Humane Society chickens????

[Sunny Side Up]

Quote:
Like I said, I think it would set an unwise precedent. They have costs to cover and policies they must set & keep. They can't start keeping a "bargain basement" of animals at clearance prices. I would contact the director of the facility to learn just why the fees were so high for the chicken and why they chose to euthanize that bird. Most people who run or work at such places really do care for animals, though they must deal with a lot of harsh reality concerning them.

 

[suburbanminifarm]

I don't really agree that it "sets an unwise precedent". I personally know the shelter director who gave me 5 chickens and he is a reasonable man who is happy to give away a low value animal like a chicken to make more room for the dogs and cats. It doesn't set a precedent. He didn't put up a billboard advertising free chickens. It is just a decision he made--- he makes many tough decisions every day. I happen to be good friends with one of his employees, so that was good enough of a referral for him and he thanked me for removing them from his shelter.
I still say that the OP should place a polite phone call to the shelter director so that policy change can be made; crabbing about it after the fact accomplishes nothing.

 

[FrizzlesRule]

I would contact the director of the facility to learn just why the fees were so high for the chicken and why they chose to euthanize that bird. Most people who run or work at such places really do care for animals, though they must deal with a lot of harsh reality concerning them.

I don't think they care about chickens. I find that to be the same almost everywhere in this insensitve world. Most people can't understand someone loving their chickens. I've been through it for years. I get so sick of the "It's only a chicken" B.S.

 

[kjmatson]

Quote:

 

[pkw]

Aren't animal rescue organizations supposed to non profit? Well $158 sounds like profit to me. Especially since they hadn't had to feed it or anything. At an LA county animal shelter you can rescue a dog for $32. Cats for slightly less I think. Here in Kern County it is a little more. If these rescue places would charge less then more animals would probably get adopted. Isn't the idea supposed to be the welfare of the animal not on how much money can they get?

 

[Orchid]

Quote:
It's not "profit". Do you have any idea how much it costs to run a nonprofit organization? Any nonprofit, but especially an animal shelter? It's not a matter of "they got the dog/cat/chicken for free and made money on it". They have a building to maintain, staff to pay, supplies (hey, even toilet paper and bleach add up), insurances, veterinary expenses, feed expenses, bedding, collars, beds, kennels, advertising...the list goes on and on. And believe me, they will never get the money for all that strictly from donations. They don't wind up with a profit at the end of the year.

That being said, $158 for a chicken IS exorbitant, no way around it.

 

[Sunny Side Up]

There's a difference between being non-profit and earning enough to cover the costs of the facility. And they need to recoup more than just the cost of the chicken feed, there's paperwork & housing & clean-up & handling & a lot more. Until the OP checks back with that facility we won't know if the $158 was a typo or if they had legitimate reasons for charging that much. I don't think they would charge that just for the pleasure of seeing a chicken not get adopted so they could euthanize it instead. Nor would they think it was a great way to make the facility rich.

Again, if you're really unhappy with the way unwanted chickens are cared for by existing animal rescue organizations in your community then start your own chicken rescue facility. That way you can run it just the way you see fit and charge as little as you think is fair for each adoption. Let us know how well it's working for you & the birds.

 

[cafe]

Wow. That was taking following the rules too far. Very illogical and counter-productive. I'm guessing they just didn't have any kind of poultry policy in place, so they just followed the standard policy for dogs and cats, rather than taking the time to learn whether it was really applicable or not. It's sad, but understandable because animal shelters are very often overrun and have a lot of political issues to consider when they make decisions. Better to follow the rules than have it bite you in the butt down the road. However, my mom works at the local human society and I am pretty sure the director would not have done something like that.

The way things run here, unfortunately, is that if you know one of the well-off volunteers/board members you can often get free animals/meds/supplies from the shelter, while people who are poor or don't know the right people are lucky to get a generic bag of dog food that was donated to the shelter (the shelter here only uses Science Diet). They rarely put animals down and usually that is due to aggression. If they are out of space, the just don't accept any more animals -- this causes problems with the city and the county because they are also provide boarding space for animal control. It's a constant conflict because the city and the county want to have an effective animal control facility, but if the shelter starts killing animals willy-nilly, they will lose a lot of their donations from animal lovers, which is a big source of income for them. OTOH, the shelter still provides the service much cheaper than the city could do it themselves. It's crazy, I tell ya!

 

[bigchicken2]

They're just trying to make you get the chicken killed. But they still want to be "humane" (NOT). Oh and you know how they make pics of a dog or cat looking at you and it says that they want to be fixed (actually broken) when no animal or person wants that to happen to them.