|
 |
| Howard City resident S. Michael Scott explains possible improvements to the Montcalm County Animal Shelter during Wednesday’s meeting. |
| | Committee options | Several unofficial scenarios were proposed during Wednesday's Montcalm County Animal Shelter ad hoc committee meeting to find a compromise making the county's contract with R&R Research more acceptable to critics.
They included:
• Doubling or significantly extending the amount of time animals must spend at the shelter before R&R Research is allowed to take them.
• Allowing people who drop off pets to fill out a form indicating they would allow them to be used for medical research. R&R Research would only be allowed to take those animals. No strays would be available for research.
• Including a provision in the contract allowing county officials to conduct random audits of records and inspections showing how animals R&R Research takes are treated.
• Separating animals available to R&R Research into another area of the shelter so volunteers wouldn't have to interact with them.
|
|
2/12/2009 9:33:00 AM
Shelter committee looking at options
Ryan Jeltema
News Editor
STANTON - The Montcalm County Animal Shelter ad hoc committee is looking for middle ground on the county's contract with R&R Research in Howard City.
Seven members of the committee spent much of their second meeting Wednesday discussing the urgency of deciding whether to recommend extending the business' contract allowing it to sell shelter animals for medical research or developing an alternative to make the contract more palatable for critics.
"If we continue to study the facilities and the volunteer program, I think it's all important," said Board of Commissioners Chairman Patrick Q. Carr, who is leading the committee. "But I think the underlying issue is how do we deal with that contract with R&R?"
He said the issue is the most important facing the committee and is tough to solve.
"It's not just that there's one side. There's two sides to it," Carr said. "I have just as many people talk to me on the street or at church about a loved one who benefited from research and they're saying, "We should keep this contract.'"
He believes the commissioners are waiting for a clear recommendation from the committee.
"The commissioners are very split," Carr said. "Unless this committee comes up with a compromise we're going to be right back to square one because there's such a difference of opinion on how we should proceed."
He hopes the panel can find a middle ground between extending the current contract for five years and not allowing R&R Research in the shelter anymore. That will require give-and-take on both sides of the issue.
"There's some scenarios that may not be ideal on both sides but it's something we all can live with," Carr said. "The compromising things are the things that get us to that point."
R&R Research owner Jim Woudenberg said he would be open to negotiation that possibly could change the contract, including allowing periodic audits tracking animals he takes from the shelter to address concerns from the public.
However, Woudenberg said there are limits to the amount of information he can provide about the animals he sells.
"I don't want to lead anyone down the primrose path that I can tell you exactly what dog went to what university and what it was used for," Woudenberg said. "I can tell you where the dog went. If the researcher wants to release more than that that's up to them."
Committee member Rhonda Waldorf of Sheridan said the community and animal rescue groups also are awaiting a resolution before deciding how best to be involved with the shelter. She said discontinuing the R&R Research contract would go a long way toward attracting volunteers and assistance from rescue groups.
"We could get a lot more support from the community if we didn't have that lingering over our heads," Waldorf said. "They are going to have an easier time getting these dogs adopted if they know they aren't going to be taken away for research. People don't want to come in and make contact with those animals."
Veterinarian Dr. Randy Carpenter of Greenville said he believes the committee is capable of developing a solid compromise for the commissioners to consider.
"Somehow we have to work together and get things on the same page so we can move on," Carpenter said. "If we work together we can come up with a total package and present that to the commissioners and let them take a vote up or down."
The committee plans to discuss the R&R Research contract in depth during its next meeting at 3:30 p.m. next Wednesday.
|
Posted: Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Article comment by:
Don
Polly,
Where do you live?
Posted: Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Article comment by:
JeanneUrbanski
The commissioners have the power to make this mess (the one they created)go away by getting rid of the contract. If the contract had been tossed out years ago we would already have some decent programs in place at the shelter including a volunteer organization and a spay/neuter program. This mess is going to take time and energy to clean up and I have the feeling that we won't be see all of the commissioners helping with the efforts. Montcalm County's dark secret is out in the open and the eyes of the nation are watching. My very own commissioner told me that it is nobody's business what happens here in Montcalm except for the Montcalm residents. Well Sir, you are soooooo wrong. The mere fact that our county gets grant money and federal tax dollars makes our business the business of the nation. We do not live in a cocoon.
Posted: Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Article comment by:
Polly Grunfeld Sack, Esq.
THE R&R CONTRACT AND POUND SEIZURE IN MONTCALM COUNTY-----FACT OR FICTION ??
Unfortunately what the commissioners have been saying (or have been lead to believe) have very little, if anything, to do with the actual facts.
COMMISSIONERS¡XI RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU GOVERN INTELLIGENTLY WITH THE WELFARE OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN MIND---MAKE A DECISION ON THE R&R CONTRACT BASED ON THE FACTS, AS OPPOSED TO CATERING TO FOR-PROFIT PRIVATE SPECIAL INTERESTS OR RELYING ON BELIEFS AND HYPERBOLE WITHOUT ANY BASIS
WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE BEEN SAYING/LEAD TO BELIEVE vs. THE FACTS
FICTION: R&R only takes animals who would not otherwise be adopted as a ¡§last resort¡¨
FACT: The very animals who have the most trust in humans and are most easily handled are the most adoptable¡Xand the ones most likely to be chosen for medical research because of their docility and socialization.
ƒÞ At one point, Mr. Woudenberg had a key to the pound facility and was hand-picking out the animals he wanted for research before they were made available to the public. This certainly does not sound like a ¡§last resort¡¨ approach. Pounds and animal shelters were never designed to be supply houses for the vivisection trade. They were developed to be places where people could bring unwanted or stray animals in the hope of a new home being found. Failing that, the animals would be painlessly killed. The release of these animals for research is a breach of public trust and leads to a loss of public support. The National Animal Control Association (a well ¡Vrespected national association of animal control officers and most definitely not an animal welfare group) opposes pound seizure as hindering the efforts of progressive animal shelters and interfering with their rights and powers.
FICTION: No money changes hands
FACT: R&R, by its own records, makes an average of $331 per animal it sells to research. Last year, R&R got, at no cost, over 150 animals from the Montcalm pound. R&R, a private corporation, made huge profits off the Montcalm taxpayers¡¦ backs.
FICTION: By not using a pound animal who would otherwise be euthanized, you use two animals ( a pound animal and a purpose bred animal) instead of one.
FACT: The National Institutes of Health has said on many occasions that the use of pound animals is inefficient and unreliable. Because of all the variables and unknowns, many more random source (pound) animals are needed for any experiment or research than purpose bred animals.
FICTION: Pound seizure in Montcalm County, and R&R¡¦s contract in particular, is benefiting mankind and enabling progress in medical research
FACT: Very few of the animals that would be killed every year in pounds are used in significant or ground-breaking medical research. In fact, Mr. Woudenberg admitted that he did not and could not know how the animals were being used. Ending pound seizure (and the R&R contract) would not stop research, it simply would change the source of some of the animals for some projects. Prominent health organizations, including the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Mental Health, the Council of Europe and the World Health Organization (two of the largest biomedical research institutions in the world) have stopped using shelter animals in their own in-house research several years ago because shelter animals were deemed unsuitable research subjects-too little being know about their origins, health conditions, or age. Further, it was also much more expensive to buy, treat and maintain animals obtained from shelters as opposed to purpose-bred animals. European researchers stopped using pound animals decades ago. Several prominent medical journals, including the British Medical Journal and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, have said that anecdotal evidence or unsupported claims are used as justification for pound seizure but there is no real evidence to support this view. The success rate for animal studies, generally, is less than 5% according to The Scientist and former FDA commissioner Lester Crawford. The success rate is even more unreliable for animals taken from pounds and shelters because of the lack of controls. This kind of medical research has actually been viewed as endangering human health according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Charles Mayo, the founder of the Mayo Clinic, has stated that he knows of no achievement or scientific discovery obtained that could not have been obtained without such ¡§barbarism and cruelty. The whole thing is evil.¡¨
FICTION: Cancer survivors have expressed support to the commissioners for continued pound seizure.
FACT: Prominent cancer researchers, including Irwin D.J. Bross, Ph.D., director of the Rosswell Park Memorial Institute, and Dr. Marvin Pollard, former American Cancer Society President, have blamed animal studies for the lack of better progress in finding treatments and cures for cancer.
FICTION: County residents have approached the commissioners in church supporting the R&R contract
FICTION: Despite multiple public records requests, no evidence has yet been provided of any letters, e-mails or other public support of the R&R contract or continuing pound seizure in Montcalm County. Just a cursory look at the local media blogs shows the overwhelming majority strongly and passionately favor rejection/non-renewal of the R&R contract. An American Medical Association (AMA) study shows that while almost 75% of the public accepts the use of animals in research for certain purposes and within certain parameters, only 25% condone using animals from pounds and shelters.
FICTION: Unsupported general statements.
FACT: Studies undertaken by several municipalities in Canada (and note these are municipalities and not animal welfare organizations) show the measurable objective benefits to the community of discontinuing pound seizure.
FICTION: A responsible politician¡¦s first duty is to the voters who elected him or her. Incumbents are held accountable for listening to the voices of their constituents. This is the ultimate fiction in Montcalm County.
FACT: Despite an overwhelming vocal majority supporting the rejection of the R&R contract, the Commissioners extended the contract and appear to be favoring the private for profit interests of R&R over the interests of the public. This is the ultimate fact in Montcalm County.
Posted: Sunday, February 15, 2009
Article comment by:
Polly Grunfeld Sack, Esq.
I am not a resident of Montcalm County. But I cannot help being outraged at the continued arrogance and indifference of the elected board of commissioners to the voices of their constituents. And, based on the blogs I've been reading, most of the constituents are compassionate, well spoken and well reasoned. Not only do Montcalm residents deserve to live in a county they can be proud of, they also deserve the respect of their elected officials. Ignoring the clear and strong outpouring of opinion on this is bad enough--to try to pacify the clear majority with a committee that has Mr. Woudenberg on it--the owner of the business the committee is evaluating-- is an outright insult to the intelligence and integrity of your community. Montcalm commissioners--listen to your constituents and get Montcalm county animal control out of the dark ages. Stop saying things that are patently wrong and baseless just to hear yourself talk. If you say it enough--it does not make it true. Stop with all the sham excuses and flimsy rationales. Your constituents are smarter than that. Montcalm residents-- make yourself heard--make noise--you deserve better !
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
ermorrow
Pound animals are not necessary for the advancement of medicine. Many states have outlawed the practice, most notably Massachusetts -- the home of many prestigious research institutions! The National Institutes of Health which funds over 80% of biomedical research testified before Congress back in the early 1980s that the former housepet "is not a good or desirable research animal." Why do you think the number of class B dealers has dropped from over 100 to just 10? Could it be that research has finally figured out these animals do not do well in a laboratory setting? What is wrong with this county and the people who are supposed to be leading it? If they are as backward in other areas of governing as they are about this issue, then we have a lot more to worry about than their insistence on continuing an unpopular and unnecessary practice. And if placing the class B dealer on the committee to study the class B dealer is a demonstration of their judgement, God help us all!!
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Amy
I agree w/you Montcalm Resident!
Lets get the recall petitions going i live near Stanton I would love nothing more than to do that all over this county!...
KV, you are only 1, the residents do give a care what happens to the animals & remember were not a rich county by any means! Would you be the first to volunteer if we had our own Humane Society? maybe i'll start one!? & would you adopt a pet from our shelter? w/the way it looks & knowing what they are doing???? Not me. i would rather go to Ionia, Grand Rapids, Muskegon! They dont sell PETS TO R & R!
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
gjo
At the Feb. 11 meeting Jim Woudenberg, the owner of R&R Reserach, assured committee members that cats and dogs do not make good product testing subjects. Of course Woudenberg offered no records or proof to back his claim. His word maybe good enough for certain commissioners, but it doesn't hold water with the public. The public wants to work with businesses who are accountable and transparent.
Carr believes the commissioners are waiting for a clear recommendation from the same committee he placed the owner of R&R Research on?
How twisted is that??
Seriously, who do we contact about this conflict of interest and possible corruption?
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Audrey
Have the Board of Commissioners or R&R put any programs into place to spay/neuter animals in Montcalm? No. Does R&R pay taxes to operate the shelter? Hardly. A total of $207.35 combined taxes for 2008. How much of that supports the shelter. A nickle? check it out on the county website. Does Jim Woudenberg profit from our county? Oh Yeah. Who else is profiting from the sale of dogs for experimentation? Oh, by the way. Woudenberg keeps talking about MEDICAL research, but he opening say at the last Blue Ribbon Panel meeting that once he sells an animal he cannot know exactly what is is used for. Hmmm. Medical Research? Doubtful. Experimentation, practice, ATLS training maybe. What else?
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Audrey
Have the Board of Commissioners or R&R put any programs into place to spay/neuter animals in Montcalm? No. Does R&R pay taxes to operate the shelter? Hardly. A total of $207.35 combined taxes for 2008. How much of that supports the shelter. A nickle? check it out on the county website. Does Jim Woudenberg profit from our county? Oh Yeah. Who else is profiting from the sale of dogs for experimentation? Oh, by the way. Woudenberg keeps talking about MEDICAL research, but he opening say at the last Blue Ribbon Panel meeting that once he sells an animal he cannot know exactly what is is used for. Hmmm. Medical Research? Doubtful. Experimentation, practice, ATLS training maybe. What else?
Posted: Friday, February 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Steve
WHY is Woudenberg on this committee is question number 1. It is extremely unethical and unimaginable that he is even there. Can this even be legal?? Of course he's going to have a vested interest in the outcome. Doesn't Montcalm want what's best for the county and its residents? Get rid of Woudenberg off this panel! It makes the entire county look backwards!!
And also, as stated before, don't kid yourself into thinking these animals are going for life-saving medical research. Yes, a few are going to medical schools where dummies and cadavers have become the norm and better educational tools than an animal. But most are being sold for product testing (getting hairspray squirted in their eyes so you can look nice, etc.). Is that the legacy Montcalm wants for itself?
|
|
Article Comment Submission Form
|
|
