L.A. Unleashed

All things animal in Southern
California and beyond

« Previous Post | L.A. Unleashed Home | Next Post »

ASPCA was right to euthanize Oreo, the pit bull that survived a six-story fall, says PETA

OreoAfter the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals made the controversial decision to euthanize Oreo, a pit bull that made headlines over the summer when she survived being thrown from a six-story Brooklyn, N.Y., building, many animal lovers were outraged.  Oreo had recovered from her physical injuries after the incident but, according to ASPCA staffers, had aggressive tendencies so severe that they felt they had no choice but to end her life. 

For some in the animal-rescue community, though, that explanation just wasn't good enough; after all, a New York sanctuary that specializes in cases of animal aggression, Pets Alive, had offered to take Oreo off the ASPCA's hands when the latter announced its decision to euthanize her. 

But the ASPCA wouldn't budge; according to the group's president, Ed Sayres, life in a sanctuary would still have been torture for Oreo because her behavior problems would have required almost complete isolation from both humans and other dogs.  "Her contact with the outside world would have been minimal at best," Sayres said in a statement. "Her quality of life would have been reduced to virtually nothing."

While Pets Alive supporters and others dispute Sayres' claim that Oreo could never have been rehabilitated -- Pets Alive staffers mince no words on the group's blog, calling Sayres "simply a coward" and Sayres and other ASPCA officials "arrogant, overpaid, unfeeling" -- the ASPCA president now has an unlikely ally in the form of PETA. 

In a letter to the editor of the New York Times' City Room blog, which covered the story of Oreo's death, PETA's animal care and control specialist, Teresa Lynn Chagrin, described the so-called "no-kill movement" as "nice-sounding but damaging." The movement, Chagrin continued, "exposes its lunacy by attacking an agency (the ASPCA) that took in" Oreo after her ordeal and exerted great expense and effort to help her to recover.  

"The only humane way to achieve a 'no kill' nation is to create a 'no birth' nation by mandating spaying and neutering of dogs and cats to stop the flow of unwanted litters into our nation’s shelters.... In the meantime, those who make the toughest decisions, who have to euthanize animals for want of a proper home, and so carry out the hardest work of all, deserve respect and gratitude, not criticism," the letter concludes.  (It's been posted in its entirety, with a personal note to Sayres from Daphna Nachminovich, PETA's vice president for cruelty investigations, on the ASPCA's blog.)

Chagrin expanded on her position in a post on PETA's blog, in which she pleads with those animal lovers who are angry over Oreo's death to "please remember that she is at peace. Unfortunately, many thousands of other wonderful dogs who will never hurt anyone are still going to have to be euthanized in New York City every year. If you have a good home to offer, there's an equally worthy dog waiting for your help. Instead of picketing the ASPCA, go adopt one of these caring animals."

PETA's support of the ASPCA isn't likely to do much to quiet Pets Alive; in nearly the same breath that the group skewered Sayres on its blog, it also referred to PETA as "a joke," so the animal-rights organization's thoughts on the matter probably won't carry much weight. (In case you're wondering, the Humane Society of the United States has also incurred Pets Alive's wrath, so it seems no large-scale animal organization is safe.)

Meanwhile, an "Oreo Will Not Be Forgotten" group has sprung up on Facebook, with several hundred members as of Friday; Pets Alive's online petition demanding Sayres' ouster as ASPCA president has received more than 2,000 signatures; and New York state Assemblyman Micah Kellner has announced his plans to introduce "Oreo's Law," which, if approved, would "allow animal welfare organizations the right to request animals be given to their care when a shelter is planning to euthanize them," according to Kellner.

-- Lindsay Barnett

Photo: Oreo is held by her handler Nov. 12.  Credit: Stephen Chernin / Associated Press

 
Comments () | Archives (36)

The comments to this entry are closed.

If you are going to save a dog, then save it. In my opinion, Oreo should have been euthanized from the very beginning from so many injuries. Instead, he had multiple surgeries-procedures that involved pain and suffering. Oreo was a dog that sustained multiple broken bones and internal injuries - ASPCA should NOT have made such an evuation until the dog completely healed-most dogs in pain will get aggressive - why? because they are in pain; it's a protective instinct to not be handled. In addition, if you had a daily diet of being beaten, hit, slapped, kicked, etc., in addition to being in pain - the reaction is understandable. The dog was put down prematurely and should have been allowed time to heal from his physical injuries.

PeTA kills (sorry makes them at Peace) overs 90% of companion animals placed in their care and is more akin to a slaughterhouse than an animal welfare organisation IMHO.

The ASPCA was correct in what they did. They were thinking of this dog's quality of life which is what we all need to think of first. However, these "No Kill'ers" think only in terms of "they are alive", shades of Frankenstein. Yes, "No Kill" sounds good and looks good on paper but what about Philly, LA, Rancho Cucamonga, Lied, NV, Indianapolis? These all show that "No Kill" is a horror story in open door shelters. The most recent failure of "No Kill" in Indy had the director stuffing cats in the ventiliation ducts in order to "save them". Oreo had problems and these problems can easily turn into a fatality of a person or an animal. So much money into one dog while others go without. Good animals with no problems were euthanized while the rehab of Oreo was happening. This is the wrong priority, save the good ones first should be the priority. The "Savior" complex has developed as an offshoot of the "No Kill" movement and it is causing havoc. Animals are being flown from one area into another area with an overpopulation problem, taking homes from their shelter animals. We can't save them all but we can save the future if we put priorities in the right place and there is no place for the "No Kill" movement in open door shelters. A goal yes, of course, but not the program as it has been presented. Apply common sense to this movement and it makes no sense. Stop people from making more Oreo's is the solution.

The ASPCA was right according to 'you'. I would have liked to see your headline say "According to "_____________" the APSCA was right in euthanizing Oreo. As many as agree with you don't, so stating it categorically that it was right can give the wrong impression in a headline...which is sometimes the only thing people read. I appreciate you covering the story however. It tells me that the rights of animals are not being ignored by your newspaper. Thank you,
People For The Ethical Treatment Of Pit Bulls

Add this to the long list of things about which PETA is wrong -- at the top of their lungs.

I would no more ask PETA how to achieve no-kill than I would ask Colonel Sanders how to be nice to chickens. PETA as an organization is so fond of the sound of its own voice that there seems to be literally nothing they will not horn in on. But they are wrong

Oreo survived a massive human-inflicted trauma. Is it any wonder that she viewed most humans with fear and mistrust? I've seen dogs do a complete 180 from terrible fear-based human aggression, but that can take years. PETA doesn't have that kind of time, being the ambulance-chasers of the "humane" movement.

Also not addressed is how calculating Ed Sayres was in making Oreo a poster girl in appeals for money, then denying her a safe home at a sanctuary when one was offered. Of course Ed couldn't miss the opportunity to make some money - how else is he going to make enough to pay himself his 446,000 salary?

Death ia a last option. Oreo deserved to have a life with a reputable group. He was killed instead..after ASPCA got tons of donations. I appriciate PETA's undercover work but I believe in No Kill as much as possible..

When human beings are unable to conform to the rules of society they end up in Jails or Mental Hospitals. This is after long and drawn out legal procedures which most of the time the person understands, and participates in.
Dogs don't have the cognitive ability to understand if they are dangerous to people and other animals.To take one and put it into virtual isolation with just a daily ration of food and water, and to clean its "cell" everyday is cruel.
Humane euthanization is really the kindest thing to do in these kind of situations. "No Kill" humaniacs are like abortion protesters. There is no reasoning with them. PETA is a terrorist group which misleads the public on its true agenda. Although they are correct in this case, their nearly 90% kill rate of the small number of animals it takes into its care, really negates that.
Legislating the mandatory spaying and neutering of all companion animals is misguided at best. Who is going to police this ? It will only end up like the drug laws in this country. Overcrowding in courts and jails, and it will still exist no matter what you do.
Education is the key but there are always some members of the population that are will never be educated. Early introduction of these ideas in classrooms might be a way to bring these subjects onto the radar like animal conservation and green movements.
There are no instant solutions. People are to blame for most dogs with severe enough behavior problems to warrant this as the only solution. Early training, and socialization are key.
Its sad that Oreo had to be put down. Its important to remember that he is no longer at the mercy of terrible people who would do something so cruel as to hurl him off a roof. The ASPCA made sure that his suffering was minimized.
A sad tale with no happy ending.

PETA IS NOT AN ANIMAL RESCUE!!! PETA kills an extremely high percentage of animals entrusted to thier care.

PETA pushed hard for killing all of the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's property. Had they gotten their way, it would have been a huge loss as real rescue groups have now accomplished amazing recovery with those dogs. Some are now in adoptive homes, all have recovered in great part.

Euthanizing Oreo before she had been able to recover from her injuries and before a qualified animal behaviorist could work with her full time was a sad decision. All the more sad because the ASPCA was given options for other paths at no cost to them and chose not to accept the assistance.

The answer is simple-stop donating to the ASPCA. What angers me about the ASPCA is that they oppose spay/neuter legislation and say "breeders are responsible". When 10 to 15 million animals are routinely killed across America yearly, costing tax payers $2 billion a year, how can breeding be "responsible" when so many die. California spends a QUARTER OF A BILLION dollars a year on animal control and kills a half million animals yearly. I say any kind of spay/neuter legislation is better than nothing because what is being done now (nothing) isn't working. And everytime a person buys a dog, they kill an animal control dog. I feel many breeders become members to the ASPCA (and anybody can for a yearly donation even as little as $30 a year), so they can advertise themselves as "ASPCA member" and turn around and breed baby breed their animals by the wazoo and do as much back yard breeding, even puppy mills, as they want. The ASPCA isn't going to check on them. I stopped donating to the ASPCA years ago. I just give to my local shelters.

PETA wants to kill every pet in American and they would LOVE for companion animals to be outlawed. So using them as a reference point is a pretty weak position.

There are many rescue organizations that would have gladly taken the dog.

Oh please "Pets Alive." Thousands of pit bulls are killed every week in this country simply because nobody wants them and (like Oreo)they are products of irresponsible pit bull breeders and irresponsible pit bull owners. If "Pets Alive" wants to save pit bull lives, there are no shortage of dogs to save. What they really want is to save the life of pit bulls who have made the headlines, and ignore the thousands of others dying in shelters (and worse places) every week. If Pets Alive really wants to fight to stop pit bull suffering, "Oreo's Law" should require that all pit bulls and pit bull mixes must be microchipped and all pit bulls and pit bull mixes except AKC and UKC-PR registered show dogs must be spayed/neutered. Until that happens, pit bulls will continue to die in horrific numbers in this country because of pit bull breeder irresponsibility.

Let's frame the debate the right way. The debatable point here is very simple...should an organization that has made the (subjective) decision to kill an animal do so when another qualified organization offers another alternative?

The answer is simple, logically and morally. No.

As to those who would predict Oreo's future at Pets Alive...you can't. She would not have lived a life of isolation. We invite anyone to come see for yourselves.

We can certainly predict her future now though...her broken body is rotting in a mass grave.

I find it absolutely Orwellian that PETA considers death "peace" for animals, having sent 95% of the animals it claims to care for to their own peace last year.

BTW..we do applaud one big national group who hasn't forgotten that the lives of the animals is more important than their ad budgets or salaries: Best Friends Animal Society.

The Oreo debacle has opened the eyes of a lot of people who realize that supporting the smaller organizations that actually do the work is more effective than sending their money to the organizations that have forgotten their missions.

Matt DeAngelis
Pets Alive

The ASPCA claims Oreo was vicious and unpredictable but yet in every pic I have seen of this dog he is on a regular leash with the staff. Aggressive dogs are walked with "catch poles". Also, I volunteer in shelters and have seen many sweet dogs display aggression when confined to a cage. Double that if they are injured. Thirdly and most importantly there were several rescues will ing to take this dog...have him evaluated and worked with by trainers specializing in behavior issues. All of which may have gone away once Oreo was in a different environment. The ASPCA OWED this chance to Oreo once they made the decision to put him through months of physical recovery. This could of been a success story. Now its just a sad ending to a sad life. Our only victory now is that the pathetic excuse for a human being who did this to Oreo will spend some much needed time in prison.

Oh Yeah...forgot to add. My donations will now go to Best Friends Animal sanctuary and directly to Pit Bul rescue groups.

The only thing disturbing about this BILL forcing places like ASPCA to relinquish the dog to another facility willing to take it-is that I have been seeing a LOT of animal "no kill" shelters lately having been accused or were convicted of animal cruelty due to neglect; I'm not saying all of them are like that, but there are those who ARE like that - lack of funds means less food and less litter. Trust me I seen PLENTY of examples lately it would have been a much better fate if the animals were put in the pound and euthanized rather than slowly starve to death or live in diarrhea infested cage and slowly die of diseases. Yeah, they don't kill them-they let them starve to death or die of diseases. According to the story Oreo completely recovered from his injuries - six months after. Oreo was a vicious dog. I thought it appropriate to euthanize this pit bull mix, though I thought originally considering the dog was tossed out of a six story window why didn't they euthanize him from the very beginning.

Point is Oreo was clearly a vicious dog. There are plenty of others that need rescuing who aren't vicious. INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING ABOUT EUTHANIZING A VICIOUS DOG, GO TO YOUR LOCAL DOG POUND AND GET A CAT OR TWO OR DOG OR TWO AND SAVE THEIR LIFE. THEY *WILL* BE KILLED IN SIX DAYS OR LESS. OR SOLD FOR HIDEOUS VIVISECTION EXPERIMENTS.

Matt DeAngelis,

Where are you located? How many pit bulls do you want to save? Whatever the number, just tell any pit bull rescuer how many unwanted, doomed pit bulls you are willing to take in and I promise that you will be inundated with desperate pleas to save dogs who will otherwise die. So don't pretend that this is about saving lives. YOu CAN save as many pit bull lives as you want to save because thousands of unwanted pit bulls are killed in this country every single week. It is about grabbing headlines and (consequently) donations. If you (or anybody else) was interested in preventing pit bull suffering, you would be lobbying hard for the kind of breed specific breeder restrictions that will make it harder for irresponsible people to breed the pit bulls that glut nearly every shelter in this country, keep shelter freezers full, and often (like Oreo) are the victims of uspeakable cruelty.

And while Best Friends does nice things for animals, they, too, grab for the "headline" pit bulls (the Vick dogs have been great cash cows for them) while admitting that they reject desperate pleas for help for doomed pit bulls EVERY SINGLE DAY. You can't really fault them for wanting to keep the donations rolling in and dealing with headline dogs are a good way to do that. But the reality is that rescuing a few pit bulls who have been on the front pages will do NOTHING to stop the suffering of pit bulls in this country. That will take breed specific breeder regulation. The best is mandatory microchipping of all pit bulls and pit bull mixes and mandatory spay/neuter of all pit bulls and pit bull mixes except AKC and UKC-PR registered show dogs.

Cygnet1: Last I heard the AKC refuses to even recognize the Amercan Pit Bull Terrier as a breed, so so much for that argument. Plus, given how they prop up the commercial puppy industry, which is to say puppy mills, they don't exactly have clean hands in humane matters.


Also, you twice called for mixes to be registered. Mixes aren't registered, unless perhaps in cases where someone has figured out how to make a buck off of them, like Puggles and Golden Doodles.


I really doubt that the answer to the predicament of Pit Bulls is to be found in more discriminatory laws. Many of those thousands of Pits who die every day die because of discriminatory breed-specific legislation that bans certain breeds. These laws lead to the killing of Pit Bulls and dogs who "look like" Pit Bulls. But who's to say what looks like a Pit Bull? A Dogo Argentino looks like a Pit Bull - should we kill all the Dogo Argentinos? Some people think Cane Corsos are Pit Bulls, because lots of people know nothing about dogs. Furthermore, lots of dog fighters fight Staffordshire Terriers and many people call them Pit Bulls, even though they're not. Whose breed standards do we use to identify Pit Bulls? AKC sets breed standards and they deny the breed exists.


Should we microchip them all, or kill them all?

LA voter,

AKC pit bulls are called "American staffordshire Terriers" and "staffordshire bull terriers" UKC pit bulls are called "American pit bull terriers." These are all, generically, "pit bulls." Of course, most pit bulls aren't registered with either AKC or UKC. The are either registered with a less reputable registry (ADBA gladly registers dogs for people whose advertisements are geared to dog fighters) or (most often) not registered at all. Who said AKC has "clean hands" in all matters? What point are you trying to make. I never called for registering mixed breeds. You are confused.

Yes, the law I propose (mandatory microchipping of all pit bulls and pit bull mixes, mandatory spay/neuter of all pit bulls and pit bull mixes except AKC and UKC-PR registered show dogs) is "discriminatory." It discriminates against welsh springer spaniels and portuguese water dogs by allocating public resources to solve the pit bull problem. These same resources aren't allocated to solve the portuguese water dog problem. Good thing that the portuguese water dog problem is non-existent, so there is no need to allocate any law enforcement recources to solving it. Meanwhile, the pit bull problem is overwhelming, with the MAJORITY of dogs in many shelters being pit bulls. In NYC, 80% of the dogs euthanized are pit bulls. In Los Angeles, 120 pit bulls per DAY are euthanized (source: Karen Delise). Many shelters and humane groups and even some municipalities offer BREED SPECIFIC free spay/neuter plans to pit bull owners (only) and some even pay pit bull owners to spay/neuter their dogs because humane groups are so desperate to get a handle on this BREED SPECIFIC problem. Who here is against doing that because it is (without question) so "discriminatory?"

LA voter,

What is your answer to your question: ("should we kill them all?") Because nobody has a solution to the problem of unwanted pit bulls OTHER than kill them, unless they are lucky enough to make the headlines. For the Vick dogs, the Missouri dog fighting bust dogs and, yes, even for Oreo, rescue groups are fighting to take them, because they are "headline" pit bulls, and consequently translate into lots of publicity and donations. Meanwhile, the thousands of unknown unwanted pit bulls die in shelters every week because the "Pet's Alive" types can't be bothered with seeking the kind of real reform that will be necessary to stop so much pit bull suffering. (i.e breed specific legislation controlling pit bull breeding).

Um...we save pits (and other breeds) every day. I have 2 myself. There are currently 30 in our shelter. What's your point?

Do you have some dogs that are more deserving of being saved than Oreo or any other? I find it ironic that people like you who accuse me and others of losing perspective (being upset over the loss of one particular dog) are the ones who actually HAVE lost the perspective.

This year we started giving the Starfish Award. Remember the story of the starfish? Let me refresh your memory:

----------------

Once upon a time, there was a wise man who used to go to the ocean to do his writing. He had a habit of walking on the beach before he began his work.

One day, as he was walking along the shore, he looked down the beach and saw a human figure moving like a dancer. He smiled to himself at the thought of someone who would dance to the day, and so, he walked faster to catch up.

As he got closer, he noticed that the figure was that of a young man, and that what he was doing was not dancing at all. The young man was reaching down to the shore, picking up small objects, and throwing them into the ocean.

He came closer still and called out "Good morning! May I ask what it is that you are doing?"

The young man paused, looked up, and replied "Throwing starfish into the ocean."

"I must ask, then, why are you throwing starfish into the ocean?" asked the somewhat startled wise man.

To this, the young man replied, "The sun is up and the tide is going out. If I don't throw them in, they'll die."

Upon hearing this, the wise man commented, "But, young man, do you not realize that there are miles and miles of beach and there are starfish all along every mile? You can't possibly make a difference!"

At this, the young man bent down, picked up yet another starfish, and threw it into the ocean. As it met the water, he said, "It made a difference for that one."
-------------------------

That was actually written by Anthropologist Loren Eiseley.

Again, let's get the debate right here. If you want to debate that there are too many pit bulls killed each year I would be on your side.

Oreo should not have been killed. Period. It was morally wrong to do so when there was another option.

Keep saving Pit Bulls. Each and every one deserves to be saved.

Matt DeAngelis

Cygnet1 - You are right....I volunteer at a city shelter....SO MANY Pit Bulls....
SO sad.....people get all emotional over one sad case and ignore the tons of healthy pits getting euthanized every day. We really need to focus on the big picture...and get these numbers WAY down....I like your micro-chipping idea.

Matt DeAnglis,

My point is that if you want to save a hundred pit bulls, heck if you want to save a THOUSAND pit bulls, you can. Go get them, Pets Alive. Empty KeeKee's shelter. They are waiting there for you to save them. You wanted to rescue Oreo (and don't want to take all the pit bulls out of KeeKee's shelter) despite the fact that she had temperament problems that would both make her dangerous to people and other animals and would make her life (at best) pretty miserable. You wanted Oreo because she was on the front pages and thus would be a donations and publicity bonanza for you and for no other reason. If you truly cared about the pit bull crisis, or about dogs dying, you would be lobbying hard for laws that restrict irresponsible pit bull breeding.

And to answer your question, no there aren't dogs that "deserve" to be saved more than other dogs. None of them "deserves" to die. But when we know that thousands of pit bulls WILL die each week because of irresponsible pit bull breeders it is morally wrong to devote massive amounts of resources to a dog who will have a questionable quality of life at best (and who, if anybody slips up even for a second, may hurt or kill another dog or a person). Those resources would be far better spent trying to solve the pit bull crisis at the spigot (stopping irresponsible pit bull breeders) than the drain (picking and choosing a few "famous" pit bulls to save while ignoring the horrific carnage in euthanasia rooms around the country.)

This is not to say that, if Oreo was your dog, you couldn't spend every last dime of Pets Alive money to build her a special prison and keep her safely if you wanted to. People keep tigers safely as "pets," after all, so I am sure that (given enough resources) Oreo could have been managed safely. Just that if you DO choose to keep unadopable dogs alive in warehouses, I won't be donating any money to you and people should fall for your smear campaign against the ASPCA because they make a different choice.

Cygnet - Staffordshires and Pit Bulls Terriers are not the same.


Go to England, where Pit Bulls are banned, but there are loads of Staffordshires.

Who the hell cares what PETA thinks.. It's very clearly posted on their website.. that they SUPPORT BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION. PETA euthanizes more adoptable pets each year than ANY other organization... and it's ALL funded with YOUR donation dollars... I support the ASPCA, however... when it comes to Bullies.. very FEW of them get it right. For anyone whom doesn't agree.. look up PETA NORFOLK VA, court case... in 2008 they took in over 2200 animals... most were turned in along with a donation to PETA.. They spent almost $10,000.00 on a meat freezer to contain the carcasses rather than promoting the animals (many of which were puppies and kittens) Out of those 2200+ animals.. only 8 were given homes... this is just ONE facility! And the only reason we know this is because two of the PETA workers from that facility were put on trial for animal abuse after the city found a "body dump" on the side of the road! They were forced to open their books for the trial.

LA Voter,

AKC recognizes two "pit bull" breeds: Staffordshire bull terriers and American staffordshire terriers.

Staffordshire bull terriers are typically smaller and squatter than American Staffordshire Terriers (often called AmStaffs) and are rarely implicated in pit bull attacks. Amstaffs are indistinguishable from American Pit Bull Terriers. In fact, the very same dog can be registered both as an AKC American Stafforshire Terrier and a UKC American Pit Bull Terrier.

So, since it is possible to have a single dog who is both an AKC champion American Stafforshire terrier and a UKC Ch. American pit bull terrier, it is pretty clear that AKC DOES register "pit bulls." It just calls them AmStaffs.

It is absolute baloney to say that PETA euthanizes more animals than any other organization. LA area shelters euthanize 120 pit bulls PER DAY because of a lack of breed specific legislation in LA.

There are too many pit bulls being bred by too many irresponsible pit bull breeders, hence many, many pit bulls suffer and die. Until the first part of that equation changes (and irresponsible pit bull breeders aren't going to stop breeding pit bulls unless laws are passed forcing them to stop), the second part is going to remain, too.

" (and irresponsible pit bull breeders aren't going to stop breeding pit bulls unless laws are passed forcing them to stop)"

Good point. That's why there is no dog fighting in the USA, because every state has laws against it, and the laws have stopped the irresponsible people from fighting dogs.

Why will Oreo not be forgotten while millions of other dogs that have suffered a similar fate (many of which who were not aggressive) have been long forgotten? Their lives were no less valuable because they weren't in the headlines.

Cygnet1,

Ah...the same tired argument....there are other pit bulls (or other dogs) more worthy of saving than Oreo. Is that so? And you purport to know more about Pets Alive than I do. Of course. Another know-it-all ignoramous.

How about these two arguments:

1. If you are going to take $58 million of other people's money in $10 donations (I see them too) and claim to be the voice of these animals, you cannot abdicate your responsibility ONCE. You can't be the voice of almost all of them or all but one. Each animal that you so casually cast aside is a life. A soul. No one animal is more savable or important than another.

2. Before you start claiming to know how Oreo's life (or any other animal's for that matter) will be, perhaps you should actually have knowledge of our facility and our methodology.

What you've been saying over and over again is that Oreo is better off dead. That's what Peta is saying too. You're entitled to your opinion.

We will always disagree. I could point you to many, many case studies at Pets Alive, but you won't listen anyway. You'd rather kill dogs. I'm not wasting another second debating someone who won't be moved.

Keep allowing your misguided support for organizations like PETA and the ASPCA kill animals.

And lastly, as for your assertion that we did this for the publicity or the money (another convenient attack), we do precisely this every day many times. We had absolutely no reason to believe that the ASPCA would kill Oreo rather than allow her to come to Pets Alive -- other organizations generally say yes when we ask.

Had this gone like any other request to another organization there would have been no publicity, no headlines, no misguided people spouting drivel. It would have been another animal saved quietly and I wouldn't be wasting my time writing this to you.

Best Wishes,
Matt DeAngelis
Pets Alive

Matt DeAngelis

Matt DeAngelis,

Here are some of your quotes from the comments.....

" her future now though...her broken body is rotting in a mass grave."
" Each animal that you so casually cast aside is a life. A soul."
"You'd rather kill dogs."
"Keep allowing your misguided support for organizations like PETA and the ASPCA kill animals."

The name of your group is "Pets Alive". The message I get from your groups name and your own quotes is that keeping pets alive is your top priority. I don't see quality of life to be the main priority for you. Something you share in common with PETA is that your are extreme in your views. PETA takes the extreme view that all pit bulls should be euthanized (see their own website for this). It seems that Pets Alive brings the opposite extremity, to keep pets alive regardless of the issues the animal or society may face from it. I'm thankful for organizations like the ASPCA, and the fact that they have more money and influence than extremists like PETA and Pets Alive. They made a judgment call that neither PETA or your organization would even consider. They made that decision based on what they thought was best for the dog and society.

Kevin

Enough Are you serious? Do you really think that a whole bunch of people decided to save Oreo because he made headlines? This goes on ALL day with thousands of dogs who are injured more severly than Oreo and who are NOT in the headlines. Do me a favor. Check out Noahs Ark Rescue in S.C on the web. There you will see just a few of the abuse cases that THOUSANDS of people are donating to. None of them made headlines. Oreo had just as much right to healing as any of the others who did not make headlines. In fact...I think he would of had a much better chance had he not ended up in the news. Your comment shows trhat you are truely unaware of what goes on aside from the media headlines.

"People For The Ethical Treatment Of Pit Bulls" says it all.


Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video






Pet Adoption Resources


Recent Posts


Archives