Pet overpopulation is a myth

Not all dogs could be helped from a effort made towards retention, just like all dogs are not helped with the effort made towards adoption. Why is it that people are finding ways to make alternative strategies not viable instead of trying to incorporate new strategies to increase the possibility of success? What harm would come from trying new strategies? Would more animals be in shelters or euthanized by attempting new strategies?

This is worth repeating. Are there numerically enough homes for all the strays in the world? Yes. But of those how many can a) afford a dog,  b) want a dog c) be ready to care for a dog d) allowed to have a dog...etc etc....that lowers the numbers by a huge margin. If we forced dogs into everyone's homes, of course overpopulation would be a myth.  But that isn't the case.

Not every home in America is able to own a dog. Some people don't like them (Shocker, I know) some people CANNOT have one where they live. Many cannot afford the pet deposite on a new home (they are NOT cheap....). People come accross personal medical problems, limiting their abilities to care for a pet - and many of those are elderly and do not have family willing to take on their pet.

We offer free behavioral advice over the phone, local low-cost vets, and yet - we still have people needing to give up their animals.

 I agree with DPU that the best target is the original owners of the dogs, not the shelters themselves.  But considering all the resources available to these people,and they still give up their dogs....where do we go next? What does a shelter do when it is full to the brim (dogs in offices,  dogs in halls) and suddenly presented with six more dogs that they by law must take, with foster homes chock full across the board and a six month waiting list on the no-kills?

2Bully, I commend you for efforts in supporting your local shelter.  It just irritates me to no end when I receive comments from people on the sidelines that tell me to PTS my fosters so I could rehome many more "adoptable" dogs.  They don't get fostering and the 3 R's. 

Now tell me how Retention has worked at your local shelter.  It is dependent on you having contact with the owner and the owner is willing to have a first conversation.  Do you know what percentage of shelter dogs are owner surrenders where the shelter actually has contact with the owner?

My rescue organization very seldom take in dogs into the program directly from an owner.  In the few cases that come our way, we do Retention, try and work with owner and the problems occurring in their home.  As part of our rehoming, the adopter can return the dog for any reason and again at that time when there is contact we do Retention.  You see, in those few cases, the owner has to approach us.  Don't you think others are doing the same thing, it seems to be a very common sense thing.

2bully

Lets start with retention. Several opportunities exist in this one area alone. Develop resources that would allow the shelter or rescue to make an effort to keep the pet in the home. One of those resources could be a list of pet friendly landlords and develop an action plan to get that to the public so that it can be utilized to prevent surrenders due to having to move.Provide free or low cost seminars that target specific behavioral problems. Initiate relationships with local trainers/behaviorists that are willing to work with clients at a reduced price through a shelter or rescue refferal program. Intiate relationships with local vets and develop a similiar referral program for vet care.

Oh a idealistic approach.....I remember when my head was full of such romantic notions. I dont mean that in a offensive way at all but when you get down to the nitty gritty questions of funding arise, supports, and bottom line.....the cooperation of the shelters,vets, trainers, the adopters, the landlords, city officials and more.

I'm not saying you have a bad idea but there is a difference between idealistic and realistic approaches. One day at a time is the only route. What do you propose we do about BYB's and owners who dont want to be educated about their animals? With some people you can talk until you are blue in the face but they will not change their ways. Its a sad reality but we all share your passion.

when I worked at a shelter, stray dogs and unwanted litters of puppies were practically never brought in. What we mostly got were 6 to 8 month old dogs. The owners generally had all sorts of stupid reasons they provided, but bottom line the most common problem was: 1) they bought a cute puppy on a whim; 2) they didn't socialize, train, or exercise the cute puppy; 3) the cute puppy is now an obnoxious destructive hyperactive dog with many behavioral issues and they want it gone, now. Education of the public about how and when and from where to get a dog, education about how much time dogs require especially as puppies, and education of the public about how and when to train your dog might dramatically reduce shelter turn-ins, at least in some areas.

mudpuppy

when I worked at a shelter, stray dogs and unwanted litters of puppies were practically never brought in. What we mostly got were 6 to 8 month old dogs. The owners generally had all sorts of stupid reasons they provided, but bottom line the most common problem was: 1) they bought a cute puppy on a whim; 2) they didn't socialize, train, or exercise the cute puppy; 3) the cute puppy is now an obnoxious destructive hyperactive dog with many behavioral issues and they want it gone, now. Education of the public about how and when and from where to get a dog, education about how much time dogs require especially as puppies, and education of the public about how and when to train your dog might dramatically reduce shelter turn-ins, at least in some areas.

Nobody is arguing there! Amen to that but I still am not convinced that overpopulation is a myth.

I'd like to know what the reason is behind the fact that my current community has a humane society that takes in 18000 animals annually yet the one I grew up in, with about the same population size, takes in 5000 annually without half the programming we have here.  If it's not overpopulation, what is it?!

stardog85

I'd like to know what the reason is behind the fact that my current community has a humane society that takes in 18000 animals annually yet the one I grew up in, with about the same population size, takes in 5000 annually without half the programming we have here.  If it's not overpopulation, what is it?!

Did you know that the national average for voluntary spay and nueter is at 60%?  This link delves into what an "overpopulation" means.

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/25351.html

I definitely agree that different areas are more saturated than others.  A few years back, our county shelter, humane society, and a few rescue groups joined together in a "network".  The human society does not euthanize for space BUT you have to PAY to surrender an animal, so they automatically have more funds and space at their disposal.  It's free to dump and animal at the county shelter, plus they take in strays and have to hold the animals for court cases.  The county shelter DOES have to euthanize for space.  Now, after this program went into affect (the HS and rescue groups helping absorb overflow from the county shelter), euthanasia went down 15%.  If there was NOT an overpopulation of unwanted animals, wouldn't the number have been 100%?  That means there are still hundreds of euthanizations a year by the county shelter.

I personally have brought in two stray dogs. At the Humane Society, I think the majority of owner surrenders are "behavioral problems" that the owners don't want to deal with, or people that have to move.  But even there I watched a lot of drop-offs that were people who found stray animals.  One guy stopped his pickup truck by me b/c he found a pit bull and was worried she would be euth'd b/c of her breed before she was given a chance.  I've never volunteered for the county shelter, but I suspect that since they are the animal control shelter, they have a much higher ratio of strays/at large animals.

So, I can't agree that HERE there is NOT an overpopulation problem, when the county shelter and one of the main rescues is routinely euthanizing unwanted animals for space, even after a network was setup to move overflow animals to other rescues.  I believe the same is true for the county to my east.  I've visited their shelter twice to pull a dog.  The manager told me they mainly have strays.  The county to the north sells their animals for research, so people will dump their animals across the county line, or put a stray across the line.  This shelter in particular is always in bad shape.  The shelter itself is nothing more than a lean-to.  It was so over-crowded they had dogs in rabbit hutches.
 

stardog85

I'd like to know what the reason is behind the fact that my current community has a humane society that takes in 18000 animals annually yet the one I grew up in, with about the same population size, takes in 5000 annually without half the programming we have here.  If it's not overpopulation, what is it?!

North versus South maybe.  Indiana versus South Carolina.

AuroraLove

2bully

Lets start with retention. Several opportunities exist in this one area alone. Develop resources that would allow the shelter or rescue to make an effort to keep the pet in the home. One of those resources could be a list of pet friendly landlords and develop an action plan to get that to the public so that it can be utilized to prevent surrenders due to having to move.Provide free or low cost seminars that target specific behavioral problems. Initiate relationships with local trainers/behaviorists that are willing to work with clients at a reduced price through a shelter or rescue refferal program. Intiate relationships with local vets and develop a similiar referral program for vet care.

Oh a idealistic approach.....I remember when my head was full of such romantic notions. I dont mean that in a offensive way at all but when you get down to the nitty gritty questions of funding arise, supports, and bottom line.....the cooperation of the shelters,vets, trainers, the adopters, the landlords, city officials and more.

I'm not saying you have a bad idea but there is a difference between idealistic and realistic approaches. One day at a time is the only route. What do you propose we do about BYB's and owners who dont want to be educated about their animals? With some people you can talk until you are blue in the face but they will not change their ways. Its a sad reality but we all share your passion.

I've illustrated through links of several sources that alternative strategies are worth exploring and that they have been employed successfully. I think when there is a will there is a way. I find that those that offer the most resistance to change are those that are happy with the way things are.

DPU

2Bully, I commend you for efforts in supporting your local shelter.  It just irritates me to no end when I receive comments from people on the sidelines that tell me to PTS my fosters so I could rehome many more "adoptable" dogs.  They don't get fostering and the 3 R's. 

Now tell me how Retention has worked at your local shelter.  It is dependent on you having contact with the owner and the owner is willing to have a first conversation.  Do you know what percentage of shelter dogs are owner surrenders where the shelter actually has contact with the owner?

My rescue organization very seldom take in dogs into the program directly from an owner.  In the few cases that come our way, we do Retention, try and work with owner and the problems occurring in their home.  As part of our rehoming, the adopter can return the dog for any reason and again at that time when there is contact we do Retention.  You see, in those few cases, the owner has to approach us.  Don't you think others are doing the same thing, it seems to be a very common sense thing.

 My shelter is as focased to oppose change as the members of this board. I volunteered to put together that landlord list that I suggested a few posts back the shelter declined. I also offered to teach basic manner/ob at no cost to the shelter, I asked that they provide the space(indoors in the bad weather outside for nice) declined.

Liesje

I definitely agree that different areas are more saturated than others.  A few years back, our county shelter, humane society, and a few rescue groups joined together in a "network".  The human society does not euthanize for space BUT you have to PAY to surrender an animal, so they automatically have more funds and space at their disposal.  It's free to dump and animal at the county shelter, plus they take in strays and have to hold the animals for court cases.  The county shelter DOES have to euthanize for space.  Now, after this program went into affect (the HS and rescue groups helping absorb overflow from the county shelter), euthanasia went down 15%.  If there was NOT an overpopulation of unwanted animals, wouldn't the number have been 100%?  That means there are still hundreds of euthanizations a year by the county shelter.

I personally have brought in two stray dogs. At the Humane Society, I think the majority of owner surrenders are "behavioral problems" that the owners don't want to deal with, or people that have to move.  But even there I watched a lot of drop-offs that were people who found stray animals.  One guy stopped his pickup truck by me b/c he found a pit bull and was worried she would be euth'd b/c of her breed before she was given a chance.  I've never volunteered for the county shelter, but I suspect that since they are the animal control shelter, they have a much higher ratio of strays/at large animals.

So, I can't agree that HERE there is NOT an overpopulation problem, when the county shelter and one of the main rescues is routinely euthanizing unwanted animals for space, even after a network was setup to move overflow animals to other rescues.  I believe the same is true for the county to my east.  I've visited their shelter twice to pull a dog.  The manager told me they mainly have strays.  The county to the north sells their animals for research, so people will dump their animals across the county line, or put a stray across the line.  This shelter in particular is always in bad shape.  The shelter itself is nothing more than a lean-to.  It was so over-crowded they had dogs in rabbit hutches.
 

 Stray dogs are strays because they were born? An owner that surrenders a dog for behavioral problems was in that predictiment for simply being born. An inability to abandon the idea that the breeding of a puppy that was wanted is somehow linked with the death of that dog in a shelter when it became unwanted.

2bully

I've illustrated through links of several sources that alternative strategies are worth exploring and that they have been employed successfully. I think when there is a will there is a way. I find that those that offer the most resistance to change are those that are happy with the way things are.

I'm not disagreeing with you but again its a geographical issue as well. I dare to say you see things as black and white with no shades of grey. Cities like Brooklyn, Detroit, Houston, and more urban cities that have poverty and other issues are less likely to adhere to your proposals.

Your kinda preaching to the choir and were trying to point out obstacle and the sad reality of some situations. We all do our share and are more then open to the proposals and links you've posted. I was just put off a bit by your wording and adamant refusal to discuss or acknoweldge obstacles.

AuroraLove

2bully

I've illustrated through links of several sources that alternative strategies are worth exploring and that they have been employed successfully. I think when there is a will there is a way. I find that those that offer the most resistance to change are those that are happy with the way things are.

I'm not disagreeing with you but again its a geographical issue as well. I dare to say you see things as black and white with no shades of grey. Cities like Brooklyn, Detroit, Houston, and more urban cities that have poverty and other issues are less likely to adhere to your proposals.

Your kinda preaching to the choir and were trying to point out obstacle and the sad reality of some situations. We all do our share and are more then open to the proposals and links you've posted. I was just put off a bit by your wording and adamant refusal to discuss or acknoweldge obstacles.

I'm not talking about obstacles or challenges, its about changing that mindset. I view them as opportunities to improve not as a challenge or obstacle to overcome. There are shelters that have to get pets from other places to meet their adoption demands, could they not network with shelters that have more animals than adopters?