Five Legged Dog Saved From Freak Show

By Jill Harness in Animals & Pets on Jul 26, 2009 at 11:04 pm

A woman in North Carolina woman recently paid $4000 to save a five legged dog from becoming a freak show attraction. The owner was offered $3000 from a freak show operator in Coney island, when Allyson Siegel offered to up the price in order to help keep the dog from being little more than a spectacle.

Although the fifth leg didn’t seem to bother the pup, Siegel intended to have it removed, but was shocked to learn it would cost another $2000 to do so. Fortunately, a Manhattan vet was so touched by Siegel’s actions that he offered to remove the leg free of charge.

“She is beautiful, she’s not a freak, she’s a normal little puppy dog and she should be just like all the others,” Siegel said.

Precious was born with a fifth leg protruding from her stomach, between her hind legs. The extra leg has six toes.

Link Via Dogster Dog Blog

Tags: animals, birth defects, dogs, freak shows

Neat stuff from the NeatoShop:

PK
Jul 27th, 2009 at 1:21 am
There is nothing wrong with being in a freak show. First of all, if you think about it, most performers at the freak shows aren’t really freaks. It is not 1900′s anymore. They are just performers with free will.

But for dogs, either way will grant them no more freedom than they already lack. I don’t see how the dog gains more freedom being stuck in a house somewhere as a ‘normal’ dog with a lady than being a performer greeting hundreds of audiences every day.

And if the fifth leg doesn’t seem to bother the dog at all, the operation is completely unnecessary and an anthropocentric view of pseudo-humanitarianism.
Cola
Jul 27th, 2009 at 2:07 am
PK, I’m sure a fifth leg gets in the way. Also, the woman who bought the dog likely assumed, probably rightly, that he wouldn’t get the kind of stability and affection working in a freak show that he would from one set of grateful hands.

I’m not terribly sentimental about animals in general, but I see no reason to disparage her choice. It’s rather touching that she wanted to provide the dog a normal, loving life.
ted
Jul 27th, 2009 at 4:10 am
I think it’s fine for her to buy him, but she shouldn’t have balked at the cost of the operation. She just spent $4000 on a dog, for Pete’s sake. And this probably won’t be the first operation.
Skipweasel
Jul 27th, 2009 at 4:10 am
Would a dog be any less happy in a freakshow? I don’t begrudge the woman her money, but the reasoning seems a little unsound. It’d probably get lots of attention and as a valuable item would get well looked after, too.
marishka
Jul 27th, 2009 at 8:29 am
John Merrick was a valuable “freak show” commodity, too. He wasn’t very well treated.
Skipweasel
Jul 27th, 2009 at 11:04 am
He couldn’t bite.
DavidG
Jul 27th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
marishka: Joseph Merrick (not John) died in 1890, we are now in 2009. Things have changed.

He wasn’t treated worst as a sideshow freak than other performers. However, his boss was indeed a jerk and took a way most of Merrick’s money. He was badly treated mostly by townfolk he encountered in the streets, not people who came to see him when he was exhibited. You have to keep in mind that the movie wasn’t true to reality

A dog, working today in the sideshow industry, would be well treated, not just because of PETA and other groups working for the ethical treatment of the animals, but because he would probably be loved by his fellow freaks and performers.
vonskippy
Jul 27th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Luckily, Allyson was there to give the pup a leg up.

Keep track of the comments with

Comment RSS

Lijit Search

The latest from NeatoBambino: