To the Editor:
I don't understand what people have against the Humane Society, and what they do for the discarded animals that nobody wanted.
What would they like folks to do for them other than try to find them good homes? This is in regard to the article in Wednesday Jan. 4, and the Rebels dog park. People from all over come go use this park because it's safe. It's grass, not dirt and mud. It is fenced, and everyone seems to have a great time...owners and dogs. There aren't many places folks can take their dogs that is basically worry free. I don't understand what all the problem is with the possible expansion of the park. I guess the folks complaining don't have dogs, or not ones they would like to socialize.
One thing that is stated in the article is that the Humane Society is in the business of selling animals. That surely is not the case. They take in homeless, unwanted, sick and injured animals. In most cases these animals would remain out in the elements until they died from exposure or killed by predators or hit by cars. They take them in, rehabilitate them, give them a warm safe place to lay their heads. A lot of times these animals were discarded like trash. They work very hard to take care of their needs and find them loving homes, yes there is an adoption fee but it's impossible to give them away for free and keep operating. The are treated, get vet attention, housed, fed and cared for and not at the expense of the taxpayers. Can you please explain to me how that falls under selling animals? They are finding adoptive families for these otherwise unwanted animals. I don't see the problem.
I usually read such negative press when speaking of the Humane Society and that really bothers me. They provide a much-needed service. Where would these poor animals be if not for them? Why folks think this is the wrong setting and should be in some place like an industrial park or something...I don't get it. It's far enough away from things that the barking of the dogs don't bother other neighbors. And when the new facility is built it should be a much nicer facility, up to date, and not a 63 year old dwelling. Not to say there is anything wrong with the facility they have now, but it would serve the animals so much better being more up to date and modern.
Maybe the folks that seem to have such a problem with the shelter should spend some time there and see all the good that is done. Look into those terrified eyes of a poor sweet animal that is scared and lived on the streets, now having regular meals, being warm or cool, depending on the season and having folks to love them when they have been without so much. How could you want to take that away from the animals? I volunteer there every day and see all the good that you just must not.
Please stop by and interact with the folks and the animals and maybe you would change your mind. Please consider the magnitude of what no shelter would have on these animals. I know you're not saying you don't want a shelter, just not near you, well where then? If everyone felt that way, then there would be nowhere for the shelter and no way to help these animals. Think about how good you could feel knowing what you were doing to help these poor animals.
Bel AirCopyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun