You know, we tend to pick whichever definition of a word suits our
purposes best and disregard the others.  The fact is, one of the
definitions of sanctuary IS simply a place of refuge or safety.  That
being so, the Zoo most likely qualifies.  Wildlife or no wildlife.
 
I recall having read posts which insinuated in some ways that most people
who take in animals and do not adopt them out are collectors, and I don't
think that is true.  I don't think anyone needs to question WHY Cathy is
taking in ferrets and not adopting them out.  So long as she is able to
properly care for and love the animals in her charge, we should keep our
noses out of it and focus only on the part that effects us, that being
her non-profit status.
 
Now, as to that, anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, but her organization
has non-profit status, not she herself, and it is income that the
organization makes in the form of donations, etc., which are not taxable,
not her own earnings from jobs, etc.  Frankly, any person who is taking
in abused and/or sick ferrets deserves a medal at least, and certainly
not to have to pay taxes on cash gifts that go toward the care and
medical expenses of those ferrets.  If everyone who did that could get
tax-exemption for that money, I'd say go for it.  As a tax-payer, I'm
willing to support those endeavors till the day I die!
 
I can certainly see people's points on the matter, but I guess my point
is, why quibble over a couple definitions and question whether or not a
person who is obviously doing a service to ferrets should have to pay
taxes on money given to her to continue in those efforts?
 
Melissa Rotert
Mira, Robin, Samurai, Nietzsche and O'Dell
Missing Cael, Booboo and Tasha always
[Posted in FML issue 4042]