The High Price of Animal Shelters - Page 3

The article cites some successes, including one here in Minneapolis where "socialized" puppies were far less likely to be returned after adoption. Another training program in New Hampshire cut the euthanasia rate in half, while in Ohio an aggressive spay/neuter program has helped cut euthanasia by 40 percent while reducing the number of abandoned dogs by 16 percent.

Still, I was left wondering if there are any real solutions, or if the ethically numbing reality of animal shelters is simply the way things are. As long as adoption is expensive, as long as people have unrealistic expectations of their animals, and as long as substantial numbers of people refuse to have their animals spayed, there will always be more abandoned animals than there are people to adopt them. That means there will always be disposition teams separating the lucky from the unlucky.

It strikes me that there is plenty of room for either states or private foundations to get involved here. I see a two-pronged approach.

1. A subsidy program to reduce the cost of adoption, thus broadening the base of potential adopters.

2. An aggressive education, subsidy and (perhaps) enforcement program to encourage widespread spaying/neutering of pets: working with vets, say, to offer pet owners a one-year discount on vet services if they get their pet neutered (with the state picking up most of the difference); or shelters requiring that anyone dropping off a litter of kittens or puppies must get the mother spayed; or cities requiring spaying as part of their licensing process except for licensed breeders.

The idea is to make spaying the default choice, so that it occurs unless the pet owner is highly motivated to avoid it. Then, perhaps, shelters can do more of the sheltering part of their job and less of the emotionally numbing work that comes from serving as a triage center for society's carelessness.

Page 1Page 2 — Page 3

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • The Animals' Viewpoint on Dying, Death and Euthanasia The Animals' Viewpoint on Dying, Death and Euthanasia

    This book, presented by a skilled animal communicator and spiritual healer, gifts the clarity and perspective of the animals' viewpoints on dying, death, and euthanasia, to loving care-persons wanting ...

Article comments

  • 1 - Kaonashi

    Apr 15, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    You didn't have to get your cats declawed. There's a product called Soft Claws (also called Soft Paws), which are vinyl covers you glue on your cat's claws. They come in different sizes and colors, and stay on for about a couple of weeks or so, depending on how active your cat is and how fast their claws grow.

    They can be expensive, but I get mine on eBay for a great deal. Putting on Soft Claws is not that much more difficult than trimming your cat's claws. It's a shame that no one at the animal shelter told you about them, because it would have saved your cats unnecessary surgery.

  • 2 - Kaonashi

    Apr 15, 2007 at 4:21 pm

    By the way, I only spent $60 at the shelter for my kitten. This included spaying and microchipping. However, the bulk of the costs went to the subsequent visits to the vet to treat her cold (as you said, it's a very common occurrence among cats in shelters), and all the necessary shots.

  • 3 - Lura

    Jun 24, 2009 at 12:54 am

    There is just never a good enough reason to declaw your cat. It is always human-selfish. Cat comes with furniture wrecking, there's tons of other solutions to it. If you don't like it buy a stuffed animal rather. I despise the vets who do it, even more those who decide to deprive cat of its most valuable asset.
    Shame.

  • 4 - Lindsay

    Sep 20, 2009 at 11:28 pm

    First of all, I got my cats for $80 each from my local Humane Society. This pittance of a fee included spaying, microchipping, two bags of food, their first vet visit, a grooming visit, and all their prescriptions for the first ninety days.

    This fee is incredibly nominal compared to what goes into providing these animals everything they need to make it to adoption and to care for the animals that will never be adopted. Even $150 is more than reasonable, when people often pay twice that at a pet store without any of the freebies included at the animal shelters.

    If somebody is not willing to put a small investment towards their pet, then they are likely not prepared to put the further investment of care and maintenance toward it either.

    As for your own situation, declawing your cats is something you chose to do, so this cannot be remotely factored into the sunk cost of the cats. Furthermore, it is something you chose to do knowing that it is cruel simply because you do not have the time to train the cats. If you are willing to subject them to something that you consider cruel because you are not willing to expend a bit of time initially, then perhaps you should have thought your adoption through a bit further.

    Animal shelters are money-pits full of amazing people who give a great deal emotionally every day to save the little lives that you just adopted. How can you begrudge them the tiny fee they charge to cover a fraction of their operating costs?

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 30, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs