or Connect
TheCatSite.com › Forums › Feral Cats and Rescue › Cats S.O.S › Schwarzenegger Wants Earlier Euthanization of Strays
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Schwarzenegger Wants Earlier Euthanization of Strays

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
I suppose this could fit into "SOS" or the "ferals" forum, but since it has wider implications, I'm going to post it here in the Lounge.


SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to repeal a state law that requires animal shelters to hold stray dogs and cats for up to six days before killing them.

Instead, there would be a three-day requirement for strays. Other animals, including birds, hamsters, potbellied pigs, rabbits, snakes and turtles, could be killed immediately.
I think in the case of an injured animal or one that is truly a danger to people...then OK. If they're having space problems, then they should devote additional resources to space problems or TNR, in my opinion, to get a better hold on the root cause of the issue.

I wouldn't want to see a healthy, adoptable animal get euthanized over an unadoptable feral due to space constraints, but it seems like some controls can be put into place or they can explore other solutions. I also wouldn't want a feral to be stressed for a week before being put to sleep, but "strays" seems to have a wide definition.

As always, it seems like an issue of treating the symptom (overtaxed shelter system) instead of the problem (additional funding, supporting TNR programs, encouraging responsible pet ownership and spay/neuter campaigns, etc...).
post #2 of 9
It's a bit misleading the way it's worded. A 3 day minimum hold period would actually bring California in line with the standard in most of the US. This does not automatically mean animals would be euthanized at 3 days by any means. What this changes it the requirement to hold animals that are generally unadoptable for 6 days, freeing up space to allow for longer holding periods for adoptable animals.

The article claims that other animals could be euthanized immediately, this is absolutely not true. Animals are covered under property laws which require reasonable holding periods for lost or stray animals. There's plenty of judicial history on this and there's absolutely no way a law would hold up that did not establish a holding period.

The claim that there would be a reduction in costs is also misleading. Some of the more unadoptable animals do require some medical treatment to maintain them for the aditional days, but in general what will happen is the shelters will be just as crowded and just as expensive. The difference (as I mentioned above) will be longer holding periods and a better chance for more adoptable animals.
post #3 of 9

California Governor Arnold Schawrtzanegger has proposed that any stray animal taken to a municipal shelter be euthanized (KILLED) after only THREE DAYS as opposed to the now six-day timeframe.


"Vid dis new requirement, ve coult save Cali-fornia 14 million dollars over the next year."

This is the very zenith of irresponsibility as the animals who are, by no fault of their own, being made to pay with their lives for the fiscal irresponsibility of California state lawmakers.
Perhaps we should start euthanizing others in an effort to save dollars.
The elderly in nursing homes?
Well, they're on their last legs anyway and are draining resources, right?
Sure, why not. They're from broken homes and are probably going to end up in prison or worse, thus draining dollars from state coffers.

From the story:
Despite Schwarzenegger's huge popularity, some political observers think the proposal will meet stiff resistance.

"There is no organized constituency of cats and dogs, but certainly the pet owners of America will find this reprehensible," said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, Sacramento.

"Cats and dogs are like mom and apple pie," she said. "Don't mess with the pets. Most people prefer them to other people."

Ohhhh BABY, you got that right!
I hope that anyone who reads this will call the California Governor, write or e-mail to express your opinion on this attempt to right what man has wronged with the lives of animals who have been poorly treated and served by mankind.

This from a guy who sent a Military transport plane with a 15 member medical crew to pick up an ailing state lawmaker in a Brazilian Hospital, costing California almost $150,000 dollars!

From the story"
"A military jet staffed with a 15-member medical team swept into Brazil last month on the orders of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to retrieve an ailing state senator from a coastal hospital.

The trip cost taxpayers $147,187, Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Margita Thompson said. But she said it was necessary given the circumstances described by aides of Sen. John Vasconcellos, who checked himself into a clinic after feeling chest pains during a nine-day goodwill trip to Brazil.

There is no indication that Schwarzenegger did anything illegal in authorizing the trip. But the state could have saved a considerable amount of money by chartering a jet with a medical crew rather than using the military aircraft, the Times reported."

I guess Lord Byron said it best when he said:
"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly."
Is the California Governor THAT desperate for votes in the state house?
I wonder if he'd do that for ANY California citizen, or is it just lawmakers?
I use to think a lot of Schawartzanegger, but I'm starting to have some MAJOR doubts. As California goes, so goes the rest of America and I certainly don't want this bone-headed idea coming to my beloved Commonwealth of Virginia.

Let YOUR voice be heard and TCS members should act at once to this needless slaughter for the irresponsibility of lawmakers.
We made a DIFFERENCE in the 96 cats case and I know that we can make a difference here.
Join the fight!

post #4 of 9
That's really sad. It's a sad satistic all over though. I never did care much for Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Lisa & Sash
post #5 of 9
Scott, I moved it, there are several threads about this on the different forums, including one in IMO- I will be merging them in a minute- but leaving the one in IMO there- just putting the other ones in the other forums with yours here.
post #6 of 9
I can not believe the whole California thing, it just rages me so. Why would anyone want to go with the 3 day thing is beyond me!
post #7 of 9
This is awful!
post #8 of 9
I will be more then happy to take in all the poor strays in california...i agree that if there sick or are a danger it would be more humane to give them a quick swift death...but healthy cats who have dont no wrong don't deserve there lives cut short ya know.....and i have a question...why are some shealters kill and some not........why can't they all be no kill
post #9 of 9
This is an old thread and the issue has been laid to rest, he changed his mind, after hundreds of dog owners spent over 24 hours on his front lawn -
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cats S.O.S
TheCatSite.com › Forums › Feral Cats and Rescue › Cats S.O.S › Schwarzenegger Wants Earlier Euthanization of Strays