Florida Survey Shows Animals Needlessly Killed...

[iscooterliberally]

Source: Market Watch

MIAMI, Nov. 11, 2011 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The Sunshine State just got a whole lot sunnier. FL State Sen. Mike Bennett has filed legislation "aimed at saving taxpayer dollars along with the lives of Florida's four-legged friends." SB 818, the Florida Animal Rescue Act, would require "any animal control agency or animal shelter that euthanizes animals to maintain a registry of animal rescue groups that are willing to accept animals that would otherwise be subject to euthanization..." Bennett said the legislation combines "compassion and business sense."

Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/report-florida-survey-shows-animals-needlessly-killed-rescue-access-law-introduced-2011-11-11

---

We really can do alot better by these animals. Too many are put down for no good reason. Local shelters really do need to partner with rescue groups. This will save both lives and money.

[1monster]

1. Right on! There are at least three no kill adoption/control 501 C (3)s in my

county and one county run animal control shelter. The county run shelter "euthanizes" animals not claimed or adopted within a certain time period. One shelter closed after the county built its own shelter and canceled the animal control contract with the former. That shelter "euthanied" 70+% of the animals sent to them while claiming to be a no kill shelter.

I've fostered several kittens for two of those shelters in past years. I've never understood why the county was so intent in "euthanizing" our furry, four-legged friends when there were no kill programs out there who were willing and able to make sure that all of those homeless cats, dogs, and others got good homes. No matter how long it took.

This is a step in the right direction.

[jtuck004]

2. The only thing that has ever fixed this is changing people's attitudes

toward the pets in their community, combined with spay/neuter at low or no cost.

http://www.montanaspayneutertaskforce.org/ has been doing this for over a decade. New Hampshire had good results by simply lowering the cost of spay neuter, though without the behavioral work it has not been sustainable. Calgary rarely kills a dog, preferring to return them to the home (first time for free) so they don't even see the inside of a shelter. They just built a new spay/neuter clinic for cats from the licensing fees.

Cities would be money ahead to offer s/n at low or no cost. Not mandatory, just available. Each litter adds another 8 dogs or cats to the problem, and surveys tell us that most of those will go intact, for free, to another home, where they will create new litters. We did an event here here with 2 local vets, paid them for 2 days of surgery, did fundraising to pay for the materials. No cost to the pet owners. The amazing vets did 138 surgeries in two days, mostly big dogs. Compare that to the dollar cost of rounding up the 600 to 800 animals or so they would have produced. It empties the shelters, and reduces bites by a significant percentage. (Heck, even the utility companies provide free location of utilties to keep you from cutting lines in your yard because it is so much cheaper. We should do as good for our animals). Most vets make more money from well-dog and cat visits, so they are really receptive, as long as you respect the half-million bucks they spent getting a clinic together and don't ask them to do surgeries for free.

I see the same problems with shelters detailed in the article, and I applaud the thought behind this. But rescues stay full, and adoptions have never and will never keep 4-6 million pets a year from being killed in the shelter without being part of an overall strategy that includes low-or no-cost spay/neuter. (It's interesting to note the increase in people pushing adoptions at the expense of spay/neuter, but only after they figured out there are good salaries to be had from fundraising in this arena). That is why Peter Marsh calls adoption the "crack cocaine of animal services". It provides this incredible rush when you do this good thing, but the problem still exists for thousands of others who should have been prevented. Adoption is important, but just a feel-good thing unless it is paired with affordable spay/neuter. Here.

Thank you for the article.

[iscooterliberally]

3. I agree.

Thanks for your post too. It stands by itself. I'm glad that you said, "not mandatory, just available" in regards to spay/neuter. I have seen stray animals actually 'adopt' homeless people in my days and they usually care deeply for these animals, but cannot afford to spay or neuter. People and animals in this situation should be helped and not punished for being poor. I do occasional transports for some of the rescue groups in my area and they won't adopt any unaltered animals. They usually quarantine them for a few weeks, and then fix and chip them. 10 years ago, I didn't know any better, but I've learned a lot over the last few years. I am optimistic that things will get better for our furry friends in the coming years.

[veganlush]

4. Ever visit a slaughter house? have you seen how animals

are warehoused with all their natural inclinations inhibited and subdued? Ever see how pigs are treated in factory farms? It doesn't have to be that way. The single biggest step a person can take to benefit the planet, animal welfare and their own health is to switch to a plant-based diet.


Boycott Cruelty-Go Vegan!

[Angry Dragon]

5. Spay and neuter your pets is the first step