<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What do you think?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mrflapper.com/blog/index.php/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/</link>
	<description>The quacks, life and fun of Seattle&#039;s famous duck.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 01:55:14 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pringles</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5449</link>
		<dc:creator>Pringles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 00:06:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5449</guid>
		<description>Pringles says that calling animal control does no harm IF the family isnt doing any wrong.  Pringles has the responsibility of looking after animals and its Pringles duty to make sure they are safe.   If even you suspect something is wrong and you dont call them Pringles says shame on you.  

Animal Control deals with a ton of these calls and it really isnt a reflection on people unless they find problems, in that case the call is justified. 

Pringles was necleted and left to die and my mom woudlnt have been as nice as Mr Flappers mom I can tell you that.  Mom has had to make those calls before and she knows how hard this was.  Pringles says good job Flappers mom for caring about the ducks : )</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pringles says that calling animal control does no harm IF the family isnt doing any wrong.  Pringles has the responsibility of looking after animals and its Pringles duty to make sure they are safe.   If even you suspect something is wrong and you dont call them Pringles says shame on you.  </p>
<p>Animal Control deals with a ton of these calls and it really isnt a reflection on people unless they find problems, in that case the call is justified. </p>
<p>Pringles was necleted and left to die and my mom woudlnt have been as nice as Mr Flappers mom I can tell you that.  Mom has had to make those calls before and she knows how hard this was.  Pringles says good job Flappers mom for caring about the ducks : )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gayle in Seattle</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5421</link>
		<dc:creator>Gayle in Seattle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:03:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5421</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s quite clear this is animal cruelty.  Whether a person can afford to take their pet in, is not the case.  They shouldn&#039;t have any kind of pets unless they can take care of them.  Just by looking at that very first photo of Jane - her feathers, her color, her feet - you knew someone hadn&#039;t kept up with keeping them healthy.  A lot of people mean well by their pets, including hoarders - they have good hearts but we have to be realistic here.  You can tell something is wrong and an animal needs to be checked out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s quite clear this is animal cruelty.  Whether a person can afford to take their pet in, is not the case.  They shouldn&#8217;t have any kind of pets unless they can take care of them.  Just by looking at that very first photo of Jane &#8211; her feathers, her color, her feet &#8211; you knew someone hadn&#8217;t kept up with keeping them healthy.  A lot of people mean well by their pets, including hoarders &#8211; they have good hearts but we have to be realistic here.  You can tell something is wrong and an animal needs to be checked out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Calnicky</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5414</link>
		<dc:creator>Calnicky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5414</guid>
		<description>Oh Crumb. I hadn&#039;t read to the bottom. I&#039;m so sorry Jane didn&#039;t make it. Let me know if we can do anything. Your Neighbors, Nicky &amp; Brad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh Crumb. I hadn&#8217;t read to the bottom. I&#8217;m so sorry Jane didn&#8217;t make it. Let me know if we can do anything. Your Neighbors, Nicky &amp; Brad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Calnicky</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5413</link>
		<dc:creator>Calnicky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5413</guid>
		<description>Poor, sweet girl. What happened to her? Is this the quacker I&#039;ve been hearing in the AM? Hope she&#039;s on the mend.

Nicky

PS I have an AFLAC duck for you if you want it...And it QUACKS!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Poor, sweet girl. What happened to her? Is this the quacker I&#8217;ve been hearing in the AM? Hope she&#8217;s on the mend.</p>
<p>Nicky</p>
<p>PS I have an AFLAC duck for you if you want it&#8230;And it QUACKS!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linda</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5405</link>
		<dc:creator>Linda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 19:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5405</guid>
		<description>I believe so, definitely.  And BogieKitty has a good point -- if you suspect it, report, and the people qualified to make the decisions will do it.  

Big hugs, Tiff.  Thank you for looking out for the beaky types.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe so, definitely.  And BogieKitty has a good point &#8212; if you suspect it, report, and the people qualified to make the decisions will do it.  </p>
<p>Big hugs, Tiff.  Thank you for looking out for the beaky types.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BogieKitty</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5404</link>
		<dc:creator>BogieKitty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:14:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5404</guid>
		<description>Report them.  Let ASPCA decide.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Report them.  Let ASPCA decide.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chackler</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5403</link>
		<dc:creator>chackler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5403</guid>
		<description>Best to investigate further before coming to such a serious decision - but if there is solid evidence then yes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Best to investigate further before coming to such a serious decision &#8211; but if there is solid evidence then yes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kim</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5400</link>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5400</guid>
		<description>My reaction is strong yes.   It&#039;s not the fact that reportedly the other animals are in good condition - its the fact they let these ducks SUFFER.   If the ducks (Jane, Lily and Sam) illness is not curable, why let them suffer?  

To say in theory, we did our best, but they just didn&#039;t get better and so we let them suffer - not able to get food, swollen joints which are painful, lack of feathers and etc.... is not acceptable.    The kind thing would have been to have the poor ducks put to sleep and end their suffering. 

So one wonders, at least I do, have there been other animals there in similar situations in the past that suffered?  I don&#039;t mean suffered from a short illness that was cured, but truly suffered.  Suffered like Jane.   

It is cruel to let animals get to a point that they are days, hours, moments from death the way that Jane appeared to suffer.   If the former owners don&#039;t have the knowledge to care for waterfowl, then they need to get educated. If it&#039;s a case of money then reach out to animal rescue groups sooner.   But for the love of God, don&#039;t let the poor animals suffer.   

As animal people we all know there is a point of no return. There is a point where our help is not going to make a difference.  The kind loving thing is to put the animal(s) to sleep. End their suffering.    Show some compassion.  

I would also seek more information from the place where the ducks came from.  There has to be a story there too.   

So my strong reaction is to the suffering.  Like cats sometimes its hard to tell when they are sick because they hide it well, like ducks,  but there is a point where you know something is wrong. Feather quality and the look in Jane&#039;s eyes should have been a strong indicator.  (There are/were three ducks currently with same indicators)

Indicators that can not be ignored.  As I said, there is a point of no return and then the compassionate thing is to set them free from their suffering. 

I pray that Lily and Sam make a full recovery.  If not I at least know, albeit difficult, that Tiff will do the right thing and end their suffering if it comes to that. 

Jane will always stick with me.   

K~</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My reaction is strong yes.   It&#8217;s not the fact that reportedly the other animals are in good condition &#8211; its the fact they let these ducks SUFFER.   If the ducks (Jane, Lily and Sam) illness is not curable, why let them suffer?  </p>
<p>To say in theory, we did our best, but they just didn&#8217;t get better and so we let them suffer &#8211; not able to get food, swollen joints which are painful, lack of feathers and etc&#8230;. is not acceptable.    The kind thing would have been to have the poor ducks put to sleep and end their suffering. </p>
<p>So one wonders, at least I do, have there been other animals there in similar situations in the past that suffered?  I don&#8217;t mean suffered from a short illness that was cured, but truly suffered.  Suffered like Jane.   </p>
<p>It is cruel to let animals get to a point that they are days, hours, moments from death the way that Jane appeared to suffer.   If the former owners don&#8217;t have the knowledge to care for waterfowl, then they need to get educated. If it&#8217;s a case of money then reach out to animal rescue groups sooner.   But for the love of God, don&#8217;t let the poor animals suffer.   </p>
<p>As animal people we all know there is a point of no return. There is a point where our help is not going to make a difference.  The kind loving thing is to put the animal(s) to sleep. End their suffering.    Show some compassion.  </p>
<p>I would also seek more information from the place where the ducks came from.  There has to be a story there too.   </p>
<p>So my strong reaction is to the suffering.  Like cats sometimes its hard to tell when they are sick because they hide it well, like ducks,  but there is a point where you know something is wrong. Feather quality and the look in Jane&#8217;s eyes should have been a strong indicator.  (There are/were three ducks currently with same indicators)</p>
<p>Indicators that can not be ignored.  As I said, there is a point of no return and then the compassionate thing is to set them free from their suffering. </p>
<p>I pray that Lily and Sam make a full recovery.  If not I at least know, albeit difficult, that Tiff will do the right thing and end their suffering if it comes to that. </p>
<p>Jane will always stick with me.   </p>
<p>K~</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dawn</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5399</link>
		<dc:creator>Dawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5399</guid>
		<description>Upon looking at the heartbreaking photos of Jane, my gut response would be YES. However, as others have said, it&#039;s important not to jump to conclusions. I am also confused as to which ducks were taken to the vet -- was it only that first duck, but not Jane, Lily, and Sam?  

And how did the care of the special-needs child interfere with the care of the ducks? Was it that the family couldn&#039;t afford to bring the three to the vet? That is understandable, but they should have immediately given the ducks to a foster parent who could have afforded the care, rather than letting the illness linger. As Elaine says above, they didn&#039;t get that way overnight.  

It doesn&#039;t seem to be a clear-cut case, and I don&#039;t have the knowledge to make an assessment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Upon looking at the heartbreaking photos of Jane, my gut response would be YES. However, as others have said, it&#8217;s important not to jump to conclusions. I am also confused as to which ducks were taken to the vet &#8212; was it only that first duck, but not Jane, Lily, and Sam?  </p>
<p>And how did the care of the special-needs child interfere with the care of the ducks? Was it that the family couldn&#8217;t afford to bring the three to the vet? That is understandable, but they should have immediately given the ducks to a foster parent who could have afforded the care, rather than letting the illness linger. As Elaine says above, they didn&#8217;t get that way overnight.  </p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t seem to be a clear-cut case, and I don&#8217;t have the knowledge to make an assessment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meg</title>
		<link>http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-5395</link>
		<dc:creator>Meg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 12:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mrflapper.com/blog/2009/03/30/what-do-you-think/#comment-5395</guid>
		<description>Absolutely.  Animal cruelty is not defined only by beating an animal.  It can include neglect, inadequate food, water, shelter and medical attention.  That statute was written for cases like this.  Perhaps these people do care for the rest of their animals, and perhaps the rest of the lot appear to be happy and healthy, however the bottom line is that these ducks were not properly cared for.  I&#039;m not sure the rest of the animals need to be taken away, though.  I have learned from Mr Flapper and Co. that caring for a duck is infinitely harder than caring for a cat or a dog.  The have the same basic needs, sure.  Tiff, you have said on many occasions that it is difficult to tell if a duck is not feeling well.  In this case, it does seem obvious that these ducks are in trouble.  

At the very least, this situation must be investigated by the SPCA/law enforcement.  It may not hurt to take away the remaining ducks.  Their situation as a whole ought to be considered.  Did they have any training before bringing home the ducks?  What is their financial situation?  Can they afford proper vet care for all of the animals?  What course of action did they take with the other ducks when they were sick?

To address Elaine&#039;s point, perhaps it is being questioned now as it appeared that the owners were doing what they could?  Once the ducks came to Chez Flapper, it may be the case that more was learned of their sad situation that was previously known.  It did appear that there was hope for them when they arrived here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely.  Animal cruelty is not defined only by beating an animal.  It can include neglect, inadequate food, water, shelter and medical attention.  That statute was written for cases like this.  Perhaps these people do care for the rest of their animals, and perhaps the rest of the lot appear to be happy and healthy, however the bottom line is that these ducks were not properly cared for.  I&#8217;m not sure the rest of the animals need to be taken away, though.  I have learned from Mr Flapper and Co. that caring for a duck is infinitely harder than caring for a cat or a dog.  The have the same basic needs, sure.  Tiff, you have said on many occasions that it is difficult to tell if a duck is not feeling well.  In this case, it does seem obvious that these ducks are in trouble.  </p>
<p>At the very least, this situation must be investigated by the SPCA/law enforcement.  It may not hurt to take away the remaining ducks.  Their situation as a whole ought to be considered.  Did they have any training before bringing home the ducks?  What is their financial situation?  Can they afford proper vet care for all of the animals?  What course of action did they take with the other ducks when they were sick?</p>
<p>To address Elaine&#8217;s point, perhaps it is being questioned now as it appeared that the owners were doing what they could?  Once the ducks came to Chez Flapper, it may be the case that more was learned of their sad situation that was previously known.  It did appear that there was hope for them when they arrived here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

