Jump to content
Dogomania

No-Kill Policy


Prairie_Gurl

Do you think shelters should have a no-kill policy??  

  1. 1. Do you think shelters should have a no-kill policy??



Recommended Posts

I was just wondering what you all think about dog shelters/humain societies and a no-kill policy. I mean, on one hand it's good because it gives dogs more time to find a good home, and you're not condemning a dog to its death just because he doesn't have a home. But on the other, if a dog doesn't have a home, and nobody takes it home, will the dog actually be happy living in the shelter its whole life?? And if you don't kill some dogs will there be an overcrowding of dogs at shelters???

I was just wondering what everyone thought about this...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sure don't like dogs being killed but, quite honestly, some of the worst places for a dog to wind up are no kill shelters. (I'll probably get flamed for saying that!) Honestly, can you imagine a dog sentenced to what boils down to life in prison? I would rather a dog was euthanized than that.

Also, what you don't hear about the "no kill" shelters is that they do have a finite capacity. When they are bursting at the seams, they simply refuse to accept any more dogs. So, what happens to those dogs? Most are shuttled off to a different shelter that is not no kill.

I would like to see shelters extend the time a dog is available for adoption when the dog is healthy, friendly and seems to be very adoptable. Of course, if they did that then I suppose the intake could overwhelm them.

I just wish people would spay/neuter their pets and folks who have no business breeding wouldn't!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted yes BUT -
I think that dogs that are viciouse, repeat biters, seriously ill/injured or otherwise have been determined to be unadoptable need to either be homed in humane permanent kennels with large outdoor runs and indoor components and with lots of toys, bedding and changing stimuli or they need to be PTS. This would mean that most of the dogs in this situation would need to be PTS. I also think there needs to be a push for way more foster homes, way more spay and nueter, licencing and inspection of breeders (sorry I know this will make people angry but there are way too many irresponsible breeders out there and you can just blame them.) I also think that if a dog has been at a shelter more than 4months they need to be evaluated regularly to see if they are suffering in their current situation - if they are a solution needs to be found, if no solution can be found and the dog is really suffering the shelter may have to consider having it PTS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of clarification seems to be needed on this topic. I also voted yes, but I believe that no-kill should be amended to 'Kept in shelter as long as we are not overfull and the dog seems reasonable to adopt.' Some shelters automatically euthanize the dogs after a specified period, usually dependant on the shelters usual intake rate. I think if the dog is determined to be safe for adoption, and not very sick, then if the shelter becomes overfull, they should pass as many of the extra dogs off to foster-homes as possible, so that we have many less dogs euthanized. I for one would put myself on a foster-list for such a shelter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...