Hallmark Xmas Card Josie
Sandy this cheered my day at work - it made me laugh so much I've sent it around to others here too. Thanks Did I mention here that we were getting a dog called Josie at the weekend - well we did and I was hearbroken as we had to return her to the sanctuary the following day - it was awful. I criticise anybody for not allowing the dog to settle and never thought I'd do it myself. She was an absolutely adorable dog who settled so well - she played with toys and was very relaxed with us. Only problem is she started to viciously attack our other dog Candy. They got along when we introduced them at the sanctuary and on their walks together - but when Josie came home she instantly went into alpha role and was attacking candy for walking into the same room as her. I was trying to restructure her attitude and pack positioning but there wasn't time. Poor Candy was shaking and getting too fearful to even walk around the house. So sad face because I hated taking her back. She would be such a loyal and loving dog with no other dogs in the house - but we have had candy 12 years and we need to keep her safe in her own home. I really thought they would get along well - didn't expect Josie turning so territorial so quickly. Michelle, Minstrel, Buddy Angel Bramble
WInstrol - build muscle mass and increase appetite
That's very good to know. I'll copy this to Susan, who's on this lilst but may not be reading. We've talked recently about how to build muscle mass on these puny kitties that just don't thrive easily. She has one now that she's hand feeding several times daily (whew!). Can you get it thru the vet? Gloria On Dec 12, 2005, at 1:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/12/05 1:33:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's Winstrol? Winstrol is an anabolic steroid, a controlled substance due to it's abuse by people using it for body-building, etc. VERY effective in restoring muscle mass, thus it's abuse. But, it can and does work miracles for animals that are plagued with terminal illnesses. It will restore their appetite, put weight on and dramatically improve their quality of life. Patti
Re: WInstrol - build muscle mass and increase appetite
Gloria~ Yes, it has to be prescribed thru a vet because as I said it is a "controlled" drug - right up there with narcotics. However, it does work very well with cats that seem to be "wasting away" due to their illnesses. As much as use of steroids is debated, I feel when it comes down to giving this kitties some quality back to their lives, it is well worth using. Especially when these babies are fighting like he!! to hang on Of course, it's use does come with "warnings", but you have to weigh in good vs. bad, especially with terminal kitties. Patti
Re: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list
That is so true - that they are in our hearts forever. Even if they've only been our fosters for a very short time. Chrissy was so pretty and had been so unhappy around other kitties, and this seemed to be the perfect home for her. TenHouseCats [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sigh. i'm sorry, gloria--but it reminds me that while they're fostersfor just a while in our homes, they remain in our hearts foreverOn 12/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Hi Tonya - you got that right. I thought it was a good home. I know she wanted to do the right thing, and that she was ignorant of these issues. But I would NOT of course, have euthanized a cat because of a bladder stone... Sigh... Gloria At 06:36 PM 12/12/2005, you wrote: Gloria, I'm so sorry. I know how hard it is to let go of a foster to its new home. I'm sure this is very upsetting to you. :( tonya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Belinda would you add one of my former fosters (not FELV) to the Bridge list? Name was Chrissy, owner renamed to Prissy. She was a pretty little exotic type kitty, silver gray with stripes and huge eyes, adopted out this past May.. Her owner found out that she had a large bladder stone, and had her euthanized, sigh. Gloria --MaryChristineAIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCatsMSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ICQ: 289856892
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??
No, the citation is just the book and volume number. You probably have the actual court decision. Thanks for offering to fax it, but that's not necessary. I saved the summary that you sent me, and if I ever need access to the case I'll contact ALDF. The only fax machine I have has to be plugged in to the phone line, so we need a call first, etc., and I don't have a current need for it. Thanks, though, and keep up the amazing self-advocacy work you are doing! Michelle In a message dated 12/12/2005 6:38:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the law office downloaded the file for me and have a 8 pages long something here – do you know what this is? (the cover letter says that this it’s the citation of the case we downloaded for you) -
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??
Look at the reasoning used in the decisions you have where ordinances were struck down, and see if you can use that. Also, if you can get one of your "expert" witnesses-- the vet or the animal services person who is writing you a letter-- to say in a letter or in testimony that different species and sized animals need different amounts of space and that, as far as they are concerned, the formula in the ordinance has no relation to the amount of space that any particular species of animal actually needs, and to give a different opinion of how to determine whether cats are too crowded or not, that should be more than enough. At that point the burden should switch back to the city to prove that there is some rational basis to the formula that they use. If you can, you might also want to contact animal control or the mayor's office in other cities in NM, like Santa Fe, and also nearby towns, like Corrales, to see if they have ordinances limited animal numbers and if so what the language is. If they do not have limits on the numbers, or if the limits they have are more flexible or make more sense than the Albuquerque one, you might want to submit those as well to bolster your claim that when cities try to figure out limits on animals for health and safety they do not use the bizarre formula that Albuquerque does. I am not sure if this will work or not. it sort of depends on what you find out. Just a thought. Michelle In a message dated 12/9/2005 8:40:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was also reading some stuff on the website from other cases.. that when it’s assumed that the ordinance does not make sense, it’s a burden of the challenger (which is me) to prove that it’s not -and though it totally does not make how they calculate how many animals one can have.. how do I prove it it does not make sense scientifically???
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??
That is really strange-- that they say you need a permit but do not have any written record of giving them out? I would say that bolsters the claim of arbitrary and capricious behavior-- that they do not seem to have a uniform way of deciding or recording the permits, and seem to do it by whim of whoever gets the call. If the officer or the office changed his/its mind from one year to the next based only on an anonymous phone call regarding the number of animals, which they already knew and had approved, that is pretty arbitrary. Michelle In a message dated 12/9/2005 7:55:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The only problem is that.. the officer who gave me “the permit” did not give me anything physically – I asked for it, and he said that there was not anything he could give it to me physically.. but I know that there are people in the animal services he told that I have a permit.. so..we were and are planning to argue that point anyway.
RE: OT: Hannibal FINALLY started eating!
Hideyo, Great news about Hannibal! If he keeps this up, you'll have to put him on a diet! :) Wendy __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list
Gloria, I'm sorry to hear about Chrissy. Do you think the vet recommended euthanasia for a bladder stone? Doesn't make sense. :) Wendy --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Belinda would you add one of my former fosters (not FELV) to the Bridge list? Name was Chrissy, owner renamed to Prissy. She was a pretty little exotic type kitty, silver gray with stripes and huge eyes, adopted out this past May.. Her owner found out that she had a large bladder stone, and had her euthanized, sigh. Gloria __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list
Actually, the owner indicated that it was her choice because she herself has had kidney stones and knows how much they hurt. She was new to that vet, as she just moved (like 10 miles from her former place). From what she said, she was just adamant about it, thinking she was doing the right thing. I mentioned to her that bladder stones were different than kidney stones, but she just said she didn't want her to hurt. I think she was trying to do the right thing, without listening to others. She's just getting over her mothers death, and seems to be depressed. I think it was a bad decision for good hearted reasons. Sigh again. Gloria Wendy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Gloria, I'm sorry to hear about Chrissy. Do you think the vet recommended euthanasia for a bladder stone? Doesn't make sense. Wendy --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: gt; Belinda would you add one of my former fosters (not gt; FELV) to the Bridge gt; list? Name was Chrissy, owner renamed to Prissy. gt; She was a pretty little gt; exotic type kitty, silver gray with stripes and huge gt; eyes, adopted out this gt; past May.. Her owner found out that she had a large gt; bladder stone, and had gt; her euthanized, sigh. gt; gt; Gloria gt; gt; gt; __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list
Actually, the owner indicated that it was her choice because she herself has had kidney stones and knows how much they hurt. She was new to that vet, as she just moved (like 10 miles from her former place). From what she said, she was just adamant about it, thinking she was doing the right thing. I mentioned to her that bladder stones were different than kidney stones, but she just said she didn't want her to hurt. I think she was trying to do the right thing, without listening to others. She's just getting over her mothers death, and seems to be depressed. I think it was a bad decision for good hearted reasons. Sigh again. Gloria Wendy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Gloria, I'm sorry to hear about Chrissy. Do you think the vet recommended euthanasia for a bladder stone? Doesn't make sense. Wendy --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: gt; Belinda would you add one of my former fosters (not gt; FELV) to the Bridge gt; list? Name was Chrissy, owner renamed to Prissy. gt; She was a pretty little gt; exotic type kitty, silver gray with stripes and huge gt; eyes, adopted out this gt; past May.. Her owner found out that she had a large gt; bladder stone, and had gt; her euthanized, sigh. gt; gt; Gloria gt; gt; gt; __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th??
What I found out from Denise who is director of animal services division is that they are currently investigating him for some misconduct he did not follow the procedure, could the city tell me sorry, we have to take the permit back?? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 8:33 AM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? That is really strange-- that they say you need a permit but do not have any written record of giving them out? I would say that bolsters the claim of arbitrary and capricious behavior-- that they do not seem to have a uniform way of deciding or recording the permits, and seem to do it by whim of whoever gets the call. If the officer or the office changed his/its mind from one year to the next based only on an anonymous phone call regarding the number of animals, which they already knew and had approved, that is pretty arbitrary. Michelle In a message dated 12/9/2005 7:55:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The only problem is that.. the officer who gave me the permit did not give me anything physically I asked for it, and he said that there was not anything he could give it to me physically.. but I know that there are people in the animal services he told that I have a permit.. so..we were and are planning to argue that point anyway.
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
Thank you, Michelle for you input. One of my vets is going to do a live testimony, so I think he can testify the below (space needs for different species) on my behalf. I will also look it up about the ordinance form other cities I know they all have a limit.. but they dont calculate the way Alb does I remember looking into it other cities even outside of NM, they all seem to tend to pick a number (3 or 4, or 5 or whatever they decide to pick) as a limit where there was no explanation as to why the number was picked as a limit, which I guess is also a bad thingAt least Alb tried to come up with a formula, if it was a good formula, it would have made a sense.. but it does not. Michelle, what would you think of my argument on this? Well the city only allows a 10% of the total property space as a place where animals can live and within the space, each animal (up to 30lb) requires 75 sq So will not the bottom line be as long as an animal is allocated for 75 sq, does it matter to the city if they live throughout the entire living space or not as long as I am ok with it? I am having a hard time to understand their 10% logic --- I have a total of 4,000 and I am claiming for 20 cats --- so theoretically, each animal is allowed for 200 sq --- which is much larger than the space they request if I dont mind personally as the property owner having cats through the entire living space, why does it matter if they take 10% of space or 100% of space.. the only thing I can think of is a density issue.. but again why would they care if they all kept indoor and each animals has a lot of space.. I hope I am making sense.. any input on this issue is appreciated, Michelle From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 8:30 AM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? Look at the reasoning used in the decisions you have where ordinances were struck down, and see if you can use that. Also, if you can get one of your expert witnesses-- the vet or the animal services person who is writing you a letter-- to say in a letter or in testimony that different species and sized animals need different amounts of space and that, as far as they are concerned, the formula in the ordinance has no relation to the amount of space that any particular species of animal actually needs, and to give a different opinion of how to determine whether cats are too crowded or not, that should be more than enough. At that point the burden should switch back to the city to prove that there is some rational basis to the formula that they use. If you can, you might also want to contact animal control or the mayor's office in other cities in NM, like Santa Fe, and also nearby towns, like Corrales, to see if they have ordinances limited animal numbers and if so what the language is. If they do not have limits on the numbers, or if the limits they have are more flexible or make more sense than the Albuquerque one, you might want to submit those as well to bolster your claim that when cities try to figure out limits on animals for health and safety they do not use the bizarre formula that Albuquerque does. I am not sure if this will work or not. it sort of depends on what you find out. Just a thought. Michelle In a message dated 12/9/2005 8:40:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was also reading some stuff on the website from other cases.. that when its assumed that the ordinance does not make sense, its a burden of the challenger (which is me) to prove that its not -and though it totally does not make how they calculate how many animals one can have.. how do I prove it it does not make sense scientifically???
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th??
I had a bond arraignment this morning for the criminal complaint this morning.. so pleaded not guilty and trial is now scheduled for 1/12 (so soon) I hope everything will go well next Monday otherwise, then I have to appeal,, and I guess I could get a continuance on the trial 1/12 (or at least thats what Greg said) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 8:21 AM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? No, the citation is just the book and volume number. You probably have the actual court decision. Thanks for offering to fax it, but that's not necessary. I saved the summary that you sent me, and if I ever need access to the case I'll contact ALDF. The only fax machine I have has to be plugged in to the phone line, so we need a call first, etc., and I don't have a current need for it. Thanks, though, and keep up the amazing self-advocacy work you are doing! Michelle In a message dated 12/12/2005 6:38:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the law office downloaded the file for me and have a 8 pages long something here do you know what this is? (the cover letter says that this its the citation of the case we downloaded for you) -
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??
do you have a criminal lawyer? I really would consider getting one. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 1:53:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I had a bond arraignment this morning for the criminal complaint this morning.. so pleaded not guilty and trial is now scheduled for 1/12 (so soon) – I hope everything will go well next Monday – otherwise, then I have to appeal,, and I guess I could get a continuance on the trial 1/12 (or at least that’s what Greg said)
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th??
Yeah.. Gregs friend is a very good criminal lawyer he is probably too good he defends lots of federal crimes.. I will ask him.. Greg does not want me to freak out too much.. we will do out best to see what happens on Monday (he is pretty optimistic about Monday) and then if it does not go well,, we will worry the next step.. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 11:54 AM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? do you have a criminal lawyer? I really would consider getting one. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 1:53:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I had a bond arraignment this morning for the criminal complaint this morning.. so pleaded not guilty and trial is now scheduled for 1/12 (so soon) I hope everything will go well next Monday otherwise, then I have to appeal,, and I guess I could get a continuance on the trial 1/12 (or at least thats what Greg said)
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
If they all have limits and they are a fixed number, I probably would not bring them up at all. As to your argument, I think you are right about focusing on the 10% issue. It is really random. Where does it come from? Are they suggesting that people who have dogs are supposed to confine them to 10% of the house and are wrong to let them live in the whole house? On what basis could they say that? And if they say no, they are assuming people allow animals the run of the house and that is ok, then there is obviously no basis for limiting the number based on an assumption they are only using 10% of the house. Basically they are saying that if someone has a 9,000 square foot house they can have more than twice as many animals even if they keep all the animals in only 900 square feet of the house, whereas you are giving them 4,000 square feet-- they are saying that someone who owns a bigger house, just by virtue of owning the bigger house, is allowed to keep more animals than you even if they give them less space. There is no rational basis to this regarding the health or welfare of the animals or the neighbors. The one danger I can think of with this argument is that most towns have ordinances limiting the number of large animals, like horses, based on acreage-- e.g. you must have 1 acre per horse-- rather than on the amount of space actually given to the animals-- e.g. the person might keep the horse in a 10 foot by 20 foot paddock. I actually think those ordinances are stupid too, and it should have to do with the space you can actually give the animal versus what you own, but a judge may think about those ordinances and not want to call their validity into question. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 1:51:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thank you, Michelle for you input. One of my vets is going to do a live testimony, so I think he can testify the below (space needs for different species) on my behalf. I will also look it up about the ordinance form other cities – I know they all have a limit.. but they don’t calculate the way Alb does I remember looking into it – other cities even outside of NM, they all seem to tend to pick a number (3 or 4, or 5 or whatever they decide to pick) as a limit where there was no explanation as to why the number was picked as a limit, which I guess is also a bad thing…At least Alb tried to come up with a formula, if it was a good formula, it would have made a sense.. but it does not. Michelle, what would you think of my argument on this? – Well the city only allows a 10% of the total property space as a place where animals can live – and within the space, each animal (up to 30lb) requires 75 sq – So will not the bottom line be as long as an animal is allocated for 75 sq, does it matter to the city if they live throughout the entire living space or not as long as I am ok with it? I am having a hard time to understand their 10% logic --- I have a total of 4,000 – and I am claiming for 20 cats --- so theoretically, each animal is allowed for 200 sq --- which is much larger than the space they request… if I don’t mind personally as the property owner having cats through the entire living space, why does it matter if they take 10% of space or 100% of space.. the only thing I can think of is a “density” issue.. but again – why would they care if they all kept indoor and each animals has a lot of space.. I hope I am making sense.. any input on this issue is appreciated, Michelle
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??
sounds good. whatever happens on Monday, if the criminal charges are not dropped, bring the lawyer. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 1:58:10 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah.. Greg’s friend is a very good criminal lawyer – he is probably too good – he defends lots of federal crimes.. I will ask him.. Greg does not want me to freak out too much.. we will do out best to see what happens on Monday (he is pretty optimistic about Monday) and then if it does not go well,, we will worry the next step..
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
I think it came from hobby breeder permit where people keep their animals in kennels and cages (originally, they did not even have a multiple permit, the law was only written for hobby breeders and then, they add the multiple permit name added to the existing hobby breeder ordinance As I read lots of other cases and articles written regarding the pet law what it is saying that pet limit law may seem like a quick fix to the problem, but in reality, It targets all owners, regardless of their actions or the behavior of their animals. Limiting the number of animals an individual may own is an ineffective solution to animal control problems because it fails to address the heart of the irresponsible ownership. Limit laws often force caring, responsible owners to surrender their excess animals to shelters already overcrowded, there by increasing a citys shelter population problems and euthanasia. In many cases, communities already have nuisance laws in place that, if nuisance law is properly enforced, there really wont be any need for limit law as what happened to the PA case, more number of animals per se does not mean more nuisance. I also requested stats information from the city, regarding the type of complaints and the number of complaints so that I can draw a conclusion whether there is any relationship between the number of animals one own and the number of complaints the city receives. What Greg is concerned is that.. I am going to present my case before the hearing officer who is contracted by the city --- so he was not sure how he is willing to admit that the ordinance is invalid after all he is hired by the city --- so I should primary focus on the factual information that there is no nuisance, no complaint from neighbors, and all animals are taken care of and am not violating the intent of law at all and then address how the provision of the current ordinance does not make sense.. and then argue about the problem of the enforcement of law as you mentioned --- (trying to take away something that was already) and then mention the validity of pet limit law and conclude again with the very first point I made regarding welfare of the animals and community (not being impacted) what do you think? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 12:02 PM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle If they all have limits and they are a fixed number, I probably would not bring them up at all. As to your argument, I think you are right about focusing on the 10% issue. It is really random. Where does it come from? Are they suggesting that people who have dogs are supposed to confine them to 10% of the house and are wrong to let them live in the whole house? On what basis could they say that? And if they say no, they are assuming people allow animals the run of the house and that is ok, then there is obviously no basis for limiting the number based on an assumption they are only using 10% of the house. Basically they are saying that if someone has a 9,000 square foot house they can have more than twice as many animals even if they keep all the animals in only 900 square feet of the house, whereas you are giving them 4,000 square feet-- they are saying that someone who owns a bigger house, just by virtue of owning the bigger house, is allowed to keep more animals than you even if they give them less space. There is no rational basis to this regarding the health or welfare of the animals or the neighbors. The one danger I can think of with this argument is that most towns have ordinances limiting the number of large animals, like horses, based on acreage-- e.g. you must have 1 acre per horse-- rather than on the amount of space actually given to the animals-- e.g. the person might keep the horse in a 10 foot by 20 foot paddock. I actually think those ordinances are stupid too, and it should have to do with the space you can actually give the animal versus what you own, but a judge may think about those ordinances and not want to call their validity into question. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 1:51:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thank you, Michelle for you input. One of my vets is going to do a live testimony, so I think he can testify the below (space needs for different species) on my behalf. I will also look it up about the ordinance form other cities I know they all have a limit.. but they dont calculate the way Alb does I remember looking into it other cities even outside of NM, they all seem to tend to pick a number (3 or 4, or 5 or whatever they decide to pick) as a limit where there was no explanation as to why the number was picked as a limit, which I guess is also a bad thingAt least Alb tried to come up with a formula, if it was a good formula, it
some email addresses for Chinese cat/dog fur
PLEASE CROSS POST Forwarded Message: Subj: LETTER - China's Dog/Cat Fur Markets Date: 12/10/2005 8:35:57 PM Eastern Standard Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent from the Internet (Details) - Original Message - From: Kinship Circle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 2 Kinship Circle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 8:24 PM Subject: LETTER - China's Dog/Cat Fur Markets 12/10/05--China's Dog/Cat Fur Markets KINSHIP CIRCLE LETTER CAMPAIGN http://www.kinshipcircle.org SOURCE OF INFORMATION http://www.furkills.org/dog_fur_horror.shtml http://justnicephotos.homestead.com/DogAndCatCruelFurTrade.html http://www.animalsasia.org/ DOG CAT FUR PETITION: http://www.heathermillsmccartney.com/petition.php CHINESE DOG/CAT FUR VIDEO: http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=jcruel_china_dog *Overseas postage from anywhere in the U.S. is 80 cents. == SAMPLE LETTER Full contact information follows letter == *All email addresses come directly from Chinese government websites. We have researched this for a week. If a particular email bounces, there is nothing more we can do. [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Honorable Officials of China: I urge you to make enforceable animal protection laws a priority before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. Please do not let China's notoriously inhumane bear bile farms and live animal markets tarnish your image during the Games. In particular, I implore you to immediately enact laws to ban China's dog/cat fur trade. Like many potential tourists, I cannot support a country that condones animal abuse. Neither revenue nor tradition justifies the profoundly cruel Chinese dog and cat fur trade. UNACCEPTABLE: Up to 8,000 caged dogs and cats are stacked into a single truck for cross-country transport without food or water. At an animal market in Southern China, investigators documented 20 cats smashed inside one wire cage and dead cats draped over cages. I've seen the video footage with my own eyes: Live dogs and cats flattened inside cages the size of filing drawers are tossed from truck beds on to hard pavement. Animals scream as their paws are crushed. Workers pull them out with long metal tongs and fling them over a 7 ft. fence. Some of these cats and dogs still wear collars and ID tags, indicating they are stolen companion animals. UNCONSCIONABLE: Chinese fur markets violently bludgeon, hang, electrocute and strangle fur-bearing animals, including millions of cats and dogs. Cats are choked in their cages alongside live cats. Dogs are hung from wire nooses and slashed across the groin. At fur farms in Hebei Province, investigators videotaped workers carving off skin and fur from alert dogs, foxes and other animals. Some fully skinned animals continued to blink and breathe spasmodically as their hearts beat for another five to 10 minutes. DECEITFUL: Dog/cat items are deceptively labeled Gae-wolf, Sobaki, Asian Jackal, Wildcat, Goyangi, Katzenfelle, or other names before exported abroad. Unsuspecting shoppers purchase unmarked, dyed or vaguely labeled boots, coats, linings, toys and homeopathic remedies. I will not visit a country that brutalizes animals to decorate a sweater, line a coat or become a trinket. This is the ultimate betrayal of creatures who are instinctively trustworthy and devoted companions to people. I stand firm in my boycott of Chinese tourism, commerce and the 2008 Olympic Games--unless China makes visible strides to end the vicious treatment of dogs, cats, bears and other non-human beings. Thank you for accepting my comments on this matter of international concern. Sincerely, == FULL CONTACT INFORMATION == *All email addresses come directly from Chinese government websites. We have researched this for a week. If a particular email bounces, there is nothing more we can do. Mr. Hu Jintao, President, The People's Republic of China 9 Xihuang-Chenggen Beijie Beijing, China Chinese Government's Official Web Portal: http://www.gov.cn/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] China National Tourism Administration 9A Jianguomennei Ave., Beijing 100740, China ph: (0086-10) 65201114; fax: (0086-10) 65122096 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] website: http://www.cnta.com China National Tourist Office, New York (in the U.S.) 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6413 Empire State Building New York, NY 10118 ph: 001-212-7608218; fax: 001-212-7608809 CHINA NATIONAL TOURIST OFFICES IN OTHER COUNTRIES:
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
I think the next logical step is for you to go to law school! Ok, if you are going to be before a hearing officer rather than a judge, Greg is right-- the hearing officer probably can not, let alone will not, rule an ordinance invalid. I think you are right to stress the no problem, no nuisance, no health and safety issue first. But I think that second you ought to argue that, in fact, because there is no problem the city actually approved you for the permit in 2004 and should not be able to arbitrarily change its mind now, especially since you relied on the approval last year to make build things for the cats, etc. I think you actually should ask Greg to pull up some relevant cases on equitable estopel and that you should ask Greg to tell you if it makes sense to argue this at the hearing level. I probably would argue it because it could give the hearing officer an out-- a way to approve your appeal without having to strike down the ordinance, which he probably will not want to or be able to do, and without having to say that anyone who is not a nuisance can have more animals than the ordinance says (which he also will not want to do). If you can convince him that in your case specifically the city actually approved your request for permits, that you relied on this and spent money based on it, and thenthe citytook the permits away with no change in circumstances and is trying to say it is now illegal for you to have the same number of cats they had already approved, and then show the hearing officer that there is a legal principle called equitable estoppel (and give him some cases) saying they can't do that, then the hearing officer might feel like he has a way to rule in your favor without either striking down the ordinance or giving everyone else a reason to flaunt the ordinance. He can say that in this particular case, because the city approved the permits and you relied on the approvals, the city can not now turn around and deny them without any change in circumstance or actions on your part. That is my opinion, though again I have almost no experience with municipal. law. I would then conclude by saying that you also think the ordinance is unconstitutional because it has no rational basis for setting the limit it does, and the limit is totally arbitrary and makes no sense, have your witness testify about why it makes no sense, and give the hearing officer copies of the relevant decisions from other states. Say that you realize the hearing officer may not have the power to declare the ordinance unconstitutional, but you want him to consider that is probably is, when making a decision on your other arguments and the facts of your case, and that -- and this is important!!-- you want the argument and the cases entered into the record in case you need to appeal the decision to a court, so you can make the argument there (I have no idea if you would need to have them in the record of if a court would have the power to decide the case de novo, which means from scratch, so you could raise new arguments later-- it depends on New Mexico law-- but saying this will give you a good reason to insist the hearing officer take a look at materials that are going to tell him the ordinance is probably unconstitutional, which may sway how he decides the case on the other issues. Does that make sense? I used to do that a lot in administrative hearings before the MA welfare agency-- I did need to get the stuff in the record there in order to later raise it in court, so the hearing officers had to include it if I submitted it,and sometimes I think it may have swayed how they decided the case on other grounds even though they did not have the power to strike down regulations entirely. The other benefit to doing this is that the city attorney will also get copies of the stuff then, and it may make him drop the whole thing. Hope this helps. Again, I am far from an expert on this, so take my suggestions as merely that. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 2:36:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: what do you think?
RE: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
Michelle - If I ever forget to tell you, I wanted to you know how grateful I am of your insight on this. And I will tell all my furry children how much you are helping me and saving their lives!! Yes, everything you say totally makes sense. I wish I had something physical to proof that they had given me the permit --- I think I can reasonably reason it in such a way that someone reported me in 2004 having multiple cats and the officer came by to investigate --- and he did not put any record in my file that he gave me the permit after the investigation,, but also there was no other follow up in the file at all, which may make it reasonable to believe what I am saying --- though the officer who gave me the permit lied to Denise (director of ASD) that I only had 8 cats in April of 2004 and he only gave me the permit of 8 (I had 18 then, and I have 20 now) --- so, I am not sure how I am going to prove that he is also lying to cover his butt I gave all the paper work to him, but he did not keep anything in the file.. I dont know, Michelle if I mentioned to you about another lady who had 120 cats in her property in Alb, in 2004, they gave her a sanctuary status to her. She was very much in a similar situation as I was (lives in a residential zone) --- but she really did not want me to bring her case up as she wants to protect her cats which I respect totally in case the city finds out and may try to take her status away, too. When I mentioned this case briefly, she thought the sanctuary status was also given to incorrectly. But I did not want to give Denise this ladys information is there anything I can do from this information?? I will bring all the points up as you mentioned, and thats what Greg suggested, too --- so that if I appeal, I can make sure that I can use all the arguments I need Hope this helps. Again, I am far from an expert on this, so take my suggestions as merely that. Michelle In a message dated 12/13/2005 2:36:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: what do you think?
Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle
Hmm. Wow, I would want to bring up that other woman's case, but you're right in not wanting to jeopardize her. What is the zoning for where you are? If you incorporated as a nonprofit rescue group, could you get a kennel or sanctuary license? Michelle
Re: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list
Thanks so much, Kerry... At 05:07 PM 12/13/2005, you wrote: Gloria, I am so sorry. That is awful, truly heartbreaking. I am sort of dreading the time my foster Pookie goes back home. (Supposed to be Xmas now, but it was supposed to be Thanksgiving, so I don't know...) love and hugs to you, Gloria Kerry - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 12:33 PM Subject: Chrissy/Prissy on the bridge list Belinda would you add one of my former fosters (not FELV) to the Bridge list? Name was Chrissy, owner renamed to Prissy. She was a pretty little exotic type kitty, silver gray with stripes and huge eyes, adopted out this past May.. Her owner found out that she had a large bladder stone, and had her euthanized, sigh. Gloria
Fwd: A final rescue and adoption drive for displaced Katrina pets
---BeginMessage--- Dear Members Friends, In the week after Thanksgiving, nearly 40,000 of you signed our petition, showing your support for a plan to mount a final rescue, care, and nationwide adoption drive for family pets who are still roaming the streets in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. When you signed the petition you helped make a difference, and today we are delighted to announce the national humane groups are all on board with this plan, as are local shelters. The whole effort is about to get underway. First, we're setting up two new rescue centers: one in New Orleans and the other in Gulfport, Mississippi. Rescue teams will be bringing animals there for an official 5-day holding period in case it turns out the pets they rescue still have a local family. After that, we'll be driving or flying them to carefully chosen shelters around the country to be placed in good, new, loving homes. Best Friends is functioning as the lead agency in this whole effort. The Humane Society of the United States, the ASPCA, and United Animal Nations (UAN) will be helping to fund the work at the two rescue centers. And UAN will also be offering volunteer support. The American Humane Association has offered their emergency rescue truck to do spaying and neutering if needed. And the Helen Woodward Animal Center will be playing a major part in the adoption effort, bringing many of the rescued pets into their nationwide Home for the Holidays adoption drive that's in full swing at this time of year. Since the hurricane blew in at the end of August, thousands of people have worked together in the biggest animal rescue effort ever. And now comes the last stage of that effort. Incidentally, there was a concern on the part of other national humane groups that our petition implied some criticism of them. That was not our intention, and we have no such criticism. Other humane groups are working hard in planning for the future of the region. For example, the ASPCA is putting together a major spay/neuter drive across a wide area there. But our own assessment of the region, the week before Thanksgiving, showed that there was still a need for serious rescue work, and we're delighted that we can all have a unified plan of action, backed by the major humane groups and supported by you, our members and friends. A copy of the rescue plan, along with regular updates as it gets underway, will be posted on the Best Friends website by the end of Friday. And we'll keep in touch with you as the work develops. Thank you, as always, for making it all possible. Michael Mountain www.bestfriends.org P.S. Best Friends estimates that we will spend well over $1 million in transport and adoption costs alone to get these animals to safety and then to loving homes. Anything that you can donate at this time would be a tremendous help. Please contribute what you can at https://www.bestfriends.org/donate/hrf.cfm === TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS EMAIL NEWSLETTER: Reply to this message and type the word UNSUBSCRIBE into the subject line of the email. IMPORTANT: If you reply from a different email account than the one to which the newsletter was sent, include the email address you want removed from our list following the word UNSUBSCRIBE (e.g., UNSUBSCRIBE [EMAIL PROTECTED]). TO CHANGE THE EMAIL ADDRESS WHERE YOU RECEIVE THIS NEWSLETTER: Reply to this email message and type UPDATE EMAIL into the subject line. In the body of your reply, please include both the old email address and your new email address. ---End Message---
