Pet overpopulation is a myth

2bully

Strays are an owner retention problem.

Not always.  Some urban areas have populations of strays breeding.  I guess "feral" is a better term.

Common sense says that we should first manage our own "overpopulation" crisis.

I agree.  I just think it's wrong to paint everyone and the entire country with the same brush.  Our area has already done what these shelters advocate.  We have no-kill rescues and HS, the HS has tons of programs to help previous or new owners, people can come back and get their dog if they change their mind, and they take overflow from other shelters rather than import.  Still animals are being euthanized so obviously the solution is not black and white. 

Feral populations need a seperate approach. I agree not all shelters and rescues are equal. Those on top should continue to develop innovative strategies. those that are in the middle and bottom should adopt/mimic those programs that make those on top successful.

2bully

Feral populations need a seperate approach. I agree not all shelters and rescues are equal. Those on top should continue to develop innovative strategies. those that are in the middle and bottom should adopt/mimic those programs that make those on top successful.

And if they are on severely limited funding.....?

The last shelter I went to was so bad, dogs were being kept in rabbit cages.  The dog I pulled had an abscess the size of a grapefruit in her mouth.  She was severely emaciated and had kennel cough and whip worms.  The shelter manager said they don't have money to staff a vet or treat animals, but she found antibiotics somewhere and gave them to the dog.  My vet said it probably saved her life. 

Liesje

2bully

Feral populations need a seperate approach. I agree not all shelters and rescues are equal. Those on top should continue to develop innovative strategies. those that are in the middle and bottom should adopt/mimic those programs that make those on top successful.

 

And if they are on severely limited funding.....?

The last shelter I went to was so bad, dogs were being kept in rabbit cages.  The dog I pulled had an abscess the size of a grapefruit in her mouth.  She was severely emaciated and had kennel cough and whip worms.  The shelter manager said they don't have money to staff a vet or treat animals, but she found antibiotics somewhere and gave them to the dog.  My vet said it probably saved her life. 

 If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it? If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations?

2bully

 If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it? If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations?

Rather an extremely different situation, between the two. The one is purposely bringing the animals into the world....the breeder and if they do not have the money, time and space, before they make the decision to breed, well there in lies some of our problem. The shelters, rescues, humane society's have to clean up after those that have neglected their responsibilities. And we are constantly fighting that battle, to be able to provide for the care and shelter of these animals who have found themselves homeless. It is a constant battle and volunteers, money etc. do not come always bouncing merrily our way.

2bully

 If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it? If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations?

County shelters are funded by state/county money.  Apparently the citizens of the county don't care enough to make it a priority that shelters and animal control receive adequate funding.  Michigan has the highest rates of unemployment, worst housing market, and worst state economy in the country.  Unfortunately to many, saving stray animals is the last place they will spend money.  The shelters are not the only public services that are really struggling right now. 

Our privately funded (donations) shelter never euthanizes dogs for space (only dogs that are so ill they have a poor quality of life.  I've walked three-legged and one-eyed dogs at that shelter.  They employee a behaviorist and dog trainers.  There's a large network of volunteers and foster families.

And I'll make my little contribution......

"Pet overpopulation" means a greater number of dogs compared to number of willing owners. It does not necessarily mean dogs running around in the "wild" and starving on the streets. That would be "dog overpopulation" which we do not have..

We don't have a "dog overpopulation". There are enough (strictly numerically speaking) households in the world to own dogs. But we have a **pet overpopulation*** - as in an overpopulation of animals as compared to households *willing and able* to take on a pet (and retain it in the future).

Simply put, Animal Control (and many shelters as well) does not have the resources to individually manage every owner who is giving up a dog with a behavioral problem. Most of the people giving dogs up for that reason are extremely unwilling to try anything. Trust me, I have argued myself blue in the face with many of them

And I'll say it again....anyone who says overpopulation is a myth should come on down to Blacksburg and see how choked with gangly young good-tempered mixed-breeds, some barely out of puppy stages, from unwanted litters we are. It isn't only a "retention" problem. The largest volume of intake is litter drop-offs, usually past the point of cute puppyhood because people threw them in the backyard, trying to sell them, and failed. A numbers problem AND retention problem. Some shelters have simply "retention problem" animals (i.e. owner surrenders). But here (and in many other places) it is too many dogs being produced and not enough responsible and willing households to adopt them. THAT's overpopulation.

If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations

 You can't be serious. It's the shelter's fault for not advertising? You do understand that advertising (radio and TV spots, posting ads and flyers) costs money, right? You can't spend money you don't have in order to try and get some. It's a vicious cycle.

If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it?

 That's a laughable comparison. It's like telling a homeless person he should be held to the same clothing standards as an exec.

2bully

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.

Strategies are great and your effort to initiate a change is commendable.  If you are sincere in your belief of Retention, then find another shelter.  They are out there.

Any strategy for Retention is contingent on contact with the owner and the owner participating in a conversation as a start.  Dogs owners open to and seeking help are not the ones that need approach.  So many resources are available and a shining example is this board.  How do you get the cooperation of the dog owner.  A lot of resources and time spent on an offer is not a wise use of the resources if the offer is most of the time rejected. 

nymaureen

2bully

 If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it? If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations?

 

 

Rather an extremely different situation, between the two. The one is purposely bringing the animals into the world....the breeder and if they do not have the money, time and space, before they make the decision to breed, well there in lies some of our problem. The shelters, rescues, humane society's have to clean up after those that have neglected their responsibilities. And we are constantly fighting that battle, to be able to provide for the care and shelter of these animals who have found themselves homeless. It is a constant battle and volunteers, money etc. do not come always bouncing merrily our way.

 Deplorable conditions are deplorable conditions regardless of the mission of those responsible for the deplorable condition. should we then give a pass on hoarders because their intentions were to help? Why should one find those conditions acceptable in one setting and not another? I find the condition that the animal was kept to be the problem, I could care less if it was breeder, owner, shelter, or hoarder.

whtsthfrequency

If the shelter is funded by public donation and they fail to procure donations is that a failure of the public to donate or is that a failure on the shelter's part to develop action plans to sucessfully get donations

 You can't be serious. It's the shelter's fault for not advertising? You do understand that advertising (radio and TV spots, posting ads and flyers) costs money, right? You can't spend money you don't have in order to try and get some. It's a vicious cycle.

If a shelter doesn't actively seek donations, is that a failure on the publics part to donate or a failure on the shelter's part? My local paper and radio station donate space and airtime to my local shelter, do you think those entities find the shelter or did the shelter approach them? One can't be expected throw money at the shelter if the shelter won't reach its hand out to catch it. What prevents shelters from doing a door knocker fund raiser?

whtsthfrequency

If you walked into a breeder's facility that kept its animals in that condition would you have sympathy for the operator? Shouldn't the shelter be held to the same standard as a breeder regarding their care or lack of it?

 That's a laughable comparison. It's like telling a homeless person he should be held to the same clothing standards as an exec.

Its not laughable at all. Its as unacceptable for an exec or homeless to have their manly/womanly bits exposed. See I would find it unacceptable to see anyones junk regardless of ones place in society. I also find it offensive that some find that a shelter keeping animals in that kind of state and conditions is excusable

 I also find it offensive that some find that a shelter keeping animals in that kind of state and conditions is excusable

  I find it offensive that you seem to want to put words in my mouth in order to discredit me,or something of the sort. Please don't imply something I did not say in order to further your arguement.

I did not say extreme conditions were excusable. I said your comparison was faulty.

In worst case scenarios (ie abuse,severe health issues,  neglect) you are right that shelters and owners/breeders should be held responsible. But we're (or at least I am) talking general upkeep and provisions. A shelter having to keep dogs in more cramped conditions, feed them grocery food because they can afford nothing else, etc.....that's not nearly as bad as an owner, with the normal resources an average owner has, doing that.

2bully

 I also find it offensive that some find that a shelter keeping animals in that kind of state and conditions is excusable

And I find it offensive that people who have not even seen the data for certain areas are so quick to make assumptions about where the money is coming from and how it's being used.  So you would support euthanizing way more dogs in order to save the money spent on them for a state-of-the-art building?  'Cus really that's the only viable solution around here, unfortunately.  Unless people can actually step up and accept the blame themselves instead of point fingers at the shelter manager.  The shelter manager is not the one that decides the county budget for the shelter.  Or should they be paying for new facilities out of their own pockets?

whtsthfrequency

 I also find it offensive that some find that a shelter keeping animals in that kind of state and conditions is excusable

  I find it offensive that you seem to want to put words in my mouth in order to discredit me,or something of the sort. Please don't imply something I did not say in order to further your arguement.

I did not say extreme conditions were excusable. I said your comparison was faulty.

In worst case scenarios (ie abuse,severe health issues,  neglect) you are right that shelters and owners/breeders should be held responsible. But we're (or at least I am) talking general upkeep and provisions. A shelter having to keep dogs in more cramped conditions, feed them grocery food because they can afford nothing else, etc.....that's not nearly as bad as an owner, with the normal resources an average owner has, doing that.

 Just in case you missed it, this is what conditions I was speaking of:

The last shelter I went to was so bad, dogs were being kept in rabbit cages.  The dog I pulled had an abscess the size of a grapefruit in her mouth.  She was severely emaciated and had kennel cough and whip worms.  The shelter manager said they don't have money to staff a vet or treat animals, but she found antibiotics somewhere and gave them to the dog.  My vet said it probably saved her life.

 You quoted my response on those conditions. So I should have known you weren't speaking about those specific conditions as I was when I posted? Either you find those conditions acceptable or not and it shouldn't be contigent on the mission of those responsible for that care or lack of it.