The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
Reviewed Service
Pros: Informative site about pets and pet products/services
Cons: Navigational problems; Too Many Vague/Meaningless Reviews
Reviewed: 5 months ago -- Saturday, February 23, 2008
Pet Service Reviewed by: Michele (MicheleZ)
Supporting Shelter: Pet Adoption League
Supporting rescue: Community Angel Network
Review Details
(A) THE GOOD:
(1) True to its slogan, zootoo does contain a wealth of information about "all things pet" and has something to offer to just about everyone.
(2) Zootoo is a great site for animal lovers and animal advocates--as well as animal neglectors/abusers--to learn from each other and, hopefully, stop the abuse, avoid each others' mistakes, and eventually lead to the improved welfare of all animals.
(3) Pet product and service reviews enable potential consumers/customers to make more informed decisions and possibly reduce the number of unfavorable/wasteful purchases as well as regrettable visits to unworthy service providers. Moreover, such reviews can enable manufacturers and service providers to ascertain consumer needs and respond to valid complaints or areas of concern.
(4) Each zootooer has his/her own profile page and seemingly endless opportunity to upload photos of pet(s) for the world to see and to enjoy for oneself. In many ways, it is the "MyPetsSpace" that will surely be a rival of MySpace and similar sites.
(5) Pet news stories featured every day bring interesting and informative articles (sometimes with accompanying videos) about animals to readers' attention and make zootooers aware of what is happening, what is being done, what needs to be done, etc. Zootooers can comment on the stories, offering advice, criticism, support, or other constructive feedback
(6) All registered zootooers with at least 100 points are eligible to receive free sample(s) of various pet products. This gives pet owners an opportunity to test products before buying them and thereby knowing whether or not future purchases are desirable.
(7) Zootoo is currently conducting a shelter makeover contest wherein the top 20 point-earning shelters will receive a makeover--one up to $1 million, one worth $10,000 and the remaining eighteen worth $5,000. Thousands of shelters across the U.S. are competing and, regardless of which shelters get the highly-sought-after makeovers, numerous homeless animals will be the real "winners".
(B) THE BAD (or "not so good"):
(1) The zootoo site is envisioned as nonbiased, user-generated evaluations of products, but there is no way of ascertaining the various views of what warrants a rating of 1,2,3,4, or 5. Some reviewers seem to be easily satisfied and overly generous in awarding a "5"; other reviewers are overly critical/judgmental and perhaps unjustly award only a "1"; still other reviewers give an arbitrary rating (often a 5!) for products/services they have NOT tried. There seem to be way too many products receiving a "5", suggesting that many reviewers are not very analytical and thereby fail to offer the products' drawbacks (which most, if not all, products have).
(2) While many zootooers post orderly, meaningful, and quite enlightening comments to the pet news stories, there is often little "discussion" per se but, instead, numerous zootooers posting random thoughts that are redundant (sometimes profoundly so) and/or add nothing to the existing comments. Discussions should have more structure and the lack of the same suggests that some--though not all--commenters are only interested in earning points, not truly contributing to the "discussion" at hand.
(3) The site can be difficult at times to navigate and the message "zootoo is updating your page" may appear for a long time, resulting in substantial delays. There have been problems with the "submit", "reply", and "back" buttons, to name few. Computer glitches can be expected and are understandable, but they are also areas that could be improved.
(4) On various locations of the site, the points for uploading a photo are inconsistently stated and therefore unclear and misleading. In some spots, it states that uploading a photo is worth 20 points, at other spots it specifies one must upload a photo of one's pet using a product to receive 20 points, and at another spot it states one will receive "up to 20 points" for uploading a photo. I have learned (through experience of uploading photos only to later have some of the points deducted by zootoo) that zootoo apparently determines which photos are acceptable; I have had more photos REJECTED than accepted and, in essence, have often received no points whatsoever for my effort.
(5) It is difficult to conduct a search for a specific product or service. Instead of getting a single match for a very specific product, the search results are numerous and vague to the point of not being able to find that specific product within a reasonable time or at all. Any one word listed--as well as words NOT listed--may show up in the search results. Furthermore, some identical products are listed more than one time, possibly leading to unintentional duplicate reviews.
(6) There is often inadequate manufacturer information and product descriptions, which may (and does) result in misidentification of products on the part of reviewers. That is, some zootooers--whether intentionally or unintentionally--are evaluating a product other than the one portrayed. For example, instead of rating a particular pet bowl, some reviewers are rating any type of pet bowl they may have used and giving "generic" evaluations. This, of course, is not useful to potential consumers and is a disservice to the manufacturer (not to mention zootoo).
(7) The shelter makeover contest is indisputably a strength of zootoo, but--to help meet zootoo's "unbiased" goal--there are a number of shortcomings worth mentioning:
(a) The need to rank in the top 20 to be eligible for a makeover invites or encourages some people with otherwise good intentions to abuse the point system yet there doesn't appear to be a foolproof way of detecting these people. Many people apparently are engaging in less than noble practices to boost their points, leaving competing zootooers disgruntled and feeling helpless and hopeless
(b) There is justified concern that small shelters in small towns can't compete at the same level as their opposites can. Stated differently, the people in the smallest shelters can put forth more time and energy yet attain only a small fraction of the results that a large shelter can attain with minimal effort. People--and the media--are most likely to support their local shelter, not an unknown (but needy) shelter in a neighboring community or county.
(c) The "digital divide" can interfere with the ability to get supporters. Shelters in some locations (typically poorer) may find relatively few people with computers and internet access. People may be willing--but unable--to help. Moreover, some people who have computers may not have (or know how to use) digital cameras to upload photos so are more limited in how they can contribute to earn points. Ironically, the shelters in the wealthiest communities may APPEAR to be the "neediest".
(d) Too many people are functionally illiterate and/or scatterbrained to verify their zootoo registrations. These people show up as "supporters" but do not receive the 100 registration points and the shelters lose out on points they thought they had coming and need to make progress (or show for their recruitment effort).
(e) There is too much emphasis on a "body count" and not enough emphasis on what each supposed supporter is doing to demonstrate his/her support. That is, thousands of disinterested--even disconnected--people may take a few minutes to register under a shelter but do absolutely nothing else in support of that shelter. Many of them (i.e., thousands!) might even claim that they will volunteer (to receive another 100 points) yet have no intention whatsoever of doing anything. Other people do as much as they can to earn points (while truly volunteering at the shelter) but can't accumulate as many points as the combined deadbeat "supporters".
(f) There isn't enough information clearly posted about how to legitimately earn points. For example, many zootooers apparently do not realize that they have to actually TRY the products/services before reviewing them. (Yes, this may be stated somewhere in the rules, but please refer to "d" above about functional illiteracy.)
(C) THE UGLY:
(1) People who post rude, offensive, vulgar, and/or deliberately hateful comments that serve no legitimate purpose. (Fortunately, these are rare.)
(2) Zootooers who manipulate, lie, cheat, etc. to increase their points.
(3) Immature children who "play" on zootoo and unwittingly may be jeopardizing their shelters' accounts and potentially destroying the opportunity for a $1 million shelter makeover.
(4) Parents who knowingly allow their children below 13 years of age to register (or themselves register ineligible children)
(5) The people responsible for the animal neglect/abuse that is featured in the pet news stories/videos...and the people who want to be cruel to those culprits. There's no such thing as "cruel to be kind".
I'm sure I'll think of other things, but this should suffice. In case some of you are thinking this is too long, it is ONLY 9191 characters and 25000 maximum is allowed!
***
GO ZOOTOO! GOOD LUCK SHELTERS!
(1) True to its slogan, zootoo does contain a wealth of information about "all things pet" and has something to offer to just about everyone.
(2) Zootoo is a great site for animal lovers and animal advocates--as well as animal neglectors/abusers--to learn from each other and, hopefully, stop the abuse, avoid each others' mistakes, and eventually lead to the improved welfare of all animals.
(3) Pet product and service reviews enable potential consumers/customers to make more informed decisions and possibly reduce the number of unfavorable/wasteful purchases as well as regrettable visits to unworthy service providers. Moreover, such reviews can enable manufacturers and service providers to ascertain consumer needs and respond to valid complaints or areas of concern.
(4) Each zootooer has his/her own profile page and seemingly endless opportunity to upload photos of pet(s) for the world to see and to enjoy for oneself. In many ways, it is the "MyPetsSpace" that will surely be a rival of MySpace and similar sites.
(5) Pet news stories featured every day bring interesting and informative articles (sometimes with accompanying videos) about animals to readers' attention and make zootooers aware of what is happening, what is being done, what needs to be done, etc. Zootooers can comment on the stories, offering advice, criticism, support, or other constructive feedback
(6) All registered zootooers with at least 100 points are eligible to receive free sample(s) of various pet products. This gives pet owners an opportunity to test products before buying them and thereby knowing whether or not future purchases are desirable.
(7) Zootoo is currently conducting a shelter makeover contest wherein the top 20 point-earning shelters will receive a makeover--one up to $1 million, one worth $10,000 and the remaining eighteen worth $5,000. Thousands of shelters across the U.S. are competing and, regardless of which shelters get the highly-sought-after makeovers, numerous homeless animals will be the real "winners".
(B) THE BAD (or "not so good"):
(1) The zootoo site is envisioned as nonbiased, user-generated evaluations of products, but there is no way of ascertaining the various views of what warrants a rating of 1,2,3,4, or 5. Some reviewers seem to be easily satisfied and overly generous in awarding a "5"; other reviewers are overly critical/judgmental and perhaps unjustly award only a "1"; still other reviewers give an arbitrary rating (often a 5!) for products/services they have NOT tried. There seem to be way too many products receiving a "5", suggesting that many reviewers are not very analytical and thereby fail to offer the products' drawbacks (which most, if not all, products have).
(2) While many zootooers post orderly, meaningful, and quite enlightening comments to the pet news stories, there is often little "discussion" per se but, instead, numerous zootooers posting random thoughts that are redundant (sometimes profoundly so) and/or add nothing to the existing comments. Discussions should have more structure and the lack of the same suggests that some--though not all--commenters are only interested in earning points, not truly contributing to the "discussion" at hand.
(3) The site can be difficult at times to navigate and the message "zootoo is updating your page" may appear for a long time, resulting in substantial delays. There have been problems with the "submit", "reply", and "back" buttons, to name few. Computer glitches can be expected and are understandable, but they are also areas that could be improved.
(4) On various locations of the site, the points for uploading a photo are inconsistently stated and therefore unclear and misleading. In some spots, it states that uploading a photo is worth 20 points, at other spots it specifies one must upload a photo of one's pet using a product to receive 20 points, and at another spot it states one will receive "up to 20 points" for uploading a photo. I have learned (through experience of uploading photos only to later have some of the points deducted by zootoo) that zootoo apparently determines which photos are acceptable; I have had more photos REJECTED than accepted and, in essence, have often received no points whatsoever for my effort.
(5) It is difficult to conduct a search for a specific product or service. Instead of getting a single match for a very specific product, the search results are numerous and vague to the point of not being able to find that specific product within a reasonable time or at all. Any one word listed--as well as words NOT listed--may show up in the search results. Furthermore, some identical products are listed more than one time, possibly leading to unintentional duplicate reviews.
(6) There is often inadequate manufacturer information and product descriptions, which may (and does) result in misidentification of products on the part of reviewers. That is, some zootooers--whether intentionally or unintentionally--are evaluating a product other than the one portrayed. For example, instead of rating a particular pet bowl, some reviewers are rating any type of pet bowl they may have used and giving "generic" evaluations. This, of course, is not useful to potential consumers and is a disservice to the manufacturer (not to mention zootoo).
(7) The shelter makeover contest is indisputably a strength of zootoo, but--to help meet zootoo's "unbiased" goal--there are a number of shortcomings worth mentioning:
(a) The need to rank in the top 20 to be eligible for a makeover invites or encourages some people with otherwise good intentions to abuse the point system yet there doesn't appear to be a foolproof way of detecting these people. Many people apparently are engaging in less than noble practices to boost their points, leaving competing zootooers disgruntled and feeling helpless and hopeless
(b) There is justified concern that small shelters in small towns can't compete at the same level as their opposites can. Stated differently, the people in the smallest shelters can put forth more time and energy yet attain only a small fraction of the results that a large shelter can attain with minimal effort. People--and the media--are most likely to support their local shelter, not an unknown (but needy) shelter in a neighboring community or county.
(c) The "digital divide" can interfere with the ability to get supporters. Shelters in some locations (typically poorer) may find relatively few people with computers and internet access. People may be willing--but unable--to help. Moreover, some people who have computers may not have (or know how to use) digital cameras to upload photos so are more limited in how they can contribute to earn points. Ironically, the shelters in the wealthiest communities may APPEAR to be the "neediest".
(d) Too many people are functionally illiterate and/or scatterbrained to verify their zootoo registrations. These people show up as "supporters" but do not receive the 100 registration points and the shelters lose out on points they thought they had coming and need to make progress (or show for their recruitment effort).
(e) There is too much emphasis on a "body count" and not enough emphasis on what each supposed supporter is doing to demonstrate his/her support. That is, thousands of disinterested--even disconnected--people may take a few minutes to register under a shelter but do absolutely nothing else in support of that shelter. Many of them (i.e., thousands!) might even claim that they will volunteer (to receive another 100 points) yet have no intention whatsoever of doing anything. Other people do as much as they can to earn points (while truly volunteering at the shelter) but can't accumulate as many points as the combined deadbeat "supporters".
(f) There isn't enough information clearly posted about how to legitimately earn points. For example, many zootooers apparently do not realize that they have to actually TRY the products/services before reviewing them. (Yes, this may be stated somewhere in the rules, but please refer to "d" above about functional illiteracy.)
(C) THE UGLY:
(1) People who post rude, offensive, vulgar, and/or deliberately hateful comments that serve no legitimate purpose. (Fortunately, these are rare.)
(2) Zootooers who manipulate, lie, cheat, etc. to increase their points.
(3) Immature children who "play" on zootoo and unwittingly may be jeopardizing their shelters' accounts and potentially destroying the opportunity for a $1 million shelter makeover.
(4) Parents who knowingly allow their children below 13 years of age to register (or themselves register ineligible children)
(5) The people responsible for the animal neglect/abuse that is featured in the pet news stories/videos...and the people who want to be cruel to those culprits. There's no such thing as "cruel to be kind".
I'm sure I'll think of other things, but this should suffice. In case some of you are thinking this is too long, it is ONLY 9191 characters and 25000 maximum is allowed!
***
GO ZOOTOO! GOOD LUCK SHELTERS!
Review Helpfulness
16 out of 20 users found this review helpful.
Did you find this review helpful?
Discussion
10 comments found.
Thank you for taking the time to post your insightful message. Yes, I read all 9,000 words, twice. The 'bad' and the 'ugly' certainly gives me a lot to think about. All members need to take the product reviews seriously. It is very disturbing to see junk food and potentially dangerous treats, especially for house rabbits, labeled as 'nutritious' by reviewers. As a 'mom' to 16 rescued kitties, seniors and speaial needs, and 2 house rabbits, I appreciate your honest efforts on Zootoo. Pats to all your beautiful rescues cats and good luck to your shelter.
Ann//seniorcats
Ann//seniorcats
Michele - I think you are a little "over the top". Some of the "rude" comments on my site have come from you - as a matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken, just about the ONLY rude comments I've found have been from you! And the "functionally illiterate" is a bit harsh. As far as having tried the product before you can write a review - maybe, but I can sure tell you this: of my 12 cats, if they truly love best the 9 kitty hoots toys I currently have, and I see a new one (the paperboy instead of the burglar)I haven't seen before, I think I can say WITH 100% HONESTY that my cats will love it and I need to get it! And just because I do not yet own a bowl I see with a cute cat face design on it, that does not mean I am being anything but honest when I rate it and say I want to get it. My opinion of Fancy Feast ocean fish and shrimp feast may be entirely different from yours. I believe it IS healthy for my cats - as their complete diet? - No. - as a treat? YES - their treat helps them emotionally as well. You may differ in your OPINION, and think it's junk. Everyone may not be as wordy and precise as you are - but that doesn't make them liars or illiterate. We are all trying to be honest, but it IS a contest as well. Sorry everyone, including Zootoo, can't live up to your expectations.
Michele-I have to concur with DebbieKelley as far as your remarks. We live in a VERY small town-NO, not alot of people have computers in our town-YES-MAYBE alot of what YOU call "functionally illiterate people" sign up to volunteer in their local shelter-but guess what? The very people that you have put this ugly label to are quite capable of walking a homeless dog or helping to clean out a kennel. SHAME ON YOU! I have worked very diligently on my zoo-too site to help our small, "out in the country shelter", I deliver cleaning supples, cat and dog food, kitty litter, and bags of toys for the animals out there-out of my pocket. I will volunteer to do WHATEVER is needed. I have received two UGLY replies on my site-1 of which was YOURS! Did my cats verbally tell me that they enjoyed their food? Yes, I guess they did as well as YOUR fish told you that they enjoyed their algae discs! I have not listed every deceased pet that I have ever owned BUT I can tell you that I have tried just about every type of food, accessories, & apparel out there for dogs, cats, birds, horses and cattle because I always have tried to buy what I think is the most nutritious & best for them and if that takes some experimenting new brands then I will do it. While you may have listed some good rules that people should follow while participating on this site I do NOT think that it is your job to label someone illitierate or worse. You have offended another young person on our site and hurt her feelings deeply. How many other people are you doing this to? And this is being done to people who are trying their very best to answer questions as honestly as they can with products that they HAVE tried. If someone makes a "typo" they are labeled as "illiterate", this is sad. I DO believe that I recall someone reviewing algei discs. This is a VERY worthwhile site and the ONLY winners are the animals-NOT THE HUMANS! I wish your shelter the very best of luck in their endeavors as well as ALL the shelters participating and hope that ALL of the top 20 winners realize just how lucky they will be to receive this fabulous gift from zootoo-however, my friend, just remember that those that live in glass houses shouldn't cast the first stone.
From "another illiterate participant"
From "another illiterate participant"
Thank you for your comment. Some people are misconstruing my statements, taking them out of context, inappropriately generalizing them to the entire population, and making other erroneous assumptions. My statement about functional illiteracy (which, in this context, refers to the inability to follow written instructions) specifically pertains to the people who agreed to register and completed the third step but not the fourth (validation)--it was not meant to be applied to anyone else!!!! People who cannot follow written instructions are classified as "functionally illiterate"; that is a fact, and I'm sorry if this sounds harsh. Your comments can be interpreted as "way over the top" since you have twisted the intended meaning of some of my statements. I don't understand why you have become so defensive (except if it is because you did not fully understand what I wrote and why).
My first comment was mostly a reply to "DebbieKelley", but also applies to "Janie's" comment. I guess many people don't understand what is meant by functional illiteracy and some people don't read far enough to get the complete picture. Some people may get angry because they inappropriately apply something to themselves; perhaps these people are too sensitive and/or self-conscious.
Janie wrote, "If someone makes a 'typo' they are labeled as 'illiterate', this is sad. I DO believe that I recall someone reviewing algei discs." This couldn't be further from the truth; a typo is a typo and I do not indiscriminately apply labels to people. By taking my statements out of context and indiscriminately applying them to everyone else, you have depicted me as a monster. Maybe I AM a monster in real life, but I don't think I deserve that "label" when people have misinterpreted my statements.
In regards to your statement, "I DO believe that I recall someone reviewing algei discs" (DELIBERATELY meant to be offensive to me), had you read my entire review you would have noticed that less than a day later I updated my original review and wrote, "I don't know how I typed 'algei' instead of 'algae'!" I also realize that there is no way for zootooers to edit what they wrote in certain sections; these TYPOS must stay as they are. That is RIDICULOUS to assert that I would label the people responsible for the typos "illiterate"!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you, too, for your comment. Perhaps if more people are willing to express themselves, they will find that some things are only a misunderstanding and no offense was intended.
Janie wrote, "If someone makes a 'typo' they are labeled as 'illiterate', this is sad. I DO believe that I recall someone reviewing algei discs." This couldn't be further from the truth; a typo is a typo and I do not indiscriminately apply labels to people. By taking my statements out of context and indiscriminately applying them to everyone else, you have depicted me as a monster. Maybe I AM a monster in real life, but I don't think I deserve that "label" when people have misinterpreted my statements.
In regards to your statement, "I DO believe that I recall someone reviewing algei discs" (DELIBERATELY meant to be offensive to me), had you read my entire review you would have noticed that less than a day later I updated my original review and wrote, "I don't know how I typed 'algei' instead of 'algae'!" I also realize that there is no way for zootooers to edit what they wrote in certain sections; these TYPOS must stay as they are. That is RIDICULOUS to assert that I would label the people responsible for the typos "illiterate"!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you, too, for your comment. Perhaps if more people are willing to express themselves, they will find that some things are only a misunderstanding and no offense was intended.
trying to find fault with anything you have written-nor am I trying to slam you in any way. This is supposed to be fun and informative for ALL of us and to help our shelters. Typos are typos and nothing more-everyone except the most professional typists make them-including Me and You. I do however find a problem with you writing me and telling me that I would need to try this or that before I can pass judgement on it. Not that I need to verify to you or anyone else that I have tried a product-any product that I have reviewed I HAVE tried. And trust me, I did read every word of what you wrote-twice. And, as far as opinions--
Definition: The formal decision, or expression of views, of a judge, an umpire, a counselor, or other party officially called upon to consider and decide upon a matter or point submitted.
We all should be entitled to ours-this is what this is all about-and I for one have gleaned alot of knowledge about some products that I did not know anything about.
I do accept your statement that no offense was intended as I hope you will accept the statement from me that I did realize your typo on algae and I think you will agree with me that there are far more important things to do on this site than to bicker back and forth on words. I do wish your shelter the best and your response comments were welcome.
Definition: The formal decision, or expression of views, of a judge, an umpire, a counselor, or other party officially called upon to consider and decide upon a matter or point submitted.
We all should be entitled to ours-this is what this is all about-and I for one have gleaned alot of knowledge about some products that I did not know anything about.
I do accept your statement that no offense was intended as I hope you will accept the statement from me that I did realize your typo on algae and I think you will agree with me that there are far more important things to do on this site than to bicker back and forth on words. I do wish your shelter the best and your response comments were welcome.
You are right on with your comments. I have noticed all of the things you have mentioned going on and am very disappointed in the way zootoo is handling things. Our little shelter doesn't stand a chance over the million dollar shelters that already exist. The concept is good, but the abuse is bad. How does a little city compete with large communities with so many supporters? Good review!
Hi Ya'll,
I won't comment on the personal slanders but give my mind-share about the general topic of discussion.
To the point of competition, I ask you this - "Do you believe in the constitution of USA? Do you Vote?". Voting is always a #s game, more people you can bag better your chances - how doe one compete with bigger forces/alliances? By convincing people both inside & outside your local geography (Had this not been true, none of the revolutions would have succeeded. The single idea is spread around to believe in the cause and defeat bigger competitors), how you do it is each on their abilities and passion.
To the point of unbiasedness, anything good always runs the risk of being abused...history demonstrates. The central idea is "Freedom", if one claims to be unbiased then there should be total "lack of control". Let's be thankful Zootoo is a biased toward the use of profanity, embedding objectionable links(use your imagination) and pictures, etc. Had they not been "open-forum"-ish, one wouldn't even get to publish the "Bad" & "Ugly" parts(Trust me most corporations/companies have blogs but they are moderated i.e. anything bad you say about them goes out).
The builds on "How-To-Improve" are very objective and that has my full support. I believe in being "FOR" something and NOT "AGAINST"...let's be thankful that some shelter will get the makeover and the luck animals won't be roadkills/victim of dog fights/put down by...
Sounds a lot like preaching but folks but you do realize that there are more people prone to animal cruelty than the handful of "us" the Zootoo-ers, right? United we stand...
Go Zootoo!
I won't comment on the personal slanders but give my mind-share about the general topic of discussion.
To the point of competition, I ask you this - "Do you believe in the constitution of USA? Do you Vote?". Voting is always a #s game, more people you can bag better your chances - how doe one compete with bigger forces/alliances? By convincing people both inside & outside your local geography (Had this not been true, none of the revolutions would have succeeded. The single idea is spread around to believe in the cause and defeat bigger competitors), how you do it is each on their abilities and passion.
To the point of unbiasedness, anything good always runs the risk of being abused...history demonstrates. The central idea is "Freedom", if one claims to be unbiased then there should be total "lack of control". Let's be thankful Zootoo is a biased toward the use of profanity, embedding objectionable links(use your imagination) and pictures, etc. Had they not been "open-forum"-ish, one wouldn't even get to publish the "Bad" & "Ugly" parts(Trust me most corporations/companies have blogs but they are moderated i.e. anything bad you say about them goes out).
The builds on "How-To-Improve" are very objective and that has my full support. I believe in being "FOR" something and NOT "AGAINST"...let's be thankful that some shelter will get the makeover and the luck animals won't be roadkills/victim of dog fights/put down by...
Sounds a lot like preaching but folks but you do realize that there are more people prone to animal cruelty than the handful of "us" the Zootoo-ers, right? United we stand...
Go Zootoo!
Service In Use:
