Seriously thoughtful Canine star of Harry Potter film is now a shelter dog

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Well, he obviously was able to put in the time and effort to train the dog, now he can't even care for him in his declining years?

Yeah, giving the dog to a breed rescue is a step up from giving it to a kill shelter, and that's better than tossing the dog out into the street to fend for itself, but the bottom line is that this guy used the dog and now is disposing of him because he's become inconvenient.

Every person who brings a dog or cat to a shelter has an excuse and a rationalization.

Pets are a responsibility and a commitment; they should not be disposable.

I repeat, I hope this SOB ends up homeless and alone.

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

I totally agree with you...I think it is just the manner in which it was done. He could have sent out a public message and had people clamoring to adopt this cutie.

I guess I think of my dog as my child. I can't imagine getting rid of a child because I got busy...it's just time to make adjustments.

*sigh* It does make me sad.

For some people though, it would involve quitting their job and choosing another career path, which could potentially have dire effects on the dogs (such as if the owner no longer made enough money to afford food for the animals).

I'm not saying what the guy did was right, or what I would do, I'm just saying it isn't always as cut and dried as him just not wanting the dogs because they can no longer make him money. My family has worked with animal rescue organizations for years, and we saw people who were stuck in situations where they loved the dogs, and hated to do it, but gave the animals over for adoption because they simply couldn't afford the dogs the lifestyle they deserved.

[ProfCrash]

The last couple of paragraphs that talk about dogs being commodities that are thrown away when they are no longer of use to their owners speaks volumes to me.

I am thrilled that these dogs owners gave them to a no kill rescue and that the dogs are being well cared for. The responsibility should not be with the rescue but with the owner. He took care of the dogs from birth, raised them, trained them, put them to work, and now is giving them up in the last years of their lives.

The dogs have to be confused, they are used to being a part of a specific pack and now a large part of that pack is gone. While it is good that he did not put them to sleep or just abandon them he is still not fulfilling his part of the agreement that he made when he took ownership of them in the first place.

[MeiLin]

OT: Skibble, I have a Cav too with very similar markings. Though mine needs his face washed.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

For some people though, it would involve quitting their job and choosing another career path, which could potentially have dire effects on the dogs (such as if the owner no longer made enough money to afford food for the animals).

I'm not saying what the guy did was right, or what I would do, I'm just saying it isn't always as cut and dried as him just not wanting the dogs because they can no longer make him money. My family has worked with animal rescue organizations for years, and we saw people who were stuck in situations where they loved the dogs, and hated to do it, but gave the animals over for adoption because they simply couldn't afford the dogs the lifestyle they deserved.

Yes, it's true that sometimes there may be truly dire circumstances and legitimate reasons to surrender a pet. However, if you're familiar with animal rescue, you know that those situations are a small minority. Most of the time, the pet becomes an inconvenience that the owners are no longer willing to deal with, and they create rationalizations so they don't have to admit what horrible people they really are under their facades.

Can you imagine how scared and confused two elderly dogs must be, suddenly uprooted from their home and forced to deal with a new situation? At least they have each other.

[speakingtohe]

Some people have no capacity to love. Many people abandon pets without a thought. Many people abandon children, spouses, friends etc. because they are not convenient.

I knew a woman who had her cats put down for a summer job as a cook on a boat. She had offers from people to petsit but she said she 'knew' they would not be happy without her. Yeah Right!

On another note, I know people who keep very unmanageable and sometimes even vicious pets till death do them part. Gotta admire that.

For this guy they are probably just business assets to be disposed of when their usefulness fades. Like a pimp and his hookers.

Helen

[odiakkoh]

Lol shelter dog my butt. What part of being in a rescue can be compared to a shelter? Trying to rehome your dogs the right way gets you crucified but its ok to overexassurate(sp) to sell your story.

[carld]

A few days ago a friend mentioned a new law that went into effect in Toronto. Pet stores can only sell rescue and shelter dogs. That'd never fly in corporate America, but I freakin love the idea.

[curtw]

Originally Posted by carld

A few days ago a friend mentioned a new law that went into effect in Toronto. Pet stores can only sell rescue and shelter dogs. That'd never fly in corporate America, but I freakin love the idea.

Actually, you might be surprised. Two major, US-nationwide pet stores, Petco and Petsmart, don't sell dogs or cats. What they both do is sponsor shelter in-store events for adoptions. Our cat Max came from one of these. We actually have some very responsible corporate citizens out there. They both seem to realize that there's a MUCH higher profit margin in selling leashes, bowls, squeaky toys and sweaters than there is in keeping and dealing in animals of questionable health from questionable breeders.

Links:

www.lifewithdogs.tv
Pet Adoption Weekend

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

If the owner isn't home enough to take care of them, a better home would be better. The article mentions he's a stuntman, and so if he's on set in another country, he may not always be able to take them (customs can be a nightmare when animals are involved).

Plus, it could be he's worked out a deal with the shelter, and this more or less is a publicity stunt. I mean, look, here is a organization now getting international attention, and will likely receive a large amount of donations, plus people who are trying to get those dogs will often wind up adopting other dogs they have instead. I don't know about where you are, but the rescue organizations (especially the purebred animals like the one in question here) are the best place to goto when you're no longer able to take care of the animal. They won't kill the animal if they cannot find it a home like the average animal "shelter", and they often are extremely thorough when doing background checks on prospective adopters.

It would have been better if he had searched for a new home himself. Or, if he had asked the shelter to search a new home for them, in name of him. This way, you only get a bad name, because it only looks as if he wanted the dogs only because of the money he got for them. And now they don't earn their keep anymore, they're useless and thus need to go.

[DMB]

I'm shocked at the judgmental statements in this thread and the wishing of an unhappy old age on this man. All this based on a very short article. I note that it did say this

the demands of his job took him away from home too much to properly care for them.

The thing is that with the current economic situation many people's circumstances have changed and we don't all have as much control as we would wish over how we earn a living. No-one here AFAIK has any extra knowledge of this man's circumstances. He may be pretty hard up and finding it hard to feed two large dogs without taking on jobs where he can find them. With the UK's very restrictive laws on animal travel, it might be virtually impossible for him to take them with him if some of his jobs are out of the country. And boarding kennels are dear.

One can love animals and be anguished for them, but sometimes one has to make difficult decisions.

I've always liked having cats. I had a succession of Burmese cats, some form kittens and some rehomed. But when my last Burmese died I reluctantly said "no more", as my lifestyle involves travel and I didn't want to have to keep on putting a cat into a cattery when I was away. However, in May 2009 I was in France and I learned that France had horrendously high levels of animal abandonment. I went to a local rescue centre, where the cats and dogs were in a pretty deplorable state because the owner got very little financial help from the locals and all she could do was feed them. My husband and I decided that despite our lifestyle problems we could give a cat a better life than it was otherwise likely to get and we adopted two of them.

The two we adopted were skin and bone, full of worms and fleas. We had them vaccinated for everything and dewormed and defleaed. And finally we brought them back to Switzerland. When we are both away they go to a cattery, where they are both well cared for. But we have a terrible problem with one of them. Even after more than two years of living happily in our house he is totally terrified of travelling. He is an intelligent cat but very neurotic. When he is in the car -- going to the cattery, coming back, going to the vet, etc. -- he screams non-stop. We're both travelling tomorrow so he went to the cattery this morning.It was pitiful. He knew what was coming and screamed even before I picked him up to put him in his travelling cage.

Now I have got him, I intend to keep him. He is not a prepossessing animal and I doubt that anyone else would want him. But I do wonder how much I have improved his life. So am I a selfish monster for having adopted him in the first place? Should I stop going to visit my family in England because of him? If I hadn't adopted him, I don't think anyone else would have done and I expect he'd be dead by now. (He had also picked up a permanent viral infection in the rescue centre -- about half the cats had it.)

There is no doubt that people take on animals to satisfy their own selfish needs. We enjoy the companionship of cats and dogs. Perhaps the really moral thing to do would be to stop having pets at all.

[Skibble]

DMB, you're right in that people sometimes have to make hard decisions, and that we don't know all the circumstances here. However, I would think that unless the situation was immediate and dire, he could have found a caring home for them himself. It's not like these are undesirable dogs.

As a no-kill shelter volunteer and owner of two rescued dogs, I can only hope that this is in fact a publicity stunt designed to get more people interested in adopting pets and supporting shelters and rescues.

Originally Posted by MeiLin

OT: Skibble, I have a Cav too with very similar markings. Though mine needs his face washed.

Miss Bean always needs her face washed! It must be a Cavalier thing.

Edit to Add: I hope it's clear I am not defending ill-wishes to the owner. It's one thing to wish that someone had taken a slightly different course of action (in this case, one less stressful on the dogs) but another thing entirely to wish that person actual harm.

[carpetmojo]

Look, I'm sorry, but what nonsense......

Firstly, so you know where I'm coming from, I'm a genuine dog lover, and only became a dog-less person when our last fellow popped his clogs after 17 years, and our then 3 year-old son became the priority. Up till then, I'd never been without at least one dog, on occassion three.
And, I would find it very hard to give my dog away under any circumstances, but life and circumstances change....

In this case, the owner, Paul Thompson, has taken a responsible means of finding a new home for his animals, because he finds he can no longer look after them as they should ideally be.

He hasn't dumped them by the road, or given them to any of the hundreds of people who offered to take them, or "put them down" - you know, killed them "for their own good" , but given the job over to a very highly regarded organisation, who are well known for their standards of care and love of animals, and are well experienced in homing dogs, Shepherds in particular..
They will vet applications, in order that they go to the best home, rather than leaving it to chance or his own personal feelings.
He is, in short, doing the best he can upon finding he can no longer look after them - for whatever reason.

And hoping the guy ends up homeless because he is trying to do the best he can for his animals, is simply - again, I'm sorry - but "holier than thou" rubbish, ignorant, cruel, and plain wrong.
If nothing else, we have no idea of the circumstances that have led this person to take this decision.

So please, do Google " Paul Tompson stuntman dogs" and learn a bit more before pronouncing your misguided, sentimental misconception of of the case.
In my humble opinion, he has taken the best action anyone could for the dog's welfare, ensuring their health and well-being is paramount - and made sure they stay together.

Finally, forgive my own outburst of "righteous anger" !

over.....

[ProfCrash]

I would agree that the idea that he should be miserable when he gets older is silly. I still think that he had a responsibility to the dogs who he raised and made money off of. It is better that he turned them over to a rescue but it would have been better for him to find a way to care for his dogs.

[MovieBird]

If he absolutely had to get rid of these dogs, then yes, this is the best way to go about it.

However, I seriously doubt he had to get rid of them. The Harry Potter movies have made the young actors some of the richest people in Britain. I would presume an animal with a few movies worth of showings, particularly with as important a character as Sirius, would be well compensated. At least to the point where the owner could keep him in dog food and toys for a few years.

I view pets as a 'for-life' commitment. You don't give away children because you don't have time for them; you f*ing make the time. Dogs, as social animasl, and particularly Shepherds which tend to experience more attachment to their pack than other breeds, deserve for their owner to think of them when making lifestyle decisions.

[Catlady]

Judgmental? Damn right I am.

He might be having troubles because of the lousy economy? Well, shelters and rescues are having a terrible time because of the lousy economy too. Their resources aren't unlimited, and the no-kill groups have only so many openings to take in animals.

You adopt a pet, you are responsible for it. Period. Same way that if you have a child, you are responsible for it--you don't foist it off on someone else.

Again, yes, there are sometimes extreme circumstances--but those are rare. The vast majority of the time, people just don't want to take care of their pet anymore.

And that's all I'm going to say.