For many years the public has been told that dogs and cats must be killed in our municipal shelters due to overcrowding.

However, based on data from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Pet Food Manufacturers Association, and the latest census, there are more than enough homes for every dog and cat being killed in shelters every year. As a matter of fact, there are more homes for dogs and cats opening each year, than there are dogs and cats - even in shelters! This means that the problem of finding homes for shelter animals is not insurmountable. Those most responsible for shelter deaths are not the pet owners and communities, but the shelter management, staff, and local town board.

If a shelter is killing healthy, adoptable animals, that shelter has failed in its mission. The primary cause of this failure is leadership that is stuck in the status quo of killing for population control and a lack of willingness to adopt innovative lifesaving programs that have proven so successful in many other shelters. The buck stops with the shelter's director.

Bad shelter management leads to overcrowding, which is then confused with pet overpopulation. Instead of warehousing and killing animals, shelters should be using innovative programs to find the homes that are out there. They should wholeheartedly adopt the movement known as NO KILL, and stop using killing as a form of population control.

If motherless kittens are killed because the shelter doesn't have a comprehensive foster care program, that's not pet overpopulation, that's a lack of a foster care program. Some shelters use as an excuse for "overpopulation" the fact that many people get their pets from other sources. In reality, this is nothing more than a poor excuse for the fact that a shelter isn't doing outside adoptions (adoptions done off premises). This is not overpopulation! If animals are killed because working with rescue groups is discouraged, again, that's not pet overpopulation.

If dogs are going cage-crazy because volunteers and staff aren't allowed to socialize them or volunteers are not are not allowed in the shelter to walk them then those dogs are killed because the shelter doesn't have an exercise or behavior rehabilitation program in place. Once again, that's not overpopulation, that's a lack of programs and services that save lives.

In communities throughout the United States,rescue groups,animal lovers,good Samaritans and No Kill shelters are demanding change. Rejecting the failed notion that the best we can offer homeless animals is a "humane" death and that shelters bear no culpability for the numbers of animals killed,these individuals and organizations are challenging the status quo,and calling for an end to the killing. But not all animal control departments have embraced this renaissance in lifesaving.Many refuse to change with the times.Still others are adopting the name and language of No Kill,but not the programs and services that save lives.With large national groups and other industry associations mired in the failed philosophies of the past,many shelters and bureaucrats are resisting demands by citizens for a more progressive humane shelters.

Here is a brief overview of key programs that have proved sucessful in "No Kill Shelters."
These key programs include:
1.Comprehensive adoption programs that operate during weekend and evening hours and include offsite adoption venues
2.Rescue group access to shelter animals
3.Volunteer programs to socialize animals, promote adoptions,and help in the operations of the shelter
4.TNR programs
5.A foster care network for underaged, traumatized,sick,injured,or other animals needing refuge
6.Medical and behavioral rehabilitation programs
7.High volume,low-cost public spay/neuter and spay/neuter of animals before adoption
8.Pet retention programs to solve medical, environmental, or behavioral problems and keep animals with their caring and responsible caregivers
9.A clean shelter,where animals are provided prompt veterinary care, adequate nutrition,shelter, exercise,and socialization

Sometimes animal control isn't interested in changing. Many times animal control will only implement superficial changes. As one commentator has noted:
"The bottom line is that too many animal control departments and humane societies have a vested interest in doing what they have always done.Going a different and more successful route would mean accepting some of the blame for causing barrels to fill, day after day,with furry bodies.Complain though many animal control and humane society people might about the stress of killing,they still find killing easier than doing what is necessary to stop it."

When change is not forthcoming despite the efforts of Step One and Step Two,the concerns must be made public to either force changes in sheltering operations,or force changes in shelter leadership.In short,it is time to prepare for regime change.