You want to REALLY feel old? Mention the word “typewriter” in front of a kid and get the “What’s that?” response.

About electronic email faxes. Ironically, before I started the pet food recall assembly line of faxes I only used my fax machine maybe 10 times a year, tops. Everyone I know except a couple rare dinosaurs, have email which serves to transport documents.

Ironically, just this weekend my fax machine coughed and sputtered and died. No more, I decided. Still - had to do something about it. I checked online. Basically two major fax services and the cost is almost nothing. One is eFax.xom and the other is Faxaway.com

There was a letter of praise for Faxaway.com from someone on staff of the NY Times, so that was a positive. then I read that the spam from eFax.com is horrid. They let you have the service for free for a while, all the time selling your email address to spammers. Faxaway.com promises no spam. So I signed with them. I really have to try it out - been too busy.

But then this morning or last night someone asked me how I was going to handle scanning certain documents that I needed to fax. I have so few of those that I don’t have a scanner - just a good next door neighbor who does. Then my cousin emailed me and told me what a dummy I was - just use my digital camera and upload. So that takes care of that. So we’ll see how Faxaway.com works out.

BTW, during my research I must tell you about a trick I learned from a blogsite. When you get spam in your fax, take an 8 1/2 by 11 sheet of DARK BLACK paper and fax it back to the phone number that spammed you. Irritates the hell out of them because you can imagine how long it takes to print [backing up other incoming faxes] AND it seriously depletes their toner!

What goes around, comes around.

This is counter-intuitive, so why do mandatory spay/neuter programs have the opposite results of voluntary spay/neuter programs? A reasonable question.

The increased acceptance of routine spaying and neutering for pets has been a major contributing factor in the dramatic decrease in euthanasias over the past three decades. So the average person thinks - all you have to do is increase the number of dogs and cats s/n’ed and you will reduce the euthanasias. If you have to make it mandatory, so be it. What they don’t
understand is that comparing mandatory with voluntary is comparing apples and oranges.

1) Voluntary represents an attitude of responsibility about pet ownership. It is the result of education. The real issue is responsible pet ownership and forced spay/neuter doesn’t change minds or attitudes, or create responsibility. If anything it creates resentment.

2) Voluntary spay/neuter programs don’t produce the negative side effects of forced spay/neuter.

a) People stop licensing their dogs, which reduces revenues that support animal control.
b) Compliance with rabies vaccination is reduced.

c) Pets will be abandoned by people who fear the fines. In particular, pregnant mothers will be abandoned in fear of detection and fines.

d) There will be fewer homes for dogs and cats because of the cost of spay/neuter and/or the fear of fines. This does not apply to animals coming from rescue organizations, who already spay/neuter, but casual breeders (the person whose pet became pregnant accidentally, the person who wants to breed their pet once to get another just like her, the person who takes in
a stray cat or dog that proves to be pregnant) will have a harder time finding homes for the kittens and puppies, so more will be turned in to shelters.

e) There are fewer well-bred, well-raised puppies and kittens available. More people get their pets from questionable sources, resulting in more abandoned for health and/or behavior issues.