Your Voice: Get animal shelter moving
by Arleen Robbins, Tracy
Nov 16, 2012 | 2557 views | 9 9 comments | 12 12 recommendations | email to a friend | print
EDITOR,

What’s the holdup on building the new animal shelter? The city has approved the money, and the land has been selected.

Of course, they have money for other things and buildings. For example, the gaudy City Hall. That’s just a little bit too fine and fancy. It looks like it belongs on a movie set in Hollywood.

During my 60 years here, it seems like the animals are always last, or not at all.

Let me paint you a picture. When you go to the animal shelter, it’s old, it’s depressing and it’s sad. Not to mention it’s near a sewer pond. And it stinks.

No, folks, that’s not the animals stinking like that. It’s the wastewater treatment ponds. Why would we subject our understaffed employees and volunteers to that kind of smell? There is never any fresh air there — not even on a good day.

The shelter has been there forever. Let’s build a new one now. Our pets deserve one, and so do we, the citizens of Tracy. The pets bring us happiness.
Comments
(9)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
sb2482
|
November 20, 2012
Yes, get the animal shelter upgrade moving! I disagree with the posters who say stray animals can care for themselves. For the most part, they cannot. We live in a city where wild food sources are few and far between as are areas that can provide shelter from exposure to the elements.

I do not understand those who say that we must show compassion only to our fellow humans. Why can we not show compassion to both human and animal. Must it be one or the other? If I see a starving, cold child, I will certainly give that child a meal and a coat. If I see a starving, cold, stray animal I will give that animal a meal and warmth. I have a big enough heart to care for both humans and animals.
debbdaves
|
November 16, 2012
I disagree. Animals not in a jungle environment are not equipped to take care of themselves, they can't be left on the streets to die, that is simply inhuman. That's like saying we can leave a baby on the pavement and just wait around until someone picks it up or takes it to a hospital. The animal on the street has no Child Protective Services, it is at the mercy of a pound. We MUST build more shelters for animals. If we are human, we will, if we are subhuman we won't.
Sneaky
|
November 16, 2012
There is a big difference between the baby and animals. Human babies are pretty much helpless at birth. Most animals, not so much. They are pretty well equiped to take care of themselves.
victor_jm
|
November 19, 2012
I recently had a conversation with someone about the unregulated propagation of cats and dogs in this country and this person ultimately emphatically defended her position of wanting more shelters built, saving every pet life, and encouraging more people to collect pets as they would baseball cards with this comment: My pets are family members!

I replied, "If my child dies, I will carry this pain with me for the rest of my life, but if my pet dies (I had a dog die), that pain will be with me for a few days or weeks and I will move on with life."

Sneaky
|
November 16, 2012
For the most part animals dont need our compassion. They got along well enough for hundreds of thousands of years without humans and will get along just fine for many more.

I am far more worried about our fellow humans that are starving or homeless or suffering. Spending money on a fancier animal shelter (a luxury item to begin with) is inappropriate with the economy in shambles and so many folks doing so poorly.
aztec
|
November 19, 2012
Sneaky,

So your saying that animals can survive better than humans? Humans have all the abilities to do anything and survive anywhere but animals have limited resources...and how funny is this, "Spending money on a fancier animal shelter (a luxury item to begin with) is inappropriate with the economy in shambles and so many folks doing so poorly". Are you serious?



Sneaky
|
December 02, 2012
As serious as a second heart attack.

I find it curious that anyone would find my statement controversial. (the one that starts "Spending money...")

Animal shelters are clearly a luxury item. Consider the entire scope of human history and every nation on Earth. I would bet that only a small fraction of nations have the money for an animal shelter (I will guess 25%). I would further bet that the idea of animal shelters has only been around for a hundred years or so, versus the couple hundred thousand years of human history. For the vast majority of cultures that have existed animal shelters are an unimaginable luxury and most would probably see them as insanely trivial and wasteful.

As for the second part of the regarding the appropriateness of spending on an animal shelter when humans are suffering, I again fail to see how that could be considered so odd that you would doubt my seriousness. Imagine that, I think that humans are more important than animals, how insane of me.
debbdaves
|
November 16, 2012
Or show compassion towards humans.
aztec
|
November 16, 2012
Excellent choice of words, it's unfortunate that the City of Tracy yet again fails to move forward. It's sad to see how some people including TPD don't show any compassion towards animals.


We encourage readers to share online comments in this forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a space for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Comments that stray from the topic of the story or are found to contain abusive language are subject to removal at the Press’ discretion, and the writer responsible will be subject to being blocked from making further comments and have their past comments deleted. Readers may report inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at tpnews@tracypress.com.