Woah, wait a minute. Just so everyone understands, "they" are not going to do ANYTHING with the gliders at our rescue. We take care of them and work diligently to adopt them out and provide educational workshops to prospective adopters. PETA just put up a form so people could send out letters to show owners asking for them to ban the sale of gliders at these shows.
Yes, of course with the word "PETA" in the subject line of this post, it was somewhat predictable that would be a lightning rod for anti-PETA sentiment. That's OK. And that's why I chose the "fire" icon knowing full well this would happen. Go figure.
To keep it all in perspective, PETA is but one vehicle for media outreach to trade show venue owners and show management. Not THE vehicle. So for all of you who have a disdain for PETA but are still interested in "getting the word out" it would be helpful and instructive if you could post alternate ideas for our little media campaign. We have used local TV and newspapers as outlets but maybe something more grass roots would be even better.
So far PETA has lent a sympathetic ear and there has been no indication that they intend to send people here to kill our gliders. (I will fight them off with fists, pots, pans and anything I can grab if they try to do that).
To erase any doubt, what PETA have done so far is to put up a web landing page for us so people could send letters and other communications to people who own venues or produce shows in which exotic animals are sold to impulse buyers. That so-called "campaign" is directed at Shelly Adelson and Chris Woodruff who own the venue and show, respectively of the gift show where Steve Larkin of Pocket Pets of Dallas sells gliders. Larkin (formerly associated with Custom Cage Works) also sells joeys at the Home Shows all over the country and also here in Vegas.
After reaching out to dozens of organizations to ask for help in getting the word out on sugar gliders, PETA were the only ones to take action. The ONLY ones to do ANYTHING.
So if you do not want to do anything under the auspices of PETA but still want to do something, you can contact the people and companies in question directly and urge them to ban the sale of exotic animals at their shows:
[Christmas Gift show where Steve Larkin sells gliders]
Chris Woodruff, President
Group W Productions
6211 Southwest Blvd., Ste. 100
Fort Worth, TX 76132
817-566-8800
817-566-8806 (fax)
info@groupwproductions.com
[Owner of venue where gliders are sold]
Sheldon Adelson, Chief Executive Officer
Sands Expo and Convention Center
201 Sands Ave.
Las Vegas, NV 89169
702-733-5556
702-199-5568 (fax)
info@lasvegassands.com
Perhaps a post on just PETA is appropriate at this point. PETA does in fact advocate euthanasia if animals are suffering, but so long as animal cruelty or suffering is not in the equation, they advocate life. Lucky Glider Rescue & Sanctuary is a "no kill" rescue and sanctuary. That may put us philosophically at odds with organizations like PETA because they regard the notion of "no kill" as naive. But even with our differences, they saw this campaign as a worthy ideal.
FOR THE RECORD, and to ensure that everyone reading this post understands the position of Lucky Glider Rescue & Sanctuary, let me address the notion of "no kill."
To put our convictions into a "real" light, consider our actions last week when little Makudo had his eye enucleated. Going in, we knew that if the doctor had found deeper skull infection or tumor behind the eye, she would probably have euthanized Makudo to avoid his suffering. Nonetheless, at a cost of $600, we gave the go-ahead to operate. But we were ready to have him euthanized on the doctor's say-so if she felt - in the middle of the operation - he was going to suffer. Now had we NOT spent the money and just kept him alive in that awful state, with a raging infection and necrotic tissue all about the head, THAT would have been cruel. And if we did not have the funds to do a humane operation, I am quite sure PETA would have advocated "kill." And if we did not have the money to do the operation, the fact is his death would have been imminent and it would have been painful, with infection reaching his brain and poisoning his little body. So yes, we would have euthanized him had we not been able to secure the funds to operate. This past year, as an alternative to euthanasia, we have always sought to dig deep into our pockets to do expensive operations. Eyes, tails, open sores, etc. - all amounting to thousands of dollars in fees - even though we get a discount. So for the record, we are a "no kill."
But being a "no kill" does not mean an animal will never be euthanized. Being a "no kill" means euthanasia is only a last alternative and is only used if the animal will suffer otherwise. And in most cases, the distinction comes down to MONEY.
There are all too many occassions where rescues become over-run, understaffed, and have raging infections and diseases running rampant. Animals suffer in those circumstances. Here in NV, there was such a situation a year ago where a "no kill" shelter fell to such disrepair and mismanagement that virtually every animal in the shelter (mostly cats) had to be euthanized. Yes, a no-kill shelter where euthanasia became the final word because the animals where suffering.
So we advocate "no-kill" and that's one of the reasons why the word "sanctuary" is at the end of our name. But just because we are a "no-kill" does not mean we will keep an animal alive if, in the opinion of this staff and our vet, the animal is indeed suffering.
Now to bring it full circle, none of this suffering, euthanasia, and neglect would happen if it weren't for the sale of these animals in the first place. Worse, the sale of them as "Christmas Trinkets" in impulse-buy venues - and sold by people who outright LIE about how hard it is to take care of these animals properly.
Soi on this post, I am hoping we can share information along the lines of contact information and media campaigns advocating the ban of exotic animal sales at shows and flea markets.
Simly put we want the sale of exotic animals at these shows and flea markets to be banned. (Yes pet stores are bad too, but at least they are there the next day to account for themselves and not off in a van travelling to the next show).
Our sentiment stems from the fact that over 50% of the animals in our rescue were sold by these impulse buy vendors at these shows.
So we are passionate about getting the word out to stop selling gliders at "impulse buy" venues.
NEWSFLASH Gail just sent me a note she got back from Best Friends Animal Society: Best Friends Animal Society (5001 Angel Canyon Rd, Kanab, UT 84741, 435.644.2001, www.bestfriends.org). They had some suggestions too:
If you're going to influence the 'Demand Side' (the buying public) of the problem you have to educate them and this means you have to be very knowledgeable not only about Sugar Gliders but also about the laws regarding the sales at trade shows. If you're to create public awareness then you should be prepared to write letters to the editors, or to the trade show organizers, or to your legislators...etc.
If you want to promote adoption so people won't buy Sugar Gliders then you have to provide them with contact information about rescue groups. Is it possible for you to form a coalition with other rescue groups &/or individuals in order to create a 'presence', a 'face', a 'point of contact'?
Here is the link to the Best Friends' "The Truth About the Pet Trade" community. Under the 'resources' tab you'll find many articles and tips about how to influence the situation. In particular, I've attached three PDF documents for you -- the last one outlines Best Friends general strategy -- Unite, Educate, Create a Model Program, and Assist Other Organizations.
In addition, check out "Tackling the Supply & Demand" --
http://network.bestfriends.org/truth/news/30069.html