Posted on 06/16/2012 8:39:11 PM PDT by Innovative
A new program in San Francisco will pair carefully selected dogs from shelters with panhandlers in an effort to steer the latter away from asking for money on the streets and keep the animals from being euthanized.
The temporary guardians (the words "pet" and "owner" are frowned upon in San Francisco) will receive weekly stipends of $50 to $75 and must agree to jettison their cardboard signs in the pilot project believed to be the first of its kind in the country.
The program, scheduled to start in August, is called WOOF, short for Wonderful Opportunities for Occupants and Fidos. The animals will eventually be placed in permanent homes.
"I can't make panhandling go away," said Bevan Dufty, one of the plan's architects. "But I can make a better offer."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
I lived in San Francisco in the 60’s, then visited frequently until the mid 80’s. In 95, I went back for a few days, went over to Powell and Market to catch a cablecar, and was literally mobbed by about fifty homeless demanding money. Pretty sad what it’s come to, used to be a great place.
Thanks Missy...I admit to having a big soft spot for stray critters...both 2 and 4-legged. It’s a weakness of mine. :(
Not judging, just making a calculated observation. That is one of those dog lovers photos that gets passed around facebook/interwebs. I just think it’s unlikely to be candid.
That said, saddling a panhandler with a dog seems to me to be another one of those well-intentioned but stupid ideas. Panhandlers work the street and giving them a dog and rather a lot of money to supposedly care for the dog/gain a friend(?) is not going to turn out like they plan. They may have a couple of success stories, but it’s far more likely IMHO that the money will primarily not be spent on the dog, and the dog will be a prop at best.
If you are having trouble taking care of yourself, do you really need/want the responsibility of an animal as well? Especially if you may not have a home? Couldn’t that money be better spent on coping skills training, job training, food, clothing, medication, mentoring, whatever?
Especially since often shelter dogs have behavior problems, are of indeterminate temperament, etc etc. I think they may have said puppies but that makes even less sense to me.
lol
I call it a strength, and your big soft spot, a great and loving heart. :-)
I agree...giving panhandlers a living creature to care for is stupidity beyond the limits of stupid.
I’ve seen too many panhandlers close up, having worked in downtown Las Vegas, and I learned quickly not to carry cash. If I were having a bad day, it was not uncommon for me to tell them to “get a job.” Of course, THAT got some colorful responses!
I am getting extremely ticked off at these liberal creeps. First the moochbots (”occupiers”) put their pets in harm’s way by taking them to ows flops & riots, now this. No question it works (to have a dog or 2 with them) to get people to give money to panhandlers. I am furious at the pre-meditated exploitation of these animals.
It just doesn’t get a lot sicker than this. “Afterwards” give them a home? What. They hadn’t been through enough?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.