No-Kill Animal Shelters

[envisionary333]

No-kill shelters may be harmful to animals - Pet Health - MSNBC.com

[GailtheGuineaPg]

That's interesting. I've never seen an article that talks about the negatives of no-kill shelters like that.

[piggly wiggly]

The article explains both sides which is good, and they ask the question what is the alternative. All of the shelters around me stopped doing low cost spay and neuter, maybe if places brought that back,it might help a little. Every little bit helps.

[Susan9608]

Personally, I've always felt like no-kill shelters are a bad idea. They aren't truly "no-kill" - they just take in only the most adoptable animals and leave the killing up to someone else.

[envisionary333]

I agree. A no-kill shelter is a great idea until the shelter gets full, and then the problems quickly begin to outweigh the benefits. Can life in a cage with no interaction really be considered better than a humane euthanasia? What about all the dogs who have been abused or injured to the point that trusting people or other dogs is near impossible, and finding a good home for them is exceedingly difficult? It is really more humane to keep them around to live a life of pain and suffering?

So long as there is such as vast and overwhelming animal overpopulation problem, euthanasia remains a tragic, but necessary, component of dealing with it. Rather than spending money towards keeping all the abandoned animals in the shelter to live a substandard life, it makes more sense to put that money towards preventative measures that will help block the overpopulation problem at it's source. That would mean increasing the awareness of society and individuals, stopping breeders, creating a rigorous application process for adopting/buying new pets, and promoting the spaying and neutering of strays as well as pets. It's better to prevent the problem from occurring in the first place than to just try to continually and endlessly absorb all of it's effects. It would be wonderful to see the overpopulation issue so thoroughly resolved that shelters could easily maintain all of the animals they care for at any given time without the need for euthanasia.

[Alusdra]

Somewhere that warehouses animals is not a rescue- it's a hoarder.

No-kill shelters are a good supplement and partner to kill shelters at the moment. They do and should take in the animals that are adoptable that would otherwise be euthanized at the kill shelter. Hopefully in the future all of them can be, and those with problems can be worked with and found good homes, but right now it's simply not practical.

[aqh88]

Except noone takes animals to shelters that aren't no kill. They are more likely to just turn the animal loose or leave it in front of the shelter after hours than risk it being euthanized. The no kill shelters then end up packed from end to end like the current conditions in Iowa City while animal control, the only place that puts animals down, only has a few dogs that were picked up wandering loose in the city. The no kill shelter actually tells people with pets that they don't think they can adopt out to have them PTS at the vet but noone will do that. They find some other way to dump them.

Of course what's the point at which you should PTS an animal instead of dumping it on the shelter? Is my mom right who wants to euthanize a barn cat that for the past 5years has a phobia of all litterbox setups one can imagine and so pees in the house daily after sneaking in? No shelter will take the cat and noone will adopt it. I can't even adopt out a tame litterbox trained cat. I questioned her decision and instead today I find out my stepdad hauled the cat off and dumped it somewhere. It's been making me wonder lately if no kill shelters really are any help considering how full they are and how many animals end up facing potentially worse circumstances than if some were euthanized. There are so many feral and barn cats around here that honestly all of them would just be better off if majority were euthanized but it's considered such a horrible thing to do and no shelter will take them so instead people leave them running around to breed, cause trouble, and suffer a much worse death on the highway. Noone can afford to neuter all the stray cats that show up around here. Low cost neuter programs failed because there were so many that needed neutered. The vets and people in charge of the programs couldn't keep up and that's only the people willing to bring them in for $5-$10 a cat.

[crazywiggy]

I'm not really sure how I feel about this, I can see both sides.

I certainly don't like the fact that animals are being euthanised in such high numbers, but no-kill shelters can't always provide the answer.

I don't think no-kill shelters are necessarily harmful, as long as they are run properly. In other wordd they need to ensure that they do not go over their capacity, so that all the animals are kept in good conditions and recieve the attention they need. Of course the problem with this is that they have to turn animals away, which will only end up being dumped or euthanised elsewhere.

I guess its a lose-lose situation. Until we stop animals being bred, sold and owned by irresponsible people who see them as disposable there will always be overpopulation and one way or another animals will have to die.

[Susan9608]

On the contrary, I see no-kill shelters as exceedingly harmful. Because they have this angelic sounding policy of "no kill", they receive a great deal of support from communities, businesses, and individuals. That is support that could go to the kill shelters and help prevent "kill" shelters from having to utilize euthanasia. In addition, people are more likely to volunteer at no kill shelters, depriving the "kill" shelters of this valuable asset as well.

No kill shelters aren't no kill; this cannot be stated enough. They simply leave the euthanasia up to someone else. In Dallas, for example, our SPCA recently turned "no kill." Animals can only be "surrendered" with a reservation; if they have no room, then they encourage you to call the city's animal control, which of course, does not shelter any animals (at least not to my knowledge.) The SPCA has simply passed the burden of euthanizing unwanted animals to someone else ... in this case, the city.

And for some unfathomable reason, some people only want to adopt from no kill shelters; whether that is because they don't want to support the practice of euthanasia or because they simply want a bigger selection of highly desirable, adoptable animals, but it's true - some people are more likely to adopt from a no-kill shelter.

Some so called no kill shelters remain so only for limited periods of time. For instance, if a kitten is taken in and not adopted, causing it to grow old there in the shelter, no kill shelters will - and have - "donated" the animal to a facility that practices euthanasia. That way they ensure they have room for all the highly adoptable animals.

It doesn't matter how well run a no-kill shelter is; the fact remains that there is really no such thing. They simply put the nasty business of euthanasia on someone else's plate.

[envisionary333]

Here are a couple more articles about no-kill shelters:

PETA Living > Animal Times > Summer 2005 > The Disturbing Facts About ‘No-Kill’ Shelters
Independent Weekly: News: State: No-kill shelters defend practices

[Hooray4Ashley]

I work for a veterinary clinic. Most of the no kill shelters around us have a limit on the number of animals they will take in. When they no longer have space they send the new arrivals to animal services, who practically euthanizes everything that walks in the door.

[Susan613]

Whats so sad about animals having to be euthanized at shelters, is that you know that there is a person out there for every animal. Its just trying to find that right person.

[aqh88]

I disagree. I think there are at least double the number of animals as there are homes out there for them. I don't think you could possibly place every animal that is currently homeless even if no more came in. I think some would still sit in the shelter for years and possibly their whole lifespan without anyone willing to take them. There isn't a home for every one of them. There are only so many homes and far more animals.