no, i wouldn't. it's a lot like, "natural." or, "organic." then there are the ones who won't euthanize even when the animals are clearly suffering, which to me is as bad as killing healthy positives.... have you read the asilomar records, which is what the maddie's fund "no-kill nation" stuff is based on? damned if i've ever been able to get a straight answer from anyone on whether FIVs/FeLVs fit their definition....
On 12/13/06, Phaewryn - Controversy Queen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You'd be shocked at the actual definition of "no kill" in shelter circles. In most, it simply means that when they run out of space, they stop taking in new animals, rather than just killing the ones that have been there the longest. Their testing policy, and euthanasia policy outside of the "space" issue has NO RELATION to their thinking of themselves as "no kill". There are countless shelters listed on many lists as "no kill", shelters that PROUDLY claim to be "no kill", shelters that picket-toting hard-core activists support as "no kill", yet, the vast majority of them, if you browse the list of cats they have up for adoption, all say "cat has been tested negative for FELV and FIV", and they don't list a single FELV+ or FIV+ cat on their website for adoption. If you take the time to email them and ask, "Do you adopt out FELV+ or FIV+ cats?" most of them either choose to NOT REPLY, or reply back and say they don't. No kill? I don't think so... but the majority of people in rescue circles consider them no kill. To me, no kill means that you DON'T KILL any animals unless it is SUFFERING and BEYOND the point of recovery. Not so for most people though. Phaewryn Please save Whitey! http://ucat.us/Whitey.html VT low cost Spay&Neuter, and Emergency Financial Assistance for cat owners: http://ucat.us/VermontLowCost.html Special Needs Cat Resources: http://ucat.us/domesticcatlinks.html
-- Spay & Neuter Your Neighbors! Maybe That'll Make The Difference.... MaryChristine AIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCats MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 289856892
