🚀 go-pugleaf

frankh@gil.com.au (Frank Halliwell) writes:

>   It's very easy for someone in a profession that charges more to treat 
>a dog than the family doctor charges ,to dismiss a hundred dollar charge
>as "nothing", but most of us don't have a captive clientele.


Really? Does the family doctor have their own dispensary, and beds for 20 
patients that need to be maintained, and a surgical suite equipped to 
perform procedures ranging from lump removals to hysterectomies, and 
intensive care facilities, etc etc.

If all we had was a desk, a blood pressure monitor and a prescription pad 
to maintain then perhaps we could get away with charging a smaller fee. 
But if the public expects high quality service, then how about comparing 
us to private hospitals and see if perhaps you could get away with a $160 
hysterectomy on a person(same equipment, same procedure). 

I know that a vet fee can come as a big shock, especially when you don't 
expect it. But hey, if our services are worth nothing to people then we 
might as well make vet science a 2 week course in how to give a 
vaccination and what end to put a worm tablet in. 

I read and understand your comment regarding the price of dogs at the 
various RSPCA facilities, and I sympathise. I guess that in a roundabout 
way they may be saying "hey, if this person will pay $100 for this 
animal, then there may be less risk of it ending up back on the street 
again". i.e. there is now a higher perceived value of the animal.  

Frank, I really admire your concern for the poor abandoned animals in 
these shelters. How about we direct our anger and energy towards the 
mongrels who dump the animals rather than the societies who struggle to 
get even a small percentage back on the right path again.

Sarah Ladd BVSc