That's because it's not an unfunded mandate, and it's not micro-management. It's just truth in advertising.
We need to pass a law that animal organizations that kill more than 10 percent of the animals that come in their doors may not use the words "humane," "shelter," or "prevention of cruelty" in their names.
I suggest we call it "Scruffy's Law," after the bottle-fed kitten killed by the Arizona "Humane" Society the other day, after they refused to provide emergency medical care for a cut that needed stitches unless her owner signed her over to them -- even though his mother was ready and able to pay for the care immediately with a credit card over the phone. From Yes Biscuit:
A 49 year old Phoenix man named Daniel Dockery bottle fed a kitten from birth whom he named Scruffy. He raised enough money to get her spayed when she was old enough, fed her tuna, and slept next to her on the pillow at night. Mr. Dockery credits Scruffy with helping him to remain sober for one year after battling a lifelong addiction illness.
Earlier this month, 9 month old Scruffy apparently cut herself on fencing and Mr. Dockery took her to the Arizona Humane Society for treatment. Unable to come up with $400 on the spot, Mr. Dockery asked if the facility would accept his mother’s credit card by phone (she lives in MI) or be willing to accept payment the next day after his mother wired him the cash. The Arizona Humane Society would do neither. In fact, they reportedly advised Mr. Dockery that the only way for Scruffy to receive treatment was for him to sign over ownership. He reluctantly complied.
For the next 3 weeks, Mr. Dockery searched area shelters and repeatedly asked staff about Scruffy. He kept getting the runaround. Finally this week, Mr. Dockery learned that Scruffy had been killed shortly after he signed ownership over to the Arizona Humane Society...
Their explanation? They lacked the resources to treat Scruffy, because they took in too many animals that day.
Why did they take her, then? Beats the hell out of me, and anyone else with a lick of sense or ounce of compassion. Scruffy had an owner -- an owner apparently quite willing to suffer for the sake of his pet, and a family member willing to pay for her care.
In what universe did this make sense?
Only in a universe where an organization like this gets to market itself with the word "humane" in its name.
It's a simple fix, folks. A consumer protection law that will cost almost nothing, just some signs and new business cards. Heck, it will create jobs! Talk about a win-win!
What do you say: Are you on board with Scruffy's Law?