.jpg)
"I understand the intent of CAPA is to drive KCSPCA out of business, so the no-kill shelters can extort an endless supply of funds from the state and county taxpayer for their no-kill adventure, just like Austin. But how many animals are they, and their political partners, willing to allow to suffer like this to gain a little notoriety in the no-kill circles?"
I came across this blogger who discussed the various problems associated with CAPA inspired bills. I've always been concerned about CAPA because it in effect offers "Obama-care" for shelter pets with the taxpayers expected to pick up the tab.
Under that type of benefits package people would convince themselves that dumping the pet or breeder stock that has little or no previous medical care on a place where it could receive that care plus for the rest of their life is no kill compassion at work. It never stuck me that the bill would indeed cause many humane open admission shelters to simply close up shop rather than cover budget shortfalls as we are witnessing in Austin.
The only CAPA type bill I would consider would be a law that required breeders to provide the same standards of care that CAPA expects public and humane shelters to provide without clearly explaining that it will be the taxpayers funding this disaster.
No kill has already demonstrated it's unethical business side of the equation with No Kill Nation flexing it's mindless muscle with civil lawsuits being filed against whistle blowers attempting to expose that organization for soliciting and depositing over $100,000 in NKN corporate account on donations earmarked to rescue the 100+ Abandoned Dogs in the Everglades. The no kill movement not only has it's eyes focused on the millions of dollars raised by animal protection groups but will not limit itself when it looks at money donated directly to rescue shelter animals as well. One fact is certain - No Kill Nation has admitted on their Webster and in court papers that NKN is NOT a rescue organization.
They simply pose as a rescue group or as a group that saves animals when in fact they have no one working actively in rescue of any type. With an agenda that preaches pet overpopulation is a myth and that it's shelters who kill the pets being bred irresponsibly one could surmise that money donated towards the no kill movement in general and not donated directly to a credible rescue group is just as likely to be used promoting a political agenda that recognizes breeders as part of the solution to shelter killing which of course would be a myth.
http://delawarecapa.blogspot.com/2012/08/passing-buck-cruelest-state-in-nation.html
And here is the most ridiculous part of spending hundreds or thousands to treat animals under CAPA. What happens when they fill up? The shelter is allowed to euthanize an animal if they go through all the steps under CAPA. So when a shelter finds a 10 year old pit bull that has been hit by a car, they are required to treat it. And then weeks later, when nobody has stepped up to adopt the dog, or a rescue to pull it, the funds used have been wasted treating a dog that still needs to be euthanized. And worse yet, the dog has spent the last 2 weeks recuperating in a shelter environment or with a foster if lucky, but did it make sense to put the dog through the pain of surgery & recovery process only to be euthanized anyway? So CAPA doesn't just waste money, it's also encourages prolonged suffering.
ReplyDelete