* The issue I have is that domesticated animals are dependent on humans, and some groups don't realize that. We've shaped the genetics of dogs to the point that they behave like wolf pups all their lives. Most can't communicate with other dogs the way that wild canines communicate with each other, and several have genetic disorders due to inbreeding. The only way they can have a happy life is ''with humans''. I'm not saying un-domesticating is bad, I'm just pointing out that for now several organizations don't understand that the problem is not easily fixable. Killing helpless animals just because they're owned by humans won't solve anything.
** Are there organizations that think it's preferable to kill animals rather than have them live as pets? If so, that's pretty crazy; if the animal is at the very least content, and is not being made to suffer through abuse or neglect or whatever, it seems to me that killing it would be cruel rather than humane.
*** PETA has killed over 17,000 animals since 1998, about 85% of all the animals it rescued. [[http://www.newsweek.com/2008/04/27/peta-and-euthanasia.html No, really.]] I wouldn't be surprised if they were not the only ones.
*** ''[[http://toramutsagama.deviantart.com/art/PETA-Kills-186759292 This is not a joke.]]'' '''''[[http://www.petakillsanimals.com/ PETA KILLS ANIMALS.]]'''''
*** To be fair, PETA kills animals (painlessly) that they rescue and can't find any homes for. Only so many rescued animals can be housed by them and if no one takes them to a new home, should they just put them in the wild to die there alone? You make it sound like they harvest puppies for yuks.
**** With a horribly high kill rate (usually above 90%), they may as well be.
*** They try to find homes for any of them? I was under the impression they killed the animals to "spare" them the torment of being pets.
** Actually, humans did NOT shape the genetics of dogs. They came on their own, without any interference from humans. Any canine living close to humans for a few generations will grow dependent on them. [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enrLSfxTqZ0 Case in point]].
*** If you mean 'dogs in general', then you're correct, humans did not directly shape their genetics to make them dependent on humanity. We did, however, selectively breed the majority of domesticated canine breeds to such an extent that they are unsuited to live in the wild.
*** This troper knows dogs are unsuited to live in the wild, but even if she hadn't studied animal comportement, she'd live in a farm with 7 to 9 dogs and she can assure you they don't act like puppies, have a complex social structure with an alpha-male, and usually have zero problems communicating as they act like a pack. Also I don't think most of them have enough pedigree to have genetics problems, as most dogs in the majority of countries are mixed. What you're saying only applies to dogs that are very "spoiled", not to the entire species.
**** It is not just dogs that are "spoiled" that act like wolf pups. Dogs that don't live in a pack situation that you have described, do, in fact, act like wolf pups. I'm talking about homes that have only one dog, and there are many. These may, in fact, be very well-behaved dogs, that are not "spoiled" in any way, and yet they act like wolf pups, and have a hard time communicating with other dogs. There are thousands of pure-breed dogs out there, and most, if not all, breed lines have genetic problems, due to excessive inbreeding.
** I honestly don't understand this complaint amongst animal rights people. Why is dogs being dependent on humans a problem when they're going to be around humans anyway? That's like complaining that an animal that lives in an environment with, say, a large, readily available supply of bananas becomes dependent on bananas for its food source. The only way I see this complaint making sense is from the perspective of those people who think pets need to be "liberated," i.e. forcibly ejected from their homes and made to live in the wild because that's their "natural habitat" is or some crap like that.
*** I believe, they want dependent animals killed and for no more dependent animals to be breed.
* Would releasing pets into the wild even be possible for most people? Many would just end up sitting outside their former owners' house until they starve to death.
** Either that, or they'll end up trashing the ecosystem for other species that ''never were'' domesticated. Take a look at what feral cats, goats, and dogs have done to the wildlife of islands like the Galapagos, or how many bird populations the former have decimated worldwide, and ''then'' we can talk about whether abandoning pets in the wild causes more harm if they starve or if they don't.
*** Case in point: The dodo. Not only did humans hunt it, but they brought dogs, cats, monkeys, invasive birds and other harmful species with them. There were very few (if not zero) natural predators on the dodo's island, and so the dodo was [[FearlessFool completely unafraid of all these odd animals that were eating their eggs and babies (like cats) or these new types of birds that were decimating their food supply]]. [[RealityEnsues You can guess how well this ended]]. Eventually, Mauritius was no longer a safe haven for large, plump, flightless birds and they all went extinct. The island of Guam was even worse; the introduction of the brown tree snake [[UpToEleven met the extinction of twelve bird species]].
** Just as an FYI: the majority of ancestral species from which domesticated livestock are descended are now threatened with extinction in the wild or are actually extinct. There's barely enough wilderness left to sustain existing populations of wild goats, horses, donkeys, and sheep, never mind releasing the ones in captivity. The chief exceptions are wild boar, which themselves pose a serious threat to the survival of native species in regions where they've been introduced, and the aurochs, wild ancestor of cattle, which is flat-out ''extinct''. Yes, putting an end to the meat and dairy industries would only complete a species' total extermination.
** Not that the test is going to be done anytime soon. What's all this talk of releasing pets into the wild, anyway? Where has anyone said that they would?
*** PETA and other groups ''have'' "rescued" domesticated animals and released them into the wild, occasionally in entirely the wrong habitat where, at best (ecologically speaking, anyway), they're quickly killed and eaten, and at worst become an invasive species that wrecks the local ecosystem.
* Why do PETA and others throw paint at fur coats? Isn't that actually a very bad way of dealing with it? I mean now that the coat is ruined, all that it caused is the person to now need to go and buy ANOTHER fur coat. Imagine if 40 chinchillas are needed for a coat, and they throw paint on one thousand people, now those people (who probably have money to spare) are now gonna buy another coat. That means that their actions actually affected 40,000 chinchillas more.
** [[VocalMinority Because it's a big attention-getting statement]] and [[DontShootTheMessage people who make big attention-getting statements]] [[YouFailLogicForever aren't exactly known for thinking things through]]. In PETA's defense, I for one have not heard about any incidents of people getting paint thrown on their fur coats lately.
*** Thats because there strategy eventually worked(for the most part) and now theyve moved on to other things. once people switched from "oh nice looking coat!" to "OMG, im killing cute animals!" they ran out of targets. Thus moving on to renaming fish "sea-kittens!" ( logic behind that one- if fish were that cute, would as many people eat them?)
**** To that I say "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, and a fish by any other name would be as delicious".
** On the subject of fur and paint, I remember that there used to be a trend of people spraying wild baby seals with paint so they wouldn't get poached (the logic was that the paint made the fur worthless). They didn't seem to notice that this was actually a really bad thing for the seals; they're colored like that so that they can hide from predators, and the paint makes them stick out like a sore thumb...