That I have not been able to do, all by myself, what is needed to prevent the deaths of the vast number of those cats and dogs, which are the unfortunate products of over breeding, is no reason to assume that these deaths cannot be prevented. All it demonstrates is that the anti-animal forces are too wealthy and too politically powerful to be able to be defeated by one single person acting alone. There is no doubt that it is their intention to continue in their lucrative and conspiratorial animal disposal business, unless and until such time as the job of defeating them can be undertaken adequately by a sufficient number of people who sincerely care enough about the animals to do whatever it takes to put these animal exploiters out of business.
I believe that there are several approaches that can be taken in correcting this tragic situation, but that all of them will require the determined participation of a large segment of the public. This, of course, was my reason for creating this web site. I need to enlist your help in using whatever means you can to get as many people as possible to this web site. Furthermore, time is of the essence, for, if the internet should be taken over by the same wealthy corporations that, in support of the big money making businesses, have taken over all of the other information media, this one remaining avenue of communication will no longer exist, and whatever little hope there is for our pets may be lost forever.
There is an idea I hit upon back in the 1960’s, before I had a chance to come up with any better plan, which could be employed to save our pets in the event that all of our better options should fail. It does not require the cooperation of anyone other than the pet owners and would cost virtually nothing. I formulated the plan and set it forth in a letter addressed to the pet owners. The letter was never mailed and the idea was never tried. It would be, at best, a last resort. Here is a major portion of that letter which I wrote in 1968:
“We can readily see that the number of surplus animals can be reduced only by reducing the number of productive females. This can be accomplished in two ways. One is by spaying the females and that is the best, but the cost is prohibitive to many of us. The other way is by destroying the females at birth, and that, for those of us who do not spay, is our only way of solving the problem.
"Most of us wait until our kittens and puppies are a few weeks old and getting into mischief and adding to our grocery costs before we decide that we must get rid of them. When we turn them in at a pound or humane society we are told that the personnel there will try to find homes for them. This is to make us feel better, but the truth is that nearly all of these wonderful, lovable little pets are destroyed, partly because the supply is so much greater than the demand and partly because most of those people who do want them are, understandably, not willing to pay the thirty to forty dollars that must be charged for the females and the fifteen to thirty dollars that must be charged for the males in accordance with the new policy of the animal welfare people.
"What we now propose is to save as many males as possible by offering them free to good homes. We then propose to reduce the number of females by destroying them soon after birth before their eyes are open and before they are even aware of their existence, which is the next closest thing to abortion. This is certainly much more humane than waiting until they have developed their personalities, learned to love life, and acquired the will to live and then destroying all of that sweetness and happiness.
"In carrying out this program, we predict that the number of surplus, unwanted animals can be reduced to zero in as few as three or four years depending on the degree of cooperation that is given. And cooperation should be one hundred percent since all we are being asked to do, when our animals have babies, is to call the phone number below and give our address. A volunteer will come and take only the newborn females. (A magnifying glass will be used in the case of kittens to see that there is no mistake.) These can then be euthanized more easily, inexpensively, and humanely than if we waited until they were older.
"This plan is good because after the first year, far fewer young animals will be destroyed than are presently being destroyed. (Fifty percent rather than eighty or ninety percent of a number which will decrease greatly each year.) Since there is virtually no cost involved, the probability that the plan will succeed is excellent. Not only will we have the joy of seeing an end to the wanton destruction of our helpless animals, but also we will be saved our portion of the thousands of dollars that are taken from our taxes each year to finance the pounds, dog catchers, and gas chambers.
"So please copy this number into the cover of your phone book where you can readily find it when that “blessed event” occurs next spring. Your phone call is all it will take to see an end to this sad and serious problem.” (P.37)
"There are, of course, more satisfactory means by which our pets could be saved than the one suggested in that letter, and every effort should be taken to employ the best means possible. A few suggestions as to what might be done are contained in the following excerpts taken from later chapters of my book. In the paragraph below, I am referring to the “wills” of the animal exploiters.
“The reason I feel justified in advancing the opinion that their wills will be thwarted at last and that the resolution of the non-pet problem is just around the corner is because all it will take to bring it about is the making of a very small financial investment by someone, anyone - so small in fact, that most organizations, foundations, and even many private individuals with a few thousand dollars to spare, are all in excellent positions to do it. All that is needed is for someone to conduct one small inexpensive spay project in one small community and then publicize its success. The announcement of its success, when received in other communities, should provide those communities with the incentive to undertake spay projects of their own. News of their successes should be expected to spread all across our nation and to all of the other advanced nations of the world, as well.” (P.176)
The following paragraph offers a similar suggestion.
“One reason the animal shelter operators are able to get away with all of this duplicity and to fulfill their greedy ambitions without detection is simply because their feline and canine victims have no voices with which to protest or to complain. What I have, therefore, tried to do in this book is to give a voice to the animals, who would otherwise have no choice but to remain in their helpless and hopeless situation forever. A voice on their behalf is needed now more that ever before, since the plight of the animals is not only no longer being brought to the attention of the public but is, in fact, being deliberately and clandestinely withheld from the public, who are being lulled into the comfortable and happy belief that “We are no longer euthanizing any adoptable animals”. Don’t believe a word of it. Get together with the other good people in your community and use the money you might normally donate to some animal welfare organization to, instead, establish a fund to be used to conduct a spay project in your own town or city. Only after a spay project has been completed, will you be able to believe the shelter operators when they claim to be operating “no-kill” shelters.” (P.220)
What is advocated in the above two paragraphs could still be a viable plan, though I am sure I have made it sound considerably more optimistic than it actually is. The drawback is that it would have to be done, not just without the support of the local Animal Control Departments, but in spite of their attempts to undermine its success. Furthermore, even if the spay project were to be successful, without the cooperation of the news media, it would be hard to find a way to publicize its success. Furthermore, it would still be resisted by the local anti-animal people wherever else it might be tried. The degree of success on a widespread basis, could, therefore, be less than optimal and could take a very long time.
At one point, I became so discouraged that I wrote the following:
“I am now beginning to think, since the anti-animal people are rejecting my spay plan so violently, that destroying the females at birth might not be such a bad idea after all, since this could be done locally everywhere, without the interference of anyone, and would require only the cooperation of the pet owners. If these anti-animal people continue to stand in the way of the spay projects, I think destroying the female animals at birth is something that could be given serious consideration, since it would solve the problem of pet overpopulation at practically no cost, without involving vets, without any legislation, and would be much more humane than to just go on killing millions of both the males and the females forever, as seems to be Virginia Handley’s preference. So let us keep this plan in mind, in the event that we should have to abandon our better alternatives, though I hope we will not.” (P.219)
The best idea I have been able to come up with and that I am particularly advocating is the one that follows:
“It would be nice to entertain the thought that when the anti-animal people realize that the public is on to them, they will feel that they have no choice, at that point, but to loosen their stranglehold on the animals and to just slink away into the shadows with their tails between their legs. But these people are brazen beyond belief, and I am afraid that that is not something we can necessarily count on.
“I am now convinced that it is only the determined and sustained cooperation of a well informed public that can defeat the anti-animal forces and accomplish what needs to be done for our pets. All of us, collectively, need to write letters by the thousands to all of our elected officials and make thousands of phone calls to them and appear in person, en masse, at meetings of the city councils and boards of supervisors and threaten to vote them out of office if they don’t make spay projects a major priority. This is evidently how politics works. If enough of us make squeaky wheels of ourselves and agitate as violently as we can and keep the pressure on full force, I believe we will win at last. This would be most effective, of course, if done in every state of the nation simultaneously - at the city, county, and state levels.” (P.219)
Please propagate this idea and any other ideas you might have, by whatever means you can. The animals have no one but us to rely on, so let us spread the word to as many others as we possibly can and then, collectively, take whatever actions seem to offer the greatest potential for success.