Please urge everyone you know to boycott Petsmart throughout its entire network in the UK and abroad. Tonight a report on the BBC "Watchdog" programme showed how Petsmart encourages its employees to abuse animals. There is text of the programme at...
I have also printed the text of the website below in case you cannot access the site. It is appalling that such practises have been taking place.
regards, helen s
----------
Thousands of pets will be bought in the run up to Christmas - and where better to go than Petsmart - whose colourful sign and slogan promotes ‘Where Pets are Family’.
It appears to be everything that you would expect from the UK’s largest pet supermarket, however Weekend Watchdog has discovered a shocking catalogue of cruelty at many of their stores.
A former employee who worked as a livestock assistant for Petsmart, spoke to Weekend Watchdog. She claims Petsmart regularly sells unweaned hamsters, which is illegal. She says: "They would be bought in at about four or five weeks and they would be just too young to sell. They would get stressed and ill very quickly. Most of these animals would die and we would have a lot of very unhappy children after Christmas."
Natasha Stewart worked at Redhill Petsmart, in Surrey. She says during the summer of 1997, the store’s air conditioning was often broken and the animals were left to swelter in the heat. Natasha was told by the manager, if the RSPCA or press visited the store then staff were to say ‘no comment’.
Scott Wilson is a former employee of Petsmart in Peterborough and worked there until April of this year. He recalls rabbits kept in a rusty apex pen, with many cutting their feet on the sharp edges.
Andy Guile was the store manager of Petsmart in Kilcaldy. He also worked at three other stores in Scotland. Andy says Petsmart are very unprofessional and don’t really care about the animals. He feels Petsmart is using the animals as a shop window, to get customers into the rest of the store.
Weekend Watchdog discovered more disturbing facts about Petsmart. The programme has learned that sick or unwanted animals have been killed in the most gruesome of ways. One former employee said she can remember a rabbit being taken out the back of the warehouse and being knocked over the head with a spade. The rabbit was then put into a bag and disposed of in a skip. Andy Guile also told Weekend Watchdog about similar stories. He says hamsters were often disposed of in a bag, by hitting them against a wall.
Any shop selling animals would expect to dispose of sick or dead creatures from time to time. It would be impossible to run a successful business by preserving stock at all costs until natural death. However, the rules say animals should be killed in a humane way. The normal method being euthanasia, using an injection of barbiturates, normally given by a veterinary surgeon. There are also strict guidelines which govern the disposal of dead animals. All clinical waste should be placed in a separate, clearly marked yellow plastic sack - and picked up by a licensed carrier to be incinerated. Employees have told Weekend Watchdog that this did not happen.
Petsmart says it is absolutely determined to make whatever changes may be necessary to get things right. It says: "We have strict animal welfare procedures and we want to make sure that all our staff know about them and stick to them. To help us do this, we are setting up an external Advisory Panel, made up of independent expert consultants, veterinarians and educators to investigate immediately all of the issues raised and carry out a comprehensive review to make sure we do things right. We are also in contact with the RSPCA who have agreed to review on paper our standards and procedures."
Petsmart have also set up an Animal Welfare Hotline for staff to use and asked the company vet to review every one of the 92 stores. This will be followed by spot inspections by a team of managers. Petsmart says it has many experienced and dedicated staff around the country who are passionate about the care and welfare of animals, who share it’s concern over Weekend Watchdog’s report.
helen s <he...@clowder.agm.net> wrote in message 38484c12.137890...@news.agm.net... >Please urge everyone you know to boycott Petsmart throughout its >entire network in the UK and abroad.
>Thousands of pets will be bought in the run up to Christmas -
And come January, many will find their way to the shelter - how sad.
Regards Kate ------
"Panta cwrei, oudei menei." "Everything flows and nothing stays." (Heraclitus)
<k...@hellobillkath.demon.co.uk> wrote: >Greetings, >helen s <he...@clowder.agm.net> wrote in message 38484c12.137890...@news.agm.net... >>Please urge everyone you know to boycott Petsmart throughout its >>entire network in the UK and abroad.
>>Thousands of pets will be bought in the run up to Christmas -
>And come January, many will find their way to the shelter - how sad.
>Regards >Kate
So true. So, anyone thinking of buying a pet for Christmas, please don't. Wait until January, February and go to your local shelter to adopt and animal - it's likely to have been a Christmas present where the novelty of having something warm and furry in the house has worn off.
regards, helen s
>------
>"Panta cwrei, oudei menei." >"Everything flows and nothing stays." (Heraclitus)
I truly share your concerns about animal abuse, whether it comes from the private sector or commercial enterprise. However, how does boycotting a company, that appears, from what you posted, to be attempting to address their problem areas, help?
""Petsmart says it is absolutely determined to make whatever changes may be necessary to get things right. It says: "We have strict animal welfare procedures and we want to make sure that all our staff know about them and stick to them. To help us do this, we are setting up an external Advisory Panel, made up of independent expert consultants, veterinarians and educators to investigate immediately all of the issues raised and carry out a comprehensive review to make sure we do things right. We are also in contact with the RSPCA who have agreed to review on paper our standards and procedures."
Petsmart have also set up an Animal Welfare Hotline for staff to use and asked the company vet to review every one of the 92 stores. This will be followed by spot inspections by a team of managers. Petsmart says it has many experienced and dedicated staff around the country who are passionate about the care and welfare of animals, who share it’s concern over Weekend Watchdog’s report. ""
It appears to me that a boycott, at this time, would more than likely send the message that nothing they do is going to be satisfactory.
Certainly, the policies outlined above should be tracked, and all violations should be reported. If the company does not live up to their, apparently new, "standards and procedures", then a boycott most certainly would be in order.
It appears that the company has already acknowledged a problem and has taken positive steps to address same. I guess the argument could always be made that these steps are not enough, but since the company appears to be in a receptive mode, a correspondence to them with recommendations would seem to me to be more in order than a boycott.
Again, I do share your concerns, just disagree with the boycott approach, in this case.
To all readers, I have zipped up my flame suit and am awaiting incoming.:^)
On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 11:41:45 GMT, mermaid6...@my-deja.com wrote: >Thank you for bringing this to my attention. There is a big PetsMart >in the town where I live. I notice they also advertise on this site.
>Is there anything else we can do? anyone we can lobby? An email >address we can send complaints to at PetsMart?
Well, my personal choice is that I will not frequent a Petsmart out of choice again. The issue is still on UK news. One of the branches mentioned in the BBC report is in my local news area. There was a report on that saying the chief exec. of Petsmart has apologised. It would be nice to think it's all genuine, but one wonders about that and the PR setups of big organisations.
Apparently, I missed the original post. What is going wrong at petsmart? I foster kittens for a no-kill organization that displays their animals at Petsmart during the week. We screen potential owners and ask all adopters to contact us if their is any sort of problem. Given the fact that we have been contacted in a few instances, I'd like to think that people are not paying lots of money for our kitties and then taking them to the humane society.
Myself and at least one of the other foster parents have been taking special interest and talking personally with those who are interested in adopting our babies. I feel really good about where my little ones have gone. We are doing our best to make adoption a group effort and if someone doesn't feel good about it, the cat stays with us.
In article <384a1ef6.257432...@news.agm.net>, he...@clowder.agm.net (helen s) writes: > On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:22:25 -0000, "Kate" > <k...@hellobillkath.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Greetings, >>helen s <he...@clowder.agm.net> wrote in message 38484c12.137890...@news.agm.net... >>>Please urge everyone you know to boycott Petsmart throughout its >>>entire network in the UK and abroad.
>>>Thousands of pets will be bought in the run up to Christmas -
>>And come January, many will find their way to the shelter - how sad.
>>Regards >>Kate
> So true. So, anyone thinking of buying a pet for Christmas, please > don't. Wait until January, February and go to your local shelter to > adopt and animal - it's likely to have been a Christmas present where > the novelty of having something warm and furry in the house has worn > off.
> regards, helen s
>>------
>>"Panta cwrei, oudei menei." >>"Everything flows and nothing stays." (Heraclitus)
Petsmart have not denied the findings of the BBC report. Indeed, Petsmart have apologised for the abuse of animals that has been uncovered. Given what has been uncovered, they really can't do anything other than apologise - profusely.
I guess I'm just an old cynic, but one wonders whether their practises would be changing if it were not for the BBC report.
flyer...@my-deja.com wrote in <82ehf3$23...@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>It appears that the company has already acknowledged a problem and has >taken positive steps to address same. I guess the argument could >always be made that these steps are not enough, but since the company >appears to be in a receptive mode, a correspondence to them with >recommendations would seem to me to be more in order than a boycott.
I agree. A boycott would send the message of "You can't please these people no matter what" -- not a message that's conducive to change.
Certainly, it would have been best if the company had not had any problems to begin with. But it's not a perfect world; the next best thing is that they speedily and effectively correct those problems. And have the corrections checked and reported on by other agencies, of course.
On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 20:20:53 GMT, flyer...@my-deja.com wrote: >Helen,
>I truly share your concerns about animal abuse, whether it comes from >the private sector or commercial enterprise. However, how does >boycotting a company, that appears, from what you posted, to be >attempting to address their problem areas, help?
Firstly, I tend not to flame people:-)
Secondly, I guess I am an old cynic. It's the PR stance of companies and individuals here in the UK now, that if they've been caught out doing something they're not supposed to do, to apologise profusely. I tend to treat such PR exercises as just that - a PR exercise.
Thirdly, as an individual I can do little else to register my protest at Petsmart's activities other than hitting them in the financial department and register my protest by taking my business away from them. I can tell others of Petsmart behaviour and ask them to make their decision that ia all. If you choose to carry on shopping theiur, it's your right. It's just something I choose not to do. You will note I included the entire text of the Petsmart report in my original posting and I didn't try to alter it at all.
he...@clowder.DOTagmDOTnet wrote: > Firstly, I tend not to flame people:-)
You may not, some do. If it was really a problem to me I would not have posted my reply in the first place. This statement was not meant to be directed at you but to any of the readers.
> Secondly, I guess I am an old cynic. It's the PR stance of companies > and individuals here in the UK now, that if they've been caught out > doing something they're not supposed to do, to apologise profusely. I > tend to treat such PR exercises as just that - a PR exercise.
It may well be a PR exercise, but from what was posted it appears that more than just an apology was offered by Pet-Smart.
> Thirdly, as an individual I can do little else to register my protest > at Petsmart's activities other than hitting them in the financial > department and register my protest by taking my business away from > them. I can tell others of Petsmart behaviour and ask them to make > their decision that ia all.
You certainly have that right. I did not attempt to tell anyone what to do, I only questioned whether a boycott was appropriate at this time, in this case. I appreciate the notice as I had no idea this problem existed.
> If you choose to carry on shopping theiur, > it's your right.
Even if I elected to participate in a boycott of this store, it would not make much of an impact on them as I don't shop there. I have found better prices elsewhere.
> You will note > I included the entire text of the Petsmart report in my original > posting and I didn't try to alter it at all.
Indeed, I did notice this and, in retrospect, I should have commended you on doing so. Some would not have done this and would have posted only bits and snippits of the text to bolster their own agenda. I apologize to you for not mentioning this in my post.
At any rate, I sincerely hope that adequate monitoring is done on the new program that has apparently been put in place. But, I still believe that the company should be given the opportunity to make this new program work and to correct these problems, especially since they appear so willing to do so.
