Animal Welfare Post: Why No-Kill? (Updated)

There are many justifications for preferring a "No-Kill" approach to animal sheltering. First, there is the utilitarian argument based on numbers that it simply isn't true that "you can't save them all." If in fact you can save them all through the application of No-Kill principles, then the numbers will weigh heavily in favour of No-Kill, since countless many more will be saved in a no-kill shelter vs. kill shelters which needlessly destroy saveable animals. I adhere to this view. You can read more about it here:

http://www.nathanwinograd.com/

The more difficult question which perhaps remains academic given my stance with respect to the above justification is where we should fall if it really were true in any given community that not every animal could be saved. Would it then be justified to kill the less marketable ones so that a higher number of animals could be spared?

In my view, even in those circumstances a "No-Kill" approach would be mandated. The fundamental purpose which should guide the governance of any animal shelter should be to serve as an exemplary guadianship relationship between the guiding forces of the shelter (staff, board, volunteers) and the animals it takes under its protection. What I mean by this is that to serve any meaningful purpose, an animal shelter should be a place that truly sets an example of what the human-animal bond can and should be. The basis of such guardianship is a genuine relationship, involving love, trust and respect. Animals are not numbers. They are companions under our protection whom we love and have a very personal sense of connection to.

The reason why I feel this is so important is that it is the only real way that we are going to have any hope of changing widespread attitudes about the role of animals in our lives, regardless of how the numbers currently fall: by actually providing a living example to inspire and instruct the public about what the human-animal bond can be like.

How can we expect society's utilitarian attitudes towards companion animals to ever change if those of us who dedicate our lives to the protection of such animals fall back on the same excuses as the public does in discarding animls? How can we expect the public to be inspired to experience meaningful relationships to their animal companions if we cannot inspire them by the way we regard the animals for whom we care?

For instance, we criticize people for abandoning their pets due to behavioural issues rather than working with them. So what message does it send when shelters (who purport to love animals more than the average citizen does) do precisely the same thing by euthanizing the animals who are not immediately adoptable for behaviour reasons rather than lovingly working to rehabilitate them, with patience and understanding concerning the origins of their lack of trust in the failings of humans to have guided them? We are incensed and horrified when people abandon their pets because it is too much trouble to care for them when their pets age or suffer from medical issues. Yet what message does it send when senior and special needs animals are weeded out in shelters in favour of the more marketable, younger and healthier animals?

It is unacceptable for shelters simply to become thrift shops for discarded animals. That does nothing to address the real issue. What must be done is transformative. Shelters must not passively hold unwanted pets in the hope that someone might want them, thereby saving the lucky ones and regretfully saying goodbye to those who could not capture the imagination of a member of the public to take them in. Rather they must generate something that was not there before: an exemplary relationship which can serve as a source of inspiration and education for members of the public who might not otherwise feel this connection.

When I took my special needs dog Lilly home with me, everywhere I went I encountered people who would NEVER have dreamed of considering an older dog (with cancer no less). Yet by observing my example (and the example of the shelter which gave her a chance), they became inspired to think about animal guardianship in a different way. Suddenly the beauty of saving a life as precious as hers so obviously was planted a seed inside their imagination, which I have no doubt will lead to more compassionate choices in at least some of them. This is what shelters must do if we are ever to have hope not only in maximizing the number of animals that can find their way into homes but also in transforming the attitudes that lead them to be abandoned and overlooked in the first place.

Most importantly, it's just the right thing to do if we truly love animals. Betrayal of the trust of those whom we love is simply not an option. What we need to do is to find a way to transmit this vision to others and inspire them to share in it. This can't be done in an environment where the killing of those whom we purport to protect is a routine occurrence. We will never inspire anyone that way. On the contrary, people will exercise their option of simply turning away, feeling defeated, because what we are showing them is too ugly to face. Instead we need to show them the beauty in the true bond between animals who would not otherwise have a chance, and the people who love them. Only in that fashion will we inspire and transform rather than simply reshuffle.

***Addendum May 22: Another point is that when kill practices are employed, so much creative energy that could otherwise go to saving animals is lost. Staff and volunteers become depressed and traumatized by seeing the animals with whom they have formed a bond be destroyed. They therefore disengage or leave altogether. The shelter becomes a depressing place that people don't want to visit or think about. If they do attend there to save an animal or assist in some way, they will not be inclined to linger. A No-Kill approach changes this dynamic by cherishing each life within the shelter walls and nourishing the bond that forms between the animals and staff, volunteers, and members of the public, thereby creating a positive energy that can be harnessed to save more animals. The shelter becomes a positive place, full of inspirational stories that people want to be a part of. This is the kind of shelter that people want to visit and where people want to linger. The compassion fatigue that characterizes so many shelter workers and volunteers (and members of the public who visit shelters) is replaced with a positive energy, nourished by the successes that are enjoyed and celebrated. This then equips participants with greater emotional capacity to expand the shelter's ability to help more and more animals.