Hurricane Katrina abondoned dogs

Discussion in 'General Conversation' started by wolfman, Sep 1, 2006.

Who are the rightful owners?

  1. The previous owners that abondoned their pets

  2. The new owners that adopted the pets

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. wolfman

    wolfman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,081
    State:
    Triadelphia, WV
    Name:
    Walter Flack
    Here is the dilemma. After the evacuees have abondoned their pet dogs, a good number of these pets were rescued and were adopted by new owners. Now the previous owners of these pets that have left them behind are trying to sue the new owners to get their pets back. Who should be the rightful owner of the abondoned pet?
     
  2. wolfman

    wolfman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,081
    State:
    Triadelphia, WV
    Name:
    Walter Flack
    I vote that the new owners are the rightful owners. JMO
     

  3. Eithne

    Eithne New Member

    Messages:
    408
    State:
    OK
    I agree with you Walter. I know from volunteering at one of the local shelters that they made every effort to locate and contact the old owners of the animals. Most of those without licenses or collars were held for a few months and were probably even listed in hopes that their owners could be found before trying to find new homes.

    After all this time, those animals deserve to stay in their new happy homes without being uprooted again. Those people had plenty of time and opportunity to find their pet, as evidenced by the ones that were reunited in the past year.
     
  4. griz

    griz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,744
    State:
    Murray Ky.
    I think it would depend on if the original owners just left the pet or if the agency that evacuated the owners did not allow them to bring the animals.
     
  5. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    well first you have to understand hurricanes and then understand the EXCEPTION!!!!!

    Typically a hurricane is done and over with an area in a few days and then you go back and unboard your windows and take the patio funiture out of the pool and within a week everything is back to normal,basically.

    Then there was Katrina, which was NOT typical. People have NO idea just how bad it was going to be. They had NO idea that they wouldn't have a home to back too in some cases. I was in Katrina, ok, I was lucky, Thank GOD, but when you have so much to contend with, to think that some greatful soul has recued your beloved pet and has provided shelter and love while you were trying to get back on your feet wants to KEEP your pet is wrong. I am sorry, they have basically stolen your pet. I understand there needs to be compensation for the pet, which there should be. But to keep it and say, " Oh you lost everything and on top of that, Im taking your pet, you dont deserve it." Give a freaking break, thats cold. If thats how you 'HELP" someone in a disaster, please park your butt right where its at, cause you arent needed.

    I apologize if I come across harsh but thats how I feel. I have heard so many stories of how 'relief workers' and people that were suppose to be 'helping' others take advantage of them any way they could. This is just another example. :ah:
     
  6. TDawgNOk

    TDawgNOk Gathering Monitor (Instigator)

    Messages:
    3,365
    State:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Amy,

    I disagree with you. People have NO idea just how bad it was going to be. They had NO idea that they wouldn't have a home to back too in some cases.

    I do not agree with this statement as there were many, many people who felt that if Katrina was a near direct hit on NO that it would be wiped out all together. Not believeing warnings and not knowing are 2 different things.

    Yes, I feel for the people, yes, I wish I could do more. No, I don't feel that if their pet was left behind, and 6 months later they want it back, they should be able to sue if they don't get it back.
     
  7. Flatheadhunter33

    Flatheadhunter33 New Member

    Messages:
    3,764
    State:
    Yuma, Arizona
    I think that it depends on the situation. Some people may have had no choice but to leave pets that could not be located right away behind. I can only imagine how hectic it might have been to try getting all of family and worldly possesions together, loading it up, calming panicked loved ones, and a dog or cat etc...that would have been going crazy too. Some folks may have made a very valiant effort to take their pets and it just didnt work out. If I got separated from my kids and we were reunited eventully, shouldnt I get my kids back? If I left my pet with malicious intent, then no, I shouldnt be able to sue to get it back. I wasnt there, thank God, so it's very hard to say.
     
  8. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    And assuming that Katrina only hit New Orleans isnt bright. 94% of Missississippians were affected by Katrina. When people say Katrina, the place that comes to mind is New Orleans, been there...aint too bad...I mean it aint its orginial state, but...anyway...I think that if the pets were left to never be picked up or reclaimed, then they should be kept by the new owners. But when an owner wishes to have there pets back they should be granted so.
     
  9. FishMan

    FishMan New Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    State:
    Tennessee

    Griz hit the problem. The question is cut and dry. If you abandon your pet it is no longer your pet. During the event most people were not allowed to take their pets and in many cases the people were lied to just to get them to leave. They were told that their pets would be resuced and cared for until they could recover them.

    Your poll is incomplete and it makes many people look really bad that just want their pets back. I would like to think that because of our media not properly reporting the facts you not aware that in almost every case the people were misinformed and this was the true cause of them loosing their pets.

    I did not vote

    Walter I mean no disrespect and I could be in the wrong but I just can't believe that in most cases folks abandoned their pets. I know in some cases their pets were torn from their arms.
     
  10. Bobpaul

    Bobpaul New Member

    Messages:
    3,039
    State:
    Supply NC
    If they do get thier pets back, what about compensation for the current caretakers of said pets.

    "Thank you for taking care of my pet, now shove off"
     
  11. RiverKing

    RiverKing New Member

    Messages:
    2,232
    State:
    Yellow Spr
    I didnt vote, but what if the pets got lost in the shuffle of things?? You know ran away to somewhere safer???? It depends on if the owner really abandoned them, or if the pet ran off, during the disaster
     
  12. wolfman

    wolfman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,081
    State:
    Triadelphia, WV
    Name:
    Walter Flack
    No disrespect taken. I have no problem with folks being reunited with their pets. However I dont think they should sue to get their pets back. The pole is complete but the story isnt. Just wanted to keep it simple
     
  13. Cutshad

    Cutshad New Member

    Messages:
    283
    State:
    Newalla, Oklahoma (Shawnee)
    Well here in Oklahoma we don't get alot of hurricane action! I wish we had a week warning about tornadoes! Why couldn't the pets owner make arrangements the week before K hit the coast? I know people who left and they have no problem with their pets, they weren't "torn from their arms" when they left after being told it was going to be bad. I also know a few who were rescued and left the area. They are still here...what about those pets? If someone is taking care of their pets while they are gone for a few MONTHS I don't think they can just automatically get their pet back. I think the people that adopted the pets are justified in receiving compensation for taking care of the pet. I do not think the people that left the pet behind are entitled to sue someone because, Now, they want their pet and everything is ok now, and we can take care of it again. Why do we punish the people that do it right and aid the people that didn't listen to the warnings??
     
  14. Flatheadhunter33

    Flatheadhunter33 New Member

    Messages:
    3,764
    State:
    Yuma, Arizona
    Brother, I understand your point and agree to a certain extent. However I dont think it is fair to judge what those people thought of the storm warnings and so forth. Wasnt Katrina was the worse hurricane to hit the states (I am asking, not stating)? If someone told you right now that the world was going to end in 24 hours...what would be your priorities (if you believed that person)?
     
  15. CJSCASTER

    CJSCASTER Guest

    I think I could have managed to get my pet(s) in the car in a weeks time. I feel sympathy for the folks who lived in HK's path, but I believe they all had plenty of warning. I saw the storm on t.v., heading their direction. If I lived there, I hope I would have recognized the danger and accepted the responsibility of protecting my family, including the pets. I would have been long gone by the time the storm hit. Self reliance outperforms reliance on the government every time. The good folks who adopted the pets should keep them!

    Paul.
     
  16. greg

    greg USCA - STAFF Staff Member Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,171
    State:
    GA/ Ia
    The original owners had their chance to keep their pets and decided to abandon them.