[QuickSilver]

Thanks for your thoughtful response, livingdustmops. What I am wondering about is his contention that for the most part, shelters could be run differently and we could effectively stop euthanizing pets. Winograd's contention is that there is NOT a pet overpopulation problem in the US, that if shelters ran more efficiently, almost all these pets would have homes.

He says several times in this book that he would visit shelters where well over half the cages were empty, but at the same time, these same shelters were still euthanizing dogs because they were "over capacity."

Also, while I hesitate to bring this up because I know it's a real sore spot... I believe this book gives lie to PETA's claims that their abysmal kill rate (90%+) is because the animals they take in are the "worst of the worst". Based on my reading, it appears to me that they ran (run?) some open admission shelters in several counties, and there's no reason to believe that the profile of dogs and cats they admitted was any worse than it is for an average shelter. If this is the case, this is an appalling failure of leadership on PETA's part, and it makes me ill that they basically lied about why their kill rate is so terrible.

Again, I'm not sure I trust Winograd to tell the "truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". I'm still learning about him.