« From Abbey | Main | More from Patricia »

From Patricia

"I was stunned when I read your article. That so much time and money are invested in saving the lives of dogs that continue to represent a threat to each other and the human population is incomprehensible. There are countless nice dogs who are euthanized each year because they're returned after the owners decide that they are too much work, or that are never adopted in the first place. Perhaps they're too old, not good looking, with health problems, simply too depressed from having been caged w/out respite from the endless barking.

"To forgive a dog for having bitten off "half her (the walker's) face" because it wakes up cranky? The dogs for whom he provides refuge behave as carnivores in the wild. Perhaps they should be located somewhere where they can stalk prey and be preyed upon, just as would happen in the natural scheme of things?

"One of the most wonderful pets I've ever owned came from a shelter where, having not been adopted w/in a few months, she would have been killed before long. She was neglected, poorly nourished, infected w/intenstinal parasites and ear mites, unspayed. Money is better spent on a dog such as that. That dog was so gentle that others a fraction of her size could eat her food, drink her water, steal her treats with no repercussions.

"Markwell contradicts himself when he blames the behavior of vicious dogs on humans, though that's sometimes true, and then describes new litters of puppies that are equally dangerous. Where's the logic?

"I regret that you provided free publicity for such an awful cause.

"Patricia xxxx"

Thanks Patricia - I'm often surprised we don't get more hate mail from people who don't know what they're talking about, but most people choose to keep their opinions to themselves or to express them anonymously on in Internet. I'm not sure what you thought you would accomplish by sending me this, but here's the fruit of your labor - a point-by-point dissection and refutation of your ill-formed arguments for the benefit of our website visitors:

"I was stunned when I read your article." - You must be easily stunned. What happens when you read something that's truly shocking?

"That so much time and money are invested in saving the lives of dogs that continue to represent a threat to each other and the human population is incomprehensible." - I find it quite comprehensible. It takes a lot of money to care for these animals, and people who support what we do donate that money. It's not your money, so it's not your concern; I'm certain you spend money in ways that I would disapprove of, but it's not my money, so I don't email you about it. Also, the dogs are kept in small, compatible social groups and do not have contact with the public. The only members of the "human population" that they have contact with are those who know the risks associated with their care and are still willing to work with them. We take safety seriously; that doesn't mean accidents will never happen, but we do everything possible to be safe, short of what would negatively impact the animals' quality of life. No member of the public has ever been injured by one of our dogs once we have taken custody of them, and as for the threats they pose to each other, you want them all dead anyway, so what the hell do you care?

"There are countless nice dogs who are euthanized each year because they're returned after the owners decide that they are too much work, or that are never adopted in the first place." - 'Nice' isn't typically a word used by behaviorists to describe animal temperament. You seem to believe that some dogs are 'nice' and some dogs are 'mean'; that implies that animals have morality - is that what you think? We believe that animals are not morally culpable for their actions because they lack the intelligence and the social constructs that are necessary for a moral system to exist. We think it's ignorant and selfish to impose our own sense of morality on an animal, and it's also pretty damned immature. And as far as all the animals being killed in shelters across this country, we're well aware of them, and that's why we support the no-kill movement. We work with shelters and rescue groups to find homes for those dogs, but a sanctuary is not an appropriate home for an adoptable animal. We fill a different niche in the no-kill community by providing lifelong care to animals that can't go through the more traditional channels.

"Perhaps they're too old, not good looking, with health problems, simply too depressed from having been caged w/out respite from the endless barking." - You've just described a lot of our dogs. Some dogs get labeled vicious while others with identical behaviors are excused for their actions. Others act out because of kennel stress. Not all dogs become depressed as a result of intensive confinement - some become dangerous in that environment. We work with them because we understand the problem and know how to deal with it. The fact that you don't has no bearing on what we do.

"To forgive a dog for having bitten off "half her (the walker's) face" because it wakes up cranky?" - Maybe we're more forgiving than you. The dog-walker forgave him, why can't you? The person who placed that dog with use loves him so much that she was willing to spend thousands of dollars to transport him across the country to get him here, and she continues to provide financial support for his care. She loves the dog unconditionally - apparently that concept is a foreign one to you.

"The dogs for whom he provides refuge behave as carnivores in the wild." - No they don't - they behave as domestic carnivores in captivity. I have a great deal of experience with wild carnivores as well, and there are significant differences. And even if they did behave like wild carnivores, we'd still provide them with the best care possible because we don't see 'wild behavior' as a negative thing.

"Perhaps they should be located somewhere where they can stalk prey and be preyed upon, just as would happen in the natural scheme of things?" - That would be irresponsible and inhumane. Most of these dogs aren't experienced hunters and lack the survival skills that would be necessary for them to thrive in that kind of environment. I realize you're being sarcastic, but that's seriously stupid.

"One of the most wonderful pets I've ever owned came from a shelter where, having not been adopted w/in a few months, she would have been killed before long." - Do you want a award?

"She was neglected, poorly nourished, infected w/intenstinal parasites and ear mites, unspayed." - We rescue animals like that all the time. You're not special.

"Money is better spent on a dog such as that." - We believe that every dog deserves an equal chance at health and happiness, regardless of its temperament and past behavior. I assume from the rest of your email that if your dog had turned out to have behavior issues you'd have gladly killed her, and we think that makes you a terrible, terrible person. I mean a really awful, just despicable human being. If I had your outlook I'd throw myself in front of a train.

"Markwell contradicts himself when he blames the behavior of vicious dogs on humans, though that's sometimes true, and then describes new litters of puppies that are equally dangerous." - There's no contradiction there - people breed dogs, and if they breed them for dog fighting, any genetic predisposition for fearful behavior is a result of human action. There are a lot of situations that can cause a dog to become dangerous, but because dogs are domestic animals and are by definition intended to be in the care of human beings, their actions are our responsibility.

"Where's the logic?" - Where's your logic? Your arguments are based on arbitrary value judgments and a lack of expertise in the subject matter. If you've missed the logic in my above responses to your statements, please let me know and I'll ask a nine-year-old to map it out for you.

"I regret that you provided free publicity for such an awful cause." - You'll be happy to know that thanks to that free publicity we've received over $20,000 in donations, and after people read your idiotic email, they'll happily give us even more money for our "awful cause". So thank you for your unwitting support.

Did you think I'd read your email and suddenly be ashamed of myself, see things your way, and kill all these dogs? I believe in what we do and I know it's the right thing to do. That you see animals as disposable is not a reflection on me, it's a reflection on you. What an ugly reflection it is, and what an unhappy person you must be.

I'm going to hand this off to our Facebook fans now and let them write their messages to you; since you like to send hate mail, maybe you'll like to receive it as well. I will keep your last name and email address private; feel free to check in and read people's comments to you, though. I've made my opinions public and my contact information is freely available to anyone who wants it; perhaps you have the strength of conviction to give people the same unfettered access to you. Say the word and I'll post your information so that people can contact you directly.

Steve

Posted on January 4, 2010