foreclosure pets

i read this article on msnbc.com this afternoon, and it totally bummed me out. if you read the article, you'll see that it already says (twice) that bloggers everywhere are furious, so i guess i don't have to tell you that i'm furious, but wow, what an awful situation.

after having volunteered at my local humane society for the past five years, i've heard a lot of stories and read a lot of reasons for surrender in animals' files, and the ones that just say "moving" always break my heart. i mean, yes, it's obviously much better to surrender your animal to a reputable shelter than leave them tied to a tree in your yard(!), but still, the idea that people regularly relocate without planning around one of their important family members is just so sad to me. i can honestly say that if wherever i'm going won't accept my kitties? i'm not going there.

Comments

[laura]

seriously. i managed to move 20+ times to apartments in san francisco and san jose with two cats. sometimes it was cut a little close, but i always found something even in tight housing markets. so i generally don't accept moving as an excuse. i used to work at a vet hospital and one of the worst calls i took was "yeah, i need to bring in my cat to put to sleep. my wife is pregnant." !!! wtf? we didn't put down healthy animals and were free to be nasty to people like that, but still.

[listie]

One of my cats was relinquished because the family she'd been with since she was a kitten was moving. But at least they took her to the shelter and gave her a chance.

Have you seen this? http://www.foreclosurecats.org/

[girl least likely to]

i totally agree that surrender to a good shelter is better than just putting them to sleep, or abandoning them. i guess the whole idea just makes me sad in general. and i'd never seen that site before, listie--thanks!