sadness

I'll keep donating regardless. Sometimes, something is better than nothing at all.

Local_Historian wrote: Interesting - "Our" shelter. Tell me, how is it "our" shelter if you don't invest anything in it?

If you've not donated money, time, supplies, etc - how do you get away with calling it yours? It's not coming out of our taxes, it's a private entity. YOu can call the RTD "our" bus, because most of us to pay taxes for it.

Without support, a private non profit closes - simple fact. Not even a fear tactic - a plain and simple fact.

But you cannot demand changes unless you are willing to give something back to it - and I don't mean an unwanted pet.

It is not an "our" anything - it is a service provided by kindly people who voluntarily give of their time and/or money to provide it, and should they decide they are not appreciated by the community, the BOD can shut it down permanently.

So again - are you going to provide support, or are you just going to whinge and whine because it doesn't fit your ideals of how life should be run?

If you're referring to my post, where I say "our" shelter, then I will respond.

It is our community that supports the shelter, so it is in essence, "our shelter". Where did I say it was my shelter? I called it "ours" as in the community. Also, IMHS cannot sustain itself without the support of the community since it relies on donations and/or grants to help it stay in operation.

Let me be clear on this. I have supported IMHS for many years with my money, supplies, time and fostering of animals. Since my employment was terminated, I have not fostered animals, but I have still dropped off supplies regularly, so you're comments are inaccurate and lack merit. Just recently, I managed to drop off two bags of cat litter at Christmas, which I used money I received from my Father for Christmas to pay for, since I didn't have any extra money at the time, and just this week, I went and bought a gift card for the staff at IMHS to use to purchase coffee during their clean up. I know it's not much, but considering I got laid off last year and am only working part time, it was the best I could do.

You obviously haven't read my previous posts. I used to volunteer and was an employee of the shelter during the ringworm outbreak of 2007. I believe I have invested far more of my time, energy, effort, money, etc.. to this organization than some and I resent your implication that I'm just whining, when in all actuallity, I am doing the opposite. And for the record, I have NEVER surrendered one of MY pets to a shelter. It is the strays that end up at my house that have been taken there and EVERY time I have brought in a stray, I have donated litter, food and toys with them, all at my expense. If there is anyone affiliated with IMHS that says otherwise, I will call them out on it! And for the record, I have five pets, four of which came from IMHS and right now, it's all I can do to support them, but I still manage to give a little here and there when I can! I'm also fostering a cat for a friend and trying to find a forever home for him. So, yes, I think I'm doing my share and then some!!!!!!!!!! I also forgot to mention that prior to going on staff with IMHS, I took in two seniors that no one wanted, one cat and one dog who are no longer with me. Ruthie and Emily were the last two seniors, unwanted by anyone else, I took in when I left IMHS, and they are completely loved and continue to thrive in my home.

You're right, the board can shut it down and if you read my posts, you can clearly see that I have asked the community NOT to pull their support - is that not good enough for you?

Geez - quit attacking when all I'm trying to do is help! I have put up so therefore, I will NOT shut up and I will continue to demand that changes be made with their euthansia policy!

Now, are you and everyone else clear on where I stand????????????????

Somehow the quote didn't come through (I think I restarted my post and did not requote) - I was referencing Steve-o's comment, not yours.

I wasn't questioning you in the least - your position has been clear all along, and yes, I did read your posts - all of them. Fully. Don't assume that people aren't reading what you are saying, and if you're going to request that people pay attention to what is posted... need I say more?

Your position was already clear.

Local_Historian wrote: Somehow the quote didn't come through (I think I restarted my post and did not requote) - I was referencing Steve-o's comment, not yours.

I wasn't questioning you in the least - your position has been clear all along, and yes, I did read your posts - all of them. Fully. Don't assume that people aren't reading what you are saying, and if you're going to request that people pay attention to what is posted... need I say more?

Your position was already clear.

Well, at least we're clear on that and I appreciate the clarification. I wasn't assuming, only read your post that followed my post - more of a misinterpretation on my part, which is understandable. I guess we're all a bit emotional about this issue. I will leave my post as it stands, just so everyone knows how I feel and where I stand and will again, take a break and refrain from posting in this thread.

Best to all!

I am very pleased to see the open discussion of this issue which is allowed on 285bound. That is the only way this issue can be satisfactorily resolved IMO.

What is past cannot be undone, but we can all work together toward better resolutions in the future.

Local_Historian wrote: Interesting - "Our" shelter. Tell me, how is it "our" shelter if you don't invest anything in it?

If you've not donated money, time, supplies, etc - how do you get away with calling it yours? It's not coming out of our taxes, it's a private entity. YOu can call the RTD "our" bus, because most of us to pay taxes for it.

Without support, a private non profit closes - simple fact. Not even a fear tactic - a plain and simple fact.

But you cannot demand changes unless you are willing to give something back to it - and I don't mean an unwanted pet.

It is not an "our" anything - it is a service provided by kindly people who voluntarily give of their time and/or money to provide it, and should they decide they are not appreciated by the community, the BOD can shut it down permanently.

***********
That being said, yes, open and honest policy would be good. I can get why the cats were put down in the shelter; I cannot get why they were taken out of fosterage, where the family was willing to provide the care needed, and put down. That is baffling indeed. And in that case, unnecessary.

For those who do actually physically support the place - what do want it to be? And what can and will you do to help make it be that type of place?

I want to make sure that I am getting the inferences that you put into your response. Are you saying that I do not support IMHS? I ask because your opening statement seems to imply that I cannot call it OUR shelter unless I do. Also, your closing comment "For those who actually support the shelter.." also seems to imply this. It seems you are saying "For those of you, who unlike Steve-o, support the shelter, what do you want it to be?"

So, can you please clarify if that is what you are basing your statements on.

That aside, I can tell you that I prefer it to be a place that is a low-kill shelter and only euthanizes animals for the reasons stated on their website which are:

* Advanced age with significant medical or behavioral problems.
* Severe medical problems with a poor prognosis.
* Aggressive behavior toward people, including dominance aggression and severe fear response aggression.
* Severe aggression toward other dogs (if we feel this dog will seriously endanger other dogs in a household or neighborhood)
* Other severe behavioral problems that make the pet dangerous or distinctly unacceptable to a reasonable household.

I can also tell you that I don't consider ringworm to be a severe medical problem with poor prognosis. It is treatable as was shown in the past incident and has been confirmed by the local vets who have commented here. As a matter of fact, my wife and I are the proud parents of one of the cats who lived through the last outbreak at IMHS and that cat is a loving, well socialized and wonderful pet.

Thanks in advance for the clarification on your comments.

Thank you, Dr. Johnson. This is why I love you and the other vets in your practice!

I would add, though, that I don't think this tragedy was the result of the folks at IMHS not caring about the cats. I'm sure that the folks who cared for these cats had a very difficult time navigating this situation, and having to be there for 23 euthanasias...well, I can't even imagine how painful that was. I think that a difficult decision was made...some will agree with it, others will not. I, personally, feel as Dr. Johnson does...more time should have been taken to really research the options and evaluate the community resources, starting with convening all of the vets along the 285 corridor as a task force and get the best of the best medical advice they have to offer. 10 minds are better than one no matter what the situation! Additionally, the pet lovers in this community are one-of-a-kind and I just can't help but think we could have done something to help save even just a fraction of the little kitties' lives...or at least tried.

I pray that this will be a learning situation for everyone involved. I don't know what the right answer would have been, but I hope that folks can glean enough from this situation to make the wise choice going forward. I adopted one of my kitties from IMHS and I believe they are a great organization. We need to continue to support them and learn with them so that crises such as this are not so paralyzing for the organization or the animals in their care.

The Denver Channel story.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26 ... etail.html

CONIFER, Colo. -- The Intermountain Humane Society near Conifer is temporarily closed. The entire facility is being sanitized and painted after six cats became infected with ringworm.
It’s an outbreak so dire, the shelter board agreed to euthanize all 23 cats in its care.
"We've considered all the options and it was the board's decision," said shelter director Dianna Whitlock.

The board should be replaced. I saw the channel 7 coverage and am not only very sad for the kitties that were victimized by this board that apparently cares very little for life, but very angry that when the "shelter" opens it will only have dogs in it. They certainly took care of their cat problem, didn't they?

Before flaming me, know that I too have adopted a kitty from that shelter--back when its board valued the lives of all its animals, not just the pups. I have donated money, litter and cat food to them. No need now, since there aren't any cats left!