No-kill issues and the PETA debate

The Christian Science Monitor, a widely distributed and highly respected international newspaper, continues its recent run of thoughtful articles on animal issues with a piece about the controversy surrounding the arrest of two PETA employees who euthanized then discarded the bodies of companion animals. The Monday July 25 piece is headed, "Case of cruelty, or compassion?" (Pg 11.)

It explores the issue, perhaps best summed up with a quote from Annette Rauch at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University:
"One side is arguing for the ethical, philosophical concept that an animal deserves not to be euthanized just because at that particular moment it is unwanted. But every shelter has limited space, so when they adopt no-kill, they fill up. That leads us to the next question: What happens to the animals that get turned away?"

The article ends on an uplifting note, as Richard Avanzino from Maddie's Fund reminds us that no-kill policies can be made to work, for example in San Francisco: "The city now euthanizes about 2,000 dogs and cats annually, compared with 65,000 four years ago, he says."

You can read the whole article on line at:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0725/p11s02-lire.html

It presents a great opportunity for appreciative letters to the Christian Science Monitor discussing the importance of spay-neuter and the joys of adoption. The Christian Science Monitor takes letters at:

http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/encryptmail.pl?ID=CFF0C5E4


(DawnWatch is an animal advocacy media watch that looks at animal issues in the media and facilitates one-click responses to the relevant media outlets. You can learn more about it, and sign up for alerts at http://www.DawnWatch.com. If you forward or reprint DawnWatch alerts, please do so unedited -- leave DawnWatch in the title and include this tag line.)