Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dogs - General Dog Chat


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-10-2012, 07:54 AM
Aleron's Avatar
Aleron Aleron is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,270
Default

There is a lot more to real no-kill shelters than just not killing for space. When you talk about no-kill shelters just warehousing animals, that is the HSUS version of a no-kill shelter. For it to work it requires a total change in how the shelter is managed. One can't take a high kill shelter and do everything the same except stop killing for space and expect to succeed. This outlines the "No Kill Equation": http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/...kill-equation/

I don't believe most high kill shelters do any of these things, at least not the ones around here. Around here, it's hold for so many days (I think 3 is the legal requirement, owner surrenders are not required to be held) then kill by heartstick or gas chamber. I have seen the difference a change in thinking and management makes with our county pound. 10 years ago, they were high kill. They gave strays 3 days, owner turn ins sometimes no days. They'd keep puppies a bit longer sometimes and the extent of promotion for adoption was putting a picture of an available puppy in the newspaper every Sunday. Of course, they were only open M-F from 9-4. Local rescue groups would sometimes go in at closing, the day before the dogs would be killed and try to take as many as they could. And the pound would turn them away and if they didn't, they'd require the rescue pay for the dogs knowing that if the dogs didn't go to the rescue they were dead (and giving them to the rescues would actually save them money, as it costs money to kill them).

However, about 5 or so years ago things changed there, it seems someone decided promoting adoption and saving the lives of the dogs there was important. The pound extended their hours in the middle of the week so they were open until 7, giving people who work during the day a chance to come see the dogs. They stopped killing all pit bulls (and sadly, that is most of the population at the pound), they promoted a dog walking program for people to volunteer to come walk and interact with the dogs there, a volunteer puts their dogs up on petfinder/craigslist, local rescues are worked with rather than turned away or given a hard time. While they are not no kill, they have greatly reduced the numbers of dogs dying there. Just by changing how things are managed. So much so, that the fact they were full and going to have to start killing for space...something that was so common before that it certainly wasn't newsworthy.
__________________
Nikki & the Herding Breed Variety Pack
Visit Us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Alerondogs
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-10-2012, 08:19 AM
Taqroy's Avatar
Taqroy Taqroy is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,552
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet72947 View Post
If you are the one putting a needle full of fatal-plus into the dog, you are directly to blame for it's death. Others may be indirectly responsible, such as the breeder who created that life and failed to look after it, and the owner who surrendered the pet to the shelter in the first place, but the person doing the killing holds the ultimate responsibility.

That's just an awful thing to say. Wtf do you expect that person to do? Take every dog that comes to them and take it home? What do you think will happen? You can't put the responsibility solely on ONE person and expect awesome things to happen - that's not just naive, it's stupid. I understand that euthanasia isn't always the peaceful slipping away that we think it is - but I still think it's better than spending YEARS in a kennel, or a crate, or being bounced from foster home to foster home.

This is Chai.


She's a dog that lives at the rescue I volunteer/train with. The rescue has had her since she was a puppy - she's six years old now. She had a foster home for a little while. But she's dog and human reactive so it didn't really work out. Once she gets to know you (which can take up to a month, walking with her and someone she trusts several times a week) she is the sweetest dog ever. I adore her. But I think it's a **** life for a sweet dog to live in a kennel and only get to go for walks 3 times a day.

THIS is what happens when you try to save every dog. You end up with dogs that can't be "fixed" enough for the general public and you end up keeping them for YEARS. What will we do with all the human/dog reactive dogs that no one wants? The rescue has five dogs right now that are reactive. Despite heavy promotion and excellent pics + the promise of free classes and behavior work NO ONE WANTS THESE DOGS.

There isn't an easy catch all solution to this problem. And IMO it's pretty offensive to say that there is and "you're just doing it wrong" or "you just have the wrong mindset" to people who are doing the best they can. The power of positive thinking isn't going to stop BYB breeders from producing more dogs, or the people who buy those dogs from dropping them off at the pound. That's not how this world works. I don't know the answer, but I do know that getting up in people's faces doesn't change a **** thing and mostly just puts them on the defensive.
__________________


I have a blog!! TeamShortLegs - Last updated 10/13/2013
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-10-2012, 08:28 AM
Gempress Gempress is offline
Walks into Mordor
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 11,955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyzelle View Post
The person holding the needle has the ultimate responsibility for homeless dogs and cats.....

Uhm. No.

You are oversimplifying this to an extreme level.
THIS X 1,000,000. Wow. My mind is boggling. That's like saying the prison warden is ultimately responsible for the number of incarcerated persons in society.

Here's who *I* think has the responsibility for homeless animals:
- The ones who breed irresponsibly.
- The buyers who get an animal for all the wrong reasons.
- The owners who don't devote the time or resources needed to maintain a pet responsibly.

Pet overpopulation is certainly not a new thing born of modern society. Hundreds upon hundreds of years ago, people were drowning unwanted puppies and kittens. Pets are prolific. Say your average dog has 5 pups in a litter, 2 litters a year, for 6 years. That's 60 puppies from one female. Say your average pet owner has 10 dogs throughout his/her lifetime. That means a single bitch can produce enough pups to fill the lifetimes of 6 people.

I live in an area that suffers greatly from pet overpopulation. One you reach a certain saturation, there are just no more homes to be found. I don't like kill shelters, but as long as there is pet overpopulation, there will sadly be a need for them. Rather than debating whether or not pet overpopulation even exists, I believe that problem should be brought front and center into the public eye and awareness campaigns started. Also, perhaps coming up with new ideas to controlling the pet population. I think a fund or charity that would neuter animals for free would make a huge impact. I think that would be the best way to eliminate kill shelters.
__________________

Last edited by Gempress; 10-10-2012 at 08:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-10-2012, 08:41 AM
JoLeigh's Avatar
JoLeigh JoLeigh is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Greenville SC
Posts: 580
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gempress View Post

Lyzelle
The person holding the needle has the ultimate responsibility for homeless dogs and cats.....

Uhm. No.

You are oversimplifying this to an extreme level.

And

THIS X 1,000,000. Wow. My mind is boggling. That's like saying the prison warden is ultimately responsible for the number of incarcerated persons in society.

Here's who *I* think has the responsibility for homeless animals:
- The ones who breed irresponsibly.
- The buyers who get an animal for all the wrong reasons.
- The owners who don't devote the time or resources needed to maintain a pet responsibly.

This completely!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-10-2012, 08:57 AM
stardogs stardogs is offline
Behavior Nerd
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 4,546
Default

I'm honestly still speechless about the comment that the person euthanizing has ultimate responsibility for the animal's death.

I can imagine that your coworkers at the shelter that euthanized really appreciated that sentiment. >.< Talk about stress for staff who have that task - it's bad enough when it comes from the public, but from someone working in the trenches?! wow.
__________________
Erin, Ziva, Kestrel, Aerten, and Snipe
Always in our hearts: The Amazing Maggie Mae


Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-10-2012, 09:19 AM
LauraLeigh's Avatar
LauraLeigh LauraLeigh is offline
Irritate with Caution!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton Ontario
Posts: 3,659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stardogs View Post
I'm honestly still speechless about the comment that the person euthanizing has ultimate responsibility for the animal's death.

I can imagine that your coworkers at the shelter that euthanized really appreciated that sentiment. >.< Talk about stress for staff who have that task - it's bad enough when it comes from the public, but from someone working in the trenches?! wow.
This!!!!

That may have been one of the cruelest, most callous things I have ever read on here.....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-10-2012, 09:25 AM
Shai's Avatar
Shai Shai is offline
& the Muttly Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gempress View Post
Here's who *I* think has the responsibility for homeless animals:
- The ones who breed irresponsibly.
- The buyers who get an animal for all the wrong reasons.
- The owners who don't devote the time or resources needed to maintain a pet responsibly.
Those people are certainly responsible for some of the pets that come in. The continuing existence and economic success of farming dog operations is another. And there are a fair number of dog who wind up in shelters due to a perceived lack of alternative options...owner dies or has a major and unexpected change of circumstance...whatever the case may be.

However once the pet enters the shelter, it *does* fall on the shelter and the community to get him or her back out alive. It's a team effort and a team responsibility. Of course there are animals that can't be saved for one reason or another but (general) treating the each animal as a Failure of Human Society and the shelters as witless pentibarbital dispensaries with no say in the fate of the animals that enter their doors is self-defeating and preposterous. As Aleron said, it's amazing what even a few improvements in advertising and public accessibility can make for many shelters. There needs to be a meeting in the middle.
__________________

ARCHX U-CD Kim MX MXJ NF CL3-SF RL3/2X/1X-COE CGC -- Golden Ditzhund, b. ~Mar'07
MACH ARCHX U-CD Webster MXB MJB RL3/2X/1X-COE CGC -- Flying Houdini, b. ~Jun'07
Mira CD JH MX MXB MXJ MJB CGC WCX -- Princess Cheeseface, b. Jul'09
Lodin -- Crazy Monkeybean, b. Dec'13
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-10-2012, 09:26 AM
GoingNowhere's Avatar
GoingNowhere GoingNowhere is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet72947 View Post
Is it "cleaning up the mess" when shelters refuse to work with local rescues and choose to kill instead? Loudoun County Animal Control refuses to work with most groups in our area. And they kill most pit bulls that enter their shelter, even though there is no BSL in VA. Why?
I'm not sure why Loudon County Animal Control won't work with rescues (if this is true), but to fill everyone in, Loudon County does have a BSL law even though the larger state of Virginia does not.

Virginia statute, VA ST 3.2-6540, states that no canine may be discriminated against solely based on its breed, yet Loudon County has a policy prohibiting the adoption of all pit bull dogs that are taken into its custody. In 2007 and 2009 respectively, a lawsuit was filed and overturned against Loudon County's BSL. At the filing of the lawsuit against the Loudon County pit bull adoption policy, all pit bulls that came into the custody of Loudon County animal control were euthanized. Although Judge Burke McCahill sided with Loudon County in his decision, following the litigation, pit bull dogs can now be transferred to different shelters to be adopted providing that they pass a temperament test. Pit bull adoptions are still prohibited within Loudon County. This local litigation was able to be passed and upheld within the state of Virginia because while the Virginia statute enables ownership of any breed of dog, it does not state that any breed may be adopted out of any shelter.


Of course, this strays from the topic of discussion, but I thought it was warranted because the above quote might be a bit misleading.


I've always thought that more "middleman rescues" should be created. That is, more groups should act as a branch between rescues and shelters. In VA at least, there is a huge divide between NoVA and more rural areas that are only a few hours away. Dogs that would be killed in a southern VA shelter could be easily adoptable in more northern areas. Yet because rescues lack foster homes, those rescues might be at max capacity. Why then are there not more groups that utilize transporters to bring 'death row' dogs up from a rural shelter to a more populated area for adoption events. Those that don't get adopted would be transported back to the shelter (and thus probably euth'd), but overall it seems it could save many lives without the expense of permanent foster homes or much manpower.

Everything aside, I think in an ideal situation, euthanasia of healthy, adoptable dogs wouldn't be necessary, but as it is, it is sometimes unavoidable. I think that the backbone of the problem needs to be addressed and then euthanasia rates will drop on their own by virtue of the problem being lessened.
__________________
-GoingNowhere



My Hiking Blog: http://thehikinghokie.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-10-2012, 09:37 AM
Greenmagick's Avatar
Greenmagick Greenmagick is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,059
Default

I dont think anyone is saying ALL shelters are doing everything they can. There are plenty that are high kill because they have kind of just thrown their hands up and probably just feel stuck...lack of money, over abundance of dogs, burn out, etc.

HOWEVER, there are plenty of others that DO try really hard, DO everything they can to move animals, to get them adopted, etc and still have just too many.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-10-2012, 10:20 AM
stardogs stardogs is offline
Behavior Nerd
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 4,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenmagick View Post
I dont think anyone is saying ALL shelters are doing everything they can. There are plenty that are high kill because they have kind of just thrown their hands up and probably just feel stuck...lack of money, over abundance of dogs, burn out, etc.

HOWEVER, there are plenty of others that DO try really hard, DO everything they can to move animals, to get them adopted, etc and still have just too many.
Exactly! There are certainly many, many shelters who don't even really provide safe *shelter*, let alone actively working toward adoption vs euth. That said, don't let the hideous ones lead you into thinking that no one in open admission, euthanizing sheltering cares or that all shelters are lacking the programs that are so highly touted.
__________________
Erin, Ziva, Kestrel, Aerten, and Snipe
Always in our hearts: The Amazing Maggie Mae


Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site