By Victoria Swanson — One of many Pet Behavior blogs on SmartLivingNetwork.com
I don't believe so, but hold on. Before you start getting after me and thinking how anyone can be in support of a public shelter that euthanizes animals, let me first disclose that there are good and bad in both public and private Shelters.
First, let's take a look at private shelters;
A "No Kill" shelter is an organization that does not euthanize any animal that can be adopted. If an animal is deemed dangerous or terminally ill, then euthanization will be performed, although there are no written guidelines or policies for these shelters to go by. These determinations are left to each individual private shelter's discretion. Don't let this determination confuse you with animals that are considered non-adoptable, but not necessarily deemed for euthanization. The fact that they aren't adoptable doesn't mean they are euthanized, instead the unadoptable pets live out their lives at these no kill facilities.
Some private shelters have been compared to an animal hoarder for the following reasons:
These wonderful adoptable pets can suffer from depression, act out in aggression, or they withdraw, making once adoptable pets now more difficult to deal with. So the question stands: Does a no kill shelter provide the best scenario for pets that are adoptable, or is the clock ticking against them, altering their adoptability?
Because many of these facilities are trying to save every life, they are often forced to refuse drop offs and have the right to turn away animals. Although the fate of death doesn't lie at these no kill shelters, these animals are often brought to the public shelters and euthanized or worse yet, cast off somewhere to die a more horrendous death. So the question stands: Because a no kill shelter can refuse to take an animal, does that make a death by injection more humane or a person making a conscious decision to disregard their pet along the side of a road letting fate take its course the better option (yes, people do this)?
The act of saving an animal and keeping it alive because it is regarded as unadoptable doesn't necessarily give these pets the optimum lifestyle. There was documentation of an unadoptable pit bull that had lived at private shelter for 12 years. Unfortunately, this pit bull had suffered mental anguish from his many years of confinement and would thrash himself against the walls of its kennel to the point that volunteers and workers were unable to handle him. So the question stands: Does this constitute an exemplary lifestyle for this pit bull or would have euthanizing this dog been more humane?
ABSOLUTELY, private shelters work extremely hard trying to place a majority of their animals, helping families reconnect with lost pets, as well as providing a refuge for many pets that otherwise would be euthanized and not have a chance at life.
12-20 million animals were euthanized in the 1970's at public shelters. However, since private shelters came about in the 90's, this number has significantly dropped to 4 million per year.
Now, let's take a look at public shelters;
A public/animal shelter provides housing or shelter for injured, lost, and abandoned animals, as well as voluntarily surrender - mainly for dogs and cats. We all know what the hard facts are when it comes to public shelters. Yes, they euthanize animals, too many in my opinion. But let's take an objective look at the reasons why and what we can do to help put an end to this unnecessary euthanization:
ABSOLUTELY, they offer an alternative for people that otherwise have no where else to turn for a pet they no longer want or can keep.
Private and public shelters work toward changing the value of how pet ownership is perceived through educating, training, and assisting low income families financially.
I encourage you to share your thoughts and opinions on this hot topic.
Discuss this blog and find related content at: