Fw: Chatham Chatlist #4362, 4361, 4358 :: lost dog postings
15 views
Skip to first unread message
Chatham Chatlist
May 30, 2012, 12:05:01 AM5/30/12
to Animal Lovers
From: Charles Jones <chee...@centurylink.net>
Sent: Tue, May 29, 2012 10:02:59 AM
Subject: Chatham Chatlist #4362, 4361, 4358 :: lost dog postings
Adam,
No slam intended, but I think you are overestimating the general awareness of this topic if you believe that familiarity with "safe" procedures for lost dog postings is widely accepted.
As you can see from today's chatlist, the original poster replied to the effect 'that concern over pets being returned to the wrong person with malicious intent was somewhat overhyped and out of date' (my paraphrase).
I applaud people like the O.P. who make the effort to notice lost animals, shelter them, and try to reunite them with concerned owners. I wish them the least inconvenience and most happy outcomes in trying to perform a public service. However, I do think there is a middle ground where the finder can give enough information to target the likely owner, yet omit enough information to screen potential imposters. It's all about *awareness*.
Honestly, even if it is all just "urban legend", what's the downside to being cautious (aware)?
I have advised people of all ages and backgrounds to be aware when posting lost dogs, giving away extra puppies, etc, and the issue remains largely under the radar, or disbelieved. I continue to hear the same warnings underscored from veterinarians, breeders, trainers, etc, that all emphasize an ongoing need for caution.
I understand your exasperation that this topic requires such frequent reiteration, but honestly, this was an opportunity for people who believe there may be an issue to make an impact on those who may be less familiar or less convinced. Your post lost it's power for positive change due to the sarcasm and condescending tone.
Let's try to get this message across in a different way.
Charles Jones
Subject: Chatham Chatlist #4362, 4361, 4358 :: lost dog postings
Adam,
No slam intended, but I think you are overestimating the general awareness of this topic if you believe that familiarity with "safe" procedures for lost dog postings is widely accepted.
As you can see from today's chatlist, the original poster replied to the effect 'that concern over pets being returned to the wrong person with malicious intent was somewhat overhyped and out of date' (my paraphrase).
I applaud people like the O.P. who make the effort to notice lost animals, shelter them, and try to reunite them with concerned owners. I wish them the least inconvenience and most happy outcomes in trying to perform a public service. However, I do think there is a middle ground where the finder can give enough information to target the likely owner, yet omit enough information to screen potential imposters. It's all about *awareness*.
Honestly, even if it is all just "urban legend", what's the downside to being cautious (aware)?
I have advised people of all ages and backgrounds to be aware when posting lost dogs, giving away extra puppies, etc, and the issue remains largely under the radar, or disbelieved. I continue to hear the same warnings underscored from veterinarians, breeders, trainers, etc, that all emphasize an ongoing need for caution.
I understand your exasperation that this topic requires such frequent reiteration, but honestly, this was an opportunity for people who believe there may be an issue to make an impact on those who may be less familiar or less convinced. Your post lost it's power for positive change due to the sarcasm and condescending tone.
Let's try to get this message across in a different way.
Charles Jones
|
|
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages