Posted by rmbcollege (anonymous) on October 13, 2007 at 3:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It's nice to know that there are people that want these loving animals, and they are not getting put down because people in the area don't want them.

Posted by Wallace (anonymous) on October 13, 2007 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What a wonderful story! The Buck Fund should be very proud of their new director! It sounds like she is going way above and beyond to save the animals!

Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 13, 2007 at 5:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Too bad we can't ship out the former pet owners that won't take care of them too. I can't imagine any municipality willing to allow stray animals from other communities let alone other states, to be brought into their jurisdictions. I saw a recent article where unwanted pets from Puerto Rico? I think it was, were being brought the US due to the surplus and inability to adopt them out. The agency hired to do the job went door to door like swat teams gathering animals from apartment complexes that were supposed to be pet free. The animals were given shots by the teams, and witnesses reported seeing the animals thrown off a bridge. Over 50 animals, some dead, some severely wounded, were found under the bridge.

I don't believe in animal cruelty, but I do not trust HSUS, PETA, or any of the major organized AR groups because of their radical fringe elements, beliefs, dishonesty, and true motives.

Posted by emporian (anonymous) on October 13, 2007 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That and PETA kills animals that it gets from shelters under the disguise that they were taking them to be adopted. They then threw them in dumpsters.

Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 5:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Not necessarily. I just have a hard time believing that Colorado has a shortage of pets and that they would have large enough demand for larger breed dogs for adoptions that they would need to go and get another state's unwanted animals.

Posted by Heartland_Rescuer (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 4:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

1. The Colorado Animal Rescue Express, Inc. is a newly formed 501c3 organization.

2. For years prior to their inception Buck Fund volunteers, employees, and shelter workers have been transporting dogs/cats all over the country to save their lives.

3. More volunteers make a much greater impact. Why don't ya'll get involved?

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 4:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The walk of death is not because of shelters or rescue groups or animal control officers. We as a whole do our part to save as many as we can. You seem to want to just criticize. I'd like you to really think about why shelters are always so full and there is a death row. Do you really want to blame the very people that are doing everything they can to help these unwanted animals? I'd like to see you get involved and help save a few lives. Transporters are always needed.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Colorado Animal Rescue and The Colorado Animal Express are different. The Express is a transporting group that just started up and what a wonderful thing that they are doing for these animals. I could not personally transport all of the animals that I have sent to other rescue groups that were out of state. I am sorry that some one from the Buck Foundation has offended you, but please remember that humans make mistakes and not one person can be the organization. For example just because you get a phone operator that maybe rude does not mean the phone company is not a reputable, responsible quality company. I don't know what would become of some of the animals I take in if I didn't have the Buck Foundation to turn to and that is why I apologize for your bad experience.

Posted by Heartland_Rescuer (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Colorado Animal Rescue Express, Inc. is a transport company formed in 2007. They are not an animal shelter. They transport animals for other shelters and rescue groups.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Colorado Animal Rescue, Inc. (CARE) was incorporated in 1992 by local veterinarians. For eight years the rescue and placement of abandoned, stray and surrendered animals was done out of the homes of dedicated CARE Board members. Our no-kill shelter facility opened its doors in 2000. In the five years since opening, CARE has taken in and placed (through adoptions) over 4,200 dogs and cats.
Colorado Animal Rescue has been a successful resource and a model animal shelter facility for five years, and continues to solidify its place in the local community.
This is some info I pulled off their web site. I don't know what the "E" stands for but maybe it's just because they CARE. :-)

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 15, 2007 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Same web site. At the top of the page Click on about and then Click on Mission and philosophy. That gives their information I quoted.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 15, 2007 at 12:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

greenday You are just being hateful. This is a wonderful thing that all these organizations can work together to save many lives. Why critize the very people who are doing everything they can to save the lives of these unwanted pets. Tail wags to ya. ACO out.

Posted by enddvsa (anonymous) on October 15, 2007 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Buck Fund is a 100% volunteer entity. They have no employees, just dedicated caregivers. I don't have a fenced in backyard, so I do not qualify for many of the animals that the Buck Fund has for adoption. I see the valid point of that guideline as well as the guideline of having all pets spayed and neutered. I may not always agree with a policy, but certainly appreciate all of the hard work and dedication that goes into animal rescue. I encourage anyone who has time or availability to foster animals so that the animals do not reach "death row" so quickly.

Posted by create (anonymous) on October 15, 2007 at 4:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I've said this before, but I'll say it again. I have a fenced yard but the Buck Fund still wouldn't let me have a dog because the woman told me, number one, I worked full time and couldn't be at home with the dog. Number two, I didn't have a doggy door. Geez! I went round and round with the woman at the Buck Fund who was very, very rude to me all over a bloody doggy door and the fact that I worked full time. What was I to do? Quit work so I could adopt a dog from the Buck Fund? Get real!!! I can see me quitting work so I can be at home with a dog all day long then not be able to afford dog food. The woman made no sense to me whatsoever. Incidentally, the entire time she talked to me she coughed like she had a cigarette cough so bad she couldn't say one entire sentence without stopping to cough. Holy macaroni!

Posted by siamesefred (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 2:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm not an Ellen DeGeneris fan, but here's another horror story about animal adoption.
--------------
DeGeneres under fire for giving away dog
By BETH HARRIS, Associated Press Writer Today at 9:30 am
Ellen DeGeneres is in the doghouse with a pet rescue agency after giving a pooch away to her hairdresser because it didn't get along with her cats.

The talk show hostess and her partner Portia de Rossi adopted Iggy, a Brussels Griffon mix, on Sept. 20. But when things didn't work out, DeGeneres gave the dog to her hairdresser.

In doing so, DeGeneres violated an agreement with the Mutts and Moms dog rescue agency by not informing them of the handoff.

When the agency called DeGeneres to ask about Iggy, she said she found another home for the dog. The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

DeGeneres went public about the situation Monday while taping an episode of her show to air Tuesday. She admitted she didn't read all the paperwork involving the adoption.

DeGeneres said she spent $3,000 having the dog neutered and trained to be with her cats. But the dog had too much energy and was too rambunctious, she told her television audience.

"I guess I signed a piece of paper that says if I can't keep Iggy, it goes back to the rescue organization, which is not someone's home, which is not a family," she said in a show transcript provided to The Associated Press.

"I thought I did a good thing. I tried to find a loving home for the dog because I couldn't keep it."

DeGeneres said her hairdresser's daughters, ages 11 and 12, had bonded with Iggy and were heartbroken when the dog was taken away.

"Because I did it wrong, those people went and took that dog out of their home, and took it away from those kids," a sobbing DeGeneres said on her show.

"I feel totally responsible for it and I'm so sorry. I'm begging them to give that dog back to that family," she said. "It's not their fault. It's my fault. I shouldn't have given the dog away. Just please give the dog back to those little girls."

Mutts and Moms, a volunteer nonprofit organization in Pasadena, does not have a listed phone number and didn't immediately respond to an e-mail request for comment.

Posted by Weltha (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah I saw that. Its just WRONG. They would rather take to dog to an impersonal group home or what ever they call it the nlet it be loved. Why???? Because she went the wrong way about it.

Posted by create (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, Tre, what a joke indeed. But this is not uncommon. Give somebody a bit of authority when they aren't accustomed to it and they become despots. Ever hear of "a bitch with a badge"? I guess I'm gonna get bleeped for that.

Posted by Weltha (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So true so true. Nah, I think I said in another post a few months ago and its still there.

Posted by siamesefred (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's be fair. I've run into SOBs with badges, too.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How many times have you said stick to the issue. Yeah you got me back, probably the statement B.W.B. I'm ashamed of you bashers. If it wasn't for irresponcible people the world would not need so many rules and policies. Officers do not create the LAW they uphold it. That's their job and as I have said before not all people are good and not one person alone is an organization and not all organizations are the same. Seems to me that a handful of you hate rules, policies and law enforcement and non for profit organizations. You are so against these wonderful rescue groups that save these dumped animals and that is awful and you sound like you are not very nice people. So what if you don't care for one person in the organization or their policies. The bottom line is they are THERE for these pets that need them. Where do you think all these unwanted animals would be if the very people you are bashing weren't there? DEATH ROW. The point of this article is that MANY lives were saved and that's a great thing. I get emails every day from rescue groups updating me on adoptions. I could say give an idiot a computer and web acess and well..... I guess I did say it. My point is that you are not here for these animals you only want to critize the very people who are saving their lives and it makes me sad to know you are so bitter and hateful and ignoring the fact that LIVES are being saved. As I said before "The walk of death is not because of shelters or rescue groups or animal control officers. We as a whole do our part to save as many as we can." What are YOU doing to be a PART of the SOLUTION for this pet overpolulated world we live in????????

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 10:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No, I truly hope the family is able to adopt the dog. Do you have any idea why that particular policy is in place? Well work a day in a shelter. When a pet is adopted and some one just gives it away because for some reason it is not working 95% of the time that pet ends up back at the shelter and the other 5% are in a loving home. The statistics on that are just to high not to have that policy in place. When policy is followed the organization can help the pet find it's FOR-EVER home. I couldn't find any information on this organization as of yet and I do not know all the circumstances of how this transpired. But what I do know is that I have to support protocol as a whole. I said a lot of things, but not one mention of that program in my last statement, so I really do believe you are just looking for a reason to bash the very people who are saving these animals. And I'll say it one more time for YOU "not all people are good and not one person alone is an organization and not all organizations are the same." What are YOU doing to be a PART of the SOLUTION for this pet overpopulated world we live in????????

Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 10:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mutts and Moms would have been kicked to the curb had they come to my house demanding the dog back. That's rediculous.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 11:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ellen has a web site, you can post on it. I copied one post that made a lot of sense to me."
Hi Ellen and all the thousands of people who have spoken up on this issue with Iggy. I've read pages and pages of the comments and other information about the situation from the myriad of sites who've now made this dog the biggest issue in North America tonight. I can't find the video of your plea online, but I've read the transcript on your site here and I'm pretty sure from the comments naming the rescue agency among other things have been edited. I'm not sure how I feel about that but it's some slight improvement for protection of the privacy of the woman and her work.
So I'm on the fence about who's right, wrong and how this can best be resolved for both you, the family, Iggy and the rescue agency.
Ellen, you are a sweet, genuine person who has millions of people backing you and you've made a mistake. I have too when it's come to contracts and I've had to pay for them. In cash, not heartbreak, I'm pretty sure you could handle a fine from the agency for breach, actors do it all the time. Even if you don't read it before signing, you still have to go home and know what you've signed. Above and beyond that, there is so much good you can do for the rescue itself and all the other animal welfare societies in the world. Speak up for them. Support them even more strongly than ever. Let the woman speak her piece, have a civil conversation on air and have it soon. This could be one of the most difficult conversations of your life (and we know you've had a few of those) but it is the most important one you can have at this time. PART ONE

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 11:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

PART TWO-The supporters of the agency are right. Rescue societies run on love. Not much else. These people spend their own time and money saving these animals and if this situation destroys that woman and her organization, you will be not only making a mistake, you will be doing severe damage. She may have overreacted in her actions with taking Iggy from your hairdresser’s home without providing them and you the opportunity to explain the situation and proceed in the best way possible. Explain how you’re working together with her and the family to come to a resolution that is suitable for all. She doesn’t need to be vilified at this time. She too made a mistake, but both of you did it with the best of intentions.
I’m not entirely sure you gave Iggy enough time to acclimate to your home, it’s been less than a month since you took him into your home and he’s already been gone two weeks. I also can’t be sure that your standards for your friend’s family are the same standards of the agency. As I understand from another post-er that there are clauses prohibiting adoption to families with children under 13 years old. That’s probably the bigger reason that the pup was taken out of the home, more than that you breached contract. I understand that to a point, a dog like Iggy is 10 times smaller than any child and what they deem play can inadvertently be causing harm – they don’t always understand. Exceptions can be made to bring Iggy home, but there needs to be a lot more research about the family before that can happen.
Please work with the agency, recommend your friends and assist them in applying to adopt Iggy – please above all don’t abandon him and get some other pup for these kids. Pay their fees, but work with the agency, not only to bring the dog home, but also to save the agency. People are wondering why they can’t be found on the net – They’re in HIDING from DEATH THREATS. I’m not sure you’re in a much better position, but fanaticism is not going to help anyone in this situation.
Finally, you’ve been such a huge supporter of rebuilding after Katrina, there were thousands of animals rescued by people just like this woman down in New Orleans –you know the upset and pain caused to the human population during and after the storm (to this day no less) – those animals went through it too, but they can’t speak their pain. We are their best advocates and you do promote welfare for them with Jack Hanna and so many other groups – keep it up. Now can we please stick to the issues of this article.

Posted by PJean (anonymous) on October 16, 2007 at 11:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't know about that particular rescue group that Ellen went through to obtain Iggy; however, with many breed specific groups they do have policies that ensure if the new home doesn't work out for whatever reason(cats don't get along, kids hate the dog, whatever)that the contracting individual will return the animal back to the rescue group. These policies try to ensure that when the dog doesn't suit, that it doesn't wind up in a kill shelter or dumped out on the street. Not everyone is as consciencious as Ellen.

On the surface it seems that removing the dog from the hairdresser's home is cruel and completely against what the rescue groups profess they are attempting to do(place animals in good suitable homes). Yet who knows if the hairdresser has the home that that particular breed needs,? I would have to trust the rescue group to decide that. Ultimately, it would be nice for them to be able to adopt Iggy since the two girls bonded with him. They should apply and go through the proper channels.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 12:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank PJ now don't you think that we are doing a Great job Placing and transporting these pets in this area. Tough job, because there are so many unwanted animals and what a wonderful thing that there are resue groups in other states that are willing to help.

Posted by Heartland_Rescuer (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 1:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The really nice thing about working with licensed, non-profit rescue groups from all across this great nation is that we all have an understanding of what fellow rescuers deal with out there. It ain't pretty.

Thankfully, many times rescue/foster groups in other areas help fellow rescuers in other parts of the country when they for some reason or another happen to have open spots in their foster care, and in return favors are swapped in order to save more lives.

When a litter of puppies is taken from an owner these rescue groups step up and help the owner get the mama dogs spayed and the papa dogs neutered so that these families will never again have to deal with a litter of unwanted puppies. Spay/Neuter SAVES LIVES - it is the only proven method of controlling pet overpopulation in any region. Why do you think so many municipalities across the country are looking at mandatory spay/neuter legislation to implement into their local laws to require pet owners to spay or neuter their existing pets? It is because all of the unsterilized pets are a huge drain on city animal sheltering budgets.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Rules and regulations are in existence for reasons (many based on sound experiences over the years) - it's unfortunate that groups cannot keep every individual happy all the time. I know that most all rescues out there would love to be able to accomplish that feat. But in reality - is that really possible? No, it is not. Too many fractious personality types and conflicts without everyone trying to focus on the goal at hand.

Sometimes people get hung up on something that they just can't let go. It happens to the best of us. Holding onto grudges and harboring resentment and hate towards anyone or any organization only leads to bitterness. In the end, the only person that kind of bitterness hurts is the person harboring the terrible resentment.

Open minds breed an environment of comradery and brainstorming ideas of how to make things better in our own communities. People who are truly offering comment based on the desire to help do not post inflammatory comments such as "bitch with a badge" or calling people "arrogant", etc....

Posted by PJean (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Kstrebucet you stated "I have not always liked your policies or even some of people who represent you here in Emporia" so it's just as likely the remarks were describing you; "Sounds to me like your talking about yourself as much as anyone else on here." is an inflamitory statement and only serves the purpose of starting an arguement.

There are folkes that have spent a lot of time venting their spleen toward several participants in discussions on animal rescue, belligerance is not condusive to civil discourse on any subject,
On most webboard forums it's politely discouraged.

Posted by Heartland_Rescuer (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Kstrebuchet: I most definitely was including myself in the afore mentioned statement, and it was not directed at you individually, it was a blanket statement. I get hung up on things I disagree with same as anyone. The difference I try to make for myself is to read, read, read, and educate myself about other opinions and why they exist. Sometimes, I can truly learn why someone feels the way they do. With that said, I have left a package for you to pick up at Dorsey Animal Clinic in Emporia. It is something that really opened my eyes to what it is like for shelter workers, rescue workers, and Animal Control Officers who are on the front lines in the pet overpopulation epidemic in Kansas. Consider it my gift to you with no strings attached. You can burn it if you would like, but I hope you will take the time to read it.

And again I will reiterate, it's unfortunate that groups cannot keep every individual happy all the time. I know that most all rescues out there WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT FEAT. But in reality - is that really possible? No, it is not.

With that said - I feel it is an incredible unproductive waste of time reading this forum or posting to this forum.

"On matters of taste, swim with the current. On matters of principle, stand like a rock."

Posted by Heartland_Rescuer (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

K - Yes, I read. But I prefer positive solution-based reading material. I have found this particular forum to be 90% negative all of the time.

Posted by ACO (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Kstrebuchet, I am truly sorry for the fact that you are not getting the positive side of this article. I wish I could make the bad experience you had better, but I have tried to point out to you what really matters and I have failed." it just bugs the heck out of me when, (at least in my mind) people seem to be so narrow minded" your quote and I know that is how I feel trying to get the whole picture across to a few of you. Please try and understand that we are doing the very best we can for these dumped animals. Colorado spay and neuters are a lot higher than here and puppy mills barely exist there, that is why we are able to send our unwanted pets there to have a chance to be loved and wanted. I hope you accept the gift that was offered to you and read the book. I know I'd like to have a copy of it. I employ you to let go of the hatred that you have and bask in the joy of knowing lives are being saved.

Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 17, 2007 at 10:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Kstre, give it up. I have tried to discuss different points of view with other ACO's, HSUS advocates, Humane Society members, bunny huggars, peta members, etc. They are all the same. They will not hear anything but what they believe in.