When Animals Die in Shelters: Who Really Kills Them?
We have become a nation whereby people just don't want to accept the responsibility of the consequences of their actions. For every action there is a reaction.
There is a movement in this country that is deceptive at best and is causing animals unnecessary suffering. This movement is the "No Kill" (NK). The term alone is deceiving. If you aren't for No Kill, then you must be for killing, is how the public perceives it with the use of this term. Roger Caras, longtime President of the ASPCA, called No Kill a hoax, something that hurts shelters and he was right.
Thus far, it has been a miserable failure. Claiming to have 27 open door shelters, but these shelters are turning owners away during their time of need. In this economy, it is rubbing salt into the wound of those who have lost their jobs, their homes, their lives and need to surrender their pet.
This movement, by turning away owners, results in more strays on the streets, the last thing we need. San Antonio, TX found that out the hard way when they declared No Kill. It is estimated that there are more than 100,000 animals on their streets. On a regular basis, "No Kill" shelters are busted for cruelty. They are overcrowded and riddled with disease. Frankenstein only cared about his creation being alive, and that describes NK, they are alive but suffering horribly.
We all know the manta of the No Kill movement is that the shelters are kill crazy, all the people who work in shelters want nothing more than to start their day killing animals. That does sound ridiculous but there are plenty of people who actually believe that it is the choice of the shelters to kill, not a dirty job that the irresponsible public has bestowed upon shelter employees.
The No Kill movement also justifies itself by saying that the public is guilt free, it is not the public's fault that animals are in the shelters and certainly not the public's fault that animals are dying in the shelter. NK goes to outermost limits of madness by proclaiming that there is no pet overpopulation. Our shelters are full, strays running in the streets and dead ones lying beside the road and NK says there is no problem?
Yes, there is a problem. First there is a question, why are animals dying in the shelters? Is it because employees enjoy killing animals, hearing their cries give the employees pleasure? Hardly. Shelter employees are the most put upon people in the world. When asked why they took the job, the answer always is to help the animals. A shelter director once said that a sure sign of her success on the job would be if there was no longer a need for her job.
Another shelter director stated that he loved his job with one exception, assigning an employee for the euthanasia room. It is immoral to blame these employees. We should be thanking them for cleaning up behind us, the public. We should be grateful that there are people with the strength to do the job. Does NK push the public toward the shelters? Hardly. Condemnation of shelters, telling people they will see dead animals and murders is not the way to get the public into the shelters to adopt.
Next weekend there is a push to hold demonstrations at shelters by the followers of NK. Is this a good idea, or will it mean more animals die in the shelters? It means more will die and the blood of those dead animals will be on the hands of the demonstrators, the followers of NK.
When a man is told his family will see dead animals, experience rudeness from people who kill animals, will see neglect of animals, do you think this man will place his family in such a position to see all of this? It will never happen. That man will not go to the shelter, he will not save the life of a shelter animal, he will run right into the waiting arms of a "rescue". Who is telling all of this to that man? The very rescues that benefit from that man running from the shelter. Could there be a hidden agenda at work here?
All rescues refer to themselves as being No Kill. What that means is they are able to pick and choose, picking only the "adoptable" ones and leaving the rest to be taken to the shelter, the "unadoptable" ones. There is a double standard at work here. Animals in the shelters are often times the "rejects" of these rescues. Adoptable to a rescue means a cute, fluffy pet, usually from the owner, and usually with a donation attached. Shelters can't pick and choose, they take any and all, adoptable and unadoptable. There's where the difference lies.
We are still having to euthanize for time and space in our shelters. Space is the most valuable commodity of a shelter, without it, they would have to turn away animals. Turning away animals means that those animals will be abandoned on our streets. There they can suffer many different fates, getting hit by a car, tortured by neighborhood punks, eating poison, attacked by coyotes, in other words, inhumane ways of dying. We should not have to kill for space if the rescues would step up to the plate and take out the animals in danger of dying.
There are all kinds of rescues, some good, some bad, some hoarders, some perverts. Rescue means one thing and only one thing, saving lives. The shelters are still euthanizing for time and space, so where are these "rescues"? Killing for time and space could stop if rescues truly lived up to their titles and would take the animals out. Instead, they go into a shelter, many rescues never see the inside of a shelter, and cherry pick, leaving the least adoptable, the old, the big one, the black ones to die. A report from a major animal control agency plainly shows that small dogs are rarely euthanized in the shelters except for medical or aggression. This cherry picking by rescues only leaves the "unadoptable" pets in the shelter for the public. There is a double standard of the rescues verses the shelters, always has been, and probably always will be.
So who really is responsible for the animals dying in the shelters? Is it the shelters who only collect the animals off the streets or is it the rescues who are leaving them in the shelters? It's time for NK to clean house. NK and rescues need to realize that they are the ones failing the animals in the shelters. It's quite simple, really, you can't kill 'em if they ain't there. So it is time for rescues to take them out and stop the euthanization. If an animal dies in the shelter, it is the failing of rescues to save it. The shelters provide a haven, but it is the job of rescue to save the lives. NK is placing all the responsibility on the shelters without looking at itself as the responsible party when it comes to saving lives.
NK and the humane community is at fault, they are not the ones pulling the trigger, but they are the ones with the blood on their hands. Demonstrating in front of a shelter about bad things only pushes away the people who can save lives. Telling the public that they are not at fault so the public can continue with their bad ways of allowing oops litters is killing animals. You won't save shelter animals lives this way. The way to save their lives is to tell the public how great a shelter is.
The public has never come running to the shelters because of demonstrations and condemnations. Has NK given thought that this negative publicity generated by NK followers is causing the rise in euthanasia? If NK hasn't thought about it, then it is past time that it does. Shelters aren't killing in as much as the humane community following NK is with their propaganda. When animals die in shelters, it is the failing of the humane community, in particular those who followed NK. Visit your local shelter, adopt a pet, and save a life.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
I see only a negative in a witch-hunt against the "no-kill cultists". NotBornYesterday, you need to direct your efforts towards those who are guilty - and if you read my original comment (to which you dared to read me the riot act) I plainly said it was the public that needs to be educated. I have NEVER said anything negative about shelter operations. I signed off on no gassing. I have given my opinion about the human-perpetuated animal-holocaust on just about any site you can name. And showing the horror-images must be part of the public education. "Never Again" If you don't see, you don't know. If you don't know....it will continue. I repeat, you can find a jillion postings if you type in my name and it is the mindless egoistic and sick public I have targeted. I'm not going to waste anymore time on this site. I obviously will not get the apology I deserve. // Jean Clelland-Morin
Jean, you wanted to show the world, throw it in their faces and that is the point. Showing the horror images is exactly what you should not want done, it pushes the public further away from the shelters and more animals die. You don't want education, you want revenge. Education would be telling people how wonderful shelters are, encouraging them to go. Vengence is wanting to hurt the public, turning them against the shelters. You don't deserve an apology at all for wanting to push the public away and more shelter animals have to die, you deserve something else for that morbid thinking.
I have been giving the opinion for about 3 years (since before I left San Antonio): that there needs to be a TV media blitz with the images of the animal-holocaust. The public needs to be slapped in the face. The last video I watched was An Act of Dog Project. I was already depressed over what I had seen and heard. This video finally crushed me. / I am a 6-afternoons-a-week volunteer at the local animal shelter here in France. This is a no-kill facility - and I am still heartbroken by what I know. In the U.S., the animal-holocaust is unbelievable. My only grandchildren are feline and canine - all rescued from the cruel streets of San Antonio. Last I read, S.A. was "down" to euthanizing 25,000 animals a year!! Get the innocent off death row! TV media blitz with the horror images! The blind must be made to see!!!
I do agree that the public needs to be slapped in the face, but not for the reasons that you subscribe to. You subscribe to "No Kill". You are one of those who condemn the shelters to the public, tell the public that they are not to blame, and then scream when adoptions go down and euthanasia goes up. Do you not see the interchange here, Jean? Do you not see the role that you are playing in increasing that euthanasia, the "holocaust" as you call it? Do you have so much faith in man kind as to think a man will load up his family and take them where they will see this "holocaust"? What planet are you on? It ain't gonna happen. Now realize that this movement you subscribe to has blood dripping from it and I don't appreciate your adding to the problem with your fanatical, cultish views. Animals are dying because of this cult, wise up, you are part of that. The last thing we need is to show horror images and drive that man into the waiting arms of a rescue, but not into the shelter to save a life. How dare you!
NotBornYesterday. How dare YOU!!! You are picking on the wrong guy. I am a 6-afternoons-a-week shelter volunteer. I am not picking on shelters. I am targeting irresponsible, mindless and sick "humans" who are perpetuating the animal-holocaust. And I posted an opinion today on what I consider the base of the holocaust: faulty parenting. Too many use physical force to apply their rules. Too many use ridiculing and humiliation to "control" their children. Then we wonder why they commit suicide or sick acts against the powerless and voiceless. The blind must see!!!! Get off my back and get a life by going after the real criminals. // Jean Clelland-Morin
You said you volunteer in a no kill shelter right? You use the terms used by "No Kill" such as holocaust, right? Then if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, then it is a duck. Volunteering at a "No Kill" shelter doesn't mean you are a saint, by any means. Volunteering at a shelter that still has to euthanize for time and space would make you a saint, not at a no kill shelter. Which animals need the volunteers the most - those shelter animals that will die, not the ones already saved. The blind that needs to see is those such as yourself and the harm you do with voicing a mindless opinion that pushes the public away from adopting. And where does that public end up, right in the waiting arms of a "No Kill" shelter? Can you say "HIDDEN AGENDA" there Jean?
Personally I come from a manufactoring background. When to much inventory gets in front of a slow moving machine you get to much work in process. Which is exactly what is wrong with shelters and rescues. To many dogs breed and then discarded and not enough adopters. I found it intersting that a vet had been bitten in a Pittsburg shelter and was complaining about it. My vet seems to take getting bite in stride and indicates its part of the job. Since I do own pit bull type dogs I would like to ad that he was never bitten by one of my dogs. Our shelter has a dog handling class and volunteers are rated on their dog handling ablity. So a green dot volunteer handles greed dot dogs ( the easiest). Yellow dots and are a step up. The blue and red dots are only handled by senior volunteers or the staff. There are shelters that receive funding but quite a few run on donations or a benefactor. I would say shelter and rescues need to work togehter. Many times our shelter looks for a rescue for a dog with medical problems and sometimes with behavior problems. I have volunteered now for about 5 years in a shelter.. I handle mostly pit bull type dogs, unless there is a rotti or GSD that I like comes in. I have had some good nips from excited dogs but never anything serious. People should realize the behavior of a dog in a shelter which is high stress is different than the behavior that the dog exhibits in a home situation. Things like food agggression or toy aggression are evualted at the shelter and told to the prespective adopter or the adoption is denied if the staff feels the people would not be responsbile enough.
There are absolutely statements made in the article that generalize. There are exceptions. Sadly, though a lot of it is true. I was in Joplin after the tornado for 5 days and not one large dog left the building. Rescuers left with small dogs, puppies and kittens. Not one large dog. I did not sleep the last night I was there. Of course, I left with three large dogs and did not have one open foster home. I still have one of the dogs, five months later.
NK is also overused. I have been at conferences where we applauded shelters at 94% and they called themselves NK. Sounds like they are killing 6% to me! When I am asked if we are a NK rescue, I always say we only euthanize for terminal illness when our vets give us no hope for survival. (Distemper, PDA, Diaphragmatic hernia in small puppies, etc.)
NK also means that many dogs will live for months or years in shelters. Sad.
Unless neutering becomes widely available at low cost, we will always have a problem of pet overpopulation that leads to euthanasia. Does it matter where a pet comes from, rescue, shelter or NK facility?
Let me thank you FosterMom, for taking those big dogs. I am a big dog person myself and don't mind taking them in my rescue. I rarely take the little ones out because the other rescues do that, those that are left from the cherry picking. It does take more work to adopt them, considerably more work, but I didn't get into rescue for my convenience. I do apologize if you think it generalized.
Spay/neuter is the major part of developing a solution. Instead of focusing on adoptions, rescues need to step forward and participate more in preventing the influx. Many things they can do. Offer financial aid to the low income pet owners. I do that but find that many times these owners don't have transportation so I provide that as well. Offer free obedience training to those who adopt from shelters for better owner retention. Offer financial aid for vet bills, again for owner retention. Many low income seniors desperately need this for a pet that is often times their only family. One thing I do is go to the Neighborhood Watch group meetings and do a presentation on "Are you doing all you can to keep your neighborhood safe?" With that I present the safety factors of altering your pet. Females in heat attract males. Male dogs after that one in heat are dangerous and if the kids come between him and the female, well, you know what can happen. Unaltered males are over 6 times more likely to become aggressive. And so forth. It is an absolutely great way to reach people face to face to present s/n. I get so many that want help in that direction, plus they talk to their neighbors. Takes a lot of time because just in my area there are 200 groups. We need to start thinking out of the box for things we can do other than adoptions. I've been asked more than once why I go through so much for one cat or one dog. I never see just one, I see all they can produce. So in my book each cat I take the trouble to get altered saves 430,000 other lives. I think about the future unlike "No Kill" which is stuck in the present.
The point of the article is that if we don't have enough rescues, if those rescues don't have the capacity to clear out the animals due for euthanization, then don't condemn the shelters to the public. Our only hope is to get the public to go into shelters and adopt.
Only about 10% of pets are acquired from open door shelters. The last thing shelters need is to be condemned to the public, we need the public to see the shelters as a wonderful place, whether they are or aren't, so that the public will want to go there. To do otherwise just kills more animals. Keep up the good work you do and I hope the best for those lucky big dogs you were so kind to take in.
The group I am with does TNR, S/N, rescue, provides dog food for elderly people and on reservations and does education. We are trying to do it all but obviously can't keep up. I firmly believe that to be in Animal Welfare you have to be against suffering, not death. Most of the animals we take are not euthanized by injection. Many are shot or worse. Our big TNR project has so many starving 1 lb. kittens that will freeze to death soon. That is much more horrible than euthanasia by injection in a shelter or vet office. People protesting at "kill" shelters should be spending their time more effectively. I do rescue 365 days a year and tell people about every shelter in our area. I have never turned people away from adopting from a shelter and never will. (my best girl Trixie is a shelter gal herself!) There are bad apples in every walk of life. Thanks for pointing it out.