![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A few questions:
How do shelters that don't euthanize keep the pets? Do they cut off the amount of pets they can take in once they reach a certain point? Are pet shelters that don't euthanize preffered over ones that do? Thanks, Marty |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Marty" wrote in message m... A few questions: How do shelters that don't euthanize keep the pets? Do they cut off the amount of pets they can take in once they reach a certain point? Are pet shelters that don't euthanize preffered over ones that do? Thanks, Marty Generally, "no-kill" facilities are limited enrollment, which means that they do not accept every animal that walks in the door. Or it means that no "adoptible" animal is euthanized, and the criteria of "adoptibility" can be so strict as to make 7 out of my 8 be considered "unadoptible". And, all limiting enrollment into a "no kill" facility does is push the job of euthanasia off onto the facilities that do have open enrollment and have to accept all animals (like a municipal shelter). It doesn't elminate euthanasia, just shifts the location and statistics where it occurs. Sometimes, it leads to more animals being dumped on the roadside if there is no other facility that can take them. The real answer isn't trumpeting "no kill" facilities, but spaying and neutering all intact animals (free if need be) until there is *no* "surplus" pet population. Sunflower |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() All shelters and rescue orgs that foster face the same dilemma and come to their own conclusions on what to do when presented with more animals than they can possibly accommodate. The so-called "no-kills" fill up quickly and become "no-accepts," turning away all but the most "adoptable" animals. These shelters tend to be nonprofits or privately funded who are not obligated to accept animals they don't want. The animals rejected by the so-called "no-kill" shelter go on to the city or county shelters (who are mandated to accept every animal in their jurisdiction, regardless of available space) or are simply abandoned. These publicly funded shelters then must kill animals unlikely to find homes to make room for new arrivals. I would venture to guess than a well operated conventional (public) shelter saves more or at least as many lives as the so-called "no-kill" facility. How many animals die in the process is a responsiblity shared by both institutions; it's just that the "no-kill" gets to dodge the act and the public shelter is stuck holding the bag (the one with a dead cat in it). And of course the ultimate responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of irresponsible pet owners. Sharon Talbert Friends of Campus Cats On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Marty wrote: A few questions: How do shelters that don't euthanize keep the pets? Do they cut off the amount of pets they can take in once they reach a certain point? Are pet shelters that don't euthanize preffered over ones that do? Thanks, Marty |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Sharon Talbert" wrote in message
. washington.edu... The so-called "no-kills" fill up quickly and become "no-accepts," turning away all but the most "adoptable" animals. These shelters tend to be nonprofits or privately funded who are not obligated to accept animals they don't want. The animals rejected by the so-called "no-kill" shelter go on to the city or county shelters (who are mandated to accept every animal in their jurisdiction, regardless of available space) or are simply abandoned. These publicly funded shelters then must kill animals unlikely to find homes to make room for new arrivals. I would venture to guess than a well operated conventional (public) shelter saves more or at least as many lives as the so-called "no-kill" facility. How many animals die in the process is a responsiblity shared by both institutions; it's just that the "no-kill" gets to dodge the act and the public shelter is stuck holding the bag (the one with a dead cat in it). Shelters that euthanise are forced to be creative and find solutions where it can. We're installing a Special Needs Annex (commonly called the ringworm trailer) to treat the sudden multitude of cats that have come up positive with the fungus, where policy used to be euthanasia. We've also just gotten permission from the Board to do some rearranging and construction on a very new building to create more multiple rooms for adult cats (we have somewhere in the area of 140 cages in the building, with the original playroom capable of housing a maximum of 16 cats, I think) along with a new isolation room. We offer a feral program for rehabilitation or alter-and-release. We have a huge foster program that still hasn't been large enough to accomodate this summer's influx of cats. No matter how big the organization, though, it seems like the problem just gets bigger... or at least no smaller. It's a line of work that makes one feel bipolar, for all the joy and depression that happen routinely. And of course the ultimate responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of irresponsible pet owners. Sharon Talbert Friends of Campus Cats |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Shaggin" wrote in message
... I never thought of what it meant for a non-kill shelter. You have some really good points but regardless I applaud the shelters that have this rule bc I believe the killing of any animals is wrong and I've been a vegetarian for 13 years trying to save some lives any way i can.... I just wish the shelters were able to have more animals in there capacity. I'll continue to applaud the shelters that euthanize, and the people that work most directly with the animals that may or may not be there again the next day, or after their weekend, or after a well earned vacation. It takes a lot more courage and strength to work under such conditions than it does to work in a facility where a person can close oneself off to the reality of the overpopulation problem. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You support the shelters that euthanize? That in term says that you support
the practice of euthanasia to clear space in a shelter. I think that is terrible. I also have to disagree with your position that those in no-kill shelters shut themselves off to the reality of the over-population. The shelter workers at no-kill facilities are very much aware of the problem and should be congratulated for their hard work. It takes more guts for them to work there than those who work at shelters who just kill off the animals to save space. Many of the no-kills have volunteers who foster the cats in their own homes, spend time with the felines, feed the cats, and of course press harder to get the ones that have been in the shelter system for far too long, adopted. No-kills will have my respect since it takes more to save a life than to take it away. -- Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs! www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time! www.catgalaxymedia.com "Kalyahna" wrote in message ... I'll continue to applaud the shelters that euthanize, and the people that work most directly with the animals that may or may not be there again the next day, or after their weekend, or after a well earned vacation. It takes a lot more courage and strength to work under such conditions than it does to work in a facility where a person can close oneself off to the reality of the overpopulation problem. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:54:35 -0700, "Cat Protector"
wrote: You support the shelters that euthanize? That in term says that you support the practice of euthanasia to clear space in a shelter. I think that is terrible. I also have to disagree with your position that those in no-kill shelters shut themselves off to the reality of the over-population. The shelter workers at no-kill facilities are very much aware of the problem and should be congratulated for their hard work. It takes more guts for them to work there than those who work at shelters who just kill off the animals to save space. Many of the no-kills have volunteers who foster the cats in their own homes, spend time with the felines, feed the cats, and of course press harder to get the ones that have been in the shelter system for far too long, adopted. No-kills will have my respect since it takes more to save a life than to take it away. The shelters that euthanise also have dedicated volunteers who frequently foster animals. Caring is not only for "no-kill" shelters. What do the "no-kill" shelters do when they are completely full and there are no more foster families availible? The staff and volunteers at both kinds of shelters are sadly aware of pet overpopulation and they strongly support spay and neuter. The volunteers feed, care for, and foster just like the "no-kill" shelters. No one ever will "kill off the animals to save space." I normally don't critisize posters for their opinion, but that is a terrible thing to have said. It is totally untrue and insulting to the dedicated people at those shelters. Just what do you think should be done when a shelter is 100% out of space and 100% out of foster families and all the other shelters are also? And what do you think should be done with the animals that are in pain and cannot be saved? What do think we should do with animals that are too dangerous to be adopted, or even fostered when all the behavior specialists say there is no hope for rehabilitation? What would you do with a dog that has killed other dogs, bit multiple people over a period of time, and has now severly injured a child. Do you want to foster a pit bull that has been trained to kill and is out of control? How do your "no-kill" shelters deal with these issues? Please answer these questions, this is not an arguement, I want to know your side of this. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Cat Protector" wrote in message
news:gpXTb.29217$L_4.27930@okepread01... You support the shelters that euthanize? I work for one, and am a certified euth tech. That in term says that you support the practice of euthanasia to clear space in a shelter. No. It doesn't. It means I support the euthanasia decisions of my supervisors and coworkers. This means, as Fan said, repeat bite cases, terminally ill cases, and cases of outstanding aggression. VERY rarely are animals ever pulled for space, and when that comes up, it is STILL the sick or injured or aggressive animals that are euthanized. This is because we function as a county shelter. We MUST take in strays and hold them through the stray period, we MUST take in protective custody animals. We have no choice, and sometimes that means my supervisors have to make terrible choices when we have no more foster homes and no more cages. I also have to disagree with your position that those in no-kill shelters shut themselves off to the reality of the over-population. The shelter workers at no-kill facilities are very much aware of the problem and should be congratulated for their hard work. I don't doubt they work hard. It was a generalization on my part, and for that I apologize. However, it can be held as true in specifics, as you, at least, seem to think that only no-kills do any good for the animal population. Which is blatantly false, and you know it. It takes more guts for them to work there than those who work at shelters who just kill off the animals to save space. CETs rate higher for compassion fatigue than nurses in emergency rooms. Not because we feel guilty for what we do, but because we're dealing with emotions on a staggering scale. You seem to assume that shelters that euthanize enjoy it or take pride in it. You know how we sleep at night? Because a pit bull who bit a child in the face cannot bite anyone else, that a cat who aggressively attacks other cats and bites people repeatedly will scar no other cats and no other people, that a tumor-infested rat will be at peace. And when my cats grow old and start to fail (not for another 10+ years, if I have my way), I will schedule appointments at my humane society and hold them while they go to sleep. I will KNOW the effectiveness of the methods used, and I will know that whoever does the injection understands my grief and grieves with me. Contrary to what you seem to think, I have NEVER worked with more compassionate and generously spirited people. Many of the no-kills have volunteers who foster the cats in their own homes, Really? I foster. Every full time employee in the kennel department who is capable of it fosters. One of them has a litter of kittens and a blind dog as fosters, and two dogs of her own. Another has two cats, both of which she's adopting. One of them does reptile rescue. One of them does rabbit fostering. One of them fosters semi-ferals. We ALL foster for space reasons. spend time with the felines, The front office comes to us with recommendations for placement, or to ask where a certain cat is. My supervisors listen when we mention petrified cats that are coming around, the foster coordinator takes seriously our suggestions for adult cats in need of foster care. feed the cats, and of course press harder to get the ones that have been in the shelter system for far too long, adopted. Really? You think so? So THAT's why we had that whole Top Ten thing... and the radio and TV spots... and the satellite centers in a local pet store chain... So sorry that any euthanizing shelters with which you've had contact were ****ty conveyor belts of dead animals. But those shelters aren't everywhere. And they sure as hell don't employ myself or my friends. No-kills will have my respect since it takes more to save a life than to take it away. Ah. We're all dead inside. Uncaring and terrible people. *sarcasm* You do my job for a week, friend, and we'll see how much you find it takes. -Kal |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Kal, I hope you stay with this newsgroup and that you never allow your voice to be stilled. I admire the work of most private shelters and always will, but I am very sorry the blurry term of "no-kill" was ever invented. Better for all facilities to agree to "low-kill" (with an actual definition of the term to work from) and for private and public shelters to work together toward a common goal: that of educating the public to spay and neuter and to adopt for life. Sharon Talbert Friends of Campus Cats |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Fan, I admire your posting on the subject of euthanasia and "no-kill" shelters. Do you work in a public shelter or a private shelter that assumes the responsibility of euthanasia as necessary? Sharon Talbert Friends of Campus Cats |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
feed Nutro? | Tamara | Cat health & behaviour | 90 | November 19th 03 12:57 AM |