Random thoughts

Sharing some thoughts, ideas, and some laughs

No Kill? No Give a Damn!

9 Comments

I continue to be a proponent of a No Kill philosophy BUT I continue to fear the “movement” (NKA & NKN) are more concerned with  the optics of “clearing the books”, “getting them out the shelter” than they are about the welfare of the dogs and cats that are “cleared” and “transported”.  I have asked and asked but to date no one has taken the time or made the effort to reply, Does anyone follow up on the dogs and cats that are transported or transferred to the numerous rescue groups? Does anyone know or care what happens to the dogs and cats that are sent to these rescue groups. Does anyone know or care to perform checks and on site visits to these rescue groups?’ How many dogs and cats are adopted,transferred yet again or just live a miserable, diseased, starving existence until they die either naturally or predated my those hungrier and stronger.  Does anyone take the time or make the effort to care? BUT, they are not killed because this is No Kill – at all costs. Just another form of exploitation of innocent animals in order that others may write books, make speeches and garner donations.

This is the other side of No Kill, the “rescues” to which dogs and cats are sent in order to empty the cages at the shelters. They are gone, they are forgotten, out of sight- out of mind, they are neglected, they are abused  but the shelter statistics are great and the public relations train just keeps on chugging. The law suits against those that have the audacity to disagree continue to be fought (with donor money) and the animals continue to rot in hell on earth.

I recently read a superb blog by “fromamaddogwalker” and was so impressed with this piece that I asked permission to share: How I Failed as a Rescuer, Lessons From a Sanctuary

This is not pretty, but this is reality:INSIDE THE OLYMPIC ANIMAL SANCTUARY

It’s time that No Kill Movement be held accountable for the animals they have KILLED by “saving”.

9 thoughts on “No Kill? No Give a Damn!

  1. the premise of No Kill is good, but some of the practices are not. Also, cannot believe in the number 1 doctrine of No Kill (from the ‘talking head’ on down) and that is “…there is no pet overpopulation….” Can our shelters do better, of course they can…but the communities that abandon their animals to shelters, for a myriad of excuses – the same reasons and excuses I’ve been hearing for 33 years – working as an animal advocate and with a resuce/advocacy group, are not the excuses of the kind, caring and compassionate society. People give up their animals for all sorts of reasons – some may be valid – but many, many of those are not.

  2. Thanks for the comment Cath. Always informative and always welcome

  3. I think it is important to make a distinction between a ‘rescue’ organization and a ‘sanctuary’. A rescue runs with an army of foster homes, whereas a sanctuary is a static environment, that may, or may not have the benefit of a network of foster homes. I think of sanctuaries as specialized shelters and as such are as good as, or as bad as, any number of animal shelters on this continent. I think when a ‘rescue’ or a ‘no-kill shelter’ or ‘sanctuary’ becomes problematic is when it is masquerading as a rescue/shelter/sanctuary but in fact is the domain of an animal hoarder. True, well meaning individuals can quickly get in over their heads and have more animals than they can reasonably manage. However, generally they will acknowledge this is a problem and will stop taking in more animals or seek external assistance. Hoarders do not ask for help because they do not see that the increasing numbers of animals are problematic. They do not acknowledge that the animals are not being well cared for, or god forbid suffering in any way. They rarely, if ever seek veterinary care. They collect animals for very complex psychological reasons and need professional intervention to get better, although the prognosis is extremely poor. I don’t believe it is too difficult to recognize a true hoarding situation, if one bothers to honestly look.

    • That is exactly my point. Do the No Kill shelters that feed the rescues and or sanctuaries bother to check out the facility and monitor the animals they send to these places? If yes and they continue to send animals to these places then they are cruel, irresponsible enablers and should be held accountable for compromising the lives of innocent animals. If no then they are still responsible and culpable for the damage done to the animals. Just because they do not see the decay, disease and death does not make the No Kill shelter exempt from responsibility. If hoarders don’t receive animals they can’t be hoarders. It is my opinion (for what it is worth) that any no kill shelter that knowingly feeds animals into one of these rescue/sanctuaries should be charged along with the facility owner. It is neglect and abuse no matter how you try to paint it pretty. It may be No Kill but it is a life sentence of hell for those dogs and cats.

  4. I am sorry but I was not moved by “Notes From A Dog Walker”. The blog made it sound like these poor rescues who dumped dogs at Spindletop were innocent. Several of the rescues who had dogs there were in rescue for several years. How many of them went through Yet none of them checked on the dogs physically to see the condition their dogs were in. How many of them asked for a Vet Reference? How many of them asked to speak with the trainer. In one particular case a rescuer was told that one of the dogs she placed there was not able to be trained. Did she ask to speak to the trainer? NO. Did she remove the dog from Spidletop? NO. In fact she left that dog there along with the rest of them she abandoned until the news broke. It was then and only then that these rescuers cried foul and went to reclaim the dogs they dumped there. This is not rescue. Rescue is not about the quanity of animals a rescue takes but about the quality of life they have.

  5. I certainly support the no-kill movement, including doing nearly everything possible to get those animals adopted. I do have some problems with quite a few rescue groups that call themselves “no kill.” While they are not killing the animals, they are often so picky about who can adopt that they keep the animals in overcrowded foster homes or boarding facilities for years or at least months. This is not what no kill is about.

    I do understand your argument that getting them out the door too quickly can mean they end up in the wrong hands. The argument there, as you know, is that it’s important to trust adopters. Most people love animals and adopters are generally going to provide the animal with a better life than the animal would receive at the shelter. Home visits sound great, but can you really tell how an animal will be treated based on someone’s home? No.

    So, what it comes down to is there are always risks. Personally, I would rather send any animal home with just about any adopter rather than keep it in the shelter or rescue system any longer than necessary, especially if that means the animal will be killed for “space” or “lack of homes.”

    Good post, gets us thinking! And thanks for visiting my site today.

    • Hey Lindsay,
      I agree with you completely. I have no issue with “getting them out the door” as long as the door they passing through isn’t going to spell a long life of pain and suffering at an over crowded, under equipped “rescue” facility.

      I have nothing but respect and admiration for those people that take in dogs and cats that have been abandoned, neglected and abused or just plain no longer wanted. I have no time, no patience, nothing but disdain for those that hurt those who cannot speak for themselves.

      My argument is that I feel that No Kill shelters must be held accountable for the lives of the dogs and cats they relinquish to shelters. I feel that No Kill shelters have an obligation to the animal they transport and shuttle off to other centres. Just because they are “off the books” at the No Kill shelter does not mean they should be removed from the consciences of those that have sent them elsewhere, often to die a long lingering death in squalor and pain. It is my personal opinion and belief that No Kill Shelters should be monitoring the “rescues” to which these animals are sent to ensure they maintain the highest possible standards for the welfare ad health of the animals that are sent to them.

      Too many dogs and cats have been victimized by No Kill as a result of being sent to “rescues”like Spindletop and Caboodle Ranch and others of their ilk.

  6. Also, I haven’t read those links you shared, but I will make sure to do that. Sanctuaries are a little scary for me, too. I’m not sure how I feel about them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s