To the editor:
I received an email this morning from the Humane Society of Perry (HSP) to thank me for my donation to their planned online fundraising auction and to inform me the fundraiser had been canceled.
I am truly sorry to hear this, but I understand that things change.
My issue is with who lies behind the change: Joyce Conklin-VanKirk.
Mrs. Conklin-VanKirk is a dog person (nothing wrong with that) and is a caring person who loves animals. However, at one HSP Board meeting, when we were discussing the need for a new building and the handling of the cat housing, she asked why the cats couldn’t just be released.
She seemed to fail to understand that for many of the felines, this would be a death sentence. They’d been raised indoors, with people, not to fend for themselves – they would likely die if simply released in such a way.
The catch-and-release of cats works great for feral and street cats who know no other life. Capture, spay/neuter, release. It stops them from breeding and creating more feral or street cats to suffer the elements, disease or to overpopulate, leading to other sorrowful problems.
At HSP meetings it also appears Mrs. Conklin-Van Kirk has trouble understanding basic parliamentary procedure, deciding on her own to do things, albeit with good intentions, but without following the proper steps to get the HSP Board and the organization behind her.
She was going to donate some land and a new building — How truly wonderful! — for the HSP and knew the location would need to be annexed by the city of Perry. So she went ahead and made all the arrangements, including breaking ground and arranging construction, without discussing it with anyone in the HSP first. When members expressed concern, she seemed to fail to understand.
She also seems unable to grasp that there are regulations, laws and policies made by state and other officials which impact all this, especially the building. These include measurements of animal living space, ventilation and many other requirements.
These apparently did not fit her plans for the building that she wanted to construct and donate. She couldn’t seem to understand that while strictures such as these can be beyond vexing to the humans who desire to help animals, they are in place to ensure the health and safety of those same animals.
Instead of capitulating to current regulations or to the formal courtesies of parliamentary procedure, it appears Mrs. Conklin-VanKirk decided to withdraw her financial support of HSP and go her own way.
That’s too bad. She will inevitably find that any shelter, whether solely for canines or not, has requirements that may or may not fit her planned construction. I hope she will resign herself to that fact and build an animal shelter to be proud of. She certainly has the means and the drive to do so.
I find myself wondering what will become of the HSP and the animals they care for now that Mrs. Conklin-VanKirk has pulled her future donations.
I do not question her compassion for animals. What I do question, considering her abrupt withdrawal of support for HSP, is her motive. We all like to be recognized for our good deeds. It’s human nature. Is this grand design for a new shelter for her name or for the animals it would benefit?
There is a vast difference in doing a compassionate act in order to be viewed as a hero by other humans and doing a compassionate act in order to actually be a hero to the animals you’re trying to help. It’s great to be admired by human society, but no person will give you the unquestioning, unconditional love and worship that an animal can.
Wendy Taylor
Jefferson
I found my furry child at that shelter who has been a Godsend during my disability. Shocking that a so-called animal lover would choose one animal over the other as a preference! We need a bigger shelter with running water, for one thing, especially with cats. And second, from what I knew from Abby, there is NO OFFICE in either place. Now there are two major problems we needs to address fast. Great letter, Wendy!