ShanoirII
Citizen of Zooville
I just found out about this totally amazing holiday that all animal-lovers should celebrate.
no
World Spay Day is a """holiday""" observed on the last Tuesday of February each year. It promotes the castration and/or spaying of animals.
(I have an idea of how the polling will go, but I just want to test the waters.)
I am personally against such practices. If the animals are breeding excessively, it should fall on their caretaker to separate them. The answer should not be to mutilate their genitalia, especially without sedatives. If someone cannot employ basic control measures because "the animal is too aggressive when intact or whatever", that animal may not be for them!
Dang, just the thought makes me hurt. I must have too much sympathy, something that the HSUS requires employees not to have.
The HSUS has yearly goals of animals to sterilize. They were given $385,000 to neuter over 9,400 animals by the DDAF in 2008. In 2014, they held 700 events in 41 countries, and neutered over 68,000 animals. They also support the catching and neutering of feral animals. Surely, if there is a population problem, there is a better way to go about it? It seems a bit like this is a mere convenience to humans - treating other animals and their bodies as property to be used in whatever way is desired, without a thought to the interests of their "companion animal". I especially dislike all the "neutering will add 3-4 years to your animal's life" snake-oil propaganda. Just like devocalization, beak-shaving, tail-docking, and claw-removal surgeries. If the parts caused that many problems, I do not think the species would have made it this far.
The idea that this is such a widely-accepted practice today, even casually viewed by most businesses as a given necessity, makes me think we will never climb out of this ditch. Or put the shovel down.
What could possibly make people think that removing key biological features (heck, maybe even the most-important feature, considering it is the reproductive organ) from a body is a good idea, or a net benefit for the victim?
I especially dislike the image above that says intact animals are less likely to be adopted, therefore more likely to be euthanized, as if that was so devastating for the HSUS. I thought you were in control of the euthanizations?
Plus, you know, the HSUS is pretty anti-zoo.
Long story short, please do not observe this day that has been ordained as holy by the ultimate lovers of all four-leggers, the Humane Society of the United States.
no
World Spay Day is a """holiday""" observed on the last Tuesday of February each year. It promotes the castration and/or spaying of animals.
(I have an idea of how the polling will go, but I just want to test the waters.)
I am personally against such practices. If the animals are breeding excessively, it should fall on their caretaker to separate them. The answer should not be to mutilate their genitalia, especially without sedatives. If someone cannot employ basic control measures because "the animal is too aggressive when intact or whatever", that animal may not be for them!
Dang, just the thought makes me hurt. I must have too much sympathy, something that the HSUS requires employees not to have.
The HSUS has yearly goals of animals to sterilize. They were given $385,000 to neuter over 9,400 animals by the DDAF in 2008. In 2014, they held 700 events in 41 countries, and neutered over 68,000 animals. They also support the catching and neutering of feral animals. Surely, if there is a population problem, there is a better way to go about it? It seems a bit like this is a mere convenience to humans - treating other animals and their bodies as property to be used in whatever way is desired, without a thought to the interests of their "companion animal". I especially dislike all the "neutering will add 3-4 years to your animal's life" snake-oil propaganda. Just like devocalization, beak-shaving, tail-docking, and claw-removal surgeries. If the parts caused that many problems, I do not think the species would have made it this far.
The idea that this is such a widely-accepted practice today, even casually viewed by most businesses as a given necessity, makes me think we will never climb out of this ditch. Or put the shovel down.
What could possibly make people think that removing key biological features (heck, maybe even the most-important feature, considering it is the reproductive organ) from a body is a good idea, or a net benefit for the victim?
I especially dislike the image above that says intact animals are less likely to be adopted, therefore more likely to be euthanized, as if that was so devastating for the HSUS. I thought you were in control of the euthanizations?
Long story short, please do not observe this day that has been ordained as holy by the ultimate lovers of all four-leggers, the Humane Society of the United States.
I mean if you promote doing this to some species, it makes sense to apply it to other too, right?
