Re: [Media-advisors] Fwd: Working Group Update August 6

Maybe if the ban fails, they could require pet sellers to chip and register animals pre-sale, so rescue groups can bill the pet store for the eventual surrender. Surely they wouldn't be against the identification of the "precious pets"!! On Aug 6, 2010, at 10:31 PM, "Marthak816@gmail.com" wrote:

Is anybody talking stats? We have had the following requests in the LAST 2 WEEKS: Man moving - must rehome 14 aviary cockatiels Couple moving - need to rescue 19 aviary cockatiels from "being set free" Phone request to rehome 30 cockatiels from a single home

I swear to God the next person who says there's no overpopulation problem is getting 50 cockatiels let loose in their house. Or maybe their store - much better impact. -----Original Message----- Date: Friday, August 06, 2010 10:02:54 pm To: "Mickaboo media advisor team" From: "Elizabeth Young" Subject: [Media-advisors] Fwd: Working Group Update August 6

booyah!

(Karen- please accept my apologies for worrying that expanding to include non-bird rescues in today's meeting was a misstep. i stand corrected. ey)

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Date: Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:54 PM Subject: Re: Working Group Update August 6 To: harris.rose@att.net, glassgerrie@gmail.com, emk@idausa.org Cc: adoptkings@gmail.com, stephensfw@mindspring.com, pam.hemphill@gmail.com, kflaherty@pacbell.net, Kat.Brown@sfgov.org, jchick73@yahoo.com

HI all, After sitting in on the meeting today with the pet store owners trying to determine if a compromise was possible versus a complete ban on the sale of animals, here's my impressions (for what they are worth):

...

The owner of the Animal Company is essentially not really willing to compromise. He and his friend, Claudia from The Basic Bird in Berkeley, are both very antagonistic, looking for confrontation and eager to distort facts and statements to their favor. While they say they a