Dog Daze: Randy Grim Unleashed!

randy grim 3.jpg
YouTube
Randy Grim says he's now "liberated" from "nutcase" aldermen.
Perhaps the weather is to blame, this being the dog days of summer and all. Whatever the case, a pissing match between a local drama queen and a few politically incorrect politicians reached its zenith yesterday when Stray Rescue reneged on its agreement with St. Louis to serve as the city's default animal shelter.

In a letter to city hall on Monday, Stray Rescue founder and president Randy Grim wrote that his agency would no longer take in single strays or animals whose owners no longer want them. Instead the agency will concentrate only on injured animals or dogs running in packs.

Grim's letter comes weeks after several members of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen refused to give Stray Rescue $250,000 in donations that were to fund a new St. Louis shelter called Animal House. When Animal House failed to materialize last summer, the city was left in the lurch. Its old shelter on Gasconade was too dilapidated to humanely accommodate animals, and the mayor's office and health department hurriedly forged a deal with Grim to have Stray Rescue serve as the city's default shelter.

No doubt about it, Grim is an extraordinary advocate for animals. He also has a flair for the dramatic and can be notoriously thin-skinned.

I remember Grim calling me in tears a few years ago over an article I wrote poking fun at legislation he supported to change any reference of "pet owner" in city statutes to the more politically correct term of "pet guardian." Grim himself admits that he suffers from "anti-social disorder" and "[doesn't] like people."

No wonder, then, that Grim was aghast in May when he entered an aldermanic committee meeting thinking he was going to get the $250,000 and was instead grilled about how stray dogs continue to roam the streets.

"I didn't know I was walking into an inquisition," Grim told the Post-Dispatch at the time."It was awful. Awful."

Yesterday, via Facebook, Grim took a potshot at a few of those aldermen and wrote that Stray Rescue can now return to its roots.
We will continue to do what we always do -- rescue the street dog. We don't need the city to tell us. Everything will be the same except we will be doing it on our terms. The big difference is now the animals come first -- not politics Actually I am getting excited -- freedom to do what we do best, save lives. No more nutcase Troupe or Flowers or Carter or politics and greed. We are liberated.
Troupe, more than others, earned the ire of animal advocates when he suggested that the city simply euthanize stray dogs instead of sending them to Grim's no-kill shelter. The $250,000 sitting in city coffers, he'd argued, could then be used to address greater needs.

Recently Fox 2 tried to nail Troupe for his comments, but the alderman from the rough-and-tumble First Ward held his ground. In his view stray dogs aren't worth the fuss, especially with so many other societal ills.

"Yeah, I'm in favor of killing dogs that cause a threat to human life and wellness. We kill people," he said.

Politically incorrect? Yes. But I can see the alderman's point, just as I can understand Grim's frustration.

So what's the solution? Pretend you really want Stray Rescue back but secretly rejoice at the fact that Grim dumped you and -- in so doing -- took the responsibility of ending this messy relationship off your shoulders. Then I'd suggest the city take the $250,000 and use it to build its own shelter as outlined in the city charter, which states that the "health commissioner shall have charge of the quarantine, the dog pound."

That way the city will only have to deal with its own "nutcases" and not worry about outside influence -- however well-intentioned it may be.
My Voice Nation Help
50 comments
cleo
cleo

As journalism & reporting transition from paper to net, do you really want to leave behind all of your basic reporting skills and become an 'editorial' commentator?  Even though this is a 'blog' story, you might have considered a few basic tenets of journalism, i.e. research and objectivity. Does Stray Rescue pick up dogs in the city of St. Louis - yes.  Does it do this as well or better than the Gasconade pound did - yes.  Does this save the city money in tough economic times - yes.  Was the $250,000 designated for budget relief or other budgetary areas - no.  Is SR perfect - of course not.  I've been a fan of the RFT for years, but guess what - not perfect either.  

DogStar1
DogStar1

The posts on this thread prove once again that stray rescue supporters are some of the most uninformed people out there.   Big mouths and little brains. 

D Marston
D Marston

I guess PetsorUs would consider me to to be one of those dog crazy idiots, it is a title that I wear with pride, you do not have to say that you do not like dogs, by your comments it is quite clear, just because you do not like them you should not hope for their demise. It is comments like yours that make me like animals more than people also, I really feel sorry for you because you have obviously never known the love and companionship of an animal, they are mistreated, abused, and abandoned and starved, most still do not lose thier ability to forgive and  love. We humans could take a lesson from those who you feel are unworthy.Stray Rescue and Randy, just keep doing what you do, you know who your supporters are.

D Marston
D Marston

Really? How far do you think that 250,000 will go for an animal shelter. Most of the dogs that come from the four aldermen's ward are either very sick or injured. Stray rescue spends about 100,000 a month trying to get these dogs back to health. Who is going to work at this new shelter, will the aldermen give up some of their pay to  employ shelter workers. Will the aldermen be willing to walk dogs in the rain, freezing rain, snow, bitter cold and unbearable heat, because thats what Stray Rescue volunteers and staff do.Randy is not perfect, not many of us are, but I will take Randy with his imperfections any day over Troupe and his willingness to kill dogs without a second thought.Is the city really ready to get into the shelter business and do it right, will it be no kill, which is what most people in St.Louis will want. Are you ready for the huge financial responsebility that it will take.Think about it. 

Domenica J.
Domenica J.

What the article failed to mention is that Grim/Stray Rescue is the only animal group that has the nuts to go into wards like Troupe's and he has been doing it for years.  APA and HSUS won't do it and get big fat paychecks from the government.  The irony is that the most abused and tortured animals or the most animals for that fact are picked up from the wards the refused him the money.  In keeping with perceptions of their ward,  they think they are entitled to everything for free.   The city and alderman in control have proven by the demise of Gasconade that they have no clue how to successfully operate an animal shelter.  To dump the money into a new shelter that will get trashed like most of the properties in the wards of Troupe, Flowers and Carter is like throwing the money away.   Having a low median income is no excuse for chaining a dog up and moving away,  torture and abusing it for sport,  letting it starve to death while you are fat on food stamps, and the other atrocities Grim sees on a daily basis.   Stray Rescue shouldn't have to clean up after the moral decay of St. Louis for free.  Their service isn't like food stamps.   the answer is to build a new shelter for Stray Rescue and put successful animal shelter people like Grim and his staff on the city payroll.   It takes a real mentally deficient idiot to verbally attack people who do good things (for the city at no charge).   There are so many of those people out there to name but I will start with Troupe who is so freakin stupid you can't even understand what he is saying,  Flowers who has sniffed too much jeri-curl in hair salon and Carter the wanna be professional.      The way people treat animals is a reflection of themselves.  Doesn't say much for these losers and the rest of you haters.

Animal Advocate
Animal Advocate

ALL Animal Rescuers suffer from "anti-social disorder" and "don't like people."     Because we've seen what horrors "people" inflict on innocent animals.   I count myself among one that suffers from "anit-social disorder" if we want to label it.    What would you call it when you specifically "don't like" the moronic Aldermen in your city.  

Just as important as "helping" the animals and making St. Louis Pet Friendly - as we market our town - is to be progessive and not allow idiots like Troupe to make those statements - he needs to go plain and simple - get him the heck out of office.   He certainly does NOT represent me !!

underwhelmed
underwhelmed

what have you done lately besides criticize folks who actually work for the greater good?if you think your "clever" journalisticstyle is so wonderful, why don"t you work for free?

Donna
Donna

so much misinformation and hate. I have worked with Randy for many years and this is the man I know, a better person than any of the people commenting and Mr. Garrison.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

youwishuknew
youwishuknew

Randy Grim is a first class tool. He is a media whore and has been ever since he adopted the dog that the original city pound tried to euthanize and the dog ended up living. The guys an asshole and his group, in my personal experince with them, is downright pathetic. They won't answer the phone, they won't return calls, there is actually a sign on the front door of the place that says "we do not accept stray dogs". Did you not want to take over the welfare of animals in this city? Then get off your ass, answer the phone and start doing what you said you were going to do. If Grim is such a wonderful person, then why is he stomping his feet and throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old, trying to give the aldermen an ultimatum, that he'll stop service if he doesn't get the $250k? I have wondered for years what exactly Grim has on city officials that they all go with his crap. No I am not for the killing of animals, but sometimes that is the only choice. Grim wants 3 things in this deal: the publicity, the free reign to do whatever the hell he pleases whether it helps the city's animal population or not, and the $250K that we citizens donated for a new shelter. He makes me sick, the BoA makes me sick and so does the mayor. They are a spineless bunch of cowards.

mom2hounds
mom2hounds

The money was donated for a new shelter not to keep Stray Rescue going. I have had a few experiences with SR and I must say I was NOT impressed. They were rude and very unwilling to help. I called about a poor great dane crossing Gravois so skinny it could barely move. I was told "We don't deal with ill dogs and if he looked that bad he is probably dead by now anyway and out of his misery." This is not something I am making up. Mr. Grimm seems to pick and choose who he wants to go out and get. I'm sure there are some good things SR has done. I have no doubt they have the dogs well being in mind and are trying to help those poor strays but I have been told there is another proposal out there by a private vet that would possibly re-do the Gasconade Facility, with money left over to take care of  ALL dogs that it's possible to care for. With a licensed vet running it the neutering could be taken care of in house.I live in the city and I am getting the impression that the mayor and a lot of the alderman, including my own just want this over with and really don't care about the outcome. Well, I am a voter and I do care where it is going so when election time comes around I will be able to voice my opinion. Why not let the private sector share their ideas with the citizens and see what the people who donated the cash for ths project think? We have all heard SR'S side and the mayors, and the aldermanic board now let us hear from someone who has a plan, well thought out, is a successful vet himself and even owns boarding facilities. Who has a background of not only being a good vet but a good businessman also. Let's all stop yelling at each other and try to find a common solution..WHAT IS BEST FOR THE ANIMALS!

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

Isn't here a limit on how many times you can swear in a post--even for Riverfront Times?

Maybe some comment moderation would be a good thing.

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

Stray Rescue will most likely continue to have problems maturing with Grim as the leader. He makes a great animal advocate but a lousy administrator.

There really is no "agreement" between the city and Stray Rescue. Grim allowed his ego to override his common sense and boastfully claimed he could take care of the dog problem in the city. Well, Stray Rescue cannot. Of course it can't. Anyone with any commonsense should see this.

The city accepted this boast, because if got them off the hook. The city thought it could weasel out of its animal care responsibility without having to pay a dime. Well, it can't. A city the size of St. Louis without an official shelter? What the heck were Slay and the Aldermen thinking?

Shooting the dogs is not the solution, because there's an uncommonly large number of indifferent pet owners in St. Louis who will just keep dumping more dogs on the street. Stricter controls on animal owners, required spaying and neutering, and an official, decently maintained shelter and animal control system are what's needed.

The dogs and cats shouldn't have to pay for the callous indifference of the people of St. Louis. After all, no one forces anyone to get a pet. And just think of what happens if you do such a barbaric act? Want to bet about the complaints conference organizers will get if they schedule a conference in that "dog killer" town?

Does St. Louis really want to take on the entire animal welfare movement? Think "Proposition B" before you answer that one.

Stray Rescue needs to go back to being another non-profit no-kill shelter. Animal House needs to go back to being a non-profit no-kill shelter for cats. And St. Louis needs to face up to the fact that it needs to build a decent shelter. If the city can't do it by itself, then maybe it does need to give over being it's own little county and join with St. Louis County--because St. Louis County managed to build a decent new animal shelter. 

Amgst77
Amgst77

The city has made the same mistakes with its animal shelter as it did with the trash collectionl.  It paniced and did not plan for problems.  We need some educated aldermen in those positions,  I have never seen so many immature, uneducated and dysfunctional people running city government.  Gregory Carter, Jennifer Flowers, Quincy Troupe,  just to mention a few

Charles Pavlack
Charles Pavlack

I think some folks are missing a crucial point of this story.  The $250k wasn't just collected tax revenue or some money that the city budgeted.  It was specifically donated via a check box on the tax forms.  It was designed to go to animal control.  So for the aldermen to shut down the shelter and then claim that the money was theirs to do with as they see fit was disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst.

I'm not a particular fan of Randy Grim.  I'm marginally involved in the rescue community (my wife is the director of a non-profit puppy rescue), and I've heard some stories.  I've also been to fundraisers for Stray Rescue that Mr. Grim can't be bothered to attend.  I'm not a fan of him as a person, but AM a fan of the work he's doing, and the fact that he stepped up when the aldermen shut down the Gasconade shelter (which was heartbreaking to go into) without an alternative solution.

So yeah, I think Stray Rescue should get the money.  But I think Mr. Grim maybe needs to step back a bit and deal with the animals, and let someone else be the public voice of the organization.

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

You’re a retard Phil (if that is your real name).  Your handicapped response to my valid points has me amazed you can even fucking spell.

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

"animals come first -- not politics."  Bullfuckingshit!

Apparently not when it comes to reneging on your agreements with the city to serve as its animal shelter because you didn’t get your $250,000 and throw a temper tantrum.  Alderman troupe is completely correct that this $250,000 has far far worthier causes.  A lot of the stray dog and cat problem is created by the touchy-feely animal loving weirdos that take on the responsibilities of these animals without the wherewithal to take care of them.  They need to be neutered, spayed, or euthanized, not made the care and responsibility of these people that would likely exacerbate the problem of more “pets” than less.

“pet guardian”!?!?  Is this a fucking joke??  By his own admission Grim “doesn’t like people” and the city was stupid enough to enter into an agreement with this weirdo!?!  This self-admitted anti-social person needs to shut the hell up about what he thinks the rest of us should do regarding animals and give up his money, his possessions, take off his clothes and run into out-state Missouri to frolic with the beasts of the field and think happy happy thoughts forever.  They’ll really love him out there….

Domenica
Domenica

The truths hurt DogStar1 don't they so you have to respond by criticizing people who support a group that has done good things (for free to the city) for over ten years.   I've done a lot of fact checking you moron and the facts are out there so before you start flapping your uninformed jaws you need to do the research.   Until alderman like Troupe, Flowers and Carter acknowledge the facts and accept responsibility for the actions of their wards,  things will never get better.   I don't care if its Stray Rescue picking the dogs up or another group,  the facts are the majority of dogs which are usually injured, starving or abused are coming from their wards.   Once they pay someone with a proven success record of picking up strays, they need to get to the root of the problem which are people not animals.  Low income excuse?  Bullshit.   Moral decay?  Definitely.   Lack of respect for people, property and pets?  Definitely.   They need to start with the school age kids and have classes or speakers to teach kids how to properly treat and take care of animals from little on.  Its not okay to chain them up and move away,  starve them, throw rocks and bricks at them,  beat them,   torture them for sport,  fight them,  knock their teeth out and tie their legs together to be a bait dog,  cut off a paw to excite another dog, use wire for a dog collar or never change its collar so it become embedded.   That is the kind of shit Grim faces everyday going into their wards.   If he is crying,  I can't say that I blame him.  I would probably be vomiting if I saw that on a daily basis.   Here is another fact for you,  Kathy Warnick is "president" of the Humane Society of Missouri,  the euthanization capital of Missouri that won't go into the wards of Troupe, Flowers and Carter and makes $247,000 a year.   Grim, "president" of Stray Rescue goes into their wards everyday, has been shot at trying to help an injured dog, recovers, vets and rehabilitates what he brings in and does NOT even get a salary.   I guess you could say he is double doing it for free and has for over ten years.   The more facts I give you,  the smaller your brain is looking      Wake up,  do some research and then get back with me when you have something to contribute based on facts instead of your insignificant utterances.

Beth
Beth

Dominica J., well said. You are my hero! We need more people to think like you!

Louise
Louise

I don't now if you will ever read this, but I will still put my 2 cents in anyway.   Grim is probably busy rescuing animals as to why he doesn't answer his phone on your command.  why he doesn't want strays dumped?  Well, his group rescues strays.  It is an imossibility for him to rescue the world's strays.  He will have to be just a tad choosy.  He will know by looking at the animal if he can bring it right into the rescue operation or if th animal needs to go to the vet first. 

I have volunteered at a dog shelter for 3.5 years now.  We usually get the dogs off death row from the county SPCA.  We do take strays that people drop off now and then.  This is what happens  -  over the three years we have had 3 cases of Parvo problems from drop off strays, a case of ringworm, and most recently a problem with distemper from people who said, 'they are healthy'. 

ENDPuppyMills
ENDPuppyMills

My dog gets his vet care at SR and I've never had a problem with anyone at the Pine Street facility. The vet staff is great.

Sometimes it takes awhile to get a response from shelter staff, but that is pretty typical with any non-profit (HSMO, rescue groups, etc...).

Make sure you sign a Your Vote Counts petition because Missouri's general assembly is well known for not giving a hoot what Missouri voters think (I know this specific thread is at the city level)

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

I am wary of outsourcing the care of the animals to a for-profit vet. Kansas City tried this, and it ended up being a disaster and the city had to step back in and take over the shelter.

No, it's best for the city to just accept its responsibility, get the funds together and to build a decent shelter. It's obscene that a city the size of St. Louis does not have an official shelter.

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

“what is best for animals”….are you kidding me!?!  That is precisely why I posted the first comment on this story in the first place.  NO ONE SHOULD BE DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR ANIMALS.  WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON WHAT IS BEST FOR PEOPLE AND SOCIETY.  It is our money, our time, our resources and shouldn’t be wasted on keeping these animals alive in perpetuity.  A no-kill shelter retains no other purpose than to keep alive animals that would be better off euthanized because no one else wants them.  A no-kill shelter is effectively a legal method of hoarding animals.  The city should not be doing it, neither should Grim, or anyone else. I want to be very clear as I have in my other posts…A NO-KILL SHELTER SERVES NO PURPOSE EXCEPT MAKING PEOPLE FEEL BETTER.  There is nothing wrong with killing animals, and especially not when the animals in question are no longer desired by anyone for any specific purpose.  Warm fuzzies and sympathy are not a reasonable justification to do anything, and especially not when we’re talking about $250,000.  The city should take the $250,000 and create an adoption and euthanization center that will dispose of animals not found to have a use after 20 days.  Animals that are qualified for adoption and are desired should be spayed and neutered prior to release into ownership. A lot of you continue to use the word “humane” in your responses to how animals should be treated.  I take offense to that word.  Animals are not humans.  They should be treated “ethically,” not “humanely”.  Ethical treatment of animals includes meaning that they are sometimes killed, albeit with as little suffering as can be managed. People are forgetting that animals that are not wild serve the purposes of humans.  We domesticated them through selective breeding for tameness and for the value they provide.  The myriad of species that fall under this category exist in their current genetic state BECAUSE of the efforts of man, not vice versa.  Dogs, cats, chickens, cows, pigs, and many others owe their existence in their current forms because of our efforts.  We OWN THEM...right down to their DNA.

Elisabeth D,
Elisabeth D,

Don't confuse Grim's compassion for dogs with an "ego".  I've met him and he is actually one of the most humble people I've met.  Stray Rescue is doing a great job with the stray issue but the alderman never gave him a chance to give the numbers.  In this year alone,   Stray Rescue has picked up approximately 4,000 more dogs than the city pound did in the same time frame.  Stray Rescue did have an agreement with the city of St. Louis but I don't believe that anywhere in their agreement was the stipulation that the alderman have the right to treat him like shit.   If they start paying him as they should have been all along,  the services could expand even more.   Stray Rescue has a proven track record that they can successfully operate shelters without euthanizing on a minimal budget.  The alderman could take a good lesson from Grim who has also successfully attracted a total of about 700 loyal volunteers for a common cause.   Any new shelter operated by the city as you suggest would result in certain demise as did Gasgonade,  because they have no one with a proven track record of success dealing with these issues except for Grim.  If you have something that you know works like Stray Rescue,  the best investment for the good of all is to build on it,  not away from it.

steakburger
steakburger

Charles Troupe is an embarrassment. Looking at the ward he represents, it's no wonder he's hostile to humanely treating stray dogs. 

mokie
mokie

The money was donated for a purpose, and needs to be used for that purpose--to build an official shelter controlled by the city.

The local rescue community is as full of drama, politics and in-fighting as the board Grim is complaining about, and I wouldn't trust a single rescue organization in town to take the money and do the job without trying to piss out territory, unethically cut corners, or generally make asses of themselves.

Phil Adams
Phil Adams

You made no valid point, cunt.  I gave my real name. Since you an unemployed gutless cunt, I guess you will continue to troll the internet like the anonymous troglodyte you are. Have an enjoyable existence in your mom's basement, while she sucks off trannys for rent money.

ihatesuburbs
ihatesuburbs

Are you fucking kidding me? This guy may be a 'weird' as you call him but you seem to be a major league asshole. The city was the one that was stupid to go into an agreement with him? I think you have it backwards since it sounds like he was doing this when the city and its bunch of stupid fuck parochial alderclowns just up and decide to do away with any city animal control. I tell you what, why don't you get your ass out there and do just a fraction of what Randy does, then you can talk your stupid shit about him. You probably are Alderman Troupe, you sound like a big enough useless asshole to be anyway him anyway.

Anonymous
Anonymous

"A lot of the stray dog and cat problem is created by the touchy-feely animal loving weirdos that take on the responsibilities of these animals without the wherewithal to take care of them."

I don't buy it. It's these kinds of people who collect and hoard animals to a fault, not turn them loose on the streets. It's the casual "oh, let's buy a dog" people who don't know what they're getting into and are the first ones to hit Craigslist to find them a home when they're moving, or getting married, or have a baby on the way and the dog is suddenly a problem and not a responsibility.

And they weren't going to give him the $250k but he should just say "oh, I'll do it anyways even though there's barely any space or money for the dogs we do manage to rescue?" Nice try, alderman.

DogStar1
DogStar1

Thank you for proving my point for the world to see! 

You might want to fact-check your own posts before you hit send.  You're not helping your case.

Tomahawk2440c
Tomahawk2440c

Louise...

Randi is too busy for his own good.  His ego has overridden his sense of duty and obligation.  Not answering phones...he has 5-7 office staff/volunteers within arms' reach of the phones and they choose not to answer the phone...not about being busy, its called "laziness" and not wanting to deal with any conflicts, complaints or other issues.  His "group" does not rescue strays...HE DOES...he won't allow anyone to help him, because he's afraid of other people getting the attention and media recognition.

mom2hounds
mom2hounds

You may very well be right but I'm just saying they need to look at their options and plan ahead before just jumping into something...like they promised Grimm the money right away. Sit back and think about how this will work out. Consider all the options. That's all I'm asking. Thanks

Erin Kimm
Erin Kimm

ALSO, The point is, through humans IRRESPONSIBILTY, they exist.  Therefore they become our burden.  Not to just kill to quickly solve a problem.  They have feelings and suffer too.  We domesticated them and rely on us for survival. 

Erin Kimm
Erin Kimm

PetsorUs You are a sorry excuse for a human being.  "We Own them"  you have God complex and I'm sure you idolize Hitler.  "There is nothing wrong with killing animals, and especially not when the animals in question are no longer desired by anyone for any specific purpose."  Wo are you to judge if a dog is useless or not. Maybe you are no longer desired by this community and we should get rid of you. 

mom2hounds
mom2hounds

I don't understand why you are so angry with everyone. We all listen to your opinions, and we are entitled to voice ours. I just hope you have NO animals of your own. Calm down and try listening to other peoples views. You might learn something new. Maybe not but it would be worth a try.

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

OK, we get your point-- you don't like animals. After all, every little thing in the universe revolves around humans and what's convenient for us, right?

If you're indifferent to the animals, at least use some commonsense. $250,000 isn't enough money to do anything. Not in a city the size of St. Louis.

Adam Phils
Adam Phils

The fact that you want a post like that associated with a real name boggles my fucking mind.

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

Another wonderfully eloquent response...this time from both you and hotdogwaffles (this is what happens when retards multiply).  Did you fuck Phil Adams or did he fuck you?

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

Thank you ihatesuburbs for your more intelligent albeit insulting response.  I’m not saying the city didn’t fuck up.  They did.  They shouldn’t be in business with Grim.  And yes, I think Grim is a major asshole.  He and people like him work tirelessly to foist their views of animal husbandry, animal care, and animal equality on all of us.  Their irrational views result in ridiculous laws nationwide regulating how people can control their property, result in terroristic attacks against animal herders and processors, and increase the cost of scientific research through protests to raise the “standard of living” for lab rats and cockroaches.  For all its faults St. Louis city comes nowhere close to his. You mention I should do a fraction of what Randy does but I won’t because I don’t see him or his activities benefitting society in anyway.  Keeping the animals he cares for alive serves no other purpose than to make himself and other feel better.  It wastes resources, time, energy, and leaves a massive carbon footprint all for the benefit of creating good feelings.  The solution is to euthanize these animals that no one wants and spay and neuter the animals that have a future so as to prevent them breeding.  There is nothing wrong with controlling animal populations in this way.  It is intelligent and educated.  Your friend Randy is not much better than a hoarder that has found a legal avenue to satisfy his obsession, and potentially with societal resources put to better use. Also, I am not Alderman Troupe.  Just a concerned citizen worried about the growing trend in society to anthropomorphize animals.

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

I agree to a point that some of them are the casual buyers...but what happens when the "collectors of animals to a fault" die, get arrested for animal hoarding, or allow their pets out of the house?  Are you really going to make the argument that strays and other animals collected by someone that hoards aren't strays?  Regardless of whether or not it’s casual buyers, the same inappropriate and immature motivations are at play in the decision making between the “collector” and the “casual” buyer anyway. Grim and people like him are infantile.  They have an inappropriate relationship with animals and allow their emotions regarding animals to influence their judgement about what should be excellent solutions (spay, neuter, euthanize) to long-standing problems.  Animals are not people.  They do not have human rights and should not have human rights.  All animals that are not wild SERVE A PURPOSE…that is the reason why they were domesticated in the first place.  It always makes me laugh that people haven’t the slightest care for the billions of animals slaughtered each year entering the human food supply because that is their “purpose”, but treat the big-eyed furry animals in our homes as near-equals.  These are attitudes held by people that watched too many Disney movies as children and it is disgusting. The self-admitted “anti-social” Grim and people like him need to grow the fuck up and remove mention of their hobby from the public dialogue and especially from funding obligation.  The city needs to open a center with that money that will spay, neuter, and euthanize animals unwanted by society.  Elegantly simple.

Beth Green
Beth Green

DogStar1,  sounds like you just changed your name on here from PetRus!  LOL 

Jeffj
Jeffj

Hate to say it dude, but you're in denial.  I think you just proved domenica's case.  

Louse
Louse

I just made a comment to PetsorUS today where I said that she/he is probably a puppy mill owner.

Bethany Green
Bethany Green

"The most expensive aspect would be spaying and neutering of animals"-  I think not.  The most expensive thing would be manpower!  And trucks.  How many people would you have to employ to pick up strays and clean and care for the facility and the dogs waiting euthanasia.  Salaries alone would consume the $250,000 in the first year, this in your makeshift garage/shelter.  You are correct, we domesticated the dog which makes us responsible for them.  If they have become a nuisance it is because we made them that way.  The money was given by people who wanted to assist with a better shelter for those dogs and cats that were no longer wanted by their owners.  Yeah, the city could use the money but its not their choice on how to use it.  They need to use it for caring for the abused and homeless pet population, as intended.  If the animal is off the street, therefore no longer a threat, why to you care if they are kept until adopted.  Certainly the food and care couldn't cost that much(your assessment).  If  SR  is capable of finding homes for their rescued animals it really is none of your business.  Personally, the more you blog about your opinion, the more I think you are becoming a public nuisance.  And we all know your feelings about that.  It is you, dear idiot, who is not getting the connection between human/companion animal.  Your mom probably wouldn't let you have one when you were young!We humans are responsible for their ethical treatment.  If you don't want to help, don't donate, just stay out of it,  you're an idiot!

ENDPuppyMills
ENDPuppyMills

"The killing would not need to be done by a professional" Right - we could just hire one of Missouri's fine <cough> breeders to shoot the dogs like many of them do - saves on vet bills, you know?  You don't need to specifically say you don't like animals - it's very clear from what you write. </cough>

PetsorUs
PetsorUs

WOW...that's a hell of leap of judgement to make regarding my views on animals when I have not said "I don't like animals" in a single one of the comments I've posted.  It's so much easier to make your point count when you put words in someone's mouth isn't it?

Everything in the universe doesn't revolve around humans.  But you cannot make a valid argument to me that with all the suffering and pain being experienced on this planet by our own species that having the "luxury" of a no-kill shelter, or a shelter of anykind is worth it...and it is a luxury...an extravagant and ridiculous one.

I'll use common sense and say that I think you'd be amazed at how far $250,000 can go especially when the focus of the "shelter" in question is to euthanize the animals if they have no useful purpose.  The most expensive aspect of such a city run center would be the spaying and neutering of animals by a licensed professional.  The killing would not need to be done by a professional, just someone who was adequately trained.  $250,000 would be more than enough to get such a center through year 1 operations and than a determination about operational costs in year 2 could be established...and we go from there.

The real problem in my mind is that yourself and many others wouldn't support a "shelter" that killed these animals without a purpose would you despite that being the best and most efficient solution?  As I said in previous posting...an example of emotion clouding judgement on perfectly acceptable, sane, and efficient solutions to these problems.

Bethany Green
Bethany Green

Seems to me that now you two are in a pissing contest and forgot about the issue.  I believe, I think correctly, that Stray Rescue is attempting to help the abused and homeless pet population in St. Louis.  It is a no kill shelter and that seems to bother you.  All animals adopted out of SR are Neutered or Spayed!!!  They are in no way encouraging the production of more pets, they are trying to produce responsible pet ownership and the importance of curbing the pet population. I know Randy, he is a wonderful guy, who totally believes in his mission and has a deep resolve to try to improve the problem of pet overpopulation humanely while educating owners as to their responsibility when buying or adopting an animal.  The money does not belong to the city per se.  It was a voluntary contribution by citizens to build a new shelter.  There is not nearly enough money to do this and the city couldn't do it right the first time, why do you think it would do it better now? I believe you need to investigate this matter a little further to find out how the city can use this money to make the stray population less threatening.  I have spoken to my alderman and a couple others.  There are limits on its use.  If you can find a viable solution by all means share.  You can hardly build a glorified garage for that kind of money.  And the reference toCeeLows song- just funny!  Thanks.  P.S. if you want to be taken seriously you should post your name-  I will.    Beth Green, citizen 16 ward

Louise
Louise

PetsorUS - I would not be surprised if you are a puppy mill owner!! 

Jeff Jordan
Jeff Jordan

People who bring pets into their homes are not obligated to treat their pets as equals but they do bear a responsibility to treat the animal humanely. This deficit in morality and degradation of basic human kindness is the root of the problem.  The term "man's best friend" which refers to the dog has been around much longer than Disney movies so your comments seem more self-serving than factual.   Leave Grim out of the argument for a minute and understand what all animal shelters do... they are cleaning up the problem caused by man.  They are actually performing a service.   For your argument to hold water,  then you would have to concede that other organization who also clean up after mankind such as your trash men should also be considered hoarders.  They hoard your trash in a land fill.   Grim's "hobby" also seems to be the "hobby" of St. Louis County Animal Control in Ladue which is government funded.  Don't mistake Grim's compassion for immaturity.   I'm sure you are compassionate about something such as your shallow and self serving arguments that many of us find minimally entertaining at best but I would not confuse your compassion with immaturity even though that may be the case.  

Since your brain seems to be full of the right answers in your mind,  perhaps you have the right answers to deal with the root of the problem which is the socially, morally and intellectually bankrupt people who abuse, torture and dump animals that never asked to be with them in the first place.   Maybe we need to hoard them into one animal-less environment and the services of animal controls and rescues everywhere wouldn't be needed. 

Phil Adams
Phil Adams

Don't hide in anonymity you gutless piece of shit.  Phil Adams

Now Trending

St. Louis Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...