According to their website, the Cooma-Monaro Shire Council is based in the country town of Cooma, New South Wales, perfectly situated only one hour from the Mountains, Canberra and the Coast, and only 4 hours to Sydney.

A regional location, it has a population of 6,587 people and a small animal pound. It would be easy for the management of this pound to kill dogs and cats while claiming they’re ‘too rural’ to run a rehoming program, and their farming-based community ‘too backward’ to care for their animals compassionately and ‘too ignorant’ to appreciate the value of rescue pets. They could even claim that country dogs were ‘less social’ than city dogs, or the breeds they dealt with were ‘not desirable’ so killing is unavoidable.

Instead, they shook off the excuses and last year they saved 97% of the dogs they impounded.

Cooma-Monaro Shire Council has achieved its highest rehousing rate of impounded stray dogs in five years.

During the 2009/2010 financial year 97 per cent of dogs impounded were successfully rehoused.

Of the 146 dogs seized 143 were released and three were euthanased, a six per cent improvement on 2005/2006 figures.

Of the 143 dogs released 20 were handed over the Cooma branch of the RSPCA.

President of the Cooma branch of the RSPCA Lil Frezza said a total of 41 dogs came into their care last year with 39 rehoused.

She believes the high rehousing rate is largely due to people who volunteer as foster carers for the animals while the RSPCA finds new homes for them.

“The number is good for a small country town,” she said.

“Council rangers are cooperative and the foster carers make a big difference.”

Mrs Frezza said initiatives such as increased advertising of abandoned pets and increased fund raising efforts had contributed to improved rehousing rates.
……

Last year, council seized a total of 17 cats and released 16 while one was destroyed.

Cooperation and marketing, not fire and brimstone. Foster care and innovation, not condemnation and killing. What’s more Cooma celebrated this fantastic achievement, by getting this positive story into their local press, further generating community goodwill.

There is no reason every regional council pound could not follow Cooma’s lead, and the lead of other shelters around the country, and implement the programs and services that make the killing of companion animals unnecessary. Many regional councils are not only still choosing to kill, but are often doing so by draconian means; shooting pets with firearms, or gassing them with car exhausts. And while defending the methods they’re using to kill as ‘humane’, they resist pressure to stop killing from their local community; the ultimate betrayal of the companion animals they are assigned with protecting.

Every council pound who refuses to work with rescue, every council pound who refuses to use foster carers, every council pound who instead looks to laws to punish their public and make it more difficult for people to keep their animals – chooses to kill instead of work with their community to save lives.

Cooma has shown that even a small population in a rural area has enough community goodwill to make their local council pound a safe place for pets, should the pound’s management choose to stop killing and instead open their doors to pet lovers. Every under-performing pound manager should now consider themselves now on notice.

See also: How to save 79 pets in a week

This?

Or this?

From a WA animal shelter’s ‘Adoption Adviser’;

The great offence that these potential adopters committed? To need some support in working to getting landlord approval to have a pet.

When people willing to open their hearts and families to a rescue pet feel the only option they have is to lie to us, then we’ve failed to give them the information they need to have a successful pet ownership experience. There are dozens of resources we can provide to people having landlord issues; with some coaching, a clever pet resume and a reference from the shelter to offer to take the pet back should the adoption not work out, maybe this landlord could be swayed to allowing this pet. Simply denying and scorning people who clearly wanted to adopt badly is petty and unhelpful. Not to mention the likelihood that these potential adopters will now go to a pet shop, the one place we beg people not to go to!

If you allow festering attitudes of ‘us against them’ to live in your shelter, then you will have a team not working to make adoptions happen, but to relish in the chance to refuse them.






More info:

and here:
http://www.petfriendlyrentals.com.au/blog/2010/02/petnet-tv-series-two-part-special-on-renting-with-pets/

… that cats should be indoors, that cats should be registered and desexed by law and that free-roaming cats need to be trapped for their own good; then you can’t say ‘it’s not our job’ when they ask you for help.

Sad abandoned cats cause concerns at Quakers Hill

(Cat pic) It’s hard to imagine that a face like this lives off discarded food scavenged from rubbish bins. Sadly, this is the reality for dozens of stray cats who have sought refuge around the Parkway Rd McDonald’s and the Caltex Service Station at Quakers Hill.

Resident Sarah King says Blacktown City Council and the RSPCA seemed disinclined to help so she has launched a petition urging the council to take action against the growing feral cat population.

Ms King and a group of friends plan to trap as many cats as they can and petition the council to find them new homes or destroy the animals humanely.

She said businesses, the council and the RSPCA were caught up in a game of “finger pointing”.

“The response has been pretty appalling, but something needs to be done,” Ms King said. “These cats are starving, carrying disease and living a … horrible life. They keep breeding and it’s getting worse.”

Driving through the area the Advocate saw cats in bins, kittens hiding in the hedges – even remains on the side of Parkway Rd and a carcass in a garden bed.

McDonald’s hired a private firm to remove kittens and adults but numbers are again getting out of hand and they don’t believe it’s their sole responsibility.

[...]
Two RSPCA spokeswomen told the Advocate the cats were not their responsibility and “economic pressure” prevented them taking further action.

Ms King has now lodged a formal complaint with Blacktown City Council who declined the opportunity to comment when contacted by the Advocate.

Fur flies over inaction on cats

Animal lover Chris Lyall says a cat and her four kittens could be buried alive if the bulldozing of four derelict houses on Woodland St, Balgowlah, continues.

The Manly resident said the family of strays has taken refuge under one of the houses with all efforts to rescue them so far unsuccessful.

[...]
Hoping for action to delay the demolition, Mr Lyall contacted Manly Council but claims they are yet to act.

Manly Council general manager Henry Wong said the council was aware of the situation but it was the RSPCA or other animal welfare organisations that were the appropriate bodies to assist with the matter.

The cats’ plight, however, has created confusion, with the RSPCA indicating that the welfare of the mother and her kittens was the council’s responsibility under the Companion Animals Act.

Mr Lyall said the lack of help was frustrating.

[...]
Ellen McGinness, from the Cat Protection Society, said it appeared the issue was being palmed off.

“It should be the council’s responsibility – the RSPCA only deal with owned cats. There is a huge problem with councils not taking responsibility.”

The Lost Dogs Home is again calling for a ‘pet owner licencing scheme’ on the back of their efforts to develop a short pre-adoption quiz for people adopting from their shelter (I know, screening potential adopters before adoption – it’s ‘revolutionary’).

“Pet Licences issued by The Lost Dogs’ Home should be made mandatory across Australia”.
Lost Dogs Home website

But should they really? Lets look at the ‘reasons pets end up in shelters’;

Adoption returns
We can reasonably assume that there isn’t a huge problem with people returning adopted animals to the Lost Dogs Home. If there is, then certainly there is something wrong with the way they’re matching pet to owner and the follow up support they’ve been offering; because this isn’t common amongst rescues. So that could be fixed by the pound doing a better job.

Lost pets
Most intakes of any pound with a Council contract are the result of pets getting loose. This is why pounds exist and that’s ok. Having photos of each animal up on the internet helps owners be reunited with their animals, so the Lost Dogs’s Home could do a better job by taking photo of each pet on intake and getting it up on the web.

Fines, which deter people from collecting their pets, could be waived to people whose pets have never been impounded before – that again is the pound understanding its public and doing a better job.

Surrenders
The smallest intakes of a pound, despite popular opinion, are owner surrenders.

A percentage of people have a genuine or unforseen reason for giving up their pet; moving house, getting sick, pets not getting along, change of family circumstance, loss of job.

A percentage are less-than-genuine (however still valid because if someone doesn’t want their pet, it’s important to get that pet into a new home); including no longer ‘wanting’ the pet, unrealistic expectations of pet ownership, un-treated behavioural problems and unwanted litters.

And some people have genuine reasons relating to that particular pet (unmanageable aggression, hyperactivity, personality clashes between pet and owner, or pets who don’t cope with a change of circumstance, like moving to a smaller property).

It’s complicated

They’re proposing that of the 6 million owned cats and dogs of Australia, of which only a couple of hundred thousand use shelters each year, where most are claimed – and with the myriad of unforseen, genuine reasons for surrender, with only a tiny percentage of pets entering shelters because their owners are fickle…

…. the easiest way to stop shelters killing these animals is to quiz every single pet owning family before they get a pet.

Sorry, what?

The easiest way for the Management of the Lost Dogs Home to effect the number of pets killed in their shelters – is to stop killing pets in their shelters.

- Not killing young, or sick pets who could be saved by foster care.

- Not supporting draconian and unhelpful owner targeting initiatives like the Frankston ‘desex before release’ pound program, mandatory pet desexing or ‘Who’s for Cats’… all of which have seen impoundments and killing surge.

The idea of a national pet owner licencing scheme is nothing but Australia’s most ineffective shelter – the one who kills a larger percentage of their intakes than any other – expanding their failed programs beyond Victoria (the home of some of the worst pet laws in Australia). We must reject the idea, not just because it passes the buck for shelter killing back to ‘bad owners’ – a theory which has since been exploded as simply an excuse for poor shelter performance – but because those who are driving it, have no experience at all in leading a successful, life-saving community.

Let’s not follow any more ‘great’ initiatives from Victoria until they are able to get even one of their communities away from the bulk-killing of shelter animals. Forget the rest of Australia, so far they only work the leaders of animal sheltering in Victoria need to do, is to drag themselves out of the high-kill mentality.

Graeme Smith – CEO – Lost Dogs’ Home

In today’s Sydney Sun-Herald, is a series of articles about the RSPCA and other animal welfare group’s efforts to have the sale of pets through pet shops banned.

> 250,000 healthy cats and dogs killed each year
> No homes for them
> Pet industry ‘needs regulation’

Tighter legislation is needed to regulate dog and cat breeders to stop the slaughter of more than a quarter of a million healthy animals in Australia each year.

Animal welfare groups backed by Sydney lord mayor and NSW independent MP Clover Moore blamed commercial breeders for producing too many animals, and pet shops for the unacceptably high death rate.

Working on the project Where Do Puppies Come From? I know there are enormous problems with the modern pet production industry. Companion animals living in a battery situation is not only wrong on animal welfare grounds, but because it sets dogs up to fail in their future lives as family pets. I get that puppy farms are a repulsive industry that needs to be booted into the history books. I really do.

But the idea that we can wipe out puppy farms through some inventive law, totally oversimplifies the issue. Certainly we can restrict the people who can breed pets, and we can ensure that the farms are clean, rather than dirty (see a related post ‘Should there be a ‘breeder permit’ system?‘), but the idea that banning pet shops sales will somehow lead to less pets killed in shelters, is simply false.

Banning the sale of puppy-mill dogs from pet stores will not stop people from buying puppy-mill dogs. It’ll just send them to the internet where the puppy mills have even less accountability (if that’s possible). Or to the newspaper to buy poorly-bred dogs that way from someone who won’t ask too many questions.
KC Dog Blog

Until we are in a position to compete with pet shops in their own market – genuinely taking a share of their business – we cannot even begin to offer an alternative to pet shop purchases and this business will simply move from pet stores to internet and newspaper traders.

Why people buy from pet shops

Pet shops are located in convenient places, where people go. Being visible the community attracts potential customers, while the animals are presented in clean, well lit and well ventilated enclosures, all at eye height to maximise impact.

They offer convenient opening hours, 7 days a week 9-5. The offer a ‘late night trading’ nights where they stay open 7pm and later. These extended hours attract customers who work, who have families (and money to pay for lifetime care!) and who are looking for a pet.

Staff greet visitors to the store when they enter, helping to determine the reason for the visit and offer assistance. The friendly, upbeat atmosphere and ‘regular customer’ discounts build a relationship that attracts repeat clientele, until eventually the person either returns to purchase a new pet, or simply can’t resist and takes a particular pet home.

500,000, or half a million, puppies are estimated to be sold in pet shops each year. The idea that there aren’t loving families looking for pets (overpopulation), is blown out of the water, when you consider that there is a constant stream of homes available to these pets. Even in the face of high pet shop prices ($400 – $1,500).

Savvy shelters are realising that they have to adopt some of the retail smarts of pet shops. The RSPCA NSW have built the ‘RSPCA Care Centre’ a customer focused retail space to promote adoptions, while the RSPCA QLD have built a mobile adoption van, to get their pets out into the community. The AWL Queensland use 8 ethical pet stores to help them give their pets exposure, while foster care groups are able to join the PetRescue in-store adoption program.

So while advocates complain that pets shops sell too many pets, while pounds are killing theirs – of the thousands of pounds and shelters across the country, only a handful do much to try and offer an equally attractive level of service to potential clients.

The move to internet purchases

If pet shops stopped selling pets tomorrow, this would be how puppy farmers would continue to represent their pets to the public;

And this would be how pounds show their available pets;

Or you might see one of these pics on their website:

Pound:

Now might be a good time to point out that a photographer would often lend their time for an incredibly low rate, while a student photographer can often be sourced for free; so it’s not cost interfering with this process. There’s no excuse for every shelter pet not to get a gorgeous, engaging photo. Especially when it might save their life…

Overpopulation is a myth; we need to dig deeper

When you consider the hurdles to adoption, the out of the way locales of most pounds, the inconvenient opening hours and the difficulties in getting pounds to work with their communities, rather than against them – it’s a wonder that any pets get adopted at all.

But they do.

Thousands of people hit PetRescue each day, hoping to adopt a pet. The Million Paws Walk sees 60,000 pet owners bring their pets to over 70 events around the country and raise over $1 million dollars for the RSPCA. Pounds who take the time to ask their communities for help, are overwhelmed with offers of assistance. And Facebook groups for animal shelters are becoming one of the most popular and effective on the web.

Shelters need to stop worrying about ‘overpopulation’ and work on the real solutions to the homeless pet problem. Getting as many pets adopted as possible, educating the general public so that they understand the benefits of carefully researching your pet acquisition decisions and assistance in finding advice when faced with the realities of owning a pet.

Banning pets shops is noble, but ineffective in reducing shelter killing

Shelters need to be networking with like-minded local pet businesses, supporting our public, effectively promoting our pets and helping people adopt. It’s only when we stop complaining that pet shops are ‘out-selling’ us, and start taking responsibility for giving the pets we have the very best chance of finding (and keeping!) a new home, that we can finally start to address the real causes of shelter killing.

Why do pets die in shelters? I no longer believe in the ‘too many pets, not enough homes’ reasoning because I can’t make the math of hundreds of pets being sold by pet shops, in the newspaper and on the internet each day, gel with the idea that no one wants the pets we have.

The myth that the public simply don’t want to adopt pound animals and that shelters are just ‘doing the dirty work of an irresponsible public’, was dealt another blow recently, when the ‘irresponsible public’ answered the call;

10 May 2010

Pounds inundated with dogs

The Fraser Coast Regional Council is being swamped with dogs caught wandering the streets of Hervey Bay and Maryborough.

Compliance Officer Gaye Ah Quay said 125 dogs had been picked up across the Fraser Coast by the Council’s compliance officers during the last three weeks and only 46 could be identified and returned to their owners.

“That has left us with 79 dogs to re-home which is going to be extremely difficult,” she said.

17th May 2010

Public keen to house unwanted pets

THERE has been a fantastic response from the Fraser Coast public to an influx of unwanted dogs into the Coast’s pounds.

Pancake, Puffy, Two Tone, Roxy, Snowy, Foxy and Sam all have new homes and Bluey and Red are hopeful after a fantastic response from the Fraser Coast public to an influx of unwanted dogs into the Coast’s pounds.

A crowd of people was waiting at the pound gates yesterday, keen to adopt their pick of the 79 dogs needing homes while other people rang offering temporary accommodation for the animals until a home could be found.

Fraser Coast council compliance officer Sally Cripps said the compliance officers were overwhelmed with the response and expected to re-home most of the dogs and several cats.

“It is fantastic to see that so many people care about these animals and are willing to step up when they know there is a need.”

Fraser Coast residents have been willing to adopt pets from local pounds.

I don’t understand why we’re constantly surprised that, when instead of blaming the public for killing, we reach out to them for assistance and they come forward to help us. Thousands pour into the Million Paws Walk, hundreds open their wallets when they hear about a single abused pet and dozens open their homes and their hearts each time a group of pets are saved from a puppy farm.

It’s time to reject the old mantras that the public are our problem and start believing that they are our allies in the fight against shelter pet killing. Whether you believe it possible or not, if we are ever to overcome the “not enough homes” part of our problem, we have to stop denigrating the communities we’re meant to be in partnership with.

Your community does care. They will help you if you ask them to and show them how.

The New Zealanders might have just overtaken Australia in the race to modernised animal sheltering industry.

Over 125 years ago, New Zealand opened its first Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, or SPCA. Today, proving that even an ‘old’ organisation can lead the way in modern thinking, they have pledged their dedication to a No Kill future for New Zealand.

The Saving Lives philosophy is that every life is precious, and with that philosophy comes the need to help every animal into the fulfilment of life, so long as its quality of life is preserved.

Calling their program ‘Saving Lives’ rather than ‘No Kill’, they reaffirm that they are in the “business of saving lives” and call on their staff to “becomes passionately committed to supporting its philosophy” and “accept the philosophy that Saving Lives is totally achievable”.

But this isn’t just feel-good piffle. To move towards their No Kill goals, they first had to take a long hard look at their policies, identifying the common causes of shelter killing, and take audit of each one’s validity.

One of the major breakthoughs from this audit, was the identification of a cultural problem with exisiting euthanasia protocols. Rather than use the protocols to make compassionate decisions, the documentation and policies had become a way to defend killing and absolve individuals of the responsibility.

The new model asked people to step up and be more than just a ‘rule follower’;

Accountability allows, and indeed requires, flexibility. Too many SPCA centres lose sight of this principle, staying rigid with their protocols, believing they are engraved in stone. They are not.

Where protocols are important because they ensure accountability, protocols without flexibility can have the opposite effect by stifling innovation, causing lives to be needlessly lost, and allowing those who fail to save lives an excuse as to why they failed.”

The organisation’s pledge to maintain protocols and procedures orientated towards preserving life, means they must find solutions to the common reasons for shelter killing.

Beyond killing

Health

“Cat flu is not a reason to kill cats”.

By referring to cat flu as ’snuffles’, a normal and preventable part of caring for shelter cats, the group was able to take a scientific, rather than defensive, approach to managing illness;

In an eight-year study conducted in Auckland, approximately 40% of incoming cats developed ’snuffles’ (in the first year of the survey). Various methods, including efforts to reduce the stressful environment, in addition to cleaning regimes, have reduced this figure to 25%. With the development of isolation areas providing the opportunity to treat those affected, the success rate for treatment has increased from 34% (annual average) to 61%, while euthanasia of snuffles sufferers has dropped from 24% to 3% in the treatment area.

These figures clearly indicate that a combination of stress-free environments, cleaning regimes, strict isolation areas and the correct medical treatment can have a direct effect on saving lives from “snuffles”.

“Ringworm is not a reason to kill animals”. Describing ringworm as a ‘nuisance’ rather than a deadly disease, but recognising ringworm passed to the public is a publicity nightmare, the group recommends the following;

The use of foster homes is ideal in isolating ringworm from an SPCA centre. However, such fosterers need to be dedicated to the task and, due to the length of treatment, are “put out of action” for the fostering of other animals for a lengthy period of time. The use of off-site adoption events to rehome these animals will ensure that they do not return ringworm to the centre.

The use of a team of ’special needs’ foster carers, coupled with a healthy, stress-free environment, strict isolation and treatment regimes mean a commitment that pets with ringworm will be saved.

The group also treat skin conditions (flea allergies and mange) either on site, or in foster. By offering full disclosure and treatment plans to new adopters, pets with skin conditions are able to finish their recovery in their new homes.

Temperament

Pets entering shelters, by definition, have varying backgrounds and requirements for care. The organisation pledge to help all animals, regardless of their condition;

If we are to save lives we need to cater to these special problems by providing facilities that can attend to their needs and, of equal importance, that involve rehabilitation methods requiring the expertise of those qualified to provide the help needed to restore them to normality.

When referring to cats, ‘feral’ is not in the group’s vocabulary.

By definition, “feral” cats do not have contact with or dependency on humans. Accordingly, centres are very unlikely to receive genuine “feral” cats.

Incoming stray cats will normally be abandoned previously owned companion cats or possibly cats from colonies. Either way, they will not appreciate being trapped and will show their displeasure in no uncertain terms. For this reason they are described (incorrectly) as “feral”, when in fact they are “wild” (unused to handling, resenting capture, possibly never domesticated), “scared” (frightened by their captivity and uncertain of their future), or “timid” (naturally mistrusting and unsure).

Such cats deserve the chance to live, and should be given the opportunity to adjust and relax a little over a few days rather than being hastily dispatched.

Dogs get a similar level of respect, with the recognition that the behaviour of dogs is a product of their previous environment and that with time, patience and training – most dogs with perceived temperament problems can be successfully adopted.

Any temperament assessment should be aimed at “getting to know the dog” and whether any behavioural problems might exist that can be treated, rather than being aimed at putting it to the final test to determine its ultimate fate.

Additional to “on-site” facilities, rehabilitation of behavioural problems, particularly with dogs, will include the input of independent and professional individuals.

The variety of temperament problems may call for different advice, from either a veterinarian or a behaviourist.

Correct behaviour adjustment techniques can be taught to staff/volunteers, which can prove a very real asset in the operation of a centre, resulting in the correct and professional handling of animals while in our care.

Age

Recognising the importance of foster care in saving underage animals, this organisation engages the compassion of community;

The inability to save healthy young animals reflects badly on us as a welfare organisation, particularly when there are so many people in the community who would gladly volunteer themselves and their homes to foster the young until ready for adoption.

…………………………….

Getting pets out of shelters

Along with a requirement to overcome killing as a method of managing shelter pets, the organisation also needed to get those pets they have, out of the shelter.

Pet retention strategies

The Saving Lives philosophy calls for a willingness to work with people to help them solve their problems, with the sole aim of keeping people and their companion animals together. In our ethos of “prevention” we need to be seen as a place that people can turn to for advice and assistance, and we need to respond to that. to solve problems

Identifying that the very first call for help is an opportunity for the shelter to lend assistance, the organisation works to develop relationships with local trainers, veterinarians and behaviouralists. These relationships are symbiotic, generating new clients for these businesses, and expanding the knowledge base of the shelter, though simple training for staff.

There is discussion about the development of a general national call number for people with pet problems in the future,

Desexing

High-volume, low cost desexing is at the heart of any successful life-saving programme to substantially reduce the number of unwanted births, and the number of animals surrendered to SPCA centres.

It is fair to say that a proactive high-volume, low/no cost desexing programme is the best investment any centre can make in the fight to save future lives.

Along with community desexing clinic, the organisation desexes all animals before adoption and seeks the support from local council animal management for desexing initiatives. Free, targeted desexing for at-risk pets in low income areas, desexing vouchers for semi-owned cat owners, mobile desexing facilities and proactive education campaigns bring the benefits of desexing to all pets in the community.

An effective desexing programme has been proven in many cities internationally to virtually halve the centre incoming animal population within a decade of its introduction missed.

Improving reclaims

A focus on the importance of microchipping. All adopted pets are chipped and the organisation run ’snip and chip’ promotions.

The requirement that all animals are scanned and that pet owners are contacted promptly. They also list found pets on the internet.

Maximising adoptions

Focusing on promoting the benefits to the adoption of shelter animals:

- unique ‘feel good’ factor
- the use of the term ‘orphan’ rather than ’stray’
- great value (desexed, vaccinated, microchipped)

They also make the following requirement of their shelters:

SPCA facilities should be a great place to visit, with staff/volunteers happy and helpful professional people who are keen to assist as best they can because they want to, not only for the people they are serving but also for the animals they are dedicated to saving.

Adoption areas need to be clean and contain contented, well-presented animals in bright and airy surroundings, rather than the “prison behind bars” that the public envisage we are. Public facilities in cared-for grounds and surroundings must abound, to help add to the enjoyment
of their visit to the SPCA.

Hosting adoption areas with staff/volunteers who are helpful and knowledgeable is essential. Make sure that staff/volunteers are easily recognisable with suitable clothing and name tags.

There is nothing worse than having the public looking for animals when there is no one they can find to help them with their selection.

They ask that shelters name the pet to engage potential adopters (even if the animal is a stray) and that an information sheet is provided on the animal. These sheets are designed to accentuate the positive (“Not good with children” becomes “good with adults”) and all pets must be ready for adoption (behavioural and health problems resolved).

Opening hours must be convenient for potential adopters, including seven-day-a-week adoptions and early evening opening hours. They also endeavour to provide a wide range of animals:

A centre with a wide choice of animals is a successful centre, providing variety for “discerning shoppers”. If low on animals, source them from elsewhere (other SPCAs, pounds, rescue groups, etc).

Dogs being walked, all wear ‘adopt me’ jackets to attract attention and a database of people looking for a particular ‘kind’ of animal is kept. Profiles of adoptable animals are also posted to the web.

Price is presented as a recouping of a set amount of ‘adoption costs’ and special pricing promotions are used to attract adopters. ‘Two for the price of one’ kittens, special pet care giveaways, free food promotions.

A ‘14 day’ guarantee, helps adopted pets stay in their homes:

Inevitably, some animals (particularly cats) may be slow to adapt to their new surroundings, and may even become stressed, bringing on other “ailments”.

New “owners” are generally nervous and may panic at such behaviour, often rushing off to their vet for advice and incurring associated costs which they may endeavour to recover from the SPCA.

Provide a 14-day period where the animal will be covered for any associated costs at a set ceiling price (say, $50) at your expense. You will find that few people will claim this and, by setting a maximum, considerable money will in the end be saved from over-exuberant vets and anxious “owners”!

Off-site adoptions

Adoption vehicles in shopping centre car parks and outside pet shops or the use of retail space, display pets for adoption. Partnerships with local businesses can help get pets ’seen’, and off-site adoption attracts people who may not even be considering adopting an animal.

Where this has been practiced, it has been noted that off-site adoptions can account for between 20% and 40% of total adoptions achieved, and accordingly is well worth the effort.

These promotions not only raise awareness, but are a great opportunity to fund raise.

Working with rescue groups

There are a large number of animal welfare groups and individuals who, in their own way, undertake the rescue and rehoming of many animals and to whom we should look to assist us in our mission of saving lives.

These groups and individuals should not be viewed as “the competition” (as is sometimes the case), rather they should be seen as allies undertaking the same work for the same reasons we do. For, as long as unnecessary killing occurs in our own centre, rare would be the case where we would not utilise their assistance in taking custody of and rehoming those animals we have whose life is at risk.

Get to know them all, and work with them to save lives.

Working with foster homes

Proactive recruitment of foster carers, advanced levels of support and training opportunities and a positive regard for the contribution they make is vital to the success of their foster care program;

Training, equipment, food, litter and any medication required are all supplied by the SPCA to its foster homes, and a full support network of helpful staff or volunteer supervisors is also important to the programme. Keeping our fosterers happy is as important as keeping our animals happy!

They also offer innovative foster programs, like ’seniors for seniors’ and the adoption of foster pets by the foster homes.

Working with volunteers

Volunteers have been described as a dedicated “army of compassion” and are the backbone of a successful centre operation.

The organisation engage volunteers for animal care, but also public interaction and adoption support.

…fortunately there are a large number of people who gladly give of their time to help animals – however, we need to ask them, train them, assign duties to them and look after them.

Saving the strays

There are a vast number of people who voluntarily tend to stray cats in the community, normally in a “cat colony” (which can be small or large) or in a controlled situation or on their own property. Such cats were mostly once companion cats who have been abandoned, while some are the offspring of those cats who were not desexed prior to abandonment. They assemble in colonies, requiring the support and assistance of humans for their ongoing sustenance and welfare.

These people are dedicated to their task, spending many hours (and much of their own money) to care for these cats. Their sole objective is to save lives, and accordingly they are an essential part of this programme and deserving of our full support.

Recognising the contribution of community cat carers is vital to reducing intakes and the number of cats dying in shelters. This organisation embraces their work and offers them the support they need to continue in their life-saving work.

They formed the ‘Cat Coalition’, assisting with donated food and desexing vouchers and support to manage problems as they arise. The coalition members, in addition to being supported, also operate under protocols designed with the ongoing welfare of the cats and their care in mind.

They expanded the program to include those people looking to surrender a ’stray’ cat. Rather than accept a fractious cat from a surendee’s own property, the organisation offers the chance to adopt the cat as a ‘barn cat’, have it desexed and save its life.
………………….

No Kill is about what you DO, do

This organisation has taken on every aspect of the No Kill equation, and reclaimed its role as a life-saving resource in the community. What their experience has shown is that No Kill isn’t about what you don’t do (kill), but what you do, do… execute a series of proven, modern animal sheltering techniques that simply run in a contrary manner to convenience killing.

The fact that one of the oldest and largest animal welfare organisations in the country has taken the lead in moving New Zealand towards its No Kill future, is testament to the dynamic leadership of the organisation (see my previous article on Bob Kerridge from the SPCA here).

The ‘Saving Lives’ plan from the SPCA New Zealand could be rolled out in any shelter tomorrow.

It’s time that every Australian demands the same level of performance from our own animal welfare groups and seek out and support those organisations who are already on a No Kill path.

Australian shelter pets also deserve a No Kill future.

Seth Godin’s book Linchpin changed my life.

He has riffed out pretty much the whole lot and given it away free. No, not just given it away, asks people to share it.

So I can’t recommend this highly enough.

The April Linchpin Session (click)

First up, the blog post of the year;

Fighting the inevitable: The propaganda war against no-kill

People are not stupid; they understand the difference between “killing” and “euthanasia.” And the no-kill movement is not about what individual shelters do, but about a community-based effort to develop non-lethal animal population management practices nationwide. And it’s not a Utopian fantasy, it’s the reality right now in many communities, and that number is growing every year, because of the very love and commitment of people that you don’t believe in.

Go read it.

And once you’ve done that, why not settle on down on the couch for a video brain massage?

First up, we have Nathan Winograd – lawyer, director of the No-Kill Advocacy Centre and author of “Redemption: The myth of pet overpopulation and the No-Kill Revolution” – speaking with Steven from Hound TV…

Next, we have Nathan’s full presentation from the conference…

There’s lots of talk lately of licencing schemes for dog owners, to counter high numbers of ‘irresponsible owners’. The Lost Dogs Home recently introduced its own pilot pet ownership licencing scheme, while the RSPCA have been working to bring in ‘responsible dog ownership’ legislation in an effort to reduce the number of dogs abused and abandoned. And each and every week articles, like this one from WA, are published in local papers around the country:

Dumped – Dog owners shame

Dog owners are being urged to consider the consequences of abandoning their pets after new figures revealed about 1000 dogs a year were impounded in Stirling alone.

RSPCA spokesman Richard Barry said that the high rate of stray and abandoned dogs was disappointing.

“It’s of great concern to us that some dogs are simply abandoned for myriad reasons, ranging from a change in location through to a change in financial circumstances,” he said.

“One has to consider what their pet will go through once they have turned their back on it.”

He said a lack of desexing had a ‘tremendous influence’ on the high number of animals needing a home.

Stirling community development director Trevor Holland urged people to be committed to pet ownership before taking on the responsibility of owning a dog.

“Owning and caring for a pet comes with responsibilities, and these are for the duration of their lives, not just the holidays.”

And it sounds fair enough. The pounds are full and dogs are being euthanased so it’s a natural progression to start thinking that the public must be terrible and that they’re abandoning pets at enormous rates.

So, do the public really suck?

The article went on to present the following statistics:

2007
Total number of dogs impounded – 976
Reclaimed by owners – 596
Rehomed – 213
Killed – 167

2008
Total number of dogs impounded – 1015
Reclaimed by owners – 647
Rehomed – 190
Killed – 178

2009 (to October)
Total number of dogs impounded – 744
Reclaimed by owners – 500
Rehomed – 142
Killed – 102

Now, the City of Stirling has 84,000 people, and 17,000 registered dogs. They get, according to these statistics, around 1,000 dogs impounded each year. That’s about 5% of the total dog population.

So 95% of owned dogs live in their homes, without needing to go to the shelter.

That’s not terrible – that’s freaking fantastic!! And is it possible to improve on this? Probably not much.

In the shire each year around 600 dogs are collected by the owners (lost dogs) and of the 400 left, about 200 are rehomed and about 200 are killed.

Now just think about that for a second. They kill 200, save 200. They kill one for every one they save. That’s a 50% fail rate!

If I ran a business that made cakes and I failed to sell every second one; I’d go out of business.

If I was a teacher and every second child I taught couldn’t read; I’d (hopefully) get the sack.

If I was a fireman and every second fire burnt the building to the ground; my manager would be examining whether we had enough training, enough skills or whether other fire stations were doing any better.

You get the idea. Meanwhile pounds fail one in every two times, throw their hands up in the air and go ‘our public sucks – whattaya gonna do?’

And not much changes.

But there’s not enough homes!

Well, lets look at it. If a dog lives an average 10 years, and assuming most people replace a dog within a few months of it passing:

Stirling’s population 17,000 dogs with 10% dying each year means there are approximately 1,700 new homes becoming available each and every year.

Stirling have just 400 dogs each year to rehome, there’s more than 4 times more homes available, than dogs they need to place. Not counting new homes or moving outside of their shire.

So they only need to convince one in every four people actively looking for a new dog, to adopt. Or another way, they need to complete just two adoptions a day. And it doesn’t need to be just adoptions; it can be handing them over to rescue, or networking with other Shires to ’swap’ animals, or just handing them over the local pet shop. Anything but killing them.

These guys are open for 3.5hrs weekdays, while potential adopters are at work (2.00pm – 5.30pm), and they’re open for 1hr on weekends. So, they offer working families, exactly 2 hrs per week to adopt.

Imagine if a pet shop was open these hours. And located in an industrial area. Would we be shocked if it didn’t have any customers? Not very.

The myth that owners are to blame

There is an awful lot of good to comment on about Stirling Council. They work with local rescue groups, have a volunteer program and they put their lost dogs on the web. And they made their annual figures available. But they’re still trapped in that blame culture which looks to punish the community for the number of pets killed in the shelter, rather than examining whether it needs to happen at all.

The scary thing is, if you do this with nearly any shire pound in Australia, you’ll find a similar story. They’ll say ‘we’re swamped; there’s so many irresponsible people in our area’ but then when you look at their intakes, they’re some tiny, insignificant number of the overall dog population. And the number of pets they do manage to save is tragically small.

While we’re often keen to get on board legislative solutions that target the public, targeting the community, who is overwhelmingly responsible and compliant, is both insulting and futile. Meanwhile, even in the face of incredibly high kill rates, we’re reluctant to cast a similar critical approach to the operating procedures of pounds in this country.

If we ever want to see a reduction in shelter pet killing, we must start calling these councils on their lack of performance; and they need to stop blaming pet owners for the killing and start taking those steps necessary to stop it.