

For those of you saying that there should be no dna posts - go do animal control work for a month......Take a dog via confiscation that is skin and bones and almost dead and tell me if you would want those same people being able to adopt another dog 2 days later to abuse? Give me a break - no dna's? There are protocals set up to determine if it is truly a dna or if its just someone being mean and condemning someone unjustly.
There are yahoogroups which post dna's, dnr's, and dnt's. Do not rescue, do not transport, and do not adopt too. They are there to protect animals, PERIOD.
To put a dna does not say for people not to adopt from this group or that, but means for shelters not to send them dogs or other rescues not to send them dogs. Why would we send dogs to a horrible place? There are things far worse than a humane death - I have seen them with my own eyes!!
So basically some of you think its okay for joe smoe to abuse or starve a dog and we shouldn't post him as a dna in the "hopes" that he never gets his hands on another unsuspecting animal? That just makes no sense what so ever! Before you make a statement like that, educate yourself on how many horrible acts to animals occur. Go to the website www.petabuse.com and look for yourself!

Posted: Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject:

Posted: Mon Jan 29, 2007 2:57 pm Post subject:

Well maybe since you are not on any of the national lists for dna/dnr you can't judge them then.....I have not seen any posts that petty as what you mentioned. More so dna's for owners who take the dog to dump it at a local shelter to be euthanized versus keeping the contract agreement, or pets being taken back since they were being kept in bad conditions. As far as any dnr's - stating a bad rescue - I know that they are thoroughly checked out before they are deemed legitimate. Take for example (no names being mentioned) the group that took in so many Katrina animals and was later found that they were keeping these animals in horrible inhumane conditions. They are on the run now and have warrants out for their arrests for animal abuse/neglect. Would you not want to know about people like that or would you rather just "assume" its not a legitimate thing and send some animals to people such as this? I'd rather know and then evaluate it myself.
Perhaps your just a rescue that only adopts to perfect people/perfect homes and has never found your animal in a bad situation as some groups have. In a perfect world, that would be nice if that was the case.
In todays world where so many people are cruel to animals, if I can have a heads up on a bad adoptor or rescue, I'd rather have that and then evaluate it for myself before making a decision.

Maybe there are some lists that don't care who they bash or what they say, but the few I am on (2), are not like that at all. So don't knock em til you know! I agreed with you on your post about the adoptor who spayed the dog and hasn't gotten her refund yet, but on this one, can't say the same.

Petfinder.com forums Forum Index -> Rescue Forums -> Rescue -> DNA and other posts of this nature.
	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

	Petfinder.com forums Forum Index -> Rescue Forums -> Rescue -> DNA and other posts of this nature.	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3