Kill Shelters?

[spoonyspork]

I was just curious - is there an easy way to find kill shelters? I was thinking about this the other day, and out of curiosity, did a google search. I went through the first few pages to no luck - almost everything was about people rescuing FROM kill shelters, but not where those kill shelters are.

Next time I adopt, I want to from a kill shelter, if there are any around.

[CavySpirit]

Worldwide Shelter Directory - Worldwide Shelter Directory

Also, on the new site, which I hope to announce tonight or tomorrow, has the ability to list shelters that carry guinea pigs.

[Jennicat]

All the shelters around here list on their website what their adoption/euthanasia policies are.

[rabbitsncavyluv]

Ther are few very actual no-kill animal shelters. Sad fact is they all have to euthanize due to pet overpopulation and often medical issues since they don't have funds to treat tough cases. Chances are any animal shelter near you euthanizes.

[bunnyluv17]

Please do not refer to them as "kill shelters." This term is extremely offensive to the hard-working, caring staff and volunteers of the shelters. I have been a volunteer at an open-access shelter for over four years now, and I can tell you first hand that the staff do not like to euthanize any animals, but with the enormous number of homeless animals there is no other option right now. They do everything they can to improve adoption rates, make sure the animals find forever homes, and try to prevent animals from being dumped at the shelter in the first place. Oftentimes, especially with ill, old, or aggressive animals, the most humane option is a peaceful death by euthanasia.

In "no-kill" shelters, many of their animals languish for years in the shelter often developing behavioral problems from the stressful and far from ideal shelter environment. But in order to prevent this from occuring often, "no kill" shelters will only accept highly adoptable animals such as the young, purebred, or those without any behavior issues. As most animals do not fall into any of these categories, they are turned away. If it were not for open-access shelters, these animals would probably be abandoned on the street to fend for themselves or possibly taken out in the woods and shot.

When an open-access shelter in a neighboring city decided to go "no-kill", guess where all those animals turned away had to go? Our shelter now gets a large influx of animals from that neighboring city. This other shelter now only accepts approximately 400 animals a year; however, my local shelter takes in over 4,000 animals per year and they are able to help many, many more animals. "No kill" shelters do NOT reduce the euthanasia rates, they simply leave the "killing" up to someone else.

The only way to stop the euthanasia of homeless animals is to reduce the number of animals being born, as well as the number being abandoned. Shelters simply choosing to go "no kill" are not solving the problem but merely avoiding it.

I commend you for wanting to adopt from a shelter, but next time please refer to them as open-access shelters. The term "kill shelter" gives the wrong impression and could not be further from the truth since the whole purpose of a shelter is to give animals a second chance at life.

[CavySpirit]

I'm sorry, but I think your sensitivities are misplaced. I think it's very important for people to really understand what's going on rather than layer on more euphamisms. As far as I'm concerned, a real 'no-kill' shelter is a rescue.

If people take their animals to an 'open access' shelter, then what? Life is good? No worries. Don't bother to try to hard to rehome it yourself because the option is an 'open access' shelter rather than a 'kill-shelter'?

I really think it's a given that no one working in the shelters likes to put animals down.

I agree that the so-called 'no-kill' shelters just mask the issues of the 'kill' shelter usually near-by. But, there is an upside as well.

The only way to stop the euthanasia of homeless animals is to reduce the number of animals being born, as well as the number being abandoned. Shelters simply choosing to go "no kill" are not solving the problem but merely avoiding it.

Totally right.

I commend you for wanting to adopt from a shelter, but next time please refer to them as open-access shelters. The term "kill shelter" gives the wrong impression and could not be further from the truth since the whole purpose of a shelter is to give animals a second chance at life.

Again, I disagree. And order of priority for adoption is a kill shelter first and it should be.

Also, just like everything else, not all shelters are the same. Some do very little to rehome. Some policies are warped. Just a couple of months ago, I had to stand very firm and argue with the management of a generally good shelter to pull a pig about to be put down the next day for a teeny tiny little spot of ringworm on its nose. It took an hour plus of hanging out and making my case to get the pig pulled. I've had a blowup with the exec director of another shelter for not allowing me to pull the bonded brother of sick pig that they did want me to take because they wanted the adoptable pig for the front room to show as inventory. And these are some of the best shelters around.

If you work or volunteer at a shelter, you walk on water in my book. I couldn't do it. But, they are what they are and as you said, the only real solution is prevention.

[spoonyspork]

bunnyluv - Thank you! I had no idea they were NOT refered to as kill shelters! I've only ever heard that term, even from people who used to work at them.

The reasons you gave for having 'no-kill' shelters are the very reasons I want to go to an open-access shelter next time I adopt. I feel animals at 'no kill' shelters have a better chance of being adopted, and want to give a little bit of that chance to a so-called 'unadoptable' animal. I also want to give these open-access shelters my number, so they can CALL ME as soon as they get any small animal in that they'd normally euthanize immediately... if they'll do that sort of thing.

[spoonyspork]

CavySpirit - That list is great, by the way! Is there any way to tell if they euthanize from it, or would I need to call them? I don't mind if so... I was just seeing if there was a list that says which ones do

[bunnyluv17]

I was directing my post more towards actual shelter environments such as SPCA's and Humane Societies rather than rescues run out of someone's home.

I wasn't trying to imply that open-access shelters will solve everyone's problems, but merely that they are needed to take in many homeless animals that would otherwise have nowhere else to go. There are many people who are completely unwilling to put any effort into rehoming thier pets and really do not care about what happens to them. These are the kind of people who would quickly become frustrated with being put on a wait list for a "no kill" shelter, and might resort to dumping their animal on the street were it not for open-access shelters.

I agree that not all shelters are the same and there are definitely some that house animals in horrible conditions, but I feel as a whole shelters are trying to fix a problem that people's carelessness has created.

I guess my whole point was that the term "kill shelter" has very negative implications to it; and instead of directing our anger over the high euthanasia rates in this country towards shelters and their staff, we should be directing those negative feelings to the careless people who are the ones really responsible for the deaths of millions of animals.

Originally Posted by CavySpirit

As far as I'm concerned, a real 'no-kill' shelter is a rescue.

If people take their animals to an 'open access' shelter, then what? Life is good? No worries. Don't bother to try to hard to rehome it yourself because the option is an 'open access' shelter rather than a 'kill-shelter'?

Also, just like everything else, not all shelters are the same.