Why they call an animal shelter " kill nation "
If you have seen the TV Series " The hundred", you will understand that a shelter will reduce their own people for survival while the resource is not enough for everyone to live.
Most of the dog shelters are facing the same situation: They are " open-admission ", which means that they can not refuse any animal that crosses their doorsteps. But the shelters does not have the ability and enough resource(space, food ,medicine) to keep them staying in the shelter. When the space is full, it will be the decision day- Who gets to live and who will die? If you works in a dog shelter, you will call it " euthanasia day "
According to a report:
The United States have 13,600 shelters nationwide.
Approximately 7,600,000 animals enter shelters every year
Approximately 2,700,000 animals were adopted
About 649,000 lost pets were found by their owner when they strays in the shelter
It means that approximately 2,700,000+649,000 gets to live and 7,600,000-2,700,000-649,000 will not survive
Half live, half got killed
This is why animals shelter also get the name " kill nation ". For animals inside, this name means to them.
Open-admission, limited-admission and no-kill admission
*If it is the problem of resource, why they not abandon the rule of open-admission
Actually there are limited-admission and no-kill shelter.
But as far as I know, most of the shelters are still working with open-admission? So why? Are they happy with killing puppies? Are they un-normal person that want to release their stress on the dog? Or are they just demo from hell and they are meant to kill?
Of course not, most of them are normal people as us. They have their friends, family and own world. When they Have to give some dogs " euthanasia", they will not feel happy, even sad. But when they go home, they still should smile and try not to bring work back to home.
The reason why most of the shelter is "open-admission" is because it works and works Efficiently. I mean " Efficient", not " Right" or " Moral". It turns out that this way works well for rescue the greatest part of dog.
If a lost/weak/sick dog go to the no-kill or limited admission, it may not have any chance because their room or resource are not enough and they could not make room for it because they can not break their no-kill rule. And the sick and old dogs are not likely to be adopted so they will not even have an chance to go inside the shelter and get treatment. Because they are limited-admission. Most of them will get killed on the road, died in the forest or laid on the sea beach. Can we say that the "no-kill" shelters are also killing these poor dogs?
It will seems more fair for the upcoming dog when using Open-admission. When a dog enter the door of the shelter, he will not get rejected and will also have a chance to survive. No matter he is serious sick, missing part of the body or very old. He will get medicine and proper threatment. And then he will have limited time for being picked for adoption.
If he is not lucky enough, no one choose him and the spacing is running out. Euthanasia day comes. He will be taken to a small room, get tied and inject dose of the " pink stuff" Done.
What will he see when his consciousness and feeling fading? Is it the ugly and cruel person taking his life? Is it the memory when he is playing happily with his former owner? Or the better place that he is going to stay? May he get his peace.
The open-submission shelters focus on the greatest part of the dogs. They make sure that more dogs can survive. Although their methods will be cruel and ruthless. The result is, more dogs will survive
The "no-kill" shelters focus on the dogs that they have already rescued. They will put their most effort on the dog that got rescued. And only the bed is empty, another dog can have a chance.
When talking survival, we do not judge. So this time, I will not talk about which one is wrong, and which one is right.