"No Kill" - the Unattainable Ideal

No-Kill: The Unattainable Ideal

Euthanasia is the process of ending life painlessly and quickly, usually due to some incurable medical condition. It does not necessarily mean ending life due to other factors including “behavior, impractical medical costs, or inability to adopt because of age, disfigurement, unpopular breed, lack of appeal, or dearth of available homes” (“Defining No-Kill” 3). When a person thinks of a typical animal shelter, their reaction is usually a negative one. Most people think the animals that go there are euthanized as soon as they are picked up or shortly after. When a person thinks of a no-kill facility, the reaction is generally positive. Animals are treated with kindness and given a second chance at life without the fear of being euthanized. Neither one of these statements are completely true. Open entry shelters do euthanize animals that are housed there and although no-kill shelters try to minimize the euthanasia it still exists there as well. Due to many factors; including the overpopulation of companion animals, the lack of resources for most organizations, and the ignorance of society; it is unfeasible for all animal shelters to become no-kill.

A no-kill, or limited entry shelter is an organization that does not euthanize any or only euthanizes a small percentage of animals that are in their care. A kill, or open entry shelter is an organization that performs euthanasia for many different reasons. Any animal can be brought to a kill shelter including aggressive, ill, elderly, owner surrendered or perfectly healthy. Owners can also bring their animals there for euthanizing their pets at a lower price as an alternative to taking it to the veterinarian. A no-kill shelter only takes what they choose to, which is usually the very adoptable. If an animal is not adopted for a period of time, it will stay at the no-kill facility until it is adopted. Sometimes animals that are adoptable might have undesirable characteristics that keep them there longer. Is it humane to keep an animal in a cage for several years just because it has not found a home yet? Or is it more humane to euthanize the animal and save it the stress that would be caused by being caged this long? Surprisingly, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is not on the side that would be expected of them. They are in support of no-kill but realize that it is not a feasible for all shelters to become no-kill. “It’s not a popular position, because to the average person, no-kill does sound like such a good idea. But it’s a sad sham” (Hewitt par. 3).

There are approximately 5,000 shelters in the United States and only about 800 are considered to be no-kill facilities (Hewitt par. 4). With such a small number of no-kill shelters compared to kill shelters, it is logical to conclude that there is not enough room for all animals to be placed in a no-kill shelter. When no-kill shelters are full, animals are turned away and usually directed to the closest kill shelter.

With an estimated six to eight million animals being brought into shelters every year, it would be impossible to house them all until a home could be found for them (“HSUS Pet Overpopulation Estimates 1). No-kill shelters are able to take in animals as space becomes available and some no-kill shelters even have waiting lists to get in. The rest of the shelters must take in what is brought to them without turning people away. When shelters become overcrowded, decisions have to be made on how to make space and how long to hold animals if they are not getting adopted. “Most shelters don’t set a maximum amount of time they will hold an animal. In the vast majority of cases, decisions about euthanasia are based on the adoptability of the animal and the space available to humanely house the animal at the shelter” (“Common Questions about Animal Shelters and Animal Control 2 par. 4). The animals that are less adoptable; the elderly, aggressive, sick or stressed; are usually the first to be considered for euthanasia.

There are many reasons why an organization makes the choice to euthanize an animal, healthy or not. The largest contributor to this is the pet overpopulation problem. There is an abundance of dogs and cats that are born with not enough homes for them. The result of this is people turning them over to shelters or just turning them loose, eventually being brought to a shelter anyway. Spaying and neutering pets would lower this number dramatically.

When animals are turned out on the street to fend for themselves, they breed and eventually their offspring do too. Cats that are born in the wild will become feral if not contained at a young age, usually about 2-3 months. If they are not socialized during this time it is unlikely that they will ever be able to be adopted or taken into someone’s home as a pet. If a feral cat is picked up by an animal shelter, it is going to be euthanized unless someone claims the animal as their own. No-kill shelters will not take in feral animals due to their nature because they would not be able to adopt them out. Open entry-shelters have to take them in and hold them until they are euthanized. Some areas have Trap Neuter Return programs that help solve the feral cat problem. Cats are trapped, sterilized, and then released back to where they were trapped. This keeps the breeding rates down, but also maintains the cat colony’s presence. If the cats are still there, no more cats will come and replace them. The cat colonies reproduction rates will be lower and the number of unwanted litters that are born decrease.

Owners that don’t sterilize their animals and allow them to have litters are also large contributors the overpopulation problem. Every year, cats and dogs that have guardians have litters when there is already a shortage of homes. Cats and dogs can have two or three litters per year if they are able to reproduce. Their offspring mature and start reproducing as well. This is one of the major contributors to the large number of animals that are placed in shelters every year. These kittens and puppies are given away to friends, sold, or taken to the closest animal shelter. All these births every year contribute to over-crowding in animal shelters. No-kill shelters are able to turn people away when their facility is full, but other shelters have to take in these animals even when space is not available. Space has to be made because when a facility is overcrowded with animals, other problems like disease or sickness will become apparent. This space is made by euthanizing, adopting, or placing the animals elsewhere with another organization or foster home.

“Pet overpopulation is a societal problem and it will take the community to resolve it” (Boks par. 10). The solution to this problem of pet overpopulation is very simple. Spaying and neutering all animals, not buying animals from pet stores and breeders, and being more responsible owners so pets are not relinquished as often to shelters would make a large impact on the problem. As long as unwanted puppies and kittens are born, open entry shelters will have a hard time even approaching the ideal of a no-kill facility.

Another one of the major issues surrounding the kill versus no-kill debate is society. Society today is very uneducated in regard to the situation. Animals are relinquished for a variety of reasons. Some of these reasons are very legitimate, and some are just excuses. Reasons that make the top ten list according to an article by Daniel Verdon (who referred to the National Council and Pet Population Study & Policy) are moving, landlord issues, too many pets, cost, no time for the pet, and personal problems (1). The root cause seems to be not making a lifetime commitment to the pet. It is likely that almost every animal that ends up in a kill shelter is the result of a guardian who did not make a life-time commitment of care and protection to their animal (“Defining No-Kill” 3). If some pets were not relinquished for illegitimate or shallow reasons, fewer pets would end up in shelters. Open entry shelters have to take these animals no matter what the reason or excuse. If people were more educated about their animal to begin with, the number of incoming animals would decrease along with the euthanasia rates.

The public looks down on kill shelters because of the euthanasia and embraces no-kill shelters for the wonderful deed they do for society. Yet the public is the greatest contributor to the issue since the overpopulation of companion animals is mostly due to irresponsible pet owners. “If 150 million to 250 million animals were killed in pounds last decade, then the truth is most guardians just don’t care” (“Defining No-Kill” 3). The majority of the pets impounded as strays had a guardian that took care of them but never came to claim them. According to the Humane Society of the United States only Some owners treat their pets as if they are recyclable. One pet begins to have issues with behavior or illness and it is traded in for a newer healthier one. If owners were more responsible, all options would be exhausted before giving up a pet. Usually with training or research, insight could be gained into the real problem the pet is having and it could be resolved before the pet ends up at an animal shelter.

No-kill shelters provide a more positive outlook for animals in their care but what about the animals that are there for long periods of time? “Some animals, particularly the older ones are less likely to be adopted, and end up getting warehoused. If they are not being adopted and they are not being euthanized, they’re just sitting there” (Hewitt par. 5). When animals are caged for long periods of time, many things can happen. The animal can become very stressed which decreases their immunities and increases the likelihood that they will get sick. Animals become withdrawn, depressed and some develop anti-social behavior that decrease their chances at being adopted.

Sometimes people with good intentions start up no-kill shelters on their own without realizing the great physical and financial toll it will take on them. The animals end up suffering in cages and living in misery. Humane organizations like the Humane Society have shut down many of these “No-kill shelters” due to the horrendous conditions the animals were found in. Hoarders; people that “collect” animals without being able to care for them properly, sometimes start out with the no-kill ideal in mind. Everyone has seen the images on television of hoarders busted by the Humane Society or local animal control. Animals that are walking around in their own feces and urine and among other dead animals. They are often in horrible health, yet the owner denies that anything is wrong. Many times the animals recovered from these kinds of situations are in such poor condition they have to be euthanized anyway. The more humane option for these animals, even though they are being saved from death in theory, is euthanasia.

No-kill shelters do provide a wonderful service in many ways for society, but due to many factors it is just not possible for all shelters to provide this same service. Until the public becomes more aware and educated about the problems related to animal shelters and euthanasia, all shelters becoming no-kill is not possible. When people stop using animal shelters as dumping grounds and focus more on taking proper care of the pets that they do have; only then will the euthanasia rates in shelters go down and enable more shelters to come closer to truly becoming a “no-kill” facility.

Works Cited

Boks, Ed. “The Dirty Little Secret in Your Community.” Newsweek 145.26 (2005): 15-

15. Academic Search Premier. 26 November 2006. http://search.ebscohost.com.

“Common Questions about Animal Shelters and Animal Control.” Humane Society of the

United States. 2006. 4 December 2006. <http://www.hsus.org/pets/animal_shelters>.

“Defining No-Kill.” No Kill NOW!. 15 November 2006. <http://www.nokillnow.com/

definition_nokill.htm>.

Hewitt, Bill. “Should Strays Be Killed?.” People 66.19 (2006): 99-100. Academic Search

Premier. 26 November 2006. http://search.ebscohost.com.

“HSUS Pet Overpopulation Statistics.” Humane Society of the United States. 12 October

2006. 4 December 2006. <http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_ourpets>.

Verdon, Daniel R. "Sheltered." DVM: The Newsmagazine of Veterinary Medicine 37.7

(2006): 28-28. Academic Search Premier. 26 November 2006.

http://search.ebscohost.com.