Why are some shelters not no-kill????

Try calling some no kill shelters to see if you can surrender an animal and you'll probably have your answer. No room at the inn. And promoting spay/neuter is kind of a joke. Even when free it's too much of an effort for many people. So... they fill up all the no kill shelters with their stupidity and there's no room left for anyone else. Just IMO, but I've made a couple dozen calls the past two days that support what I'm saying.

We are no-kill and the city right next to use euthanises 100 animals a week - we couldn't cope with their overflow if they went no-kill. It works well for our city because we have a low stray population.

Cinder, it might be the case where you are, but we take in surrenders and currently are pulling from kill shelters because we have space and are ordering more cages to bring in new ones as well as having about 40 boarding spots at vets we can use if it gets to that point.

As far as finances, no-kill shelters face a lot of problems getting funding and with the economy, even moreso - now isn't the time to be switching to no-kill and dealing with the vet bills that come with it. I just posted in fur pics about two cats we brought in and their surgeries have cost us quite a lot, certainly a lot more than their adoption fees. Most shelters just can't afford that regardless of their funding - some shelters have a hard time just keeping enough food for all their animals without spay/neuter costs and other vet bills

Part of my problem icklemiss is that I live in a rural area that no one wants to provide coverage for. Yes, several of the organizations I called were taking in surrenders, just not from where I live. And yes, they did mention taking cats from the kill shelters.

I'm good enough to send envelopes to asking for money, they accept my donations at their thrift stores, I even have one cat left that I adopted from the Portland shelter... But when it comes to asking for help, I don't qualify. Most people I've talked to said I should just have someone who lives in town surrender them for me. Gee, I never thought to lie about it. It's sad when you think about it. Over the past 20 years I have volunteered a great deal of time and money to help a variety of shelters, because I truly thought it was a great idea to have a place to go if you ever needed help. What a joke.

In an ideal world it would be great if we didn't have so many unwanted pet animals that everybody could find a home.

But truth be told I would prefer that a shelter make room for animals who have a shot at a home life rather than be so full with animals who cannot find a good home that they can't take in new ones who might find that home. I'd rather give my money to support animals that have a shot at escaping the 'animal welfare system' and giving someone a positive pet-owning experience.

My experience with no-kill is that they get cherry-picked for the best and wind up with much space being taken up by animals who may be less-than ideal adoption candidates and then have to turn away surrenders or found animals who maybe more readilly rehomable like litters of healthy stray kittens.

Frankly, there are many more people who can take a cat and give it a decent home, than can or will take a cat with special needs or behavior problems. Working at an animal hospital I have met a few pets with issues and think its great they have an owner because w/out one they'd never find another who'd be willing to deal.

A lot of the people I met who've had a 'I'll never get another shelter cat' experience went to backyard-shelter operations that claimed to be no-kill.

We've gotten 2 of our last 3 cats from a kill shelter (our local county HS). they've both been wonderful companions. The animals were well socialized, well-vetted, we never had any unexpected health or behavior issues. and they seemed genuinely concerned over who was adopting and what kind of home the animal was going to. They did make some attempt to get older animals adopted by offering discounts on fees and a senior citizen adoption discount. (We took 4year old cats).

Its sad to have to talk about picking and choosing when you're speaking of a living breathing creature, but that's reality.

We are a kill shelter - and you know what? It sucks. But we are county impound - we have no choice, not enough funds, not enough space, not enough fosters. We do everything in our power to avoid euthanizing - but if idiots out there would spay/neuter, we wouldn't have this problem.

We don't think it's OK to kill an animal, in fact, I can't tell you how many times I've sat bawling because I made the call the kill someone. Heck, I had to kill my own foster dog due to human aggression. I just killed a kitty yesterday. I could seriously probably tell you the name of every single animal I've made the call to kill, and I won't forget them. Try holding their heads as they fight death. It's not "OK", nor is it "right". I've probably made the call the kill hundreds of animals.

We've amputated legs on cats & dogs, we've fixed broken legs, stitched up open wounds, amputated tails, done dentals, treated chronic URIs/UTIs, removed eyes, dealt with CH kitties, chronic UTI kitties, kitties with stones/crystals, etc.

We are a rural area, we often cannot take surrenders from outside our county (our "surrender area") as we do not have space. We do what we can, when we can - in fact, we just took in a 10 y/o kitty who needs a Rx diet for life - we have a 12 y/o Eskie, & a 12 y/o Maltese who will need a dental & several "lumps" removed. We've adopted out old cats before - we just placed a 13 y/o cat last fall.

Hi Nat,

having to decide to put down an animal must be very hard . I'm glad it's not done without much consideration and that it is done by people who care for the animals- not just someone who's simply "doing a job".

And yes- the heart of this is people not neutering their animals

regards,

christine

Not everyone is like Nat. I have pulled from a few high kill shelters and some just go by how long the animal has been there (and in the height of summer, that is likely 4-5 days tops).

Some go by what animals have proved most adoptable. They euthanise ferals and sick animals, really old ones, then black ones, then pregnant and nursing ones. But even the rest dont last long when they have to make space.

And just because a shelter says it is no kill, doesn't mean it is. Some hand over animals to other shelters knowing they are kill shelters because they don't want the statistic on their record. So they release them to already overloaded animal control / pound facilities. And some that claim to be no-kill just have the euthanisations done in a different business name. Or they just dont take in animals.

The animal rescue world is not as black and white as people would like, sadly

Why are all shelters not no-kill shelters? Because according to The Humane Society of the United States, six to eight million companion animals (dogs and cats) are admitted to shelters each year. Three to four million of these are lucky enough to be adopted into new homes.

There are about 3,500 shelters in the U.S.

Here's an article at "American Humane": http://www.americanhumane.org/about-...uthanasia.html

So if these numbers are anywhere near accurate, the number of shelters would need to double each year if they were all no-kill.

...and let's not forget the 60 million to 100 million feral cats in the U.S. (according to Alley Cat Allies). Don't know anything about numbers of feral dogs in the U.S.

But they are VERY sad statistics. What needs to be promoted is spaying and neutering, responsible pet ownership, and the idea that pets are for life (!), not more shelters .

Laurie

Those figures are incredibly sad. The rescue situation is different in the UK, strictly speaking, we dont have kill and no kill shelters, although some charities are known to put certain kinds of cats, like FIV+ cats to sleep regardless of health. But there are drawbacks to no kill shelters - we might not euthanase for space (the only two who have been euthanased this year have been terminally ill, and allowed to live until their health issues got too much), but we have to say no to more cats, and who knows what will happen to them then? We might indirectly cause animals to die by not taking them in. But like every rescue, kill or no kill, we only have a certain amount of space, and only a certain amount of money, and can only help so many cats, and it isn't our fault these animals have to die, it is the irresponsible people who abandon them, allow their animals to have litter after litter etc - we are just here to pick up the pieces and help what we can, and sadly rehoming is down for us, we have young adults who have been waiting for months - kittens go very quickly though, you feel like telling people that the cute little kitten will be just like the others in a few months/years time, but htey don't care about that.

Sigh......

This is SUCH a tough subject. Most everyone here has already said what I would have said. Too many animals, not enough homes, ignorant owners, backward policies....

I volunteer with a small, foster-based, no-kill rescue. We can't take in animals when we have no room. We need more foster homes and getting people interested in and committed to that is really, really tough. We don't want to overburden the ones we already have.

And sometimes we have to turn away animals b/c we don't have room or - as a judgement call - the animal would NEVER get adopted. Rescued animals - somehow we always manage to make room... for instance - If one of our volunteers finds a sick, starving dog in her neighborhood.... We do also pull animals from kill shelters - again - if we have room.

And we cannot afford to do much more than we already do - we don't recoup our care and vet costs with our adoption fees... so donations have to make up the rest of it. Frankly, I don't know how we do it.

Nat,

My experience has been a lot like yours. I work at a shelter that's on a military installation. The military has all their "strict guidelines" and I was a bit worried when I took the job that I wouldn't be able to watch the animals be euthanized. The reality of my job is much more like what you've described. They give animals every opportunity to find a home. We've had some there for months. No one wants to see them put down, even the ferals. We get ferals we know aren't adoptable and we still give them as much time as possible to see if they come around. No one's selling anyone short. Despite it's being on a military base, it's not "government funded." We have extremely limited space and funds like any other animal rescue, maybe less. Sometimes you have to euthanize animals who'd be great pets because they just don't get adopted and that beyond sucks. There aren't words for choosing a life to end and it breaks my heart every time it happens.

Since I've started this job I've done a lot of thinking about strays, shelters, etc. It seems to me that like someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there are no such thing as no-kill shelters because once they're full what happens to the animals not taken? Someone also mentioned they might be no-kill to make the workers feel better. I've done a lot of reflection on how I feel about those things and if I could work at a shelter that euthanizes. I finally decided that working at a no-kill only place would, for me, be more about me than the cats. Honestly, the kennels aren't very large. What kind of a life do they have in a metal cage? That's existing, not living. If they're severely or chronically sick, shouldn't the resources that would be spent on them go to "adoptable" animals? What about the ferals? I HATE seeing an animal put to sleep because it finds itself in a strange environment and is scared but they're not going to make good pets (unless you know what you're doing). Shouldn't food we would give them go to buy another, "friendlier" cat more time? It really boils down to a question of resources. For even the most philanthropically minded it would be impossible to fund caring for all the animals that are homeless.

I don't like any of those answers any more than anyone else but I concluded that I cannot help the situation by quitting. I remind myself that it's about the cats (and the dogs) and not about me. That means putting my own worries and pain aside, sticking it out and doing the best I can for every animal that comes into our shelter. Even if the best I can do for them is to feed them and make them feel safe in the time they're with me then that's what I'm going to do. If I see these animals in the afterlife I want to look them in the eye and know I did everything I could for them.

Really, if pet owners would spay and neuter and consider seriously what pet ownership is from the get-go I would be out of a job and not the least bit unhappy about it.

There is something to be said for the people who work at a no-kill because they dont want to make the decision - they might not ever work helping animals otherwise.

Personally, walking into animal control haunts me, I am the one who pulls cats from there but I still have to decide those lives, even at a no-kill and it is rare to find a true no-kill, even we will euthanise for temperment or severe illness. Do we turn down animals? yes, when they are surrenders - but we will make space for a stray at any time regardless of how full we are. Like Nat, we all have had animals at home to foster to make space or make sure they are cared for properly if sick etc.

Do I think I could work at the local kill shelter? No (and they dont take volunteers anyway), but I help them a lot by donating a lot of my time to the no-kill here because we can help them.

The trips there leave me with sleepless nights full of dreams of the ones we left behind. I am fully aware of the huge numbers they euthanise, and I know how many of those I have personally saved because no one else can deal with walking through and choosing the animals so despite the sleepless nights and times I have cried having to choose between two great cats, or a mom with kittens or a cat without kittens - every one of those lives are worth it. But I also think I would burn out quickly if I worked there - just because someone is at a no-kill does not mean they dont have to make those decisions.

I am with you on this. As a volunteer with a foster-based rescue, I cannot be the one to go into a kill facility and say, this one and that one will live ( goes with me) and the one or many left behind will be PTS. I would want to take ALL of them. I don't know how you can do it.

I'm not really adding anything new but...

The shelter I volunteer at euthanizes animals and is responsible for the animal control in the city (and possibly the county?). There are just too many strays.

Spay/neuter will help but it won't solve the problem. If we didn't have any surrendered animals and only had to deal with strays, then euthanizing might not be such a huge occurrence. Our euthanasia rate is pretty low for an animal shelter, it's something like 1 in 4 incoming animals are euthanized, including ones that are sick and 'un-adoptable'. They try to make it a last resort thing, and we work with rescues in the area when we can. Once an animal is put up for adoption, it doesn't have a time limit and won't be put to sleep.

I never see the euthanizing, but I did get a glimpse of my supervisor's euthanasia schedule and was surprised to see that they do it every day of the week, including weekends. I guess I just naively assumed they saved it for weekdays. I think I know the area in the shelter where it's done, but volunteers are just not exposed to it one bit. As a volunteer, I really only work with the animals in the adoption area, not the animals in the stray area or the intake area. I think that's why our volunteer retention rate is pretty high and we have a waiting list to volunteer at the shelter.

I'm not really adding anything new but...

The shelter I volunteer at euthanizes animals and is responsible for the animal control in the city (and possibly the county?). There are just too many strays.

I'm actually glad that we have a shelter than euthanizes. If the city only had no-kill places, then people wouldn't have anywhere to bring strays or wouldn't have anywhere to abandon their animals (couldn't think of a better word...). I think that the result would be people just turning their cats loose, say, if they were moving and didn't want to take the cat.

Spay/neuter will help but it won't solve the problem. If we didn't have any surrendered animals and only had to deal with strays, then euthanizing might not be such a huge occurrence. Our euthanasia rate is pretty low for an animal shelter, it's something like 1 in 4 incoming animals are euthanized, including ones that are sick and 'un-adoptable'. They try to make it a last resort thing, and we work with rescues in the area when we can. Once an animal is put up for adoption, it doesn't have a time limit and won't be put to sleep.

I never see the euthanizing, but I did get a glimpse of my supervisor's euthanasia schedule and was surprised to see that they do it every day of the week, including weekends. I guess I just naively assumed they saved it for weekdays. I think I know the area in the shelter where it's done, but volunteers are just not exposed to it one bit. As a volunteer, I really only work with the animals in the adoption area, not the animals in the stray area or the intake area. I think that's why our volunteer retention rate is pretty high and we have a waiting list to volunteer at the shelter.

I don't believe in euthanizing animals because they are less adoptable than young, healthy ones. This is one of the main reasons kill shelters give. This is simply my own personal opinion, so I am not attacking you, Lyrajean. Anyway, I believe that all animals deserve a chance (or a second chance) at finding a loving home, and they shouldn't have to fear euthanasia simply because there might be a health problem but it is cheaper for the shelter to kill the animal than fix a treatable condition.

While I don't agree with kill shelters, I used to be able to understand why they operated the way they do. But after reading a book and finding a guide to transforming kill shelters into no-kill shelters, I do not believe there is an excuse. There are ways for even the poorest shelters to at least try begin the transformation. I know the change cannot be instant, but it saddens me to see that many shelters are not even trying to become no-kill. The kill shelters near me are not even making an attempt. Sure, they want to get the animals out, but there is more to it than that. The shelter hasn't even been full here and they euthanize animals because of their policy about keeping animals a certain number of days. That isn't euthanizing to make room when there is already plenty of room there. It has to do with finances. Now, couldn't kill shelters allow donations, sponsorship of animals, fundraisers, etc. I know of some that do (but none near me). Again, I know that funds are low for most county pounds and such, but they could at least enact a sponsorship program where I could donate enough to care for a dog while he/she was in the shelter until an adopter or rescue came. That wouldn't cost them anything! Again, I've seen many shelters with such things, but none near me.

I understand your experience with animal rescues, but it is not usually like that. The group I work with doesn't even have a physical facility. We foster all animals in homes. The group has over 100 animals being fostered right now. We take owner surrenders, strays that have been found, dumped animals, and animals from several pound in the state. Yes, sometimes there isn't a foster available, but I believe we get new animals from pounds every single week. So we don't really turn away anyone unless there is nobody to foster, but usually we find someone. Also, we always have plenty of puppies, kittens, young animals, and purebreds. Sure, we have older animals and some with special medical needs, but the majority are "ideal" adoption candidates. We won't adopt a severely aggressive animal out. Just because a dog might have a health problem or is a senior or something doesn't mean it isn't someone's ideal pet. My cat was kicked in the face by a person and his jaw was completely shattered. Luckily, someone dumped him at the vet rather than the pound. The local pound would have euthanized him. The vet wired his jaw back together and kept him at the cat shelter where he received rehab for several months, after which we adopted him. When I think of the fate of my animals had they been taken to the pound rather than a no-kill rescue, I realize I probably wouldn't have any of them right now.

It is also in my experience that cats with health problems do find owners. Yes, it takes longer, but with the help of no-kill rescues, most eventually find a loving home. There are so many people out there that are compassionate and want to take cats that are less likely to be adopted. Last time I looked for a cat on Petfinder, I specifically looked for a special needs one. Again, this is just my person opinion. I had a rescued cat that was temporarily blinded and paralyzed. She is fine now, but they thought it was permanent. Again, she would have been euthanized had she showed up at the pound. She never would have been given the time to recover and become the normal, healthy, loving cat that she is today.

Well, there's a reason the people you know are unhappy with their no-kill shelter experience, but that's because these obviously weren't very professional operations. Most no-kill shelters know what they are doing and many are extremely professional. We foster all of our animals, meaning they are extremely well socialized. We know their personalities and how they get along with people, kids, cats, and other dogs. All adopted must fill out extensive applications and prove they can afford the animal. The kill shelter you adopted from sounds really nice. Unfortunately, most are not like that (in my experience). Often, the animals stay in their cages all day long and don't get socialization. The shelter has no clue how they get along with kids and other animals. Granted, I fully encourage everyone to adopt from a kill shelter if they can. I had a family deciding between one of my foster kittens and a kitten at a kill shelter. I told them to take the kill shelter kitten because I knew the cat I had could stay with me as long as it took.

I'm sorry this was so long. I am just extremely passionate about changing kill shelters to no-kill.

This is what upsets me about no-kill shelters (even though I fully support them). Most of the shelters in my area do not take owner surrenders. This means they can only take their animals to the pound. This bothers me because I feel that the shelters I have experience with turn owner surrenders away partly because they are angry at the owners for just giving up their animals. It also makes me angry to see how some people can just leave their dog at a shelter with seemingly no care in the world, but I realize that the animal should not have to suffer because of the owner's actions. It makes me sad to know that a family dog of 10 years can be dumped at a shelter, where he is depressed and confused. Then, because he's older, he has slim chances of being adopted. It just isn't right. I even know of a shelter around here that only rescues animals from the pound. While they are definitely saving animals, they believe this is the only "true form of rescue." I think that's also ridiculous. All of the animals I've saved have been strays, mostly puppies and kittens that I have found or that I knew had been left outside to fend for themselves when they shouldn't have even been away from their mothers. Sorry, rant over!

It's called Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America by Nathan Winograd.

Granted, I do not agree with every single thing that is said in this book. If you go to the Amazon page for the book, one review does claim that he touches very little on the fact that many no-kill shelters turn away animals. Unfortunately, this is true. Many will not take owner surrenders or strays off the street. The shelter I work with does not turn away animals. But I think this just means that transforming no-kill shelters has to be part of the process of eliminating kill shelters.

There is also a nice website here: http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/...l-control.html

Here's a question: Does the prevalence of no-kill shelters increase the rate of owner surrenders? Does knowing that the cat that, "just not working out anymore" won't be killed make it more likely that they'll turn them in, feel warm and fuzzy for "doing the right thing" then turn around and get a new pet for the kids six months down the road? If so, how do we combat that problem?

(I'm not suggesting we do away with no-kill shelters at all! Just asking the question in the hopes we might begin to create some solutions for the animals.)

Any cat that I ever assisted in euthanizing had at least some medical problem, but it was still difficult. The TNR had a blanket policy on FELV/FIV+s and at the clinic sometimes problems were treatable, but owners weren't willing to take the time or foot the cost. In some instances I was actually happy to help end an animals suffering.

There seems to be a big difference in owner surrenders and strays as far as who gets in and who doesn't. That may be part of my problem. When a cat/kitten gets dumped off here the first thing I do is take them in to the vet, treat anything that's wrong with them. Maybe that in itself pegs me as an owner. If so, I'll still take care of them, but how I present my willingness to do so may have to change.

I would never, in a million years, want my shelter to become "no-kill". Yeah, it sucks that we're kill, but man....I've met a dog that was adopted out from a no-kill shelter. He was utterly dangerous. He severly injured his owner - which, IMO, set the owner's health downhill that lasted for several months, going as far as almost making the owner housebound.

He was downright aggressive - yet they were "no-kill" so they adopted him out. Yes - they informed the owner - but you have a human aggressive dog - no dog like that should be adopted out.

While you feel passionately that all shelters should be no-kill, I likely wouldn't volunteer for my shelter if they became no-kill. Because we would never be able to take owner surrenders, due to the sheer numbers of strays. We would have all feral cats that would end up living out horrible existences in cages, because there is no way we'd ever adopt a feral cat out.

We get approximately $1,500 on city & county funding a year. The rest we have to raise ourselves. That's pretty mcuh $1 per animal per year. Say it costs us, on average, $75 in vet bills for every animal adopted. You do the math - that's a lot of money to be raising.

Yes, I have the blood of hundreds on my hands - but when you have a dangerous/aggressive animal - they need to be euthanized. When you have a 15 y/o kitty who lost it's owner, who is no longer eating, depressed in the cage - they need to be euthanized.

Our euthanasia rate, BTW, is anywhere from 4-10% (I can't remember the exact number from last year). Many feral cats are euthanized, if we don't have farm homes for them. Dogs with aggression issues are euthanized, as well as dogs with severe health issues. But we've had 10 dogs fostered out (large dogs) to make room at the shelter, so as not to have to euthanize anyone. We don't kill someone because they reached XX number of days - we had a 10+ y/o mother/son pair for 8 months, we had one dog for 2 years.....we do our best, and while some may not think us as great as a "no-kill", I think we're pretty lucky to have what we do.

(And I'm not just aiming this at you MissKitties - but generally for all to know)

As a no-kill we still have a clause for dangerous animals. Nat, a dog like the one you mention would be euthanised at most no-kill shelters up here maybe with the exception of one major shelter I can think of.

If a cat is feral, we TNR. We have a few each year the vets tell us are adoptable but in general they are released. We do take surrenders (we took in 5 today alone) but yes, you find people with stupid excuses because they know the animal wont be euthanised but we also get idiots who just want us to do the healthcare on their cat and 'find it as a stray but really want to adopt it'

Your post is really interesting Nat - a friend sent me an article from teh REdemption book yesterday, and I disagree with him that all shelters can be turned to no kill - maybe in the future, but with the current financial climate, you can't adopt out enough animals to be no kill, there are simply too many animals and not enough space or funds. I find it interesting to read the different policies on here regarding what cats will be taken in - we have some rescues over here who wont take strays - we are a feral rescue, so ferals and strays who could start a feral colony are our priority (as we dont always know if they are neutered), then mums and kittens to make sure the kittens are adopted out to people who will neuter and avoid them becoming feral.

I had read recently that our main county shelter is striving -- has the goal of -- becoming no-kill. It is actually quite a progressive operation with all kinds of good programs to help people fix and vaccinate their animals.

I rather agree with Nat. It sounds like we've had similar shelter experiences where in spite of being at a "kill" shelter everyone busts every available resource to do our very best for the animals. If we were burdened with dangerous dogs and massive feral populations, I'm afraid they would shut us down entirely. Then, NO animals would be helped.

I think the real issue is owner education and spay/neutering. If those things were under control this whole topic would be moot. We had a stray German Shepherd come in today. She's a great dog, super friendly. She has a microchip so we contacted her owner. When the guy picked her up I said I hoped she wouldn't get out again. She's so pretty someone might keep her rather than return her. He said to me if wouldn't matter if they did. He has her daddy and could just make more. I told him I thought that would help the overcrowding at shelters and he had the decency to look embarrassed but that was about all the decency he had. People like that should be prohibited from owning pets, or at least from owning pets who can reproduce.

Well good luck with trying to educate the brain dead. It would be great if there were some way to put teeth into consequences for those who won't take any responsibility to spay/neuter, but in many instances all that would do would be to create possibly worse circumstances for the animals. Around here if you got fined for bringing in multiple litters of kittens to the shelter year after year, they'd just hit 'em in the head with a shovel or throw 'em in the ditch. (in front of someone else's house)

I mean, for cripe's sake.... you can get cats spayed & neutered for NOTHING around here. How do you educate that kind of stupid and lazy?