 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / General Topics / March 2006Piper fell 80'...
...and wonders what all the fuss is about. http://www.local6.com/news/8163767/detail.html >...and wonders what all the fuss is about. > >http://www.local6.com/news/8163767/detail.html Around here it was all over the news. >...and wonders what all the fuss is about. > >http://www.local6.com/news/8163767/detail.html Would have been nice if the local fire department got involved and helped the poor thing; no food for 8 days? Sounds mean to let it stay up there. >>...and wonders what all the fuss is about. >> >>http://www.local6.com/news/8163767/detail.html > >Would have been nice if the local fire department got involved and helped the >poor thing; no food for 8 days? Sounds mean to let it stay up there. The fire department was there. My understanding is the cat fell from the tree before it could be reached. You do realize that in recent years local fire departments have been cut to the bone even though they are the first line of service in the war agaisnt terrorism? > On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:11:09 GMT, "NanCe via CatKB.com" > <u18214@uwe> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > service in the > war agaisnt terrorism? Even so, it took them *8 days* to get there..? Ivor >Even so, it took them *8 days* to get there..? Bear in mind in some communities the fire department does not repond to calls about a cat in a tree. Besides they also have higher priorities..... like fires, auto accidents, etc. >>Even so, it took them *8 days* to get there..? > Bear in mind in some communities the fire department > does not repond to calls about a cat in a tree. > > Besides they also have higher priorities..... > like fires, auto accidents, etc. Wrong Fire department are required to respond to any call of any importance such as a cat stuck in a tree but a higher priority call will reroute them but they are required to respond within a reasonable amount of time. But they can send a bill to the respondee if it is a non emergency depending on the are they are located in > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet > News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ > Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > =---- On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:45:44 GMT, "Matthew AKA NMR \( NO MORE RETAIL \)" <10 points a troll @linethetrollsup.com> wrote: >Wrong Fire department are required to respond to any call of any importance >such as a cat stuck in a tree but a higher priority call will reroute them >but they are required to respond within a reasonable amount of time. But >they can send a bill to the respondee if it is a non emergency depending on >the are they are located in You're wrong. Around here in the US the fire department doesn't do cats stuck in trees. I don't set the rules, I just live in the. They ask what the emergency is. If you say cat in tree they won't respond to the call. If they come and it is a cat in a treee they will leave and do nothing and you'll get a a hefty citation from the municipality. The bottom line: your cat will still be in the tree. Your fire department may do cat rescues ours doesn't. "They ask what the emergency is. If you say cat in tree they won't respond to the call. If they come and it is a cat in a tree they will leave and do nothing and you'll get a a hefty citation from the municipality. The bottom line: your cat will still be in the tree." You should remind them that your tax dollars PAY THEIR SALIARIES! This bullshit notion that the health and welfare of a treed animal is beneath them is, well, bullshit! If one of my cats had been stuck in a tree emergency services better get their a.ses out to the scene when they don't have more pressing things to do. I don't expect an immediate response, just a timely one to help an innocent animal. Stuff like this scores 'atta boy' points with the media. This also brings awareness that animals are not inanimate things, but living beings. I remember a story where a cat had been treed for days in freezing weather. The cat was unable to get down because he was stuck in a tree in a junk yard with dogs running loose in the yard. Pleas went out to help this poor cat but it was bungled by the incompetent emergency services and animal control people. This cat eventually succumbed to the elements, fell out of the tree and was mauled by the dogs. I remember sending a extremely exploitive laden e-mail criticizing them for this unnecessary precedent level setting display of incompetence; but of course, never got a reply. <n7uqa91@gmail.com> wrote in message > I remember a story where a cat had been treed for days in freezing > weather. The cat was unable to get down because he was stuck in a tree > in a junk yard with dogs running loose in the yard. Pleas went out to > help this poor cat but it was bungled by the incompetent emergency > services and animal control people. This cat eventually succumbed to > the elements, fell out of the tree and was mauled by the dogs. Do you actually expect anyone to believe that story? If there were dogs in the yard, then why weren't they locked up so the cat might come down? And if you're trying to say that the junk yard was too large or something to collect the dogs, then why would emergency personnel come into such a yard and possibly be attacked by the dogs? If you're going to make up some story to support your opinion, then try to make a little effort in making the story believable. Well, this incident actually happened. It was posted years ago and I have been unable to find the reference to it. Weather you believe it or not is irrelevant. My point is that animals are sentient beings not things. Just because they (animals) get in over their heads from time to time doesn't excuse emergency services from NOT doing something in a timely manner. Not acting will reflect very poorly on them, their mission is to help; no matter what the species. <n7uqa91@gmail.com> wrote in message > to time doesn't excuse emergency services from NOT doing something in a > timely manner. Not acting will reflect very poorly on them, their > mission is to help; no matter what the species. Helping is perfectly fine. Helping to save an animal while putting the rescuers in a position of danger is not. You seem to want to put animals on the same level as humans. That's your choice, but the law and most people would disagree with your choice. You stated previously that a cat should be allowed to go out when it wants and not be kept inside. One of the responsibilities of being a pet owner is doing what you can to prevent your animal from getting hurt. It's one of the advantages of having a more developed intellect. How exactly do you think the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" originated? Cats get into trouble when there's not enough control around to protect them. As one of the articles you quoted stated: The salvage yard was fenced in and two guard dogs were patrolling the ground inside. What's more, several power lines were in the area. "There was no way of getting to the animal," Selkurt said. "You can't just go climb up into the tree, in the winter and in the snow, risking people's life and limbs." You want to blame emergency services for the death of the cat. I'd say that the responsibility in this case lies with the owner of the junkyard dogs and liberal minded people who allow others to own dangerous animals. "Helping is perfectly fine. Helping to save an animal while putting the rescuers in a position of danger is not. You seem to want to put animals on the same level as humans. That's your choice, but the law and most people would disagree with your choice." I'm sure most people would, however, I believe the perceived 'danger' could have been minimized with the proper planning. "You stated previously that a cat should be allowed to go out when it wants and not be kept inside. One of the responsibilities of being a pet owner is doing what you can to prevent your animal from getting hurt." Yes I have, and I still stand by my statements. I still let my pets out, even though I have lost one of my cats in the past to traffic. I only let my pets out when I'm reasonably sure they won't get attacked either by people or wild animals. I guess I should of clarified this in my other statements. I have found that this instills a level of trust in your pets. If you don't show your pets love, respect and trust; they may develop a distrust in you and may be less likely to come back when let out. Furthermore, I have always had a pet peeve with the term 'pet ownership'. You don't 'own' your pets, you are taking on the responsibility of being their 'guardian'. You don't 'own' your pets anymore than you would 'own' your children. 'Ownership' implies that your pets are merely property, or inanimate objects like your TV or DVD player. "It's one of the advantages of having a more developed intellect. How exactly do you think the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" originated? Cats get into trouble when there's not enough control around to protect them." Animals are a lot smarter than most people give them credit for. They feel all of the same emotions we (people) do. They feel pain, love and fear, they just don't express them the same way humans do. Hell, even cows, pigs, chickens and turkeys are just as smart and inquisitive as cats and dogs. The term "curiosity killed the cat" is equally applicable to people. I'm sure you have read innumerable stories of people killing themselves over incredibly stupid things. "The salvage yard was fenced in and two guard dogs were patrolling the ground inside. What's more, several power lines were in the area. "There was no way of getting to the animal," Selkurt said. "You can't just go climb up into the tree, in the winter and in the snow, risking people's life and limbs." Just another excuse, you don't go climbing trees without the proper gear. What the hell was animal control doing, apparently nothing. Secondly, 'power lines' don't seem to be much of an obstacle for tree trimming crews; they are contracted by power company to trim branches away form medium and high voltage power lines. There was all kinds of awareness over this issue; and all the so called officials bungled it up and made excuses for everything. It severely undermines my confidence in our officials to do anything right. Sorry to ramble, but sh.t like this just gets under my skin. And when officials make excuses why they shouldn't do something; just shows the should of never got the job in the first place. <n7uqa91@gmail.com> wrote in message > Just another excuse, you don't go climbing trees without the proper > gear. What the hell was animal control doing, apparently nothing. Neither of us was there, so we don't know specific details. I wouldn't trust an artical too much either since there's a good chance it was sensationalized on purpose. A cat sitting in tree is not at that moment, in imminent danger. I also suspect that animal control had no right to go onto private property to contain dogs that at that moment, were not being abused and were posing no danger to anyone or anything. > Secondly, 'power lines' don't seem to be much of an obstacle for tree > trimming crews; they are contracted by power company to trim branches > away form medium and high voltage power lines. I wouldn't be comparing tree trimmers to emergency personnel. Tree trimmers are mostly kids with all sorts of bravado and little comprehension of the real dangers. Compare that to emergency personnel who face real danger almost everyday they're working. The longer they go, the greater the chance they're going to get injured from some unfortunate occurrence. As well, they have much more strict guidelines as to how they can operate than your tree trimmers. > awareness over this issue; and all the so called officials bungled it > up and made excuses for everything. It severely undermines my > confidence in our officials to do anything right. You're perfectly free to feel that way, I on the other hand have nothing but respect for emergency personnel and have benefitted more than once by their presence. > Sorry to ramble, but sh.t like this just gets under my skin. And when > officials make excuses why they shouldn't do something; just shows the > should of never got the job in the first place. I guess it's how we feel about our pets. I love my cat and I'd make certain sacrifices for her, but there's a number of things I wouldn't do for her. I might feel real guilty afterwards about not doing something when I could hav e acted, but my intellect controls me more than my passions. You're all touchy feely about this subject and I can sympathize, but I have to ask you. Are you a vegetarian? Do you own anything made out of leather, a coat, or a pair shoes? Even if you've taken an antibiotic at some point in your life, you've benefited by man's use of animals. It's not something to be proud about and it's certainly not glamorous in any way, but it's fact. It means that you, even only fractionally, value an animal's existence less than yours. Unfortunately, we all have to live with it. >I wouldn't be comparing tree trimmers to emergency personnel. Tree trimmers >are mostly kids with all sorts of bravado and little comprehension of the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >have much more strict guidelines as to how they can operate than your tree >trimmers. I would point out tree trimmers don't have the authority to shut off power, the fire department on the other hand has the authority to force the power to be shut off to a section of town. >> awareness over this issue; and all the so called officials bungled it >> up and made excuses for everything. It severely undermines my [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >respect for emergency personnel and have benefitted more than once by their >presence. If you're going to complain about how emergency personnel handle a disaster maybe you should see if you can ride along with your local EMTs and see first hand what they do and go through. Maybe after that you'll be less apt to complain. >> Sorry to ramble, but sh.t like this just gets under my skin. And when >> officials make excuses why they shouldn't do something; just shows the >> should of never got the job in the first place. You do realize policy is set by the mayor/city council/town meeting/etc.? Emergency personnel just have to follow those policies. >I guess it's how we feel about our pets. I love my cat and I'd make certain >sacrifices for her, but there's a number of things I wouldn't do for her. I >might feel real guilty afterwards about not doing something when I could hav >e acted, but my intellect controls me more than my passions. One of the first things they teach when you go to school for EMT/Fire Department/etc. is keeping yourself alive is your first priority. All that specialized training will do nobody any good if you're dead. When I took my EMT classes an emergency room doctor drove that point home forcefully. If you come up to a car with a passanger having a heart attack and a live wire is touchin it you have to wait until the power company shuts off the elctricity before you can do a single thing. To do otherwise will result in your death. That is the bottom line. "You're all touchy feely about this subject and I can sympathize, but I have to ask you. Are you a vegetarian? Do you own anything made out of leather, a coat, or a pair shoes? Even if you've taken an antibiotic at some point in your life, you've benefited by man's use of animals. It's not something to be proud about and it's certainly not glamorous in any way, but it's fact. It means that you, even only fractionally, value an animal's existence less than yours. Unfortunately, we all have to live with it." I'm vegan actually, I don't buy or eat ANYTHING that was made from or produced at the expense of an animal. I've been this way for five going on six years now. I used to eat meat, fish, eggs and drink milk. But when I saw this investigation http://www.peta.org/feat/invest/index.html let's just say it changed my life forever. I used to be ignorant of what went on in these factory farms. I used to convince myself that they (factory farms) must be adhering to humane slaughter practices. Boy, was I ever WRONG. When I saw the video of a bunch of redneck cousin f.ckers screaming expletives at this poor sow; clubbing her with gate rods, pipe wrenches and repeatedly shooting her with a captive bolt gun and finally smashing her over the head with a cinder block. And then to add a final insult to injury, started to dismember and skin her while she was still alive. You can say I got a wee bit pissed off. The guys in the video are the perfect candidates to become child molesters, serial killers and spousal abusers. They are the only people who can stomach working in sh.t hole places like slaughter houses or factory farms. Look at all the infectious diseases that have been sprouting up over the years; swine flu, mad cow and now bird flu. Not to mention hoof and mouth, you think this is just coincidence? When animals are kept confined in such large numbers disease is bound to sprout up. Mother nature is sending us a message, and humans better start waking up and smelling the coffee. But of course, the factory farming industry wants nothing but to bury these facts and discredit organizations that bring these issues to light. When I look at the overall picture of how people view and treat animals; it undermines my belief that humans are compassionate beings and sometimes, makes me ashamed I'm a human being. Now before some of you judge me as an idiot, alarmist, whacko or what ever else; do your self a favor and have the nads and enlighten and educate yourself. Some of you will see why I'm so adimate about these subjects, but if some of you still think I'm a nut case, well, thats your free speech rights. http://www.goveg.com/feat/agriprocessors/ http://www.furkills.org/canadian_seal.shtml http://www.pet-abuse.com/ http://www.covancecruelty.com/feat-paulmccartney.asp http://www.goveg.com/ http://www.veganoutreach.org/whyvegan/ I would point out though in many cases the fire department doesn't have the equipment to rescue a cat safely from a tree. To do it safely you need a tree expert who has access to a crane truck with a basket at the end. Very few fire departments have that. Also often you have to get the power company to shut off electricity to the area, which in turn creates other problems. (If it is below freezing you're going to have burst pipes becuase you need electricity to start the heaters in a number of houses. You've also got medical patients who have to have electricity.) >Furthermore, I have always had a pet peeve with the term 'pet >ownership'. You don't 'own' your pets, you are taking on the >responsibility of being their 'guardian'. You don't 'own' your pets >anymore than you would 'own' your children. 'Ownership' implies that >your pets are merely property, or inanimate objects like your TV or DVD >player. Some regions (California I believe) calls them Pet Guardians instead of owners. Owners comes into play since pets are considered property. >Sorry to ramble, but sh.t like this just gets under my skin. And when >officials make excuses why they shouldn't do something; just shows the >should of never got the job in the first place. Have you ever seen someone electrocuted by a live power line? Next time there is a storm that knocks down power lines look for a live wire to see what it can do. Escpecially if it is a hight voltage transmission line. >Furthermore, I have always had a pet peeve with the term 'pet >ownership'. You don't 'own' your pets, you are taking on the >responsibility of being their 'guardian'. You don't 'own' your pets >anymore than you would 'own' your children. 'Ownership' implies that >your pets are merely property, or inanimate objects like your TV or DVD >player. Like it or not in the US pets are property. Don't like it? Lobby your elected officials to change the law. But now for the time being they are property. >You want to blame emergency services for the death of the cat. I'd say that >the responsibility in this case lies with the owner of the junkyard dogs and >liberal minded people who allow others to own dangerous animals. Emergency workers do yeoman work when the need arises. But you can't expect them put their life on the line when you have things like a cat in a tree over a junk yard surrounded by an electrified fence and a dozen vicious dogs. If I were the fire chief i'd skip doing anything until the dogs are removed and the electrified fence powered down. Firefighters are there to fight fires, but if you're going to endanger the lives of the firefighters by doing something like shooting at them with guns then no they let the fire burn. (Yes we've actually had incidents where fire fighters were working a blaza and someone was accross the street taking shot at them. ) "Dr. O'Woodard" <DrWoodardOnDS@hotmail.com> wrote in message > Firefighters are there to fight fires, but if you're going to endanger > the lives of the firefighters by doing something like shooting at them > with guns then no they let the fire burn. (Yes we've actually had > incidents where fire fighters were working a blaze and someone was > across the street taking shot at them. ) And the world watched one of those instances on TV as Los Angeles fire fighters were being shot at during the Rodney King affair. Lot of anger there. >Just because they (animals) get in over their heads from time >to time doesn't excuse emergency services from NOT doing something in a >timely manner. Not acting will reflect very poorly on them, their >mission is to help; no matter what the species. But then if the Mayor is ordered by city council/town meeting to stop rescueing cats from trees due to budget constraints the emergency rescue people have no choice the matter. Take it up at the next election. Ask these questions the next time you consider voting for that city councilor/mayor/town meeting member/selectmen/etc. The emergency personnal don't make the laws. They just have to live by them. You do realize that is what happens when you live in a democracy? 'Do you actually expect anyone to believe that story? If there were dogs in the yard, then why weren't they locked up so the cat might come down? And if you're trying to say that the junk yard was too large or something to collect the dogs, then why would emergency personnel come into such a yard and possibly be attacked by the dogs?" "If you're going to make up some story to support your opinion, then try to make a little effort in making the story believable." http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=292358 http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4196/is_200501/ai_n11009321 These are links to the various news releases, I was unable to use PETA's search engine to find their actual news release; their search engine is something to be desired. >'Do you actually expect anyone to believe that story? If there were >dogs in >the yard, then why weren't they locked up so the cat might come down? Wake up and smell the coffee. Here in the big city a number of people have large dogs protecting their property. It's something that is common here in the big city. And sometimes those dogs are so vicious that the only way emergency personnel are coming in is if animal control, etc. come in and shoot the dogs. That is how dangerous some areas of this city are. >http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=292358 >The group sent a letter Wednesday to Mayor Tom Barrett calling for a "mandatory >animal control protocol for rescuing stray cats and dogs" - something already in >place. Maybe the first step is restore the animal control department that eliminated several years ago in budget cuts. That has happened in a number of towns around here. >According to PETA, "frantic calls" to the Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control >Commission and other agencies "were met with indifference and inaction." And, before >PETA could arrange to rescue the animal itself, "all that remained of the cat was a >pool of blood near the tree." Why call the fire department? Instead call a tree service who has a crane with a basket on the end. Very few fire departments have them. What part of the fire department doesn't have the equipment do people on here not understand? >Selkurt said the officer who went to the scene couldn't get the guard dogs taken >inside or chained up inside at the salvage yard on W. Mill Road. I rest my case. Emergency personnal absovled of fault. Complain to the dog owner. >> I remember a story where a cat had been treed for days in freezing >> weather. The cat was unable to get down because he was stuck in a tree [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Do you actually expect anyone to believe that story? If there were dogs in >the yard, then why weren't they locked up so the cat might come down? Maybe because animal control in this municipality didn't have the guts to confront the dog owner? Maybe animal control was guttted by budget cuts? Maybe the town has a bias against cats? Maybe the dog owner is a big shot in town who is allowed to as he pleases? BTW, our town has a dog officer, it has no provisions for cats. This is in the US of A. "Dr. O'Woodard" <DrWoodardOnDS@hotmail.com> wrote in message > BTW, our town has a dog officer, it has no provisions for cats. > This is in the US of A. I'm surprised they make the distinction. Up here in Canada, we have all inclusive animal control officials, not specific animal control types. I've found that most animal rescues are amplified when the press becomes involved and the rescuers are obliged to put on a good show. Obviously, small towns don't get near as much publicity as the big cities. And the USA having a much larger population would naturally have many more small towns and more likely animals might suffer from those small town difficulties. >I'm surprised they make the distinction. Up here in Canada, we have all >inclusive animal control officials, not specific animal control types. In this town it is a dog officer because they wanted to have provisions for cats and other animals but budget considerations did not allow it. A number of neighboring towns have cut their animal control department to zero. >I've >found that most animal rescues are amplified when the press becomes involved >and the rescuers are obliged to put on a good show. Obviously, small towns >don't get near as much publicity as the big cities. And the USA having a >much larger population would naturally have many more small towns and more >likely animals might suffer from those small town difficulties. This state has 365 cities and towns, most of those are towns, about 10 are cities. When it gets close to budget time after police/fire/schools/ there ain't much left for things like animal control. >You should remind them that your tax dollars PAY THEIR SALIARIES! This >bullshit notion that the health and welfare of a treed animal is >beneath them is, well, bullshit! You do realize the decision was made farther up the ladder? i.e. mayor, city council. Also budget cuts help to force the decision. >If one of my cats had been stuck in a >tree emergency services better get their a.ses out to the scene when >they don't have more pressing things to do. I don't expect an immediate >response, just a timely one to help an innocent animal. Stuff like this >scores 'atta boy' points with the media. This also brings awareness >that animals are not inanimate things, but living beings. First you have to get past the mayor. >I remember a story where a cat had been treed for days in freezing >weather. The cat was unable to get down because he was stuck in a tree >in a junk yard with dogs running loose in the yard. Pleas went out to >help this poor cat but it was bungled by the incompetent emergency >services and animal control people. This cat eventually succumbed to >the elements, fell out of the tree and was mauled by the dogs. Maybe you should blame the dog owner? >I remember sending a extremely exploitive laden e-mail criticizing them >for this unnecessary precedent level setting display of incompetence; >but of course, never got a reply. In that situation IMHO it isn't fair to blame emegency services. Instead blame the guy who couldn't (wouldn't?) control his dogs. > >Even so, it took them *8 days* to get there..? > Bear in mind in some communities the fire department > does not repond to calls about a cat in a tree. That's correct. Those kinds of responses are locally controlled situations or ordinances. Some will respond, some will give you a ticket for wasting their time, some will respond - but you pay for the rescue. It doesn't hurt to call and ask them first... at least I don't think it does. >It doesn't hurt to call and ask them first... >at least I don't think it does. Actually it odes. Some communities will fine you for making 'nuisance' calls to 911. If you're calling 911 it better be a true emergency. And in some municipalities a cat in a tree doesn't qualify. > Would have been nice if the local fire department got involved and helped the > poor thing; no food for 8 days? Sounds mean to let it stay up there. The didn't let it stay up there. A cat does what it wants. Fire departments rarely rescue cats from trees because they can so easily walk over to another branch. If it was on top of a telephone pole, that's a different matter, but tree rescues are notoriously difficult.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.