Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don;t like PETA's euthanizia rate so I'm not going to support adopting a cat from them, which means they may have to euthanize that cat, which means their euthanizia rate goes up, which means I have even more to complain about, which means more cats being euthanized, which means... So politics are more important than saving a cats life - and you people get on my case? at least I;m honest and not a phoney!
What I would support is for PETA to stop pretending to be interested in cat and dog issues. Because they clearly aren't. Someone else should run that shelter.
It's not like most of us would have an opportunity to adopt from there, unless we happen to live near Norfolk, VA, or be interested in traveling to get an animal from there. We likely wouldn't have a chance anyway, because there is usually not a holding period for "owner surrender" which is how most of the intakes are termed. It's pretty likely they don't hold them at all. How can you adopt any cats out if they are not bothered to be kept? They don't want to be in the adoption business. If they did, there would be more adoptions. It's really quite simple.
Politics ARE more important than saving a cat's life, this is true. That is the PROBLEM. Entities like PETA, ASPCA and HSUS are all part of this problem, putting politics and agendas before actually saving cat (and dog) lives.
Interesting- there are 2 major online listing services that almost every shelter and rescue in the US use with few exceptions, Petfinder and Petango. I did a search for shelter for 23510, the Peta shelter's zip code on both of these websites, and PETA did not come up, meaning they do not choose to put their available animals on these sites. This alone is not a reason to discredit them - I know there are a few very large shelters that do a lot of adoptions that prefer to only list pets on their own website, without linking to these sites. But since PETA does incredibly few adoptions, you'd think they'd want to get the animals pictures and descriptions out there. They can still require that people come in in person and do an interview, so why not? It would clearly increase adoptions.
And going on their website I cant find a mention of their shelter anywhere. Perhaps there's another web address for that? Surely they put information out about their shelter somewhere? You have to publicize animals that need homes or you're not doing your job.
My point is people should not let their politics interfere with their humanity. If PETA has a bad rep for euthanizing unadoptable cats, don't decide not to adopt from them because of that since all that does is sentence the cat to death. The only thing being hurt is the cat.
My point is people should not let their politics interfere with their humanity. If PETA has a bad rep for euthanizing unadoptable cats, don't decide not to adopt from them because of that since all that does is sentence the cat to death. The only thing being hurt is the cat.
You want to help the cats in PETA's care? Spread the word about their kill rate. Spread the word about no-kill and how many shelters have achieved it. Research on your own the politics and issues involved. If we all do these things, the killing will stop. Rescuing one cat won't do it- and you CAN rescue that one cat if you want, while still doing all those other things. But adopting just to adopt so the animal doesn't die is no different than buying from a puppy mill because you felt sorry for the puppy- one animal gets a home, but all the rest get left behind. Instead let's save them all...and it CAN happen.
Do you really think that cats will not be euthanized due to not being adopted? face the facts, millions of cats will be killed each year because there will always be more cats available for adoption than people willing to adopt them. There will be millions of shelters spaces needed if there were no such thing as only "no-kill" shelters. Its an unfortunate reality of irresponsible and care less cat ownership that caused the probelem and like it or not, some cats will have to meet their maker due to this. So we can support only those that don;t kill them and contribute tot he ned for others to kill more than we like, or we can support those who are forced to kill.
Take the ASPCA in NYC back a 25 years or so ago, they were the contracted animal control for NYC. But due to overcrowding they were forced to euthanize animals. But because they had no choice, their private donations suffered. That meant less money to fight animal abuse and cruelty. So they got out of the business of beinga shelter and their donations increased and they have done great things for animal cruelty. BUT, cats and dogs were still being euthanized by their replacement at an even greater rate. So who won? Those who support no-kill can claim victory, Whoppdy-do, the cats and dog were still suffereing and being killed because of overcrowding.
Sure saving one life may not change things except to that life that was saved, I;m sure it means the world to them! If making yourself feel good is what matters, support no-kill shelters, but if saving a life means more, adopt from those that have to euthanize.
My point is people should not let their politics interfere with their humanity. If PETA has a bad rep for euthanizing unadoptable cats, don't decide not to adopt from them because of that since all that does is sentence the cat to death.
Nobody actually suggested that except you. Saving a cat from "death row", poor conditions, etc. makes perfect sense to me. But keep in mind that saving a cat anywhere opens up a space, so I don't think we should spend time arguing that either is better than the other. Saving a cat is saving a cat.
there will always be more cats available for adoption than people willing to adopt them.
This is actually a load of the same old BS that keeps us killing millions of animals every year. I'm not blaming you for writing it BTW, because it's what many people continue to believe. But it really isn't true. There are far more people looking for an animal than there are unwanted animals put to death each year, amazingly enough. And not by a small amount, the number is 17 million every year considering bringing home a new pet cat or dog and haven't decided yet where to get it from. The number put to death is 4 million. Even if a great number of those 17 million went to breeders you could save a whole lot of animals if they were just matched up properly. We don't actually have overpopulation. We have a mismatched system and gap in communication.
People learning that this can be done by just deciding to do it is what will prevent masses of cats and dogs from being killed every year. It's actually been proven to work. Trouble is, this kind of thinking threatens some big outfits like the ASPCA and a whole lot of long-entrenched shelter managers and such, so you get a lot of pushback. You'd be amazed at how many of the people in these positions are not actually sad about killing animals. There are also shelters misrepresenting their kill rates to the public and so on. A lot of the public likely believes there's a lot less killing going on than there actually is. This PETA shelter is just a prime example; who would think PETA is killing so many dogs and cats every year?
Do you really think that cats will not be euthanized due to not being adopted? face the facts, millions of cats will be killed each year because there will always be more cats available for adoption than people willing to adopt them..
Expect animal overpopulation is a myth.
I'm not really saying this for your benefit, as I can already tell you're the type who blocks their ears. That's fine. But there are a lot of people out there who started where I was...I went along with the idea that there are too many animals and not enough homes, and that 'euthanizing' them is an unpleasant and thankless task forced upon shelter workers by the irresponsible public.
Yet the numbers show that more people add an animal to their family each year than exist in the shelter system. This means that there are enough homes for the animals in the shelter system...and there's quite a margin too. About 8 million animals will enter the shelter system each year. More than half will go home or be adopted out, which leaves 4 million animals at risk of being euthanized.
Census data shows that 17 million people will add a pet to their family each year.
Where are all these other new pets coming from? Breeders...be it puppy mills, backyard breeders, or show breeders. All shelters have to do is increase the number of animals adopted by a few percent...which means convincing people to adopt their next pet from a shelter. It also means reducing the birthrate of pets overall.
Here's some ways a shelter can fail at this mission:
* By advocate for enforced spay and neuter laws, which have been proven to affect poorer areas and raise admission rates to the shelter, which results in more killing
* By having limited hours that prevent most people from visiting the shelter to view the animals
* By having rigorous adoption standards that most people would struggle to meet or find invasive
* By having no program for feral cats
* By limiting access by volunteers, or treating volunteers poorly
* By limiting access by rescue groups, or treating those groups poorly
* By using outdated behavioral tests that many dogs will fail in a rescue environment
* By using poor pictures online that fail to represent the animal in a positive light, or by failing to post pictures online at all
I don't know about your area, but I can see things that my local kill shelter does on that list. Yet my local kill shelter says the only reason they have to euthanize is because of the irresponsible public who just won't do the right thing by the animals.
Thing is, that animal is no longer in the hands of the public. If one owner abuses an animal, the second owner doesn't get to abuse it too because the 'first owner started it'.
Many, many shelters are stuck in this mindset that the killing is never their fault. There's nothing they can do to improve the situation. So in the end they don't even bother trying.
Go ahead and adopt a cat from PETA...or rather, good luck trying. You won't be able to, because they aren't trying to get those animals adopted. That's what a 98% kill rate means...you literally have to actively work against getting those animals adopted. You would have a hugely lower kill rate by sitting on a street corner with kittens next to you in a wire cage. While other kill shelters aren't quite as bad, they still aren't doing everything in their power to get those animals out. They still believe the animals in their care are 'better off dead'.
Can we ever achieve 100% no kill? Maybe not. I'm not the idealist I wish I was. But there is no earthly reason why one shelter can have a kill rate of less than 20% and the other a kill rate of 98%. And yes, there ARE no kill open admittance shelters, and they are spreading.
So no, I'm not going to give my money to the organization that thinks 98% of the animals in their care are better off dead than alive. THAT would be supporting the killing and ensuring that more animals would die. I'm going to support the local no kill who support volunteers and rescue groups, funds low cost spay/neuter and wellness clinics, has open adoption hours, works with owners to keep animals in homes, posts great photos online, and doesn't threaten the public with scare tactics or blame them.
Greg, I have to somewhat disagree with you about the ease of creating a no-kill nation. It is something we should all work for, but not something that can happen if all the open door shelters decide to go no-kill tomorrow. The county that I live in, a very large one, adjoins the county (and state) where my shelter is located. Every town and the county operate no kill shelters. Every day my shelter gets people from that county with animals that have been turned away, by animal control, for lack of space. We get people coming from Chicago, which of course has many large shelters, looking for kittens because these large Chicago shelters don't have any. Why? They turn away any kittens under 12 weeks and people won't wait to give them up. We recently had a woman who lived about 60 miles away bring in a litter of kittens that no one else would take. The no-kill shelters have long waiting lists to give up animals, and most people don't take these pets back home and wait. They dump them, to have God knows what happen to them, or bring them to us. If we're closed, they don't wait, they throw the animals over the fence or tie them to a pole. We operate a low cost spay neuter program that draws people from as far as 200 miles away at times, and that my home, no-kill county sends its shelter animals to. We offer TNR training. We have humane investigators that rescue abused animals, puppy mill dogs etc. We have an extensive foster network. We are one of only a handful of open door shelters in Illinois. We are extremely busy. We do as many adoptions as some of the largest, most funded no-kill Chicago shelters. Our success in adopting out pit bulls, which the no-kill shelters accept, but in much lower numbers than us, is outstanding compared to most shelters. Our shelter manager and director are not heartless. I have seen the emotional toll of the necessity of euthanizing animals. It breaks their hearts. It is hard on all of us. But there must be a place that has its doors open to all, that will at least give them a chance. If there were more potential adopters than animals, the no kill shelters would not be turning animals away every day. Chicago's largest shelter sometimes pulls dogs from us. We welcome that, but it's not enough. We sometimes contact breed rescues about purebreds that come in. They usually turn us down. And no one ever wants any of our pit bulls or cats.
I'm extremely proud of our shelter and the people who operate it. They do a great service to the animals of our area. I hope someday it will be a no-kill nation. I know at least for dogs New England has just about reached that point. But anyone who tells you the whole nation could do it now if they had the will is sadly mistaken. Our shelter, operating as it does, is an absolute necessity in our community.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
