[News] Is Pet Overpopulation Really Killing Our Cats and Dogs?

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Here's a little food for thought i found....

Making a Friendlier World for Man's Best Friend: A new economic paradigm for addressing dog overpopulation and the effectiveness of policy alternatives

Another great article. And what a great organization name! FIREPAW

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Here's a little food for thought i found....

Making a Friendlier World for Man's Best Friend: A new economic paradigm for addressing dog overpopulation and the effectiveness of policy alternatives

I am sorry but I have to say I did not see anything in there that isn't already being used except maybe making larger shelters/nicer surroundings. I still believe we have to address the problem from the get go and that is not breeding so many dogs/cats/gerbils/rabbits etc.

It is like teen pregnancy to me, we stick our heads into the sand about sex and the morality of it but we throw fits with all the teen pregnancies. If we could solve the problem from the get go then we wouldn't have all the problems later.

[Woogie Man]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

I am sorry but I have to say I did not see anything in there that isn't already being used except maybe making larger shelters/nicer surroundings. I still believe we have to address the problem from the get go and that is not breeding so many dogs/cats/gerbils/rabbits etc.

It is like teen pregnancy to me, we stick our heads into the sand about sex and the morality of it but we throw fits with all the teen pregnancies. If we could solve the problem from the get go then we wouldn't have all the problems later.

Cindy, I didn't see any earth-shattering revelations there either. What I took from it is a cost analysis for trying to attain a no-kill policy for a specific area. If you go to my local shelter's web page Humane Society of South Mississippi - 2615 Hwy. 49, Gulfport, MS 39501 and look at the annual reports, you'll see there's a tremendous amount of money being poured into that one shelter that receives about 16,000 animals annually.

I realize that just throwing money at a problem won't fix it but shouldn't we expect more bang for the buck? As I posted before, I think the solutions are in front of our faces if we only would implement them more effectively. We have to have a goal of no-kill before we can hope to reach it. I don't think any shelter wants to go out of business and that may be a big part of why we're stuck at these high rates of euthanasia.

Irresponsible breeding is certainly a huge part of it. I don't think there's a cut and dried answer for that. It is simple to say that less breeding=less animals in shelters and it's true, but that's a huge subject in itself. Regardless of how an animal came to be, they usually end up in a shelter due to owner surrender or as a stray. An aggressive s/n campaign targeted at the pet owner is probably the most doable thing. In my area, we have local tv ads and billboards about s/n but more could be done as far as community outreach goes.

I won't go there on the teen pregnancy issue except to say that it, like being a responsible pet owner, is all about personal responsibility.

[livingdustmops]

Interesting...here is the link to Tucson's annual report. I am going to print both of them off and do some comparison looking.

http://www.hssaz.org/site/DocServer/...pdf?docID=2101

I know animal control in Tucson (city budget) is no where close to these figures...but I need to do a little more research on how much $$$ they are given.

Yes, I agree it is not just one thing but even when we educate and do everything we think should happen it doesn't change to much..Usually something pretty dramatic has to happen to make people dig into the issues. Even you started to question things when your manager was arrested for animal cruelty...hey until I started to do rescue I had no clue how really bad it was in a city shelter...Our Humane Society shelter was like the Ritz compared to the city shelter...

I don't know how old you are but I do know when I grew up not every family had a dog/dogs. We did because my father went hunting and I know about two other families on the street had dogs also. Now it is just about every home has a dog but I wonder how many of them understand their responsibility. It is just like people who get their little Yorkies and then have a baby and they don't have time and want it rehomed..I am guessing it has nothing to do with time but the dog still pee's or they just don't really care.

I loved your last statment...so true..

[Woogie Man]

Thanks for posting the link, Cindy. Comparing performance is a good way to rate shelters against each other. Though no two situations are the same, there has to be some way to objectively rate shelters.

I can see that Tucson's budget is relatively the same as HSSM's per animal taken in. What I notice (and I did just a quick look) is that Tucson's kill rate is around 20% while HSSM's is closer to 50%. Also, it seems like there are more education and community outreach programs in Tucson than here. While they both take in a lot of money and both do euthanize, comparing the two kind of validates for me that some shelters just do a better job with what they have.

Also, if you look at the numbers, the majority of Tucson's animals were either strays or owner surrender. I had a gut feeling that would be the case. That's why I think the community outreach is so important.

You asked my age...I'm 53 and when I was growing up, almost everyone had a dog but they were almost all mutts. Usually, someone's girl would have a litter and they would give them away to folks they knew. It was all pretty manageable. We had a small city pound at the time to handle strays. Being just a kid then, I don't know for sure but i don't think 'owner surrender' was much of an issue then. People simply took care of what they had. They may not have taken great care by today's standards, but they didn't discard them when they became inconvenient, either.

You're right...I didn't really question our shelter until the arrest of the no-kill operator on animal cruelty charges. I knew that whole business just stunk and started to wonder about what's really going on around here. Well, little by little, a picture is starting to come together and it ain't pretty.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Thanks for posting the link, Cindy. Comparing performance is a good way to rate shelters against each other. Though no two situations are the same, there has to be some way to objectively rate shelters.

I can see that Tucson's budget is relatively the same as HSSM's per animal taken in. What I notice (and I did just a quick look) is that Tucson's kill rate is around 20% while HSSM's is closer to 50%. Also, it seems like there are more education and community outreach programs in Tucson than here. While they both take in a lot of money and both do euthanize, comparing the two kind of validates for me that some shelters just do a better job with what they have.

Also, if you look at the numbers, the majority of Tucson's animals were either strays or owner surrender. I had a gut feeling that would be the case. That's why I think the community outreach is so important.

You asked my age...I'm 53 and when I was growing up, almost everyone had a dog but they were almost all mutts. Usually, someone's girl would have a litter and they would give them away to folks they knew. It was all pretty manageable. We had a small city pound at the time to handle strays. Being just a kid then, I don't know for sure but i don't think 'owner surrender' was much of an issue then. People simply took care of what they had. They may not have taken great care by today's standards, but they didn't discard them when they became inconvenient, either.

You're right...I didn't really question our shelter until the arrest of the no-kill operator on animal cruelty charges. I knew that whole business just stunk and started to wonder about what's really going on around here. Well, little by little, a picture is starting to come together and it ain't pretty.

I haven't had time to look at the two as I had to wash some dogs...

Here is a wonderful overview of Best Friends and this is how a shelter should be IMHO...This was the organization that took Michael Vicks dogs in and now they are all in new homes..

I prefer their approach more than any of the other organization...

Best Friends Animal Society is guided by a simple philosophy: kindness to animals builds a better world for all of us. In the late 1980s, when Best Friends was in its early days, roughly 17 million dogs and cats were being killed in shelters every year. Despite the commitment of shelter workers to the animal in their care, the conventional belief was that little could be done to lower that terrible number.

Best Friends' No More Homeless Pets campaign
created a new vision: A grassroots effort to place
dogs and cats who were considered "unadoptable"
into good homes, and to reduce the number of
unwanted pets through effective spay and neuter
programs. Since then, the number of dogs and
cats being destroyed in shelters has fallen to
approximately 5 million a year. There has been
much progress,but there is still much more to do.

The next phase of this work – bringing the number
down to essentially zero – will take more work and
some bold new initiatives. Shelters are crowded with
pit bulls, dogs abandoned after being bought from pet stores, stray cats rounded up on the streets and not looking their very best when they’re brought in, and other pets abandoned or neglected.

As the flagship of a grassroots network of people and organizations that care about animals, Best Friends continues to lead the way towards this future. And that's why our purpose remains: A better world through kindness to animals.

http://video.bestfriends.org/media/p/196.aspx

[livingdustmops]

Then you have this organization which is using animals from shelters and they are the only organization doing this....Freedom Service Dog

YouTube - Freedom Service Dogs Audio Slideshow

[Woogie Man]

I used the link you provided. Wow, that's a big site and takes some time to find your way around. It seems like they are the closest thing to an umbrella group out there.

I did find a couple of interesting things. First, I went to the 'local' stuff for local news nationwide and found something about the no-kill shelter that was busted here and their involvement. They seem to characterize the shelter negatively and were following the line being fed here by the sheriff and Humane Society about it. I don't agree with that, but I guess it's understandable to a point. They can only know what's being told to them.

Secondly, there is a page about the no-kill campaign, both nationally and globally that prominently features Nathan Winograd and his book, Redemption. I guess we've come full circle in a way. He also was in a video at one of the conferences they have.

With all the shelters and rescues linked from the site, it appears that Best Friends is very well connected. I wonder how long it will take all this connectiveness (I think I made up that word ) to gel and produce real results nationwide. They seem to be putting programs in place very much like what we've been discussing on this thread.

I recognize they aren't the boss of anybody else and local shelters set their own policies. What they have done in Utah and are attempting to do in other areas is impressive and very ambitious, however.

I want to take a longer look at them but, at this point, they may well be on to something.

Oh, here's the link for the bit about the no-kill campaign and Winograd..

No Kill Advocacy Home Page

Once there, just click on projects and campaigns.

[livingdustmops]

Morning...last night I sat and wrote a reply and I was to long...poof gone because I didn't copy it...so I went to bed...haha

Thanks for the link you provided...I will spend a little more time on the site.

I do think BF does the best job...they put their $$$ where their mouth is and save animals..more than any other organization that I can see. They will only euthanize, that I know of, if an animal has a poor quality of life. They go about their business without a lot of bragging and do everything in a very positive manner. I do not see this with any of the other organizations..everyone is always throwing barbs and raising $$$ but how much of the $$$ goes to help the animals...this is why I take parts from all the organizations but donate most of my $$$ to BF. The only thing I can see they are missing is providing service dogs like the FSD does...but maybe in time. One of these days I will visit BF as you can volunteer to work there for as long as you want (they are open for this type of help).

I could go on and on about BF...can you tell...

I do think before people can help they have to fully understand the system (which is not easy) and they have to be able to discuss/write/etc without a lot of emotions (I struggle with this) because many people who make decisions are financial driven not animal driven. The bottom line is, everyone is making a living off of the animals and tons of $$$ is coming in but little is used to save animals.

I also think in order to save animals you have to believe they have rights and almost have a Buddhist approach to them. This is another whole subject but I see so many people controlling their animals and in many cases they don't know why nor have they researched anything in regards to animal mental health (better know as Animal Behaviors). I have read numerous books on this due to issues I have had with rescues coming in that had been abused. I don't think dogs are any different than we are in regards to mental health issues, they are just different. I just read an article from Cornell vet school the other day that stated "Dogs have the mentalilty of a two year old child" and if people would understand this they would handle their dogs like a two year old. They wouldn't chain it up outside, nor would they beat them for going potty and they certainly would spend more $$ on quality dog food.

Lots of issues...

[Woogie Man]

Feel free to go on about them....they seem like a great group. You know, PETA and HSUS are so well known and well funded but really aren't doing the job that obviously needs being done. From the little I've read so far about Best Friends, they may well be the ones to fill the vacuum.

It's kind of ironic that this thread started about Nathan Winograd and you've been on here touting Best Friends....then come to find out, he's a big part of that group. It looks to me like they are stitching together a group of rational, passionate people that are intent on changing the status quo, well beyond their own shelter/sanctuary.

I know you posted their link way earlier but we were busy posting back and forth and I never looked at it until yesterday. I'm glad I did and thanks so much making me aware of them. I plan on looking into them more but I really like what I've seen so far.

This has been a great thread and I'm happy to have been a part of it. You know, with a subject like this, it could have easily gone off the rails but didn't. I wish more controversial subjects could be handled this way .

Jim

[Woogie Man]

Cindy,
You mentioned in your earlier post about needing an almost Buddhist approach to understanding animals. Here's my favorite quote about animals. I've posted it on YT before and you may have seen it, but it really sums up my feelings...

“We need another and a wiser and perhaps a more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature, and living by complicated artifice, man in civilization surveys the creature through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronize them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein we err, and greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with extensions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings; they are other nations caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth......Henry Beston

[Woogie Man]

Here's an interesting story about some shelters in Washington reducing their kill rate by government directive. It kind of highlights that some shelters aren't doing a good job and can do better when told to.

*************************************

Euthanasia rate at animal shelters falls to all-time low

King County animal shelters dramatically reduced the number of dogs and cats put to death in the first two months of this year, the county's...

By Keith Ervin

Seattle Times staff reporter

King County animal shelters dramatically reduced the number of dogs and cats put to death in the first two months of this year, the county's animal-control chief said Tuesday.

Al Dams, acting manager of animal care and control, said the euthanasia rate fell to an all-time low of just under 18 percent of sheltered animals in January and February, about half of the 34 percent rate in the first two months of 2007.

The sharp drop shows progress by the shelters in Kent and Bellevue toward complying with the Metropolitan King County Council's directive last year that no more than 20 percent of animals be put down this year and no more than 15 percent next year.

Dams said the improvement resulted from a number of changes, including holding more pet-adoption events at pet stores, placing of more animals in foster homes, increasing animal "rescues" by nonprofit organizations, adding programs to neuter feral cats and adopt some out as "barn cats," and increasing from four to six the number of days a veterinarian is at the Kent shelter each week.

Keeping the death rate low for the entire year may be difficult because the shelters typically become crowded during the summer, Dams said. January and February are not busy months.

"We have the mandate. We have the will to do it, and we are planning to do it," Dams said. "Whether we can do it during the [busy] times of the year is a question. Do we have the resources to do it?"

The number of animals euthanized because they were considered unadoptable for health or temperament reasons dropped to 34 percent in 2007, from nearly 40 percent in 2006, Dams said.

The county shelters housed 11,801 animals in 2007 and euthanized 4,054.

County Councilmember Julia Patterson, prime sponsor of the "no-kill" policy, welcomed the lower death figures. "That's the kind of news that we've been looking for, we've been asking for, for close to a year now," she said.

But Patterson said she would seek confirmation that the new numbers are consistent with the County Council's methodology.

She also cautioned that the shelters' performance will be judged on the basis of a full year, not a two-month period.

The shelters have been under close scrutiny since the council passed the no-kill policy last May and a citizens advisory committee reported in September that conditions in the two shelters were "deplorable," with too many animals being killed because of poor health and lack of an aggressive adoption effort.

The County Council will receive a report Monday from national no-kill-movement activist Nathan Winograd on whether the county is capable of creating a model animal-care program. The council has signaled it may shut down both animal shelters if it doesn't believe they can be adequately improved.

Keith Ervin: 206-464-2105 or kervin@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

*******************************************

Here's the link for the story.

Local News | Euthanasia rate at animal shelters falls to all-time low | Seattle Times Newspaper

[livingdustmops]

What a wonderful story and thanks for posting it. It is so wonderful to read an article where a city shelter (taxpayer owned) is trying to make a difference. I believe this is possible if people want it to happen. Somewhere in that city people said, enough is enough and let their legislators know. What is really amazing to me is they are doing this during extremely difficult economic times. I am sure behind this story is a manager who now has had to figure out how do I educate the public and how do I get more volunteers to help obtain this goal. If this city is anything like Tucson then the volunteers are there, they just need direction in many cases. The only reason I use Tucson is because when I lived there is when I was involved with rescue and worked with the city shelter (dog pound).

I hope we can continue to post these types of letters/articles because I think it helps people think about their own city/town issues and that they can make a change.

I loved your quote and it so tells the story. Thank you for posting it and I will add it to my list.

Yes Jim, I also enjoyed this discussion and hopefully it makes other people start thinking and questioning what is going on in their town/state/us and what changes they can help with. As I have said before, nothing is black and white and there are many issues and not one way to fix them. We just have to take little bites out where ever we can. We have to understand the roles every organization plays and figure out what works for us.

Yesterday, I watched an extremely emotional show on animal planet and it showcased dog fightening. As tough as I think I am about some of these things, I was a freaking mess watching dogs kill each other..even as I write this..tears roll down my face. I forced myself to watch because I did learn a great deal and now I even have more questions and I also hope I am better informed about these beautiful dogs and what "man" has done to them. Actually I could do a whole thread about my thoughts on this but I will refrain from here. The only reason I bring it up is because it was Best Friends would took the majority of Michael Vicks Dogs and rehabilitated them. BF was never recognized on the tv show and actual the ASPCA vet put many of these dogs down on the tv show due to bite wounds on the dogs and I am not sure that was necessary. I also believe BF had to go to court to take these dogs and I have seen this before of one animal group refusing to release dogs. One of the things the show pointed out was these dogs have been trained to be great with people (so their handles can do just about anything to them) but they are trained to kill other dogs. This is another whole can of worms but I just was so upset by the show.

Okay before we can fix those problems we have to fix the killing of so many animals and it will take everyone voicing their concerns to help make this happen.

[Woogie Man]

I'll keep digging around to see if I can find more of this type story. It's very encouraging to see successes like that and they can serve as a model for other communities. Did you notice that Winograd is preparing a report for them to see if no-kill is possible for them? That guy seems to be everywhere LOL. I didn't find the story by looking for things about him but was researching kill rates in shelters. Did you get the chance to read more from the link I posted from the Best Friends site? They are sending out copies of his book in an effort to promote attaining a no-kill solution both here and in other countries. I'm thinking of trying to compile some of this, maybe along with some copies of his book, and presenting it to our county Board of Supervisors, who have jurisdiction over our shelter. At least it will be planting a seed in their minds.

I'm glad you liked the quote. I've read it many times and it becomes more meaningful to me with each read.

I don't watch a whole lot of video on dog fighting, animal cruelty, etc. any more. I went through a phase where I did and I think I got an overload of it. I think it was all the factory farming videos that did it, but it's all embedded in my brain.

I think the Pitt Bull is a wonderful breed but has gotten into totally the wrong hands. Breeders breeding for the most aggression and owners using them as an extension of their 'manhood' have created a huge problem. My son owns a Pitt and a Pitt mix and they're both sweeties. They're not dog aggressive, either. He also has a poodle and 2 chi/dachshund mixes and they all get along. The first Pitts I encountered were in the early '80s and those were two my neighbor had. He had them for all the wrong reasons and they were raised to be aggressive.

Those dogs conducted a campaign of terror in the neighborhood for a while. Once, they climbed out of their yard, climbed a neighbor's fence and attacked their Cocker Spaniel. I heard the ruckus and jumped the fence and beat the dogs off him but it was too late for the Cocker. The owner of the Pitts just laughed about it.

At that time, I had a wolf hybrid (Pagan) and another neighbor had a black Lab (Ben) that were both puppies. Those Pitts came after me and Pagan more than once when I was out walking him. They had also gone after Ben. Well, one day after they were both grown, Pagan and Ben both climbed the fences out of our yards and climbed the fence into the Pitts' yard. It came to my attention when the Pitts owner came banging on my door, his pants torn and bloody...all sweaty and excited, telling me, "Jim, you gotta come get your dog off my dogs!!" I ran over just in time to see Pagan grab one of the Pitts by the neck and toss it in the air. Ben was rolling and tumbling with the other one. I got them broke up and back in their yards. Do I have to say that was the end of the 'Pitt problem'?

So that was my first experience with Pitts but I've since met quite a few with good owners and I have come to really admire the breed. There are quite a few Pitt attacks in our area but I know it's the result of irresponsible owners. Some want anti-Pitt legislation but it's really the owners that need to be regulated. If you outlaw Pitts, another breed will just take their place and the result will be the same due to whacked-out owners.

[livingdustmops]

Jim, this is wonderful...and such positive things will start to happen with more pets...

It did take me a little time to get to the links as I had to work on my income tax return...head banging... but yes it is also great news. The BF website can take you in so many directions...it is easy to get lost

It is wonderful when groups will work together to try and end what is going on. While they might not always agree on the approach they all agree to help the animals.

One of the reasons I brought up the Fighting Dog program is because of the heavy involvment of the HSUS. While a lot of people don't like them they do so much more than people realize. Their role is not just shelters and homes for unwanted animals. They were very involved in bringing down some of the biggest dog fighting rings.

I like your suggestion of bringing some of these books/articles to help people understand there are other ways to save the animals.