A dozen armed agents raid animal shelter

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:28 pm

How very very sad.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:41 pm

This was the target of their air surveillance and 12 armed agents:

So many things about this piss me off. Why are these a-holes armed in the first place? Everything has been militarized lately, it's insane. Another thing is the expense this raid would have cost at a time that our economy is in the crapper. And the biggest thing... its a fawn, for god's sake!

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:07 pm

This is ridiculous on so many levels. They urgently had to do an armed raid to prevent the fawn from going to a sanctuary? They sent agents out to do surveillance on a rescue center? They responded to calls from concerned citizens that a fawn was rescued?

I'm happy to know that Illinois doesn't have any more pressing issues than someone comitting the crime of rescuing a fawn.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:27 pm

How about the part of the video where they interviewed the supervisor of the government agency and she compared it to a drug raid? WTF.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:29 pm

Maybe that fawn was in cahoots with Pfc Manning and helped to steal gummint secrets?

Ya just can't be too careful, these days, you know.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:28 pm

Moral of story, don't be stupid. Leave fawns alone so mama dears can care of them.

Better yet. If you feel the need to interfere with wildlife, get a license.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:32 pm

So you completely excuse the overreaction of this government agency, the cost of the operation and the unnecessary death of a small, helpless and very young animal because the shelter didn't have a license. Yeah, okay.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:52 pm

SnoozeAgain;1432820 wrote: So you completely excuse the overreaction of this government agency, the cost of the operation and the unnecessary death of a small, helpless and very young animal because the shelter didn't have a license. Yeah, okay.

Nothing to excuse. It is an opinion if there was an overreaction.

Oh,

BTW hundreds if not thousands of animals are put down every day, just because people don 't neuter their pets. The fawn should have never been captured in the first place.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:34 pm

Moral of story, don't be stupid. Leave fawns alone so mama dears can care of them.

Better yet. If you feel the need to interfere with wildlife, get a license.

How about you pay the bill? This is completely ridiculous on so many levels it's beyond asinine, it's f**ked up real bad. Yeah some idiot brought the fawn in, bigger stinking morons took the fawn away and killed it because they probably had nothing better to do. Heads in that department need to roll. Bunch of goddamn dimwits.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:36 am

Yet another example of us letting gov't get too involved in making decisions for us. Good intentions gone stupid. It was a rescue shelter. They should have called. They would have found out that arrangements had been made to move the deer and that should have been that.

But hey, the police won't be filing charges the shelter. That's mighty white of 'em.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:37 am

Scrat;1432824 wrote: How about you pay the bill? This is completely ridiculous on so many levels it's beyond asinine, it's f**ked up real bad. Yeah some idiot brought the fawn in, bigger stinking morons took the fawn away and killed it because they probably had nothing better to do. Heads in that department need to roll. Bunch of goddamn dimwits.

Well said!

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:36 am

I only watched about 30 seconds of the video because it's too disturbing to me but I think I know the gist of the story. There was a similar instance here in a neighboring county where they removed a tamed adult deer from someone’s property. I tried to find the write-up online but no luck. It was a few years ago and maybe the news story is no longer available. Anyway, they had found a fawn and raised it, keeping it a pasture with donkeys, alpacas, and a few other animals and they went to the expense of putting in a tremendously high fence to keep the deer from jumping out. The deer was ultimately confiscated and euthanized and there was quite a stink raised about it locally. If I remember correctly, the tactics were not quite as dramatic as in the film but had the same sad outcome.

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries address the issue (though not specifically the case I’m referring to) ~~~~~> http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/d ... r-wild.pdf

On the second page down and on the right, is their justification for the policy.

Disease is easy spread among deer populations and there is currently a viral disease of some kind running its way through and decimating deer herds in this and neighboring states.

As for the heavy handed approach, I have no idea why they would do that unless it’s because they know it’s an emotional issue and expect trouble of some kind. Or maybe they had new equipment they wanted to try out. Or maybe they’re just overreacting thugs. Who knows. They need to re-evaluate their methods.

I would like to see them isolate any rescued deer and do blood work to see if they are carriers of disease or not and deal with each case as it merits. Having said that, it’s inevitable that some one will squawk about why the VDGIF is wasting tax payer’s money on lab tests for an animal. You can’t win.

All good intentions of the public aside, it really is best to leave the young ones alone.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 8:20 am

I certainly understand the problem of diseases being spread to livestock by wildlife, but calling in SWAT to take out Bambi seems a tad extreme.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 8:39 am

tabby;1432838 wrote: I only watched about 30 seconds of the video because it's too disturbing to me but I think I know the gist of the story. There was a similar instance here in a neighboring county where they removed a tamed adult deer from someone’s property. I tried to find the write-up online but no luck. It was a few years ago and maybe the news story is no longer available. Anyway, they had found a fawn and raised it, keeping it a pasture with donkeys, alpacas, and a few other animals and they went to the expense of putting in a tremendously high fence to keep the deer from jumping out. The deer was ultimately confiscated and euthanized and there was quite a stink raised about it locally. If I remember correctly, the tactics were not quite as dramatic as in the film but had the same sad outcome.

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries address the issue (though not specifically the case I’m referring to) ~~~~~> http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/d ... r-wild.pdf

On the second page down and on the right, is their justification for the policy.

Disease is easy spread among deer populations and there is currently a viral disease of some kind running its way through and decimating deer herds in this and neighboring states.

As for the heavy handed approach, I have no idea why they would do that unless it’s because they know it’s an emotional issue and expect trouble of some kind. Or maybe they had new equipment they wanted to try out. Or maybe they’re just overreacting thugs. Who knows. They need to re-evaluate their methods.

I would like to see them isolate any rescued deer and do blood work to see if they are carriers of disease or not and deal with each case as it merits. Having said that, it’s inevitable that some one will squawk about why the VDGIF is wasting tax payer’s money on lab tests for an animal. You can’t win.

All good intentions of the public aside, it really is best to leave the young ones alone.

I think I remember that story. Unlike this one, the neighbors apparently supported the family that had adopted the deer and were all outraged at its confiscation and 'disposal.' However in that instance, they were polite and professional in the removal and took the trouble to explain why they did it. In this case, they were more like some insane version of a paramilitary commando squad on a top secret mission with high-tech intel from their unmanned drones and the full backing of their commandant that likened it to a drug raid. Complete and utter insanity.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 9:37 am

Meanwhile In England...

Firefighters and RSPCA called out for 2 hour operation to rescue CAT from tree | Mail Online

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:30 pm

Maybe the fawn was packing heat? maybe he'd been shown terrorist videos (Bambi) and went to the dark side

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:29 pm

SnoozeAgain;1432848 wrote: I think I remember that story. Unlike this one, the neighbors apparently supported the family that had adopted the deer and were all outraged at its confiscation and 'disposal.' However in that instance, they were polite and professional in the removal and took the trouble to explain why they did it. In this case, they were more like some insane version of a paramilitary commando squad on a top secret mission with high-tech intel from their unmanned drones and the full backing of their commandant that likened it to a drug raid. Complete and utter insanity.

We did have very similar here during the foot and mouth epidemic.

There was a massive campaign to save ' Pheonix' the calf from enforced slaughter and It was actually that old war mongerer Tony Blair, then Prime Minister who stepped In and saved It.

Why Blair decided to rescue Phoenix - Telegraph

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:28 pm

Scrat

How about you pay the bill? This is completely ridiculous on so many levels it's beyond asinine, it's f**ked up real bad. Yeah some idiot brought the fawn in, bigger stinking morons took the fawn away and killed it because they probably had nothing better to do. Heads in that department need to roll. Bunch of goddamn dimwits.

Accountable Well said!

I am truly and shouldn't be amazed at so much fervor over this animal.

Where I live we also have regulations regarding capture of wildlife.

Get over it. They may be cute, but are not pets.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:50 pm

tude dog;1432992 wrote: Scrat

How about you pay the bill? This is completely ridiculous on so many levels it's beyond asinine, it's f**ked up real bad. Yeah some idiot brought the fawn in, bigger stinking morons took the fawn away and killed it because they probably had nothing better to do. Heads in that department need to roll. Bunch of goddamn dimwits.

Accountable Well said!

I am truly and shouldn't be amazed at so much fervor over this animal.

Where I live we also have regulations regarding capture of wildlife.

Get over it. They may be cute, but are not pets.Okay, Mister Evolution, explain why we humans find these creatures "cute"?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 4:49 pm

Ahso!;1432994 wrote: Okay, Mister Evolution, explain why we humans find these creatures "cute"? If he did, it would take Snooze's thread off topic.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:05 pm

oscar;1432995 wrote: If he did, it would take Snooze's thread off topic.

nah.. simple answer, no need for debate.

bambi

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:10 pm

flopstock;1432996 wrote: nah.. simple answer, no need for debate.

bambiMeaning what, that people are conditioned to see animals as cute in their youth through storytelling (i.e. movies, television, books) and deny an evolutionary link?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:23 pm

Ahso!;1432997 wrote: Meaning what, that people are conditioned to see animals as cute in their youth through storytelling (i.e. movies, television, books) and deny an evolutionary link?
No... the ability to be selfless and recognise that every species has a place on this planet and the world not revolving around the wants and needs of humanoids.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:30 pm

oscar;1432998 wrote: No... the ability to be selfless and recognise that every species has a place on this planet and the world not revolving around the wants and needs of humanoids.You're telling me that this is why Flopstock wrote "bambi"?

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sat Aug 03, 2013 6:45 pm

flopstock;1432996 wrote: nah.. simple answer, no need for debate.

bambi

Silly girl.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:03 am

SnoozeAgain;1433002 wrote: Silly girl.
:yh_rotfl

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Get over it. They may be cute, but are not pets.

STFU and write out a check for what that operation cost the taxpayer. Maybe you can split it with the moron that picked up the fawn to begin with. No excuses for such bad decision making.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 12:57 pm

Scrat;1433030 wrote: STFU and write out a check for what that operation cost the taxpayer. Maybe you can split it with the moron that picked up the fawn to begin with. No excuses for such bad decision making.

Though you are nobody to tell me to do anything, just thought I would share this with you.

Mrs.Dog is the most compassionate person you could ever meet when it comes to animals, and that drives me nuts.

She has taken in several animals for the sake of bringing them to an approved rehabilitation place, 70 miles away. Point being, she called for advice for the health of the animal so maybe it could make the ride. It was clear we had no intention of keeping the animal.

I don't fully understand the regulations regarding wild animals, but then I suspect most of us posting on this subject has any idea.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:16 pm

I think you're missing the point. They basically used a SWAT team to assassinate a small animal. Aerial surveillance. Heavily armed. Lots of tax payers' money. It's a fawn, not an armed terrorist.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:23 pm

tude dog;1433074 wrote:

I don't fully understand the regulations regarding wild animals, but then I suspect most of us posting on this subject has any idea. Not sure about America but here In England until very recently all Vets signed some sort of Hippocratic oath where by they treated all wildlife free of charge should any member of the public bring them In.

Over the years, I certainly, for one have taken full advantage of this oath especially In Fox rescue however, recently there has been changes where Vets can opt out of this.

However, most Vets In the UK will still continue to treat wild animals for free. A neighbour of mine took two Squabs In a very bad way to the local vet very recently and they were nursed back to health for free.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:29 pm

Ahso!;1433000 wrote: You're telling me that this is why Flopstock wrote "bambi"? It's like trying to nail s.hit to the wall with you.

When you look at a human baby, what do you see Arse- ho ?

I'm guessing you feel an Immediate sense of empathy at the vulnerabilty of the Infant and you see a defenceless baby that needs protection and nurture?

Accept the fact that some people, feel the exact same when seeing a baby, vulnerable animal.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:45 pm

oscar;1433078 wrote: It's like trying to nail s.hit to the wall with you.

When you look at a human baby, what do you see Arse- ho ?

I'm guessing you feel an Immediate sense of empathy at the vulnerabilty of the Infant and you see a defenceless baby that needs protection and nurture?

Accept the fact that some people, feel the exact same when seeing a baby, vulnerable animal.One might think that you'd begin making sense eventually, but that just doesn't happen, does it. You begin with making no sense whatsoever and end up making less sense putting you, incredibly, in a category of minus-sense. I think you are the only person I've ever met who can accomplish that feat. Congratulations!

IOW, WTF are you talking about?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:52 pm

Ahso!;1432994 wrote: Okay, Mister Evolution, explain why we humans find these creatures "cute"?

The answer is simple. Mammals are born cute so their parents won't eat them. Including us.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:55 pm

Ahso!;1433081 wrote: One might think that you'd begin making sense eventually, but that just doesn't happen, does it. You begin with making no sense whatsoever and end up making less sense putting you, incredibly, in a category of minus-sense. I think you are the only person I've ever met who can accomplish that feat. Congratulations!

IOW, WTF are you talking about?
Bollocks. You just can't find anything remotely Interesting to counter-claim my post.

You are obviously the missing link In Darwin's theory of evolution. Otherwise known as a Rodney.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:57 pm

oscar;1433088 wrote: Bollocks.

You are obviously the missing link In Darwin's theory of evolution. Otherwise known as a Rodney.OMFG, you're amazing!

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:59 pm

I am literally laughing my ass off!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:00 pm

AnneBoleyn;1433086 wrote: The answer is simple. Mammals are born cute so their parents won't eat them. Including us. No. It's simply because exactly the same as human babies, they are not born with adult fur, hair, teeth etc etc

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:02 pm

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:02 pm

Ahso!;1433091 wrote: I am literally laughing my ass off! That'll be the medication.

I am not trashing Snooze's thread any further entertaining your monosyllabic grunting attempts at contributing to the topic In hand.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... A%20Rodney

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:04 pm

You're always good for a laugh, oscar. Thanks for the funny stuff. See ya!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:09 pm

Ahso!;1433095 wrote: You're always good for a laugh, oscar. Thanks for the funny stuff. See ya!

:yh_ttth

:yh_loser:yh_loser

:yh_bye

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:42 pm

SnoozeAgain;1433075 wrote: I think you're missing the point. They basically used a SWAT team to assassinate a small animal. Aerial surveillance. Heavily armed. Lots of tax payers' money. It's a fawn, not an armed terrorist.

I got ya.

Taxpayers would have been better served if only a couple of animal control officers serve the warrant to take animal off then put it down.