 | market - home |
|
| market - home |
|
 |
|
News & Events:
|
Posted by prettykitty on April 02, 2003 at 21:10:21:
In Reply to: Re: % of decent pet shops posted by oregonlizardlady on April 02, 2003 at 00:14:24:
The idea is to take away animals that are being neglected, not take them away because people are giving out improper information or the animals are overpriced. I'm not saying I support giving out the wrong information because I don't, but its 2 different issues. As someone has already stated above, these organizations do have their own agendas and they make more money adopting out pure bred animals. The state vet and her staff are supposed to be the ones regulating and inspecting the pet stores. RI isn't very big so I don't see why someone else needs to do the job. Also, does anyone know if they have to get permission from someone else before seizing the animals? And how do they prove they are who they say and really do work for a humane organization? I have been in the pet business for 6 years, including 4 in RI and while I may not think every store is doing a great job, I have never seen animals being neglected or mistreated. I've seen a lot of customers take things the wrong way, lie about what they see and just not understand and turn nothing into issues of animal neglect. Also, just a few months ago the animal shelter in Cranston, RI was closed because it was unsafe for the animals and many of the animals were euthanized because they couldn't find anything else to do with them. These are the same people that are going to be allowed to seize animals and they were the ones neglecting the animals. I would personally be very upset if I was working in a store where animals were seized and then put down because the shelter couldn't care for them or house them properly (not that it would happen since I would not let the animals be neglected but just a scenario). Sorry for the tangent but I do not think this would be a good idea at all because most shelters are all for shutting down pet stores and if they were allowed to seize animals without proof then the shelters could easily put the stores out of business.
