#kill shelters

[butch-bakugo]

" bu bu bu but kill shelters will take in your 15 yr old senior cats while no kill ones will turn it away!!" Then they will just simply kill it because they don't care to give it to no kill shelters like cat cafes or private institutions when they can't adopt it out because they could get sued if it's sick and they wont even bother trying to adopt it out themselves. No, not all kill shelters are municipal shelters, stop fuckin lieing.

" bu bu bu but they legally have to treat any sick animals you give them 🥺 they are trying to give it its best chance!" No they fucking don't, stop fuckin lieing. They are not legally required to treat them, they arnt even legally required to examine them. I've called in to surrender animals before (because I find them and don't want to just leave them outside to die) and they straight up told me that if I brought in any kitten with any "deformities, wounds or illnesses" that they would put them down the moment I turned them over. I'm glad they did so I knew to fucking boycott them because what the actual fuck. Eugenics much, btw with that first one???

I have a kitten today whose the sweetest, kindest and most loving cat I've ever met and I found her as a runt with a mild respiratory sickness (RESPIRATORY SICKNESSES ARE INCREDIBLY COMMON IN FERAL KITTENS. FINDING A KITTEN WITHOUT IT IS MORE RARE THAN ONE WITH IT) that cleared up in less than 4 days with no meds. Every shelter I called, the second I mentioned she's mostly healed from a respiratory issue, even post vet examination that I paid for, said they would put her down. They wouldn't even give her a few days to prove herself. That is how fucking heartless these places are. They don't fucking care about the pets they bring in. Private shelters? The ones I give any lost animals to? Never turned down any animal I've tried to give them, no matter how sick, injured or disabled I found them. They've always popped up on their site for adoption within a week. Y'all are fucking lieing.

Why TF are y'all trying to normalize unnecessary animal euthanasia. If the animal isn't suffering, there's no reason to fucking kill them. If you're full, there are thousands of shelters with kennels for them but they won't give them away because they are fucking lazy. They are government facilities, they exist to look good not do good. Y'all are pulling up pro-cop arguments rn about this. " But some of the workers are good! Something something underpaid overworked!" They are still complicit, dude. Fucking everyone is underpaid and overworked and they arnt killing innocent healthy animals.

If you're pro-kill shelters, you should be pro-kill yo.... I don't think I need to finish my sentence :) let's just say DN fucking I and move on.

[acti-veg]

Hello!! I hope you’re doing well and this ask won’t be much of a bother. But I’d like to hear your opinion on this post because I’m really uncertain:

https://www.tumblr.com/shrimp-crockpot/772417280928858112/kill-shelters-are-the-shelters-you-need-to

In theory I’m against euthanizing animals unless it’s in their best interests, of course. However, this seems like a pretty nuanced issue. I understand that kill shelters don’t have much of a choice (and that they do lots of good things too) but like, is donating to them really better than donating to no-kill shelters? What do you think?

Thank you in advance for your time. And thank you for all the other work you do, too. Your blog and book helped and motivated me a lot when I was first going vegan. In fact they’re still really really helpful to me even after all those years.

Take care :)

I think that’s it’s a bit reductive to say that donating to kill shelters’ is ‘better’ than donating to shelters that don’t euthanise; they aren’t better organisations they’re just different.

No-kill shelters are the only places that will house abandoned animals indefinitely, and are really the lifeline for so many animals. That is amazing, but this policy is precisely what discourages them from accepting the oldest, most poorly behaved or disabled animals, because they don’t have the space for animals who will become permanent residents. Plenty of shelters do it anyway, but so much depends on context and the policies of the individual organisation. ‘Kill shelters’ will take those cases that others won’t.

Both organisations are an important part of the management of overpopulated animals, they just serve different functions. Who you donate to is up to you. Supporting no-kill shelters certainly feels morally easier and a lot ‘cleaner,’ but they’re no more deserving if your support than shelters who are forced to kill animals that they can’t house and will never be adopted. Both need funding and support.

What I will say though, is that the backlash against kill shelters, like PETA’s, is so laughably insincere coming from people who are still buying pedigree dogs. That shelters exist that have to kill healthy animals is abhorrent, but the fault for that lies with the people who breed animals, the people who buy them, and the people who abandon their pets.

[allpawsmatter]

SAY NO TO THE SYSTEM AND ADOPT AN ANIMAL FROM THE SPCA OR FROM A KILL SHELTER! You could be saving an animal's life.

If you’re thinking of adopting, I urge you: Check your local kill shelter. Your future best friend might be waiting there, scared and confused, with only days left. By adopting from these shelters, you're not supporting the system—you’re saving a life in spite of it.

Here at All Paws Matter, we dream of a world where no shelter has to kill. Until then, we fight for every paw, every tail, every heartbeat.

[tinstol-archive]

Everyone loves animals so much until they’re too difficult to home. Then they must be euthanized “for their own good”.

At least if they were on the street they’d have a shot at life

But everyone would rather advocate for animals to be killed. I feel like I’m going insane

[acti-veg]

Is it unreasonable of me to be against kill shelters? People say they're needed but I dunno..I do not agree with them at all.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable as a position, it just depends what you mean by 'against.' I am principally against kill shelters too; animals should not be killed unless it is in their best interests because they would otherwise be in pain that could not be adequately treated or managed. It is easy to approve of no-kill shelters for this reason, they do great work, and it's why they enjoy so much more public suppport.

Practically though, I know that kill shelters have to exist because there is no other viable alternative in a world where we continue to buy and breed animals despite thousands of them needing a home. The public don't want kill shelters, but they also don't seem to want to stop breeding and buying animals as if they were a commodity.

Keep in mind that no-kill shelters tend to only take on animals they know they are likely to be able to re-home, leaving the kill shelters to take the rest. Where do those animals go, if there is no one else who will take them? If no-kill shelters received better funding they could essentially function as animal sanctuaries, but that would be extremely expensive given the sheer scale of the pet overpopulation crisis, and is unlikely to happen any time soon.

I am against breeding animals who are clearly overpopulated, I am against selling them, and I am for requirements to neuter, micro-chipp and enforce licencing for all cats and dogs. I am also against killing animals who do not need to die, but until some of these changes are made, objecting to kill shelters is just a bit meaningless when we can't solve any of the problems that are the reason they exist.

[acti-veg]

Hi! I saw you reblogged that twitter thread about kill vs. No kill shelters. The thread seemed to suggest that a 'kill' (municipal) shelter is better because they take in all animals, although this leads animals to being euthanised when they are too full. However, when I read this I thought: isn't it better to not take in an animal in the first place, than to take it in and then eventually euthanise it? Wouldn't it be better for the animal to take its chances living on the street than to go to a shelter where it is almost guaranteed to be killed? And in that case, aren't no-kill shelters better, for only taking in animals if it's guaranteed they'll have space to care for it? I accept euthanasia is better than dying miserably or starving to death, but many animals can survive on the streets and be cared for by strangers. Sorry if I misunderstood the thread, please let me know what you think! Thank you :)

The thing to remember is that in many countries, feral animals are not tolerated in heavily populated places, and even when they are, they generally don’t live long and die poorly. State run or ‘kill shelters’ exists as a necessity, as a direct result of the public continuing to buy and breed animals despite the thousands of animals who need a home.

Shelters who adopt for life and will never put down a healthy animal are amazing, but they simply cannot cope with the volume of animals, at least not without proper public funding which they do not get. There is no ‘better,’ they both perform different functions. Adoption only shelters take animals that are likely to be adopted, whereas shelters end up taking on those who are unlikely to ever find a home. That any shelter has to resort to killing healthy animals is an atrocity on an unimaginable scale, but the blame for that lies with us, not the shelters.

[edgar-cornielius]

Ma was telling me a funny story about a dude getting a dog from a shelter and practically pulling his hair out cause it wouldnt listen to him, only to realise its previous owners had trained the pup in spanish. It was funny when his friend came over spoke spanish and it listened. It knew its commands. It was a good pup.

I made my self sad when i realized how many other puppies were not lucky enough to be in a no kill place like that one, and got put down for "being disobedient" when really.....they couldnt understand, like just simply didnt no english, instead raised in spanish,mandrin/Cantonese, Arabic, etc...just how many... and should it be common practice to just "attempt" to see if shelter puppies were raised by non english speaking households and try commands in seemingly "untrainable dogs"?

[big-boy-noodle]

Everytime someone bitches and moans and whines and makes a sob story about "kill shelters" I lose my fucking mind! You mean PUBLIC SHELTERS?? You mean Humane societies? You mean shelters that have to take every animal that comes through their doors, regardless of whether or not there is enough space? I grew up in a humane society because my mom worked at one. No one wants to see these animals put down but if there is no room animals that are the least likely to be adopted are the first to go. This humane society took in every animal. Cats, dogs, goats, chickens, an emu (we took her home), deer, horses, cows, baby birds, possums, etc. There isn't always room for all of these animals! I just want people to stop make shelters and humane societies into the evil kill shelters that kill every animal that comes in. If you don't want these animals to die? FOSTER THEM! Foster that old dog with mange. Foster that cat with 1 eye that hisses at everyone. Foster a mom and her babies.