Genesis Wildlife Center - fund raising letter templates (Scranton: how much, income)

[mbs7]

Dan--I think I might have seen your tree by the fish pond. Very nice, as I recall.

Anyway (and this part is directed at everyone, not just Dan), I just want to repeat something I've said a number of times, and that is that, no matter what improvements are made at the old zoo, I do not think the city should be expected to pick up all, or even most of the tab. I think that funding should come from a wide variety of sources, and that it will probably take quite some time to build up a reliable mix of sources to support a zoo in some sort of more or less stable fashion. (That is one of the reasons why I'm afraid most of the current animals may have to be moved to better homes--even if someday they could have a good home in a new Scranton zoo, that day is probably years in the future. Considering the lifespans of some of these animals, that seems a long time to make them wait.)

[mbs7]

Hi everyone. Just wanted to let anyone who may be interested know that I have posted some general information on binturongs (bear cats) as well as some specific information regarding the Genesis Wildlife Center's bint over on the original thread. ( http://www.city-data.com/forum/north...center-12.html)

[mbs7]

Here are some addresses for those wishing to contact Scranton reps about the conditions at the Genesis Wildlife Center:

Letters to the mayor of Scranton can be sent to:

Mayor Christopher A. Doherty
Municipal Building
340 N. Washington Avenue - 1st floor
Scranton, PA 18503

Also, the mayor’s email address is:
mayorsoffice@scrantonpa.gov




Here is a list of Scranton city council members:

Robert E. McGoff, Jr. (President) (rmcgoff@scrantonpa.gov)
Judy Gatelli (Vice President) (jgatelli@scrantonpa.gov)
Bill Courtright (bcourtright@scrantonpa.gov)
Sherry Nealon Fanucci (sfanucci@scrantonpa.gov)
Janet Evans

(Note: when I checked the Scrantonpa.gov website, there was no email address listed for Janet Evans. You could try jevans@scrantonpa.gov. If that doesn’t work, you can use the general city council email address: citycouncil@scrantonpa.gov and mark your email “For Janet Evans.”)

Regular mail for any of the Scranton council members can be addressed to:

(Council member’s name)
Scranton City Council
Second Floor - City Hall
340 N. Washington Ave.
Scranton, Pa. 18503

[silverfocks]

I would like to thank all of you that have been concerned about Genesis Wildlife.
Those of you who feel it is a disservice to the animals should walk a mile in our shoes!.
The people who work there are totally dedicated to the wellbeing of all of our animal friends. We do what we can with the little we receive and most of the funding is from Margie Miller's (Director) pocket! She has been and always will be dedicated to the wellbeing of every animal on this planet. Unless you have been in Genesis and have seen the animals we have taken in who zoos, labs and people have discarded there should never be any criticism. When a zoo can no longer market an animal or it is no longer viable to create an income they sell it to a lab, sell it on the open market or discard it.
It may seem like we are in the dark ages but the option for these animals is euthanasia and for most of them it should not be an option. When an animal is in pain or no longer has any quality of life we will take the steps to euthanize it. Until then we give them all loving care and spend as much time with them as possible. You don't get to see them hugging us and we them.
These animals are happy and if you have never spent time with wild and exotic animals please don't judge us.
If you wish to help please contact the people who have a say in our funding and ask them to spend the money necessary to create a Center that would give a better quality of life to these animals.

[mbs7]

Originally Posted by silverfocks

I would like to thank all of you that have been concerned about Genesis Wildlife.
Those of you who feel it is a disservice to the animals should walk a mile in our shoes!.
The people who work there are totally dedicated to the wellbeing of all of our animal friends. We do what we can with the little we receive and most of the funding is from Margie Miller's (Director) pocket! She has been and always will be dedicated to the wellbeing of every animal on this planet. Unless you have been in Genesis and have seen the animals we have taken in who zoos, labs and people have discarded there should never be any criticism. When a zoo can no longer market an animal or it is no longer viable to create an income they sell it to a lab, sell it on the open market or discard it.
It may seem like we are in the dark ages but the option for these animals is euthanasia and for most of them it should not be an option. When an animal is in pain or no longer has any quality of life we will take the steps to euthanize it. Until then we give them all loving care and spend as much time with them as possible. You don't get to see them hugging us and we them.
These animals are happy and if you have never spent time with wild and exotic animals please don't judge us.
If you wish to help please contact the people who have a say in our funding and ask them to spend the money necessary to create a Center that would give a better quality of life to these animals.

Silverfocks:


Instead of saying that there should "never be any criticism," I would respectfully suggest that you consider the possibility that much of the criticism you hear is meant as constructive criticism that is sincerely intended to help the animals and everyone who cares about them. People who do not care about you or your animals won't take the time to analyze your center's shortcomings and suggest ways to improve the conditions there: it's the ones who do care who will make the effort to speak up. Many of those who are speaking up are themselves animal lovers. Instead of considering us to be adversaries and "answering" our concerns with defensive replies like the one you've posted above, perhaps you should start thinking of us as allies and begin taking our concerns seriously.

[weluvpa]

I don't really think that a PRIVATE animal sanctuary should be publicly funded, in some part yes but the bulk of the funding should be from PRIVATE donors. If the facility is not able to raise those funds then maybe they need to look at a different type of stewardship program that doesn't rely on public funds.

I still feel that the best thing for these animals is to be moved to PRIVATE facility that is big enough to handle them and has the resources that are needed to give these animals the care and life that they do deserve.

Being involved with the city of Scranton in a currently distressed state is a financial burden on the taxpayers and honestly a unreliable source of maintenance and funding anyway. The city and parks dept with be better off without the responsiblity of these animals and their welfare and the animals would be better off in a proper PRIVATE facility.

[mbs7]

Originally Posted by silverfocks

If you wish to help please contact the people who have a say in our funding and ask them to spend the money necessary to create a Center that would give a better quality of life to these animals.

I think you have to understand that you are asking not for contributions from private individuals, but for a fairly large sum of public money provided by the taxpayers. If you want the taxpayers to support you in this, then I do not think it is enough to simply state that you love the animals. Loving the animals is wonderful, but I think that the Genesis Wildlife Center (GWC) should be providing detailed answers to some very real concerns that the taxpayers have. For example:

1) At least one person here has pointed out that the animals belong to the GWC, not to the city, and has asked what assurance the city would have that an expensive new facility would not end up being empty of animals if at some point the GWC no longer wished to keep the animals in the facility. Is there some sort of long-term contract between the city and the GWC? And if so, how will it be enforced? A fairly common problem with animal sanctuaries occurs when those who have founded them can no longer, for whatever reason, continue to support them. Has this possibility been addressed in the case of the GWC?

2) I (and others) are concerned about the number and type of animals being kept at the current facility and would appreciate some clarification of the GWC's policies in regard to taking in new animals, neutering existing animals to prevent breeding, and making efforts to place animals (especially younger animals) in roomier, better equipped zoos or sanctuaries. Unless reasonable limits on the animal population at the center are set and enforced, even a new, roomier facility could quickly become overcrowded. I understand (and share) Margaret Miller's concerns about "every animal on this planet," but Nay Aug Park is too small to accommodate them all.

3) I (and others) would like to know what detailed emergency plans are in place to move animals out of the old (or a new) building if necessary. What would have happened, for example, if the recent, fortunately small, fire at the old zoo had gotten out of control? Are there realistic plans for safely evacuating the animals (and staff!) in the event of an emergency? Do those plans ensure that no animals will end up running loose in the park?

4) I am concerned about the educational value of the facility. Right now, frankly, the animals appear to be more like pets than anything else. Would a new facility display the animals in more natural settings and respect the fact that they are not dogs and cats but are rather captive wild animals? I think if the center wants public money it must strive to be a real asset to the public. There is very little educational (or entertainment) value in watching a caged animal exhibiting behaviors (e.g. pacing) that it would not exhibit in the wild.

5) I (and many others) are concerned about what plans are in place to ensure that a new facility would have a reliable source of annual funding. Realistically, an enlarged facility will probably have even higher operating costs than the current one does, and the current facility is struggling to make ends meet. A new building would be just the beginning. Where would the money for increased maintenance and operating costs come from?

Private animals sanctuaries may, of course, operate as they see fit, provided they meet all legal requirements. But when a sanctuary resides in a public building and asks for a significant amount of public money, then I think it is reasonable for the public to ask for more accountability than they would of a purely privately funded non-profit organization.

If the GWC wants us to support its cause, then I think it is the GWC's responsibility to seriously address the above questions and all other serious questions posed by interested (and concerned) parties.

[scrantonluna]

I wish I never brough the damn thing up.

[weluvpa]

Why? Where did you think that the funding should and would come from?
Every question that mbs7 has posted is right on the money and appropriate. They are real questions and they are based on real facts and issues.

Maybe you should have thought this out better from the beginning and realized that the city would be the one holding the ball with a new facility and they would be the ones that are responsible for increased facility maintenance and upkeep on a larger structure.

Its an election year and the mayor and every body else including Mr. Dougher are going to jump on the zoo band wagon and ride it right up to the next election, just like he did in the last election. When the smoke clears, NO ONE WILL CARE because they are just using the zoo as a TOKEN for elections, just like in the last election.

Because of this, who is to say that the next admin will have Doherty's obsession with Nay Aug and all that it isn't?

If the next mayor doesn't think that we should be spending almost $8,000,000in one park and cuts the budget, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE ZOO AND THE GWC? WHERE DO THE ANIMALS GO THEN?

[SteelCityRising]

Let me get this straight. A bunch of affluent socialites from the Back Mountain were on the news this evening pleading for locals to donate $1,500,000 towards the purchase of a carousel for their "playground" at Harvey's Lake while helpless animals are suffering just a half-hour away in the Electric City? If locals are willing to donate seven-figures for an AMUSEMENT RIDE, then why can't they likewise be expected to donate to a zoo replete with LIVING CREATURES? It's nice to see we have our priorities in order in this valley. What's next? Asking for $3,000,000 to fund Pittston's "save our buildings from collapsing again onto parked cars" fund?