I have to agree with Sukie that there are a great many factors that have
to be set into place in order for a site like this to be effective.  But
if I am not mistaken, even if you are convicted of a crime of animal
abuse, for example, no one is entitled to post these names to a public
site.
 
Since my name has appeared on the list, I wondered what criteria should
be in place to protect those like myself and my husband from merely being
added to the list out of spite or jealousy.  This is a difficult to
determine because a reason not to adopt to one family or individual from
one shelter would not be the same in another.  For example... let's say
the reason is too many ferrets in the home already.  Who can honestly
determine what is a reasonable number for an individual to handle?  In my
city, I know of no other person who looks after as many as we do.  The
local animal agencies have it in the books the maximum amount of animals
that can be kept in a home within city guidelines, but make allowances
with certain other animal rescues and shelters, allowing them to take
care of more than what the law books say as they are aware of the state
most Humane Societies and SPCA's across the country, meaning not having
enough space to take in and find homes for all animals picked up or
surrendered to them.  Does that mean that just because a person can
handle and care for large numbers that they should be on the list because
another individual or group cannot comprehend what dedication and
compassion, not to mention sacrifice it takes to accomplish that?  Yes,
there are some people for which having even two ferrets is two too many,
but there has to be solid reasoning as to why that is the case.  If it
is a situation of abuse, then this needs to be reported to the main local
animal shelter and not dealt with through a single rescue or shelter.  I
am a strong believer that smaller rescues of any sort need to work with
the main local animal agencies and not independently of them.
 
What is the drawing line for being on the list or not on the list?  Is
the list intended to warn others of abuse?  As an animal lover since
childhood, I have always hated and despised those that purposefully hurt
animals... but even there, how is abuse defined when there is a wide
gamut of situations that fall into it.  By the books, there has to be
intent involved.  Most acts of abuse are simply out of ignorance... not
knowing better.  Simple education would cure many of these situations.
Leaving and animal in a locked car is a form of abuse.  Torturing an
animal is a form of abuse.  Leaving it outside on a cold or rainy day
without shelter is a form of abuse.  Is this DNA list meant to include
people who torture or abuse ferrets in the same category as.  let's say,
moving out of town?  Some shelters will not adopt to people who leave a
state or province.  Moving to another area may not be an issue for some
shelters so the reason would be rather vague and inconsistent.  On the
other hand, a person who adopts on a regular basis and moves but never
seems to have many animals around would be someone I would be very
concerned about.
 
I feel that the only way for this to be effective is for the Humane
Society to make the determination.  All cases have reference numbers.
The Officer involved reports his findings and it can be tracked.  If
shelters are allowed to post without some form of outside enforcement,
then I do believe that this list will bring more harm than good and
many people will be sued as a result of it.
 
This is not a simple issue... In all honesty, even having the site should
have been discussed before it went up.  I'm sure the person who created
it had good intentions but I'm also sure that even Oppenheimer did not
know that when he split the atom how many millions of innocent people
were going to be hurt by the bomb that followed as a result of it...
 
betty and her blur o'fur
for the love of ferrets
[Posted in FML issue 4138]