Would You Adopt A Dog From A Shelter If You Could Not Get A Purebred D

[D'smum]

I will stand corrected here, but no-kill shelters still euthanase dogs with severe behavioural problems. The point of no-kill being to rehome every dog that can be re-homed. Key words being "can be rehomed". In my experience a behavioural problem is considered a health problem like any other and if the dog cannot be re-habilitated well enough to be rehomed safely, then it is PTS so as not to handball the problem. I know this is not the case with all rescues snd some do re-home at any cost but i know this not to be true of all no-kill establishments.

[melzawelza]

Yes, the no kill movement defines euthanasia as freeing an animal from suffering (whether that be untreatable physical or mental/behavioural suffering).

Killing is putting to sleep any animal that is either healthy & rehomable or treatable & rehomable.

So they will euthanase, but not kill.

Treatable is a key word though - if the dog or cat can be treated medically or behaviourally, then it's not euthanasia.

[Mystiqview]

When the pound I worked out of was taken over by a so called "no kill agency" the kill bins were just as full if not more so than when the council owned and ran it.

We were still getting in the approximate same number of dogs and cats as before. The same irresponsible owners dumped their dogs in the overnight lockers or let them be picked up by us rangers. The dogs were not all having behavioral issues. They just were not rehomed or put in foster. At the end of their allotted time, they were given the green dream.

Sorry. But no home does equal kill. Otherwise they are overflowed with dogs and cats. There will always be irresponsible pet owners.

[Simply Grand]

At the shelter I work at we definitely only euthanase for serious medical or behavioral issues or because the dog is just not coping mentally with living in a shelter. There is NO time limit - no home, so long as the dog is coping and remains rehomable, does not equal kill for us.

I believe we are very fortunate to be able to use our own resources in addition to working with a range of others to maintain this, and I feel for the front line workers in places where this is just not tenable.

I will say however, that many of the dogs who do not have what we deem serious (as in warranting euthanasia) issues have a range of issues that make them not suited to the average pet home, we are very upfront about this and it does make it take longer - sometimes a looooong time - to find a suitable home. This is where the risk that the dog deteriorates to the point of no longer being rehomable or being able to cope in the shelter comes in. It's difficult.

ETA - it's not that we have a great deal of resources, we definitely don't, it's that we have been fortunate to have "powers that be" who recognise the value in investing in the front end to reduce the impact in the back end.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Simply Grand

[melzawelza]

When the pound I worked out of was taken over by a so called "no kill agency" the kill bins were just as full if not more so than when the council owned and ran it.

We were still getting in the approximate same number of dogs and cats as before. The same irresponsible owners dumped their dogs in the overnight lockers or let them be picked up by us rangers. The dogs were not all having behavioral issues. They just were not rehomed or put in foster. At the end of their allotted time, they were given the green dream.

Sorry. But no home does equal kill. Otherwise they are overflowed with dogs and cats. There will always be irresponsible pet owners.

Then they weren't no kill.

Pounds can empty their shelters if they market their pets well, forge great relationships with rescue groups, and have staff and a director unwilling to use killing as the answer. Pretty much all the major pounds in Sydney (Blacktown, Hawkesbury, Sutherland, Renbury, Sydney Dogs and Cats Home) have managed to achieve it.

If a shelter has bins overflowing with dead rehomable animals, then the blame for that lays squarely on the shelter doing a crappy job at saving lives.

Edited January 8, 2014 by melzawelza

[Mystiqview]

I know they were a kill group. They advertise NO kill.

There is the discrepancy.

[sandgrubber]

Returning to the if clause in the OP . . . I can't imagine circumstances in which I could not get a purebred dog. May that day never come.

[melzawelza]

I know they were a kill group. They advertise NO kill.

There is the discrepancy.

A brief look at their stats would disprove their claim pretty quickly. People lying about being no kill doesn't mean that No Kill doesn't work or isn't a real thing.