"High Kill Shelters"

[Coyoteco]

They are called “high kill” because that is what they do. Sanctuary shelters may be “low adoption” but they do not kill.

I have been a supporter and advocate for no-kill shelters for decades. That movement is growing stronger every day. I suggest, if you really want to understand the “other side” to your views, “like” the No Kill Coalition on facebook. There are some No Kill (insert state) fb groups too.

The No Kill Coalition is a great organization and is there to fight back against the false statements and language manipulation made by kill shelters/pounds.

Many kill shelters do, in fact, want to kill. Many kill shelters spend a lot of time trying to close down no kill shelters as they think the no-kills compete for their money.

We will become a no-kill country sooner or later and the only reason we are not closer to that goal is that the kill shelters don’t want that goal reached.

Of course there are some kill shelters and pounds where the people try to save animals but it is by no means all of them as the kill people like to say.

Brilliant things are being done for marketing animals now and it is working exceptionally well.

One other issue that is out there is that it is smart dogs that get deemed unsociable or dangerous because they understand their predicament. It is more than simply a shame…

An no, never to breed specific legislation and bans.

[Coyoteco]

[QUOTE=carolprudm;7699191]
We have a PETA “shelter” not to far from here in Norfolk VA. Employees there KILL about 90% of the animals brought to the “shelter”.[/QUOTE]

Killing unwanted animals is not “euthanasia”. “Euthanasia” has a definition and this does not fit that definition.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=Coyoteco;7699717]
They are called “high kill” because that is what they do. Sanctuary shelters may be “low adoption” but they do not kill.

I have been a supporter and advocate for no-kill shelters for decades. That movement is growing stronger every day. I suggest, if you really want to understand the “other side” to your views, “like” the No Kill Coalition on facebook. There are some No Kill (insert state) fb groups too.

The No Kill Coalition is a great organization and is there to fight back against the false statements and language manipulation made by kill shelters/pounds.

Many kill shelters do, in fact, want to kill. Many kill shelters spend a lot of time trying to close down no kill shelters as they think the no-kills compete for their money.

We will become a no-kill country sooner or later and the only reason we are not closer to that goal is that the kill shelters don’t want that goal reached.

Of course there are some kill shelters and pounds where the people try to save animals but it is by no means all of them as the kill people like to say.

Brilliant things are being done for marketing animals now and it is working exceptionally well.

One other issue that is out there is that it is smart dogs that get deemed unsociable or dangerous because they understand their predicament. It is more than simply a shame…

An no, never to breed specific legislation and bans.[/QUOTE]

So, what do you think happens to the pets that are brought in and TURNED AWAY from a NO KILL?

I guess my problem is using the word - SHELTER, after the term NO KILL.

I left out the part how some dogs are kept for MANY months in a cage in a very HIGH stress situation. Is that humane? The few I saw, paced and seemed extremely stressed. Adapting to a home, would have been tough for the dog, I bet would have a lot of behavioral issues from being kept in that environment for so long. Again, that dog is taking a cage, meaning dogs are being turned away.

Our NO KILL raises a ton of money. I think putting all the animals on flea/tick preventive is a silly waste of money. They are caged, only walked on the same grassy area, a good flea bath once they accepted the animals, takes care of the fleas and there is NO ticks where these dogs are walked. That is a huge expense, imo.

The problem w/your stance, is you are focused on the individual animals, where the problem is MUCH bigger than that.

Spay/neuter is the only way to reduce the numbers. Perhaps, using all the money they spend on flea/tick meds, should be used to spay and neuter the public’s pets, but that isn’t very sexy in raising money.

Best to show a sad dog and use it to fund raise.

Also, your comment “We will become a no-kill country sooner or later and the only reason we are not closer to that goal is that the kill shelters don’t want that goal reached.”

Is so silly!! How many animals goes thru your animal control?!?! Seriously, lets look at the numbers!! I really doubt there is enough room or money to warehouse all those pets. Do you really think there is a home for EVERY unwanted pet? Seriously, do you?

What is your plan for the constant flow on animals that will keep coming??

Where will they go when ALL the cages are full? Euth is a necessity. Saying that KILL shelters “enjoy or want” to kill animals is just BS.

[Coyoteco]

[QUOTE=Shermy;7699741]
So, what do you think happens to the pets that are brought in and TURNED AWAY from a NO KILL?

I guess my problem is using the word - SHELTER, after the term NO KILL.

I left out the part how some dogs are kept for MANY months in a cage in a very HIGH stress situation. Is that humane? The few I saw, paced and seemed extremely stressed. Adapting to a home, would have been tough for the dog, I bet would have a lot of behavioral issues from being kept in that environment for so long. Again, that dog is taking a cage, meaning dogs are being turned away.

Our NO KILL raises a ton of money. I think putting all the animals on flea/tick preventive is a silly waste of money. They are caged, only walked on the same grassy area, a good flea bath once they accepted the animals, takes care of the fleas and there is NO ticks where these dogs are walked. That is a huge expense, imo.

The problem w/your stance, is you are focused on the individual animals, where the problem is MUCH bigger than that.

Spay/neuter is the only way to reduce the numbers. Perhaps, using all the money they spend on flea/tick meds, should be used to spay and neuter the public’s pets, but that isn’t very sexy in raising money.

Best to show a sad dog and use it to fund raise.

Also, your comment “We will become a no-kill country sooner or later and the only reason we are not closer to that goal is that the kill shelters don’t want that goal reached.”

Is so silly!! How many animals goes thru your animal control?!?! Seriously, lets look at the numbers!! I really doubt there is enough room or money to warehouse all those pets. Do you really think there is a home for EVERY unwanted pet? Seriously, do you?

What is your plan for the constant flow on animals that will keep coming??

Where will they go when ALL the cages are full? Euth is a necessity. Saying that KILL shelters “enjoy or want” to kill animals is just BS.[/QUOTE]

Explain exactly how a kill facility is a “shelter”. Don’t bother as there is no logical explanation.

Most no kill shelters do not keep dogs and cats in cages. They are housed in open pens or open rooms in the case of cats. Many are located in foster homes. Few have “animals in cages”. I’ve only seen that in kill facilities.

There are amazing marketing campaigns going on out there in the no kill world and they are proving to be amazingly successful.

If people and local and state authorities supported small private no kill shelters, there would be many more of them.

If the zoning regulations allows individuals to have more pets, there would be plenty of homes for every animal currently in a shelter or pound.

There are many people who are willing to work with shelter animals to address their issues, and either be volunteer trainers or foster or adopt an animal with issue. If issues are disclosed to a potential adopters, a fit can be made. Where they cannot be made, then the sanctuary shelters take on those animals - and there are many sanctuary shelters willing to do that - and not a CAGE in sight.

You are simply not informed about the no-kill world and the amazing work that is taking place. Much progress has been made already.

As the no kill coalition says “We Can Save them All”… and we will even if we have to fight kill people as we have had to do for decades.

To be fair, many kill shelters are working hard to partner with no-kill shelters and every day there in another kill shelter turned no-kill. So very many.

Just look outside your own sphere and see the wonderful things that are happening for animals.

[Arrows_Endure]

Some of you guys have some serious misconceptions about no-kill shelters.

I work in a no-kill, limited admission shelter. Our euthanasia rate is less than 1%, we only euthanize for extreme behavior and medical reasons. No, we can not take every animal that comes to our door, we don’t have any place to put them.

We take in pit bulls, dogs with heartworms, old dogs, dogs with skin problems, dogs who have training issues, puppies, and any other dog. We also take in old cats, young cats, ugly cats, and sick cats. We do NOT take in cats with Felv/FIV, it’s a risk to our resident population.

I am the cattery manager. It’s my decision about who comes in and who goes out with the cats. I currently have a 13 year old 4 paw declaw with arthritis who bites. She’s a lifer, who’s going to adopt her? She’ll be with me until I can’t control her pain, then I will take her to the vet and have her euthanized. I will hold her, cry for her, and tell her I love her. I have a 12 year old that was dumped at our shelter, pregnant, with kidney disease. We spayed her, and have her on K/D for her kidneys. She’s happy and is also a lifer. She’ll be with us until I can’t control the kidney disease any more. Again, I’ll be the one to take her to the vet, tell her I love her, and cry all the way home.

Yes, we refer animals to animal control, where they may be euthanized because we have no choice. We take in animals from them when we have space, and we have a very good working relationship with them. They are doing the best they can and we know it.

There is a place for both kinds of shelters. No kill shelters tend to do more about behavior modification and taking care of any health problems that may present with that animal. The time we have with the animals allows us to learn their behavior and to place them in appropriate homes. We are allowed to turn down adoptions if we don’t feel the animal is right for that person (or if we think that person shouldn’t own pets at all!). I have all the sympathy in the world for those who work for “kill” shelters, because I don’t think I could do their job.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=Coyoteco;7699759]
Explain exactly how a kill facility is a “shelter”. Don’t bother as there is no logical explanation.

Most no kill shelters do not keep dogs and cats in cages. They are housed in open pens or open rooms in the case of cats. Many are located in foster homes. Few have “animals in cages”. I’ve only seen that in kill facilities.

There are amazing marketing campaigns going on out there in the no kill world and they are proving to be amazingly successful.

If people and local and state authorities supported small private no kill shelters, there would be many more of them.

If the zoning regulations allows individuals to have more pets, there would be plenty of homes for every animal currently in a shelter or pound.

There are many people who are willing to work with shelter animals to address their issues, and either be volunteer trainers or foster or adopt an animal with issue. If issues are disclosed to a potential adopters, a fit can be made. Where they cannot be made, then the sanctuary shelters take on those animals - and there are many sanctuary shelters willing to do that - and not a CAGE in sight.

You are simply not informed about the no-kill world and the amazing work that is taking place. Much progress has been made already.

As the no kill coalition says “We Can Save them All”… and we will even if we have to fight kill people as we have had to do for decades.

To be fair, many kill shelters are working hard to partner with no-kill shelters and every day there in another kill shelter turned no-kill. So very many.

Just look outside your own sphere and see the wonderful things that are happening for animals.[/QUOTE]

A SHELTER offers just that, SHELTER, for ALL animals that are turned in or picked up. They do NOT turn anything away. NO KILLs cant claim to do that.

You didn’t answer my question, what happens to the animals that are turned away from the NO KILL when they are full?

Also, HOW MANY animals does your County or City shelter take in yearly?? Lets talk the actual numbers.

It is easy to say you can save them all, but I think you will find out, the number of unwanted animals is staggering. There is simply NOT enough homes for them.

I am informed, have volunteered for FOUR years at a city shelter, have seen this first hand. So, you can try to discount my comments, since you may not agree w/them, but the personal attacks, saying that I am not informed, wont hold water, sorry!

Whether dogs are held in cages, pens or rooms, doesn’t totally change things for them, it is still a very stressful situation for them.

[Guilherme]

Shermy points out the dark underbelly of the “no kill shelter.” They “cherry pick” what comes in and turn the rest away. Where do folks think the turned away animals end up? In the public shelters with limited budgets and a veritable tidal wave of animals. To call them “high kill” is an insult to the folks who run them and gives a totally undeserved “pass” to folks who run the “no kill” shelters.

But, just to vent a bit, many shelters are just stupid in their attempts to “screen” applicants. We’ve tried multiple times to purchase (I refuse to use the word “adopt” when acquiring an animal; you adopt children, you buy or lease animals) cats to live in the barn and kill mice. We’ve been refused every time. Usually the excuse is “you don’t have a fenced yard” (I kid you not on that :eek:); a perimeter fence around 177 acres doesn’t count. The shelters that said “no” euthanize well over 70% of the cats they get in. We don’t “cherish” our cats but they get watched, vaccinated, and fed when necessary (but we don’t feed them up; they are expected to hunt). Lately when we need cats we just find somebody with a litter and tell them to bring them on.

Sadly, the “shelter” business is an even bigger racket than the “retirement” or “rescue” business.

G.

[Shermy]

Also, we were very supportive of the smaller NO KILLS, they took the more adoptable animals, so they do have a place.

It just pisses me off when people like you BLAME the KILL shelters, there has to be a place that takes in ALL animals, a shelter is what does that.

To slam them for euth’ing animals really pisses me off.

I see the NO KILL bashing shelters, not the other way around

NO KILL’s don’t do enough numbers to really fix the problem, as of now, the numbers are too big to NOT euth animals. Seems like some people have a very hard time admitting that.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=Shermy;7699799]
Also, we were very supportive of the smaller NO KILLS, they took the more adoptable animals, so they do have a place.

It just pisses me off when people like you BLAME the KILL shelters, there has to be a place that takes in ALL animals, a shelter is what does that.

To slam them for euth’ing animals really pisses me off.

I see the NO KILL bashing shelters, not the other way around

NO KILL’s don’t do enough numbers to really fix the problem, as of now, the numbers are too big to NOT euth animals. Seems like some people have a very hard time admitting that.[/QUOTE]

That’s the Nathan Winograd mantra. He coined it, he promotes it, he villainizes the shelters that are forced to euth for room. He disputes that there are too many animals for available homes and also is a proponent of dumping cats as ferals. Not TNR, just a dump and run. He also condones releasing FIV positive cats as ferals.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=Guilherme;7699784]
Shermy points out the dark underbelly of the “no kill shelter.” They “cherry pick” what comes in and turn the rest away. Where do folks think the turned away animals end up? In the public shelters with limited budgets and a veritable tidal wave of animals. To call them “high kill” is an insult to the folks who run them and gives a totally undeserved “pass” to folks who run the “no kill” shelters.

But, just to vent a bit, many shelters are just stupid in their attempts to “screen” applicants. We’ve tried multiple times to purchase (I refuse to use the word “adopt” when acquiring an animal; you adopt children, you buy or lease animals) cats to live in the barn and kill mice. We’ve been refused every time. Usually the excuse is “you don’t have a fenced yard” (I kid you not on that :eek:); a perimeter fence around 177 acres doesn’t count. The shelters that said “no” euthanize well over 70% of the cats they get in. We don’t “cherish” our cats but they get watched, vaccinated, and fed when necessary (but we don’t feed them up; they are expected to hunt). Lately when we need cats we just find somebody with a litter and tell them to bring them on.

Sadly, the “shelter” business is an even bigger racket than the “retirement” or “rescue” business.

G.[/QUOTE]

TOTALLY agree, altho, you could say that about shelters or NO KILLs. Trying to adopt an outside dog or a barn cat is hard in a lot of places.

I don’t agree w/that.

Our city shelter adopts out barn cats, as the lady said, as long as they are fixed, we would rather them have a life, even if not in a home situation.

I get why the adoption guide lines, spending a Saturday at the shelter, talking to people looking for a pet can be eye opening, just like some people have NO clue about horses, some people are just crazy in what they think is involved w/a new puppy. Some really thought little puppies were already housebroken, so some people that want a pet, should NOT have one.

But not all outside dogs or barn cats are shitty homes either, so should be more leeway on stuff like that, imo.

We have adopted three of our latest barn cats from there, they fix, do shots for free. All have adapted to the barn wonderfully. For a barn, it is very nice, can go in a heated washrack during winter, we are off of the road, and we feed them, so they are happy as can be. Are extremely good hunters too.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;7699820]
That’s the Nathan Winograd mantra. He coined it, he promotes it, he villainizes the shelters that are forced to euth for room. He disputes that there are too many animals for available homes and also is a proponent of dumping cats as ferals. Not TNR, just a dump and run. He also condones releasing FIV positive cats as ferals.[/QUOTE]

Would call that “pushing the buck”, it annoys me!

Again, Euth is NOT caused by the shelters, they are doing what HAS TO BE done because of the number of unwanted animals, there is simply NOT enough homes available, even if EVERYONE adopted.

[Coyoteco]

Shermy, saying that you are uninformed about no kill shelters is not a personal attack, not does it say that you are uninformed about your kill facility. I’m sure you are.

Your statements simply are not accurate, and since I assume you are being honest, it leads me to know that you are simply uninformed.

No-kill shelters network. I, myself, have transported unadoptable animals between no-kills and sanctuaries out of state.

And, no, dogs in no-kill shelters do not normally experience more stress than an average home environment - usually less because the facility is designed for the animals needs.

My local kill facility is better than most and has a high adoption rate. It sends dogs to sanctuary and no kill shelters. I assume it also sends some to breed rescues, but don’t know that for certain. I know that it is a great way to improve your kill rates.

Guilherme, that is simply not true that no-kills cherry pick. You are confused. Perhaps one source of your confusion is that there are, indeed, “breed rescues” and those are usually quite small, limit themselves to one or a few breeds, often operating without an actual brick and mortar facility but rather relying upon fosters. Most will take part bred dogs of their specialty. Those are a good place for no-kills to outsource. Kill shelters use them, too, and it’s a great way to find places for dogs.

I do agree with you on the restrictions on adoption for animals. It is often a disservice to the animal that could find an excellent home.

There is no “single” no-kill that can take them all, but a network of no-kills can.

back to Shermy

It’s not no kills turning animals over to kills. It is kills turning them over to no-kills and that is the way of the future - and in many places the present.
Does your shelter not send dogs and cats to no-kill shelters and groups? Do you not use breed rescues to find homes for dogs and cats in your kill facility? Do you ever send dogs or cats to no-kill sanctuaries? This is what many kill facilities are doing…and advertising. Programs that allow people to bond with the animals without the pressure of “if I meet a dog or cat and don’t take, it will be killed” or the kill facility not taking the time to really understand the dog so that it can market it to the right home. A lot of this is being done very successfully. Only one dog I’ve adopted form a kill facility was even remotely identified correctly. They got the breed wrong, the personality and issues wrong, the age wrong.

So much can be done when the kills start cooperating with the no-kills. ETA and that is happening more and more every day.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=Coyoteco;7699847]
Shermy, saying that you are uninformed about no kill shelters is not a personal attack, not does it say that you are uninformed about your kill facility. I’m sure you are.

Your statements simply are not accurate, and since I assume you are being honest, it leads me to know that you are simply uninformed.

No-kill shelters network. I, myself, have transported unadoptable animals between no-kills and sanctuaries out of state.

And, no, dogs in no-kill shelters do not normally experience more stress than an average home environment - usually less because the facility is designed for the animals needs.

My local kill facility is better than most and has a high adoption rate. It sends dogs to sanctuary and no kill shelters. I assume it also sends some to breed rescues, but don’t know that for certain. I know that it is a great way to improve your kill rates.

Guilherme, that is simply not true that no-kills cherry pick. You are confused. Perhaps one source of your confusion is that there are, indeed, “breed rescues” and those are usually quite small, limit themselves to one or a few breeds, often operating without an actual brick and mortar facility but rather relying upon fosters. Most will take part bred dogs of their specialty. Those are a good place for no-kills to outsource. Kill shelters use them, too, and it’s a great way to find places for dogs.

I do agree with you on the restrictions on adoption for animals. It is often a disservice to the animal that could find an excellent home.

There is no “single” no-kill that can take them all, but a network of no-kills can.

back to Shermy

It’s not no kills turning animals over to kills. It is kills turning them over to no-kills and that is the way of the future - and in many places the present.
Does your shelter not send dogs and cats to no-kill shelters and groups? Do you not use breed rescues to find homes for dogs and cats in your kill facility? Do you ever send dogs or cats to no-kill sanctuaries? This is what many kill facilities are doing…and advertising. Programs that allow people to bond with the animals without the pressure of “if I meet a dog or cat and don’t take, it will be killed” or the kill facility not taking the time to really understand the dog so that it can market it to the right home. A lot of this is being done very successfully. Only one dog I’ve adopted form a kill facility was even remotely identified correctly. They got the breed wrong, the personality and issues wrong, the age wrong.

So much can be done when the kills start cooperating with the no-kills. ETA and that is happening more and more every day.[/QUOTE]

Yes, as I posted, NO KILL do take easier to adopt pets from the Shelters, they appreciate it. We worked w/breed rescues, NO KILL, even DEA, several of our animals have been selected as bomb, search/rescue, service and drug. One of our beagles is in the beagle brigade at the Miami Airport.

They do have a place, but they can NOT solve or absorb ALL the unwanted animals. Shelters have to do that, yet, people on your side bash them for that. That is unfair, imo.

Shelters are stressful, many dogs in one place is NOT like a home environment

I have seen some NO KILLs that keep dogs for YEARS, that is horrible. Ours keeps them for many months, but not as long as some I have seen. Not only is that dog taking up a cage that something else more adoptable could use, but can cause a lot of stress.

Sometimes, euth is the most humane thing to do…

[Shermy]

Also, what happens to the animals brought in and turned AWAY from a NO KILL?

How many unwanted pets are in your area?

[BLBGP]

The problem is the divisive language which turns people away from “kill” shelters. It fools people into thinking that there is absolutely no difference between “kill” and “no kill” besides laziness and a lust for blood. When in reality, it’s really a difference of open admission shelters and shelters who limit or manage their admissions.

Also, there’s a handy thing of “no kill” suddenly meaning a 90% live release rate. 99.9% of the public thinks “no kill” means what it sounds like: no euthanasia. A shelter taking in 10,000 animals a year could be euthanizing 1,000 of them and still call themselves no kill.

Personally, I like the shelters that call themselves limited admission and are open about what that means. But that’s not as sexy.

To whoever said that shelters that euthanize are not “shelters” - they are taking in animals turned away elsewhere. Taking animals with absolutely nowhere else to go. How is that not sheltering?

While I am not a fan of PETA, this video is eye-opening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P79Vgvo6b8

It’s people trying to surrender a pet to “no kill” shelters, some very well known. I truly don’t understand how you can refuse to admit an animal, then turn around and disparage the shelter that does take them. I completely understand being limited admission. I do. It works for many, many shelters. But you can’t then point fingers and call the other shelters “high kill” if you’re the one sending pets there by closing your doors and polishing your halos.

[Shermy]

[QUOTE=BLBGP;7699916]
The problem is the divisive language which turns people away from “kill” shelters. It fools people into thinking that there is absolutely no difference between “kill” and “no kill” besides laziness and a lust for blood. When in reality, it’s really a difference of open admission shelters and shelters who limit or manage their admissions.

Also, there’s a handy thing of “no kill” suddenly meaning a 90% live release rate. 99.9% of the public thinks “no kill” means what it sounds like: no euthanasia. A shelter taking in 10,000 animals a year could be euthanizing 1,000 of them and still call themselves no kill.

Personally, I like the shelters that call themselves limited admission and are open about what that means. But that’s not as sexy.

To whoever said that shelters that euthanize are not “shelters” - they are taking in animals turned away elsewhere. Taking animals with absolutely nowhere else to go. How is that not sheltering?

While I am not a fan of PETA, this video is eye-opening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P79Vgvo6b8

It’s people trying to surrender a pet to “no kill” shelters, some very well known. I truly don’t understand how you can refuse to admit an animal, then turn around and disparage the shelter that does take them. I completely understand being limited admission. I do. It works for many, many shelters. But you can’t then point fingers and call the other shelters “high kill” if you’re the one sending pets there by closing your doors and polishing your halos.[/QUOTE]

AGREED, good post!! It is the divisive language that pisses me off too!!

If someone brings in an unwanted animal and are turned AWAY, will they continue going until they find the actual shelter?

The NO KILL here does have the money to advertise, good, BUT w/that, means EVERYONE knows of them, meaning more people to adopt, BUT more people will bring in animals too. Advertising works both ways, people that have unwanted pets pay attention too.

The more NO KILL’s adopt, the more animals they turn away, just because of their heightened profile.

It was the same in the City shelter, the more we did adoption outreaches, our intake animals rose too.

So, even the really well run, high adoption NO KILL’s, they would have many more people trying to dropping off animals. I worry about each one that was turned away!

To be called a SHELTER, ALL animals should be accepted…

[Guilherme]

@Coyoteco;7699847

Guilherme, that is simply not true that no-kills cherry pick. You are confused. Perhaps one source of your confusion is that there are, indeed, “breed rescues” and those are usually quite small, limit themselves to one or a few breeds, often operating without an actual brick and mortar facility but rather relying upon fosters. Most will take part bred dogs of their specialty. Those are a good place for no-kills to outsource. Kill shelters use them, too, and it’s a great way to find places for dogs.

I do agree with you on the restrictions on adoption for animals. It is often a disservice to the animal that could find an excellent home.

There is no “single” no-kill that can take them all, but a network of no-kills can.

I don’t think I’m either misguided or misinformed. The problem with “no kill” is that, at the end of the day, not all abandoned or abused animals are suited to sale or lease. Some are so badly damaged that it’s unsafe to return them to a “home” environment. And some will not be returned because there are not enough places for them. The Laws of Physics tell us you can’t put 10 lbs. in a 5 lbs. bag. No network of anything is infinite.

I did five years as the VP of a county humane society and we ran the county shelter. IIRC the local standard for euthanasia (and the standard used by the city run shelter on the other side of the county) is three days. If they ever waited more than three days they were on the phone to us asking if we could take the over run. Sometimes they were so full waiting the three days meant they had to call us to absorb their over-run. That often put us at capacity+++. We did it because in return they would do our euthanasia cases.

There are worse things than death.

G.

[Coyoteco]

[QUOTE=Shermy;7699869]
…
They do have a place, but they can NOT solve or absorb ALL the unwanted animals. Shelters have to do that, yet, people on your side bash them for that. That is unfair, imo.

… Not only is that dog taking up a cage that something else more adoptable could use, but can cause a lot of stress.

Sometimes, euth is the most humane thing to do…[/QUOTE]

To first quote: It is the kill facilities that are often connected to animal control that bashes and demeans no-kill shelters with false accusations.

To second quote: THIS. THIS is the difference. You judge and begrudge that “undeserving” dog or cat its space. THIS is the difference between kill and no-kill people.

To third quote: It is not a shelter if you take it to kill it. It is not humane to label a perfectly good do undesireable and kill it - you may call it “necessary” but you can never accurately call it “humane” and finally it is “killing” or “destroying”, but it is not “euthanizing”.

[Coyoteco]

You two are just stuck in the old days. That is not the situation today most places. We know better how to do this. We have better ability to communicate. We have better ability to transport. There are places in this country where there are few, if any shelter dogs or cats, and there is an opportunity to move animals between areas. This is being done, today, and can increase. Your pounds could be brought into this circle and it will help the animals and help the staff.

Yes, not all dogs can find a home but there are excellent sanctuary shelters out there. And, no they are not terrible places for dogs. They are well run and dogs have a great life - a whole lot better than being in a kennel alone while some owner is at work. And, then there are people like me who like the “undesireables” and like seeing the change in them - many people like me who will take one or more of them. But, your also going to need to increase the limit of animals your local government allows. Some of the restrictions are ridiculous.

This idea that the more you adopt out, the more that are turned does not happen anywhere with which I am familiar. It simply does not. That kind of thinking will shut down your positive actions in increasing your adoption rate.

Networking does work and I really sincerely ask you who are in kill facilities to work harder at that. These false statements about no kill shelters are very damaging to that effort.

One of you asked: My community has reduced its kill rate dramatically and does send animals to no-kill shelters AND to no-kill sanctuary shelters. It’s working very well. Some counties in my state are no-kill.

Isn’t Utah a no-kill state altogether? If not, it’s close.

Guilherme, when was that that you have so many animals? How long ago? You can’t market dogs in that three days. You can’t even evaluate one in that amount of time.

Work toward improving things out there. The changes may not happen overnight, but they are happening at a great speed.

[Graymaresrule]

[QUOTE=Guilherme;7699784]
Shermy points out the dark underbelly of the “no kill shelter.” They “cherry pick” what comes in and turn the rest away. Where do folks think the turned away animals end up? In the public shelters with limited budgets and a veritable tidal wave of animals. To call them “high kill” is an insult to the folks who run them and gives a totally undeserved “pass” to folks who run the “no kill” shelters.

But, just to vent a bit, many shelters are just stupid in their attempts to “screen” applicants. We’ve tried multiple times to purchase (I refuse to use the word “adopt” when acquiring an animal; you adopt children, you buy or lease animals) cats to live in the barn and kill mice. We’ve been refused every time. Usually the excuse is “you don’t have a fenced yard” (I kid you not on that :eek:); a perimeter fence around 177 acres doesn’t count. The shelters that said “no” euthanize well over 70% of the cats they get in. We don’t “cherish” our cats but they get watched, vaccinated, and fed when necessary (but we don’t feed them up; they are expected to hunt). Lately when we need cats we just find somebody with a litter and tell them to bring them on.

Sadly, the “shelter” business is an even bigger racket than the “retirement” or “rescue” business.

G.[/QUOTE]
Must be a local “thing”
FWIW I have 5 barn cats. Three came from the Washington DC Humane Society. The first 2 were TNR cats. The humane society had advertised a “big barn cat” on our local Craigslist and I offered to take him. They determined that cat had health issues and asked if I would take the 2 TNR cats. A bit later they contacted me and asked if I would take another cat, formerly an indoor cat who had litter box issues.

They even delivered!