Adopt vs. Buy Adopted (yes, adopted) from PetSmart

[blackarrow]

But when even the real animal lovers, who know about adoption, overpopulation etc STILL get pet store pigs then we have no hope.

Standing ovation happening over here, crazywiggy, for your entire post, in fact.

 

[blackarrow]

Personally, I wouldn't have left those pigs in that condition either and I am not going to debate how the cycle continues either.

Well, that's a pity, for the reasons crazywiggy said.
I'm sorry that because you haven't had a good experience with animal control, you seem to think it's a good idea to buy as many animals as possible from pet stores just as fast as they can stock them, but you do realize that they're going to be able to outpace you, don't you?

 

[Peggysu]

rather than squabbling amongst ourselves, why don't we direct this energy toward stopping the pet stores from selling the animals at all?

That's the whole point of this thread, by not supporting pet stores and purchasing pets from them shows that there is not a market to sell animals. That's how cats and dogs got out of big chain pet stores. This is the first step. There are still lots of clueless people out there and this site is spreading the word. I had no idea till I started reading through threads here and realized what it was all about.

I don't go into pet stores but if I do I know I'm going to be able to walk out without a new pet because I know what I'd be contributing to. If I see something I don't like I'll say it. I don't buy anything from pet stores so if I do go in it's check on the pets and make sure they are ok.

 

[Heady]

Would you think it's the most important part of breaking the cycle of drug abuse in this country to focus on the user?

Absolutely. You can get rid of all the drug dealers, you can get rid of the people that import the drugs, but what it really comes down to is the user. If they want it, they'll find a way to get it, using any means necessary. This is where education (keep this word in mind...I'm going to be using it) comes into play. They now have anti-smoking commercials where they used to have pro-smoking commercials. These commercials aren't made for the corporations that manufacture and sell cigarettes. They're for the consumer...to educate them in hopes that they'll quit or not start.

I think the idea of trying to stop animal sales by bypassing consumers and going straight to the CEO is a good idea, but not effective. They're not going to listen unless you pay them off somehow. They will listen, however, to the masses. This is where consumer education comes in. You educate enough people, they turn and educate more people, and there you have it. Eventually it will find a way up there and once these corporations realize they're no longer bringing in the dough, then animal sales, in most cases, will cease.

We all now know that smoking is bad. But a lot of people still do it. I still do it. And even though I'm educated on the outcome of how I'm killing myself, I still smoke. There are always going to be people out there that will do things against their better judgment. There will always be breeders selling show quality pigs. There will always be guinea pigs needing homes. But there is hope that pet stores selling small animals will eventually cease to exist.

While I understand why the op did what she and I understand why people got upset about it, I know that it was with good intentions...I also know that if the op would have never mentioned the term "pet store" this thread would not have turned into what it has. It would have been full of rejoicing and textual pats on the back.

If I were in the same situation, I would have made a stink about it to animal control or whoever I had to call before taking them home. I fully understand how much pain seeing an animal suffer can cause. And everyone here, we want what is best for the animal. The op did what she thought was best, even though she is educated on the plight of pet store animals. This is where I can understand a lot of the anger that has come along.

So, in my opinion, education is key. Educate the masses. I recently got into an argument with a dude about this exact thing. Someone was selling a "guinea pig cage" on craigslist that wasn't suitable, so, like always, I said something about it. And I received a rude email and I emailed this guy back telling him why I said what I said...and he told me it's not my job to educate these people. Then whose is it? The pet stores? Hardly. In my opinion, any time I get a chance to educate anyone about anything, I take it. I don't care. If it's something I feel strongly about and know for sure that I am in the right, I'll say it. It's the only way people are going to learn and it's the only way that that knowledge will spread.

 

[blackarrow]

While I understand why the op did what she and I understand why people got upset about it, I know that it was with good intentions...I also know that if the op would have never mentioned the term "pet store" this thread would not have turned into what it has. It would have been full of rejoicing and textual pats on the back.

I agree with the majority of your post but have two little quibbles here. Even with "pet store" in it, there are numerous posts patting the original posters on the back for doing as they did. I also disagree that it's just because it's a pet store involved. If this were a breeder dumping the culls, I would feel the exact same way, for the exact same reasons - it would be just enabling the breeder to get rid of the culls cheaply and quickly and without even the discomfort most people feel about killing a healthy creature just because it's in the way. If this were some idiot on Craigslist who wasn't going to be getting any more pigs, I would not have the same objection to picking up the pigs, because the issue of contributing to the breeding of replacements would not exist.

 

[bpatters]

Peggysu, it doesn't do any good to avoid pet stores unless they know you're avoiding them. I could order food and supplies online until the cows come home (to borrow a good Southern expression), and it wouldn't faze my local Petco in the slightest. Nor would it do so if every guinea pig owner in Houston boycotted them, unless they knew it, knew why, and knew it was costing them business. It's just not enough to not go to a pet store. Some other leverage needs to be applied.

There's no way to reach the legions of future guinea-pig owners who will buy from pet stores before they go do it. Guinea pig supplies are probably a small enough slice of the business of a pet store that our refusal to buy from them would affect their bottom line by a tiny fraction of a percent. So we need to do something besides not buy from them. Unless they know their profits or public image are being adversely affected, there's not much advantage in our efforts.

Blackarrow, two points. In many cases, pet stores were stopped from selling kittens and puppies by public pressure and local legislation. Where public pressure was applied, it was just that: public. People writing letters to the editor, calling the newspapers and TV stations to investigate living conditions in pet stores, walking picket lines in front of the stores, taking out ads in the newspapers. Going after the supplier, not the purchaser, although I'm sure many purchasers had second thoughts about purchasing after seeing that.

Second, I think there's a fallacy in your statement that "I'm not about to use drugs no matter how cheap they are or easy they are to get, and serious addicts will do whatever they can to get the drugs, no matter how expensive they are or how hard they are to obtain. Availability does not dictate use."

I agree that serious addicts will manage to get the drugs. But availability absolutely does dictate, or at least affect in a major way, use of drugs. The new or casual user is much more likely to try them if they're readily available.

Here's just one example. When I grew up in Mississippi, it was a dry state -- no legal sales of liquor or wine allowed at all. Beer was sold only in counties that approved it by vote. In 1966, the legislature voted to legalize the sale of hard liquor, and the first weekend that it was available, more than a dozen people died in automobile accidents involving alcohol. Availability absolutely affected use.

I hope your family hasn't had any contact with the meth epidemic, but you'd have a really hard time convincing the families of those who have, or the law enforcement people who deal with it, that availability of meth doesn't affect use.

I could cite many other examples, but this isn't a thread about drugs. It's about guinea pigs, and it seems blatantly obvious to me that the number of breeders would go down and the number of people who make ill-advised purchases of guinea pigs would decrease if they're weren't sold by pet stores. I'd just rather tackle a battle that I have some hope of winning (using effective tactics to get the stores to quit selling them) than to deal with the purchasers afterwards.

 

[Heady]

I agree with the majority of your post but have two little quibbles here. Even with "pet store" in it, there are numerous posts patting the original posters on the back for doing as they did. I also disagree that it's just because it's a pet store involved. If this were a breeder dumping the culls, I would feel the exact same way, for the exact same reasons - it would be just enabling the breeder to get rid of the culls cheaply and quickly and without even the discomfort most people feel about killing a healthy creature just because it's in the way. If this were some idiot on Craigslist who wasn't going to be getting any more pigs, I would not have the same objection to picking up the pigs, because the issue of contributing to the breeding of replacements would not exist.

No, you are absolutely right and that was kind of the point I was trying to make! I wasn't saying that you or anyone else got up in arms because of the whole pet store thing. If we had been talking about the op finding pigs the same way she found these at a breeder, I would have said the same thing...that if the term "pet store" (or in this example, "breeder") wouldn't have been mentioned no one would be upset. I was attempting to point out the similarities and differences between someone saying that, for example, they went to someone's house and rescued pigs in horrible conditions, and how everyone is happy with that, but if you go to a pet store or breeder, well...we can't really celebrate it. Either way, you're saving lives, but in the long haul one outcome is positive and the other is negative. Positive being that no pigs were bred to take the place of those adopted, and negative being that more pigs were bred to take place of the ones taken or purchased.

I suppose I was just making a statement that I understand why some people are offering their congratulations, just as others are offering their criticisms.

I don't think that a lot of people fully understand how far their decisions go. While I'm happy that these two specific pigs are safe, I am sorry for all the others that their absence made room for.

 

[bpatters]

Heady, would you still be smoking if you couldn't get tobacco?

If educating you hasn't worked to make you stop smoking, how is educating future guinea pig owners going to make them stop buying guinea pigs from pet stores?

 

[Heady]

Heady, would you still be smoking if you couldn't get tobacco?

If educating you hasn't worked to make you stop smoking, how is educating future guinea pig owners going to make them stop buying guinea pigs from pet stores?

Good point. If I was addicted to it, yes. But since I'm not, no. People will always find ways of doing what they want. Obviously, if certain things weren't readily available, no one would have any reason to use or want them. But as long as people can make money off of it, it would still exist.

That's why I think education is important and effective. Did this particular smoking lesson work for me? Not right now, but I'm not everybody. I'm only one person. Those people that decided to drink and get into accidents...that was their own fault. They could have said "no" but they didn't. Would it have happened if that law wasn't changed? Probably not. But what a lot of people fail to realize is that each individual is fully responsible for their actions. It seems no one wants to be held accountable for anything.

Educating people about the plight of, not only, guinea pigs, but any animal sold in pet stores or from breeders is allowing them to make the choice. They know both sides. They know how these animals are kept and bred before being put in the pet store, they know the risks that are involved with that and if they still decide to ignore the life in the rescue for a "pretty one" in a pet store that they're just going to eventually dump at a rescue anyway, then that is their decision. But, along with that, comes the other people that won't do that. That will have enough self restraint to say that they can wait for a pig to come in the rescue...or something along those lines.

So, yeah, even though I know I'm going to be croaking in a hospital bed some day, I'll remain the idiot that puffs away. Stupid decision? Yes, totally. I am completely responsible for any repercussions. But if a kid asked me if they could have one, my response would be a very loud "H*ll to the No" followed by the many, many reasons why they shouldn't.

Education does work, it just depends on the person's decision. Be accountable or throw your hands up in the air?

 

[Pulsepoint129]

I'd like to know why any of you who are posing the alternatives as taking the pigs vs. leaving them to die are omitting the alternative of calling Animal Control to have them actually do something about this situation. I'd also like to know why it's any better to contribute to a pet store you know is participating in animal abuse by buying their products than by buying their pigs.

Good intentions don't excuse helping this store remain prosperous by purchasing products there.

I hate to sound pessimistic here, Black Arrow...and, I cannot speak on behalf of ALL municipal animal control centers. However, the one in my town (and the close surrounding towns) have more to do with their time by chasing down neglected cats and dogs, strays, nuisance wildlife calls, and the like than to walk into our local Petco and lay down the law about the treatment of small animals. How do I know this for certain? Well, as you may or may not have read, there was an incident about 4 or 5 months back where I was in Petco with one of my best friends who was shopping around for food and accessories for her hamster. While in there, I saw two clearly injured rats, (one with a swollen shut eye) and one with what looked like to the tip of their tail was completely missing due to a fight or accident. The kind folks on here encouraged me to call the local animal control, and so I did. The animal control people's response? "If you brought it to a member of management's attention, and they told you that a veterinarian is already on staff to investigate, then there is nothing more we can do." The closest HSUS was almost an hour away. When I called to speak to them regarding it, they told me to go back and talk to animal control, since animal control is more-or-less working under the jurisdiction of local animal laws and it was their duty to take care of these matters. I was certainly appauled and pretty much lost all faith in our local animal societies. Now, keep in mind, this was just in this particular situation. Also keep in mind that I am NOT speaking about the entire USA, UK, or other such animal control populations here. Could you see how one would become rather jaded? If it were a canine or feline species, they'd definitely be more inclined to do something about the situation. But, since Petco has a co-op of veterinarians, it was "out of their hands". What I'm saying, in MY particular personal experience, Black Arrow... is that it wasn't for lack of trying. After that, however, I was very jaded and skeptical of the way the animal control folks in my general radius view the lives of small mammals compared to their canine/feline counterparts. Does that mean that I'm saying that the rest of the folks on here stop trying? ABSOLUTELY not at all! As a matter of fact, since the majority of folks on here who run rescues are in their 30s, 40s, and possibly older that makes their sage and influence 100 times stronger than the average young man or young woman, (I am 25) who is simply trying to do the right thing but lacks the confidence or knowledge to know how to deal with obstinate animal control units. You know? That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to refute your statement, I'm just saying that for those less knowledgeable about the full letter-of-the-law and how to ensure it gets enacted, it's that much more of a challenge to get animal control to actually give a flying *$*!, you know?

 

[MyZoo2]

Well, that's a pity, for the reasons crazywiggy said.
I'm sorry that because you haven't had a good experience with animal control, you seem to think it's a good idea to buy as many animals as possible from pet stores just as fast as they can stock them, but you do realize that they're going to be able to outpace you, don't you?

Blackarrow, I notice a theme on this thread and that is that you take one remark a person makes, take it completely out of context and put your spin on it.

I said I wouldn't have personally left those 2 piggies in that condition, and that I would not debate how it keeps the cycle going. But as per norm, you have misconstrued what I said into that I think it's a great idea to buy up as many pets as possible from petstores. I didn't say that at all, but that is what you would like people to think I said. Did you even read the part about filing a complaint with the USDA and animal control? Obviously not.

In all honesty, as long as pet stores want to sell animals they will have a supply regardless of your personal efforts. Where there is a will there is a way, and their mother corporations will always find a way unless the USDA bans them from selling animals. If you are going to file a complaint, it helps to have proof. Pictures are great proof, they are a lot more reliable than a verbal complaint.

A lot of pet supply stores do have legitimate adoption in their stores. All of our pet supply stores in our area have adoption areas that are filled with animals from local rescues. You are still required to fill out an application, be investigated, etc. The animals are cared for by personnel from their rescues. A lot of the rescues that utilize those outposts are usaully rescues that have foster homes, but no formal shelter therefore it allows them to be in contact with a lot more potential adopters. That is how we got our tabby. They checked our other pets, our vet, our vet records, personel references...but apparently you think I bought my cat. So I have one cat from Every Creature Counts, two cats and one dog from Denver Dumb Friends League, one dog from the humane society in Colorado Spring and our other dog came from a vets office. Did I buy those too? My rodents were adopted as well, but you can keep thinking I will just buy up any old animal from any old source that profits from breeders.

 

[akstrohm]

I'm not trying to refute your statement, I'm just saying that for those less knowledgeable about the full letter-of-the-law and how to ensure it gets enacted, it's that much more of a challenge to get animal control to actually give a flying *$*!, you know?

That depends on your local animal control. The guinea pigs I most recently adopted were born in a rescue. Their mother was confiscated after a report to animal control. So you might as well at least report the problem and see what can be done. It's not always hopeless.

 

[Pulsepoint129]

That depends on your local animal control. The guinea pigs I most recently adopted were born in a rescue. Their mother was confiscated after a report to animal control. So you might as well at least report the problem and see what can be done. It's not always hopeless.

Again, I am not and was not implying that it's useless to call and make an attempt with Animal Control, nor am I disagreeing with you about the situation being reliant upon the actual Animal Control organization/municipality.

My major gripe is that unless you're an actual rescuer and/or have had years of working to ensure animal rights and welfare... they won't take you seriously, not around in my area at least. I will admit that as much of an animal lover and stand behind everything this site advocates, I have ZERO experience and confidence in knowing what, and how to say to an animal control agency to get them to give a flying hoot. Most of the folks on here seem to be more optimistic, and rightfully so, since most of the population on here have probably taken on these agencies head-on and within a group of advocates. Whereas I'm just Plain Jane, with a gigantic heart, but not enough of experience to know exactly how to get them to really care and do something about a situation. Do you get what I'm saying?

 

[rabbitsncavyluv]

Yes the pigs are in a better place but I don't believe they were out of the pet mill cycle. They were still a very much part of it.

 

[Ash-Ro060708]

Most Animal Control agencies are far too busy with animal hording, puppy mills, severe animal abuse, abandonment cases, etc, to be able to run out and check out all the pet store complaints, like 2 guinea pigs sitting in a drawer. I'm sure if I called my local shelter (the only one with-in 2 hours) which really only deals with cats and dogs, and said someone had guinea pigs in a drawer, they would probably say "So? Do they have food?" ummm.. yeah. "Well, do they have water?" umm.. yeah. "Ok then, what's the problem?"

 

[Paula]

Yes the pigs are in a better place but I don't believe they were out of the pet mill cycle. They were still a very much part of it.

And removing them without any consequences to the pet store for putting them in such wretched conditions neither forces them to face any ramifications for having done so nor breaks the cycle of breeding and abuse that the pet store perpetuates by selling them as merchandise in the first place.

 

[blackarrow]

I said I wouldn't have personally left those 2 piggies in that condition, and that I would not debate how it keeps the cycle going. But as per norm, you have misconstrued what I said into that I think it's a great idea to buy up as many pets as possible from petstores. I didn't say that at all, but that is what you would like people to think I said.

It's called carrying your line of thought through to its logical conclusion. You couldn't leave those two pigs there. How could you possibly be so cruel as to leave the next two there? Or the next two? Are they any less deserving? I think not!

Did you even read the part about filing a complaint with the USDA and animal control? Obviously not.

Sure, just didn't have any comment on that.

In all honesty, as long as pet stores want to sell animals they will have a supply regardless of your personal efforts.

Um, which would be why I don't advocate trying to close them down by cutting off the supply of pigs to pet stores, but rather the demand for pigs from pet stores.

If you are going to file a complaint, it helps to have proof. Pictures are great proof, they are a lot more reliable than a verbal complaint.

Why are you talking about matters of proof? No one bothered to file a complaint, much less do anything to prove it.

A lot of pet supply stores do have legitimate adoption in their stores.

Right. This wasn't even close to that situation, so, so what?

 

[blackarrow]

Most Animal Control agencies are far too busy with animal hording, puppy mills, severe animal abuse, abandonment cases, etc, to be able to run out and check out all the pet store complaints, like 2 guinea pigs sitting in a drawer. I'm sure if I called my local shelter (the only one with-in 2 hours) which really only deals with cats and dogs, and said someone had guinea pigs in a drawer, they would probably say "So? Do they have food?" ummm.. yeah. "Well, do they have water?" umm.. yeah. "Ok then, what's the problem?"

The funny thing about generalities - there's no way of knowing whether you have here one of those situations, or not, unless you actually bother to report the abuse to the authorities responsible for investigating it. Maybe it's your style to sit around complaining about how the authorities probably wouldn't do their duty even if you couldn't even be bothered to give them the opportunity, but it certainly isn't mine.

 

[ojars]

The other day Lauren and I were at PetSmart getting some more pellets and hay for Yoshi, Anubis, Arby, and Mac.


We were stopped by an employee who noticed our product selections and mentioned they had two pigs for adoption.


Ollie & Wally now have a new home, free of PetSmart's neglect.

I did not notice this before! Kudos also to the sympathetic employee for bringing up the plight of Ollie and Wally. The employee acted positively to help these little piggies escape their dire situation. My hat is off to that person -- well done!

 

[VoodooJoint]

For the record you cannot file a complaint AFTER the neglected animal has been removed. If the problem is gone then there is no longer a problem. Authorities will not accept pictures or video they did not shoot themselves as evidence in something like this as the supposed "evidence" is suspect to manipulation and fabrication.

Complaints must be filed while the neglect or abuse is active. You must keep the pressure on for authorities to do something to document and address the problem. You should absolutely take pictures and video if possible to help them "see" exactly what you are talking about but do not rely on your self evidence. It also helps expedite thing (and to get taken seriously) if you show up at animal control (or other authorities) in person rather then just call.