February 14, 2009Comments are closed.attitude, shelter procedure
A fantastic piece from Christie @ PetConnection blog;
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
As long as we define “success†as the literal end of a need for animal shelters, and insist that goal must be met before we stop killing healthy, treatable pets instead of finding them homes, or before we stop insisting that breeding is evil and that pets should be required by law to be sterilized, then we’re dooming ourselves to abject failure. That day will never come. Never.
We have to replace the paradigm of “people are bad and evil so we have to prevent them from having pets in the first place so we no longer have to mop up after them†with one of, “Sometimes animals need our help, and that’s why we’re here.â€
Of course we should have programs to help people cope with behavior problems, so they know they have alternatives to surrendering their cat or dog. Of course we must provide accessible, low-cost, free, or incentivized spay/neuter. Of course we should provide counseling, dog training, and whatever other services we can to help people and their pets be happy together. Those services are for people who aren’t “irresponsible,†but rather people who need resources and assistance to do what they want to do in the first place: keep their pets and have it be fun, rewarding, and joyful instead of stressful, difficult, and unpleasant.
And of course we should provide sheltering, medical care, and rehoming services for the animals of people facing economic hard times, illness or disability, or other challenges. Those things, too, are inevitable, and their animals will sometimes need more help than they can give them.
But equally “of course†is that some people just don’t want to keep their animals. The bond isn’t that deep, and they’ll get rid of them for flimsy reasons. Reality check: that’s none of our business and we can’t change it, because it’s not about animals, but about those people, their values and personality type. We should BEG them to give up those pets to a shelter that will find them a new home with someone who really wants them. We shouldn’t be lecturing those people; we should be smiling and nodding and pushing the surrender papers and a pen into their hands as fast as we can.
What are animal shelters for?
(I can’t recommend you read this post enough!)
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
An equally smart piece from KC Dog Blog;
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
In the conversations about “overpopulation” and “overcrowded” shelters, and the desperate attempt to end the killing in our shelters, we have (rightfully so) put a LOT of emphasis on spay/neuter.
However, spay/neuter is NOT the end goal. Spay/neuter is a tool that will help us not kill animals in shelters. Ending the killing is the end goal, not spay/neuter.
Somehow that has been forgotten.
Check the rest of the article out here…
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Wow. This blogging thing is easy, huh?
I live in Austin Texas. last year our shelter killed 14,000 healthy adoptable animals. Spay/Neuter is essential. We have Emacipet that brings a mobile clinic to the neighborhoods 3 days a week and neuters anumals free. All large cities need to come up with some effective way to reduce the number of euthanizations. I have nothing against breeding i just think it should be responsible. does your dog need 20 litters ? I think not. Breeding should not just be for $$$. Look at the puppy mills, what a disgusting breakdown of the system. Animal lovers need to work together to reduce the number of needless deaths.