Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

By what right?

Support No Kill sheltering
Support No Kill sheltering
www.NoKillHouston.org

Comments

  • lieslgee 5 years ago

    I wonder what you think about the SPCA bringing in chihuahuas from out of state and saying that there are no chihuahuas here so there is a demand, when chi rescue is full and shelters have them, too.

  • Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    A shelter that is already killing 61% of the animals entering their doors should not take in more animals. I'm sure that they took those Chihuahuas because they are more easily adopted out than a bigger dog. Therefore the added adoption fees will pad their coffers. And I am quite sure that animals at the HSPCA were killed to make room for the dogs that were shipped in. I do not believe shipping animals from one high kill shelter to another high kill shelter is a solution.

    Each shelter needs to stop killing before importing more animals.

  • Marcia Piotter 5 years ago

    Thanks Bett for taking the time to research these issues and bring them before the public in a factual manner.

  • Kellee K 5 years ago

    Another great article Bett. This is the question we no kill advocates ask ourselves all the time. "By what right?" Indeed.

  • Barc-2-NoKill 5 years ago

    Yes, Bett says it all, both in the title and in the text.

    One could summarize with a sentence from Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre: "Conventionality is not morality."

  • Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    I like that quote.

  • Profile picture of Amanda Evrard
    Amanda Evrard 5 years ago

    You bring up many valid points. The SPCA is very good at making people think they are no-kill. Thankfully, San Antonio Humane Society is no longer associated with the SPCA and is a no-kill shelter.

    Regarding the chi comment above, I do not know but can only assume it is because the transport program is run like the one in San Antonio. Our city gives fully vetted dogs to other shelters, some of which are also open-door kill shelters, at no cost to them and they adopt them out for $200-300 each so they can kill the animals that come in locally that would have to be treated for medical problems. Great way to make money, not a great way to save animals.

  • Profile picture of Susan Shipman
    Susan Shipman 5 years ago

    I had signed up to volunteer at the Houston SPCA last year, but was seriously disappointed when they mentioned (in a very casual, nonchalant manner) how they euthanize every pit bull that walks through the door without even TEMPERMENT TESTING the dog first. I haven't been back since.

  • Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    I don't blame you Susan. They should not be allowed to call themselves a "Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals". What could possibly be more cruel that being killed for no other reason that a shelter worker thinks the dog looks like a particular breed. It is shameful.

  • Profile picture of Thomas Cole
    Thomas Cole 5 years ago

    First, I honor your tireless work in Houston, Bett. You have gone above and beyond over the years to get out the word. My thanks for that.

    Houston is missing a creative leader to bring this cause and all its divided factions together under one effort. This leadership will not come from the government nor from within the shelter industry.

    Cages? Really? Killing instead of rehab? Shelters, how dull and 1870s.

    American individualists must be convinced to give up their obsessive need to work alone. BARC, CAP, SPCA, Humane Society, 100 little rescue groups - see the flaw?

    Bett, you put the term "shelter" in quotes to imply that they are not sheltering. Well, the same can be said about "no kill." Ryan Clinton even coined the phrase "90% Club." When all else fails, aim lower - right? People with power are giving you the finger. You're working against nature, not with it.

    The solution is a positive approach with innovative ideas. We do not need shelter REFORM. We need shelter REPLACEMENT. Sheltering is a rotten apple. The No-Kill Equation is just polishing this rotten apple.

    Watch this little slide show = http://youtu.be/OPajZB9cPWQ

    There is a better way...

  • Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    Gary, you are right. What is going on in Houston is far too common across the US. The real kicker is that a lot of people have no idea. I talked to a co-worker last week who told me that she was going to donate to the HSPCA. I told her to please read this article first, then decide if these shelters represent her values as an animal lover.

    It is up to all of us to make people aware of what is really going in our communities.

  • Profile picture of Diana Culp
    Diana Culp 5 years ago

    I do not work in TX but my family is there. I worked in shelters in Maryland. While I agree that euthanasia is often a cover up for humane slaughter of unwanted animals I do want to say that shelters who euthanize healthy animals are faced with 200 cages that are full and a person dropping of 20 sneezing cats. What would you do?
    You would call your rescue list, request donations, notify any foster homes with isolation rooms and allow the 20 cats to remain in carriers for an hour while you do so. You would find placements for 3 because you are taking one of them yourself. Now you must examine them and set them up with water and litter. Oh, but you don't have any empty cages...What would you do? Let's say by miracle you solve this dilemma in a day. At closing time, a man comes by with four puppies he found by the side of the road. They have ring worm....what would you do?

  • Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    What I would do could not be summed up in this small space, except to say that I look to what other Open Admission, No Kill shelters are doing to move animals through the system. Here is a list of some of them: http://s312584456.initial-website.com/no-kill-shelters-us-canada/ Please read up on everything that they are doing to save all healthy and treatable pets. All of their ideas are based on the No Kill Equation: http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/nokillequation.html. All of the directors of the No Kill shelters think outside of the box and come up with solutions to save lives.

  • Profile picture of Diana Culp
    Diana Culp 5 years ago

    Thanks for the links. I am familiar with them and hope you know the current controversy over transparent reporting. When animal intake and disposition is counted under the Asilomar Accords, many open admission no-kills have the same humane slaughter rate as those who don't call themselves no kill. And it is because the scenarios I gave above would be counted as euthanasia in the traditional facility and necessary death for sick animals in the no-kill. I understand that Nathan Winograd would propose treating the cats with URI and the puppies with fungus, but they are contagious so without the facilities to isolate one can end up with 200 "sick animals" who can then be justifiably killed. When you have worked in both types of shelters you'll better understand the issue. Although you are on the right track when you say that what is conventional is not always right.

  • Profile picture of Bett Sundermeyer
    Bett Sundermeyer 5 years ago

    Sorry, but I will never agree that a cat with URI or a puppy with fungus can be "justifiably" killed. There is no justification for killing healthy or treatable animals. "Euthanasia" is acceptable when an animal is too sick or injured to be saved and they are suffering. Of course we don't want unsavable animals to suffer. But, killing healthy or treatable animals is not acceptable. There are ways to avoid an outbreak of 200 sick animals.

    I also know that the Asilomar Accords are an easy way for a not so honest shelter to skew their numbers to make themselves look better. But shifting numbers into different columns or mislabeling animals as too sick to be saved, is not acceptable. That is why that we look at raw numbers to come up with save and kill rates. True and honest No Kill shelters have shown us that they are able to save 90% of ALL animals entering their doors. This is why we consider a shelter truly No Kill when they are saving at least 90% of all animals.

  • Profile picture of Diana Culp
    Diana Culp 5 years ago

    I agree with everything you have said. What I want to point out is that unless you turn animals away you will have cats with pneumonia who cannot recover in the shelter. If you cannot find a place to send them within a few hours....what would you do?

  • Anonymous 2 years ago

    I have to disagree with you. While you have valid points, there are animals being euthanized that have treatable diseases, there is also the temperment of the animal that must be taken into account, as well as how far along the disease is. It would be equally horrible for the shelter to adopt out horribly aggresive dogs or a cat that will have to take pills for the rest of its life, even if the cat hates taking pills. You must take into account the wellbeing of the animal *after* it is adopted out. What if it is completely dependent on a medication that it can't stand taking? What if it has an anxiety disorder and will turn agressive if a child runs up to it?
    That's my two bits. I don't wish to get into an argument; I was just simply pointing out factors that the shelters have to look at.

Report this ad