Below is the script from the presentation I gave at the WA Cat Welfare Symposium last month. :)

The awesomeness of cats

Hi and thanks so much for the opportunity to present here today! I’m Shel and I’m the Top Dog at PetRescue. PetRescue is a not-for-profit organisation that supports more than 1,000 Australian pounds, shelters and rescue groups. We provide programs and services which help improve animal adoption awareness, increase adoption rates and make it easy for potential adopters to find and save a rescue pet. We’re best known for our website, PetRescue.com.au which is the largest online, searchable. directory of rescue pets in Australia. Access is free to all animal welfare organisations looking to promote their pets.

And this year, we saw the adoption of PetRescues’ 100,000th pet. A cat named Banks from NSW.

BANKS in his new home – cared for by the Sydney Dogs and Cats Home

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Do we love cats?

There is a perception in Australia, that cats aren’t liked. The truth is, while there are a few vocal cat haters out there, the majority of people feel a huge amount of compassion for cats in the community.

- IBIS World industry figures from 2009, show Australian’s spend $1.4 BILLION dollars on cat care annually.

- In WA alone, we spend $1.34 MILLION dollars each year caring for our feline companions.

- According to the latest Australian figures, 91% of pet owners report feeling ‘very close’ to their pet, reinforcing that pets are an integral member of the family.

- While 50% of Australian owners will get their cat a Christmas present this year.

Rather than convince people to like cats, it’s THESE people who already identify as cat lovers who are our audience.

And there are a lot of cat lovers out there.

According to the Australian Companion Animal Council, there are around 230,000 owned cats living in WA. That’s one owned cat for every 10 people.

That 1 in 10, can be engaged to help our mission by: replacing their cats when they pass away (adoptions), sharing their experiences to the benefits of cat ownership (social proof), supporting our organisations (volunteerism, donations) and helping to protect cats in the community (advocacy).

Today my presentation is on the awesomeness of cats and how we can improve outcomes for homeless animals, based on two pretty simply opportunities.

1. The internet loves cats

2. The community loves cats

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

1. The internet loves cats

….
“When John Atanasoff and Clifford Berry developed the first digital computing machine at Iowa State University in 1937, little did they know that their invention would become an integral part of a sophisticated worldwide cat picture distribution system.” ~ David Burge
….

One day the internet will be more than a place to post a tribute to your cat. But thankfully that day isn’t today. If you haven’t noticed, cats are big on the Internet. Even though the occasional panda, gets a slice of the viral action, cats are, and always have been, the stars online.

This is Maru – the worlds most famous cat. He has a website and a YouTube channel and some of his videos have been viewed more than 20 million times.

But it’s more than just the ‘cute factor’. Although many online hits are cute or funny – there are just as many that portray cats as sinister creatures, plotting against man. Cats inspire awe. They are enigmatic. They have a hint of the danger about them. And they’re often seen on the laps and laptops of professionals and geeks. Cats are the perfect vehicle for Internet humor because with their expressive face.and gestures they are a great canvas for human emotion, captioning and anthropomorphising.

I’m sure everyone has seen LOLcats before – this website is now one of the most popular sites on the internet and has been valued at more than $30 million dollars.

Simon’s Cat is another internet sensation. Simon is an English animator who shares his life with four cats; Hugh, Maisy, Jess and Teddy. This video was his for YouTube hit and has been viewed 30 million times.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Harnessing our love of cats

Okay, they’re all a lot of fun, but the big question is…

How to harness it?

The easiest way to bring some of this internet love to your cats is through web videos.

Check out my rescue’s guide to creating awesome web videos here

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

2. The community love cats

This trend towards seeing cats as being a geeky-funky indoor and easy care pet, has had a huge influence on how people are seeing them in the community. There is a new kind of cat owner and the influence is decidedly male.

The Top 10 Ways to Upgrade Your Cat’s Life is an article by the decidedly geeky Lifehackers site. Geeks love cats. In fact, too much cat geek is never enough…

(you must watch this until at least the ‘cat yodeling’ part *snortle*)

Modern guys like cats;

Will Anderson has been a huge support of cat welfare groups and a promoter of cats as pets. Wil has three adopted cats – Tip, Diego and Ziggy – and says that the adoption process was easy. “Going through an organisation like PetRescue means you can be confident your pet will be healthy and have all its shots and they only match people with pets that suit their needs.”

Russell Brand is also a well known cat lover (video NSFW):

While this video shows the depth of guys-who-love-cats attraction:

Here is another example where our love of cats has shone.

Since the 1980s, the area around the historic inner Sydney suburb of Newtown has had works of graffiti and street art placed on local walls.

When a graffiti artist drew about 50 cats on walls throughout Newtown, they were so popular with the community, they spawned a book entitled ‘The Stripey Street Cat’. The book which is about a cat’s intrepid journey through the streets to find a missing friend, is features 19 colour photographs of the cats taken by the author.

Back to the US now, for an example of a rescue group harnessing the community’s love of cats.

For the past six years, Macy’s department store has helped the San Fransico SPCA connect with potential adopters through an innovative Christmas campaign.

Through the months of November and December, animals are showcased to the public in comfortable, climate controlled displays as part of the Macy’s holiday windows.

Voted “One of the ten best places to press your nose” by USA TODAY, this tradition is one of the most beloved symbols of the holiday spirit in San Francisco. Last year, about 300 animals featured in Macy’s holiday windows found new homes from the adoption center on the Main Floor and more than $70,000 in donations was raised for the SF SPCA. All together more than 2,000 animals have been placed through the program. (See more pics here)

How to harness it

In WA, based roughly on the number of cats who pass away naturally, there are between 10 and 15,000 homes opening each year with loving owners looking to replace their cat. While some are already committed to getting one from another source like a breeder, if we can influence just some of the others to adopt their next cat – we CAN save every adoptable animal.

And that is simply the organic numbers. This doesn’t include people who are getting a cat for the first time. Or people returning to cat ownership after a break. Or people expanding from a single to a multi-cat household. Or people who’d be willing to care for a community cat. Or temporary homes that would foster a cat for a time.

This idea that there are too many healthy, friendly cats and not enough homes, simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Especially when you start to see what kind of success other communities are having using innovative adoption promotions.

Hold a ‘free’ cat adoption event

Free cat adoption has had enormous success overseas, resulting in dramatically increased adoption rates.

- Johnson County, Kansas did a summer promotion of ‘free’ cats & doubled their adoptions.

- The Humane Society of Boulder Valley enjoyed its largest adoption day ever, which was also the first day they ever offered free adoptions for cats and kittens. In a single day, they placed 117 animals.

- New Zealand SPCA offered ‘free-feline Friday’. Their offices were flooded with prospective owners on Friday morning and by Friday afternoon 150 kittens were adopted. Fosterers were bringing in kittens to meet demand.

- 41 shelters and rescue groups got together for the Maddies Matchmaker Adoptathon, offering free pet adoption. 1,500 pets were rehomed in a single weekend.

- Nevada Humane Society US, have been using ‘free’ in their adoption mix since 2007 and now rehome more than 1,000 pets a month.

- The ASPCA are now officially recommending ‘fee waived’ programs as a technique for increasing cat adoption.

And now we have know that ‘free’ works in Australia also.

- In February this year RSPCA NSW ran a price based campaign. They began with a call to action;

“(we) are overwhelmed by the sheer number of cats and kittens that need homes or face being euthanased. In a desperate attempt to save as many feline lives as possible, the organisation is waiving cat adoption fees at five locations throughout the state.”

Instead of an ‘adoption fee’ new owners simply had to buy a $60 pack of cat goodies from their online store. On the *very first day* of their 5 day ‘free’ cat adoption promo, the RSPCA NSW has issued this notice on their FB page…

“UPDATE: Please bear with us. We are overwhelmed with the response & we thank everyone for their support. Our facilities are very busy at present and your patience and understanding is appreciated”

The campaign was an overwhelming success, finding homes for over 500 cats in five days. They’ve since adopted a similar campaign which extended to cover all animals at all RSPCA NSW shelters state-wide.

- In November last year, the RSPCA Victoria offered three days of free cat adoptions and extended trading hours.

Cat lovers swamped the organisation’s shelters, taking advantage of the twilight adoption hours. Between Thursday and Saturday (3 days) 110 cats found new homes. And why didn’t they adopt more?

They ran out of cats

Every cat older than four months found favour with a new owner offering a home. The shelter’s nine Victorian catteries were emptied for the first time, ever.

According to the New Zealand ‘Saving Lives’ program, where this has been practiced, it has been noted that these kinds of adoption events can account for between 20% and 40% of total adoptions, and accordingly are well worth the effort.

See more on free cat adoption events here

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

So that’s it from me.

I hope this has provided some inspiration for your cat promotions and adoptions today. Feel free to come speak to me either after the event, or contact me through the PetRescue website, if you would like any more information on the things I’ve presented here today.

Thanks very much!

For the last several decades, as the animal sheltering system in Australia grew into an industry supporting multimillion dollar charities, we were told the reason for shelter killing was simple; ‘bad pet owners’. We were told the shelters were the victims in the situation, forced to do the irresponsible public’s dirty work and that they had no choice but to kill. In fact, killing was a gift to animals from the shelter workers who cared *more* than the public. We should be thanking them for their efforts.

Now, as the community are able to compare the performance of pounds and shelters across the country and the world, we have been able to see that the responsibility for shelter killing lay solely with those who run the shelters and do the killing. Pounds and shelters who embrace their community, emphasise returning pets to their owners, offer a welcoming and convenient service to potential adopters, and work to keep untame cats from being impounded, have eliminated killing in their communities virtually overnight. Pounds and shelters who choose to run foster care programs and rescue group outreach, provide options for pets other than death. While those who engage pet lovers through social media, clever adoption promotions and local media have harnessed community compassion to give every healthy, treatable pet a second chance at happiness.

So now, pounds and shelters who have failed to embrace this new lifesaving model have a problem.

- How do you defend killing, when your community knows it is no longer necessary?

- How do you defend killing, in the face of proven alternatives to killing?

Unable to continue to blame ‘irresponsible pet owners’ for the killing, they have created a new villain de jour.

‘A lack of collaboration’.

If you’re in animal welfare circles, you will have heard it;

“We can’t save the pets unless we all collaborate and work together. Rescues are unsupportive and critical. The public are misinformed and it’s hard on shelter and pound workers to have to defend themselves. Animal advocates are extremists and cyber-bullies, and shelters can’t be expected to make positive change when they’re being treated like this. Given they’re working under such hostile conditions, we should in fact, be thanking them for their efforts…”

‘A lack of collaboration’ is the new ‘irresponsible pet owner’. It’s code for; we’re not changing and here’s a red herring, the hoop we want you to jump through, that deflects blame away from us and our failings and back onto the wider community.

Most reprehensibly, ‘a lack of collaboration’ lays blame on those in the community fighting hardest for pets; the whistle-blower rescue who shines a light on high kill rates, inhumane conditions or abuse. The animal advocate who compiles stats and information for their own community. The animal lover who takes their concerns about unnecessary killing to their local councillor. THESE people are now being blamed for shelter killing. By defending animals, they are be accused of harming animals by interfering with the process of ‘collaboration’… and it would be laughable, if it weren’t so tragic.

It doesn’t take ‘collaboration’ to extend your trading hours so people can visit on weekends and after work. You don’t need‘collaboration’ before you open your doors to volunteers and foster carers. It doesn’t take ‘collaboration’ to host an adoption event, or create an off-site adoption program or a pet-of-the-week media blast. It doesn’t take ‘collaboration’ to stop sending your rangers to impound healthy, free-roaming cats.

These things take leadership, not collaboration.

Collaboration is a goal. A nice-to-have. It makes things easier for everyone and is the icing on a mature ‘animal sheltering industry’ cake. But it is neither they key to saving lives – nor a lack of it, a hurdle to saving them. Collaboration must never mean ignoring the ultimate violence against animals – their unnecessary death – in order to all ‘just get along’. And we must reject any suggestion that a lack of collaboration is the reason for animals being killed, or an acceptable reason to continue killing.

Sorry guys, I’ve run late to this event (baby wrangling), so I’ve missed a couple of the presenters. Hopefully we’ll have some interesting presenters coming up and I’ll blog them as best I can – I’ve noticed there’s a camera here again this year, so yay!

continue reading…

Notes from a YouTube video from Michigan’s 1st No Kill Conference. More videos can be seen here.

Susanne Kogut, Executive Director of the open admission No Kill Charlottesville SPCA, details how she drastically reduced killing and created a No Kill community (saving 90% of the animals) in a very short period of time. Under her direction CASPCA quickly became a no-kill shelter and has since become a national model, as well as a model for other countries, in how to operate an animal shelter in a way that saves lives. CASPCA has seen a 600 percent increase in the number of fostered animals and a 70 percent decrease in the euthanasia rate, in less than two years.

Can we “Save them all?”

- Susanne was called “naive”, told “she didn’t know what she was doing”, that “you’ll never get to No Kill”, “you don’t have any experience”, “we know better”.

- They have saved 92% of intakes in 09/10. Their community is not in some great situation. They don’t have a lot of money and take in a lot of animals. It’s about attitude.

- Community pride. The community is really proud to be part of a community that doesn’t kill healthy, treatable pets. It helps with fundraising and their community is part of the effort.

- It’s not ‘just about the animals’ – you have to care about people. They are the ones who are going to help you achieve your goals.

- Positive! Positive! Positive! People don’t want to be involved in “the pets are all abused and if they don’t get adopted, they’ll be killed” negative messages. All of their messages are upbeat. Solutions not excuses.

- Its not about a ‘No Kill shelter’ it has to be about a No Kill community. It’s not about telling other people what they “should” do, it is about surrounding yourself with good people and motivating them to achieve great things.

- They demand accountability of themselves; adoptions for March weren’t what they wanted them to be. They didn’t sit around going “oh woe is us; people aren’t coming in!”. Instead they were asking “What did we do wrong and what can we do to increase adoptions?” It doesn’t happen to you, you make it happen.

- CASPCA do around 4,000 desexing per year and have used grants to do it. “You have to look at the data of where most of your intakes are coming from and target your desexing programs to those areas.”

- Outreach desexing is important, but there is a pretty good correlation between an increase in the number of desexing surgeries they were doing and an increase in their expenses. So you’ve gotta do the easy stuff too; the adoptions, the foster care, the marketing… you can do these very cheaply.

- They had seen their intakes go up after they announced they were going No Kill (people started bringing the kittens to them rather than rehoming them, themselves). Their intakes are finally starting to come down: the reason their intakes are going down? Is it desexing? Nope it’s actually not. Number one for reducing intakes was developing a relationship with animal control and getting them to stop bringing in the feral cats.

- The county was reducing their budgets. The SPCA was paid ‘per intake’; Susanne told them they could save money by allowing them to develop TNR programs with local community groups and arranging desexing.

- Surrender counseling also reduces intake; working with people on common pet behavioural problems. There is nothing wrong with asking someone to make an appointment to surrender an animal. You don’t get to get up and go to the doctor without an appointment, so it is no big imposition.

Example; a lady came in desperate, saying she was going to be evicted because of her dogs. The SPCA staff got more info saying she had 90 days, so they knew they didn’t have to take them immediately. They called her landlord, told them they were going to take the dogs and not to evict her. The landlord said there was no problem with the dogs. Turns out a neighbour who didn’t like the pets, had told the lady they were going to be evicted. The lady kept her dogs.

Adoption policies

- They don’t do home visits for every pet; they don’t think you need to, to find a good home.

- Don’t be afraid of returns. Some people are so afraid of returns, that they only adopt out a few.
- – Rescue tell people in our adoption contracts, that if they’re not happy with an animal to bring it back. When they do, rescue are mad. But they did what we asked them to! How can we be mad at them?

– We all know not all pets act the same in the facility as they do in the new home. Take the pet back, say thank you, get more information on what that pet is like in the home and make a better match next time. Don’t think they’re a bad family, don’t put them on a DNA list and send it out to everyone in the community. It may have just been not a good fit,

- Their adoptions returns are around 8%. This has remained constant since they changed their adoption policies from judgemental to more relaxed. It has not increased.

- They screen foster homes through an interview. If they feel uncomfortable they can do a homecheck, but they don’t always.

- If they are a family and the kids want kittens for a while – give them kittens! Give them kittens that day – don’t make them come back. Use students and transient people who want a pet ‘for a time’ – given them ‘adopt me’ vests to walk the pets around in the community.

- They hardly ever refuse an adoption. They don’t believe people come into their organisation to abuse animals. They may not be as educated about animal care as we like, but they try to make the adoption happen.

- Barn cat adoptions works for outdoor only cats.

Offsite adoption events; are no longer needed! People love their organisation and they adopt everything out successfully. They do still work with local businesses (a antique store took kittens) and they did publicity around it in the local news.

“When an animal comes in that door, its life depends on us,” she says. “It’s a huge sense of responsibility and obligation. To turn your back on that is impossible.”

Notes from a YouTube video from Michigan’s 1st No Kill Conference. More videos can be seen here.

Photo: The Geelong Advertiser

Above is a photo of the weekend’s protests by animal lovers, following the release of video footage of pets being killed at the Geelong Animal Welfare Society. These members of the ‘irresponsible public’ met on the stairs of City Hall, calling for such outrageous demands as, a new system where volunteers assist the shelter in preparing pets for adoption, the recruitment of foster carers to place pets temporarily and the opening of the shelter to potential families looking to adopt.

And these ‘bullying’ and ‘harrassing’ animal advocates then finished their attack on the organisation with “one of the busiest adoption days” ever seen at the shelter.

As you can imagine, the staff at GAWS have been left distressed by this experience. Acting president David Cecil confirmed the society’s lawyers are “ready to act”, with retiring president Ian Walter telling The Age “GAWS’s lawyers believed there were grounds to take out intervention orders against those responsible for the online campaign. This activity is being monitored and if it persists legal action will be taken.”

Council is also taking a tough stance. The city’s general manager, community services, Jenny McMahon said; ”We acknowledge that the situation for homeless animals can improve further, and we are working hard towards this goal.”

The ’situation’ (pets being yelled at before being killed, pets being killed by heartstick, hundreds more pets being killed than being saved) ‘can improve further’. How positively inspirational.

**Warning – videos in this post include footage of animals being killed by lethal injection**

It is a pervasive idea that shelters and pounds who kill pets, are doing so with a compassionate heart and after every other avenue has been exhausted. And it has been the doctrine of these same high kill pounds and shelters to continue to push this notion, afraid that should the truth be exposured – that they kill easily, lazily and unnecessarily – that the backlash would be detrimental to their empires.

However, the truth will no longer stay hidden.

GAWS encouraged the trapping, impoundment and killing of feral cats, claimed the majority of the pets entering the shelter were untreatably aggressive, and killed pets for being non-english speaking. In fact, so high on killing were they, that in 2009/10 they killed 852 dogs and rehomed just 487 (they also ‘misplaced’ 217 dogs), and killed 2,426 cats, rehoming just 546.

But even those claims to shame were nothing compared to the behind the scenes videos that leaked onto the internet last week, showing just how callously the unfortunate ‘death row’ animals were being treated before they were killed.

(More videos here & here)

These videos are a window to what is taking place behind the doors of pounds and shelters across the country. Rather than the ‘good death’ so often defended by killing apologists, we’re given a glimpse into a world where killing is antagonistic and methodical. Not only is it accepted, it is promoted in favour of alternatives to killing. Even when those alternatives are literally beating down the door in the form of foster homes, rescue groups and pet lovers looking to adopt.

Watching these videos is difficult. Their release on the internet caused shockwaves through the animal loving community. However, rather than listen to the pleas of pet lovers to change their ways, the staff involved defended their actions.

While the idea of a ‘good death’ at the hands of compassionate staff is the cornerstone of kill-sheltering, these videos show just how far from the truth that story often is. Around Australia, pounds and shelters who claim to ‘care’ for pets, yet kill them with heartstick, shoot them with guns or send them to university teaching hospitals for ‘non-revival’ surgery. They do so in enormous numbers – hundreds per day – while the strategies exist that would eliminate shelter killing overnight, are simply ignored.

But as in the case of GAWS, the community is the key to change;

‘GAWS Exposed’ community rally

Those who champion life over a quick death in a ’shelter’, are finding their voice. Rather than being an anomaly, they are becoming a powerful movement; taking their message to the streets, where they find extraordinary support in the pet loving public. They are compassionate animal advocates, who find themselves working in uncompassionate surroundings. Or they are tax paying citizens who believe their government dollars should not be funding the wholesale slaughter of pets, in the face of alternatives.

GAWS is the first in a long line of No Kill community protests to come. The times are changing for the shelter animals of Australia.

The killing must stop.

In the often under-resourced area of community services, having a select few industry ‘professionals’ exclusively hoarding power, resources and knowledge is outdated and inefficient. Across many different areas, these kinds of paternal approaches are widely being replaced with projects which teach the community how to manage their own issues; harnessing the capabilities and expertise of citizens, resulting in increased effectiveness, better results and a reduced demand on public services.

Equipping citizens with the skills and knowledge to help themselves and each other is clearly a good investment. But running through many of these innovations is a more radical idea that challenges the nature of professionalism and expertise.

That isn’t to say that there isn’t a vital role for professionals in the public services of the future; of course there is. What we’re seeing is the huge potential for professionals and citizens to join forces in new ways that enable them to create much more value by working together.

Read the full article from the UK Guardian here Why public services can only benefit from working with citizens.

Hat tip Jayne Cravens.

There is a difference between advocacy and adoptions, and understanding this key to an effective message.

If a person is considering adopting a pet, what they need is support, encouragement and praise for their decision (positive) Yet, often when people come to rescue to adopt, via our websites or facebook pages, we present them with the evils of pet shops, puppy farms, animal abuse and abandonment (negative).

Neither advocacy or adoptions are more important than the other, but they are drives that need to separated so as not to overwhelm the regular, off-the-street pet owning family.

You need to decide what your core mission is; is it advocacy or adoptions? Design everything you do to support that mission.

Then, when considering every message or action ask yourself; does this support our adoptions (advocacy)?

Widely celebrated as Australia’s answer to the No Kill movement of the US, the ‘Getting to Zero’ (G2Z) program has been, being developed by the Animal Welfare League of Queensland and claims to “detail the principles, structures and strategies for achieving zero killing of healthy and treatable cats and dogs”.

The AWLQ seems like an excellent strategic driver for the program, having achieved a 91% save rate for dogs and a 76% save rate for cats in 2009/10 in Gold Coast City. And G2Z purports to be both similar and superior to the No Kill movement:

Simultaneously, in the United States of America, the No Kill Movement has been developing. It identifies similar strategies, providing evidence of the effectiveness of these strategies in a range of communities.  However, the G2Z Model also provides the structures needed so that strategies can be applied effectively.

With G2Z being…

…a more comprehensive term than No Kill

and

… providing for a more comprehensive and sustained ongoing cooperative improvement community wide.

Both the G2Z Model and No Kill Equation claim to be working to zero out the killing of healthy and treatable cats and dogs in whole communities. Both programs are based on the belief that 90% of stray and surrendered dogs and cats are either healthy or treatable. And both programs allow for ‘euthanasia’ in the true sense of the word; to relieve irremediable suffering from illness or injury; or because an animal is irremediably vicious. But from there, the G2Z Model and the No Kill Equation deviate significantly.

The No Kill Equation

The No Kill equation calls for the comprehensive implementation of 11 mandatory programs;

1. A feral cat TNR program
2. High-volume, low-cost desexing programs
3. Working relationships with community rescue groups
4. An internal foster care program
5. Comprehensive adoption programs
6. Pet Retention strategies
7. Medical and behavioral rehabilitation programs
8. Public relations strategies and community involvement
9. A comprehensive volunteer program
10. Proactive redemptions for lost pets
And finally, 11. A hard working, compassionate shelter Director

“To succeed fully, however, shelters should not implement the programs piecemeal or in a limited manner. If they are sincere in their desire to stop the killing, animal shelters will implement and expand programs to the point that they replace killing entirely. Combining rigorous, comprehensive implementation of the No Kill Equation with best practices and accountability of staff in cleaning, handling, and care of animals, must be the standard.”

The No Kill Equation works. No Kill communities have been created in;
- Tompkins County, NY
- Austin, TX
- Benzie County, MI
- Berkeley, CA
- Charlottesville, VA
- Chippewa County, MI
- Copper Country, MI
- Duluth, MN
- Fluvanna County, VA
- Grosse Ile, MI
- Hastings, MN
- Kansas City, KS
- King George County, VA
- Lynchburg, VA
- Marquette, MI
- Otsego County, MI
- Porter County, IN
- Reno, NV
- Seagoville, TX
- Shelby County, KY
- Terre Haute, IN
- Williamsburg, VA
- Williamson County, TX
- Allegany County, MD
- Arlington, VA
- Georgetown, DE
- Longmont, CO (dogs only)
- Prescott, WI
- Emeryville, CA
- Piedmont, CA
and
- Wilmington, DE

Last month the City Council in Rockwall, Texas voted unanimously to become a No Kill community and achieved a 97% save rate. And according to the No Kill Advocacy Center more than 30,000 shelters, rescue groups and animal lovers have signed the No Kill declaration.

The No Kill equation has become the backbone of the ‘Saving Lives’ program of New Zealand; with a near identical set of 10 steps making up the program. When Saving Lives was launched in 2010, some of the organisations 48 centres were killing as many as 87 out of 100 of animals they were taking in.

Royal New Zealand SPCA national chief executive Robyn Kippenberger says SPCAs must save lives, that they can save lives, and that they should adopt their way out of killing. She says there are many humane alternatives to putting down animals.

“We are now in the “business of saving lives”. We are working to make New Zealand the world’s first ‘no kill’ nation.”

The immediate goal of the program was to achieve a situation where no animal coming in to an SPCA was killed because of a lack of space. In less than a year at least two SPCAs reported zero euthanasia rates, with more in single figures and some in the 20-30% range.

It must be noted, none of these cities enacted mandatory desexing laws to achieve these goals. These communities have seen that these laws have never worked in any community to either increase desexing rates or to decrease shelter intake. Not only that, but such laws have actually increased shelter intake and killing as pets are either surrendered or seized for failure to pay regressive fees. It is also believed that such laws may reduce veterinary care and vaccination rates. In fact, nearly every single national animal welfare organisation in the US is against mandatory desexing laws, including Alley Cat Allies, Best Friends Animal Society, the American Veterinary Medical Association, and the No Kill Advocacy Center among many others.

Instead of passing regressive laws that criminalise pet ownership, the No Kill movement recognises the true cause of pound killing is the refusal of pounds and shelters to implement the programs that would stop it. We know that if No Kill is going to be achieved, shelters must put in place key programs, such as a commitment to Trap, Neuter and Return (TNR) for feral cats, a foster care program, a comprehensive adoption strategy and working with community rescue groups.

The proof we see in city after city, is that these programs can eliminate shelter killing overnight. With the general public’s support, the No Kill movement has managed to reshape the thinking of many larger organisations and change community expectations of animal shelters and pounds. No Kill has brought about a new hope for companion animals worldwide. Given the overwhelming success of communities who have implemented the No Kill Equation, it would make sense that those driving for change here in Australia would want to follow in their footsteps.

Is Australian smart enough to follow success?

While the blueprint for No Kill success is written in history, the G2Z program has deviated and its aim is based on an entirely different premise:

Getting to Zero (G2Z) aims to increase responsibility for companion animals so that every city and shire can achieve zero euthanasia of all healthy and treatable cats and dogs.

In short, the G2Z major driver is to get pet owners to be more responsible, moving away from the key programs proven to eliminate shelter killing, back to ideals that have failed us for decades; the belief that ‘irresponsible owners’ and ‘pet overpopulation’ need to be eradicated before the killing can end.

The four programs of G2Z are:
1. Community vet clinic
2. Shelter vet clinic
3. Community education, legislation and support
4. Rehoming

So, desexing, desexing, berating an irresponsible public, new laws… and finally, adoptions.

Which is exactly the strategy of the traditional high kill model; Legislation, Education & Desexing (LES). We can’t save all the pets until all the pets are desexed, we have the right laws and people are responsible. However LES has proven to be a failure, and is debunked in Redemption as never having achieved a No Kill goal being met.

… familiarize yourself with the opposition’s purported alternative strategy: Legislation, Education, and Sterilization (LES).

The opposition will say that the real keys to saving lives are tough mandatory laws (like pet-limit laws, licensing, bans on feeding outdoor cats, and mandatory spay/neuter laws), humane education, and sterilization. It’s a strategy they’ve been pushing for over 30 years, but that has never created a single No Kill community.

Remember, while increasing spay and neuter rates is an important part of saving lives, and community outreach is a fine goal in theory, ‘LES’ has never achieved No Kill success anywhere in the country. In fact, most communities that have achieved No Kill success did so even before a comprehensive, high-volume spay/neuter program was in place. Moreover, some programs of this strategy – like mandatory pet-limit laws or mandatory spay/neuter requirements – have actually increased shelter killing by increasing the number of animals surrendered to or seized by animal-control authorities. What works is the proven, cost-effective programs and policies of the No Kill Equation. It represents the future of lifesaving success, not the history of failure resulting from ‘LES’.

To be fair, a lot of the programs of the No Kill equation are outlined under G2Z; but they’re presented as suggestions, not requirements. There is no mandate for pounds to offer TNR to untame cats. There is no mandate for pounds to work with rescue groups. There is no mandate to expand adoptions to include all healthy, sociable dogs including pit bulls. There is no mandate for pounds to work collaboratively and transparently with their public. In fact there is no less than 55 optional programs and services for pounds to pick and choose from, under the banner of “getting” somewhere. . not actually achieving, but simply “commiting to achieving”, “focussing on” improvements and “progressing toward zero”.

While squandering the opportunity to drive for proven and effective internal shelter improvements, the G2Z program simultaneously emphasizes the very same laws that have been shown to drive up impounds: mandatory desexing and expanded licencing.

So how’s it working?

AWLQ has been working intensively on two key goals over the last 8 years:

- To achieve zero killing of healthy and treatable cats and dogs in one large Australian city, and

- To develop a strategic model that can be applied in other cities and shires around Australia to Get to Zero nationwide.

And in this 8 years;

Zero euthanasia of all healthy sociable dogs and cats in a whole city has been achieved.

while

Saving every treatable cat and dog in a whole city is the next goal, which is getting closer.

So while they’ve made an enviable improvement using the program, they’re yet to actually achieve No Kill.

The organisation is currently processing 7,000 stray and surrendered cats and dogs in Gold Coast City. Washoe County, NV, takes in 15,000 with a save rate of 91%.. Austin, TX is saving 93% despite 25,000 intakes a year. The Gold Coast is at most a medium sized city.

When collaboration means defending the status quo

The G2Z program is about building alliances and relationships. They boast that their program; “is relevant to state governments, local government animal management departments, pounds, shelters, rescue groups, breed organisations, breeders, pet shops, animal trainers, groomers, wildlife organisations, veterinarians, and all community members who are concerned about better management and welfare of cats and dogs.” This broad desire to include ‘everybody’ in incremental improvements has evaporated the G2Z program’s ability to bring about a true revolution in sheltering practices.

Everyone in the industry having nice comfortable relationships with each other, has never stopped the killing. Animal advocates ‘getting along’ has never stopped the killing. Conferences where everyone networks and designs new ways to target pet owners has never stopped the killing. Groups putting up a nice front and agreeing not to speak of the unspeakable or challenge each other, has never stopped the killing. Communities supporting animal welfare groups with multi-million dollar fundraising budgets has never stopped the killing. Allowing groups free reign to lobby politicians directly for more and more draconian legislation around pet ownership has never stopped the killing. Even huge amounts of money spent on ‘public awareness’ has never stopped the killing.

The only thing that has ever stopped the killing is the implementation of the No Kill equation and a community brave enough to speak out and demand the killing stop at their local pounds and shelters.

Certainly, if the pound or shelter is being driven internally by compassionate staff who are willing to step up and make the changes needed to bring about No Kill outcomes in their shelter – such in the case of the Animal Welfare League Queensland – then just about any program can lead to good outcomes for pets. But no amount of ‘collaboration’ will work to change a pound or shelter who believes the killing is not only necessary, but a integral part of their sheltering processes.

An opportunity squandered?

There is the chance for Australia to learn from the past and not make the same mistakes that the U.S. collaborate-even-when-they-refuse-to-do-what-it-takes-to-stop-killing school have done.

We are at a crossroads. We can always come back to this crossroad – so it is not a point of no return – but for every unsocial community cat killed because council has followed the LES model, for each dog killed because a pound refuses rescue access and for every other animal killed because the No Kill Equation was a mere suggestion – there is no return. Once dead, they can never be brought back. Each time we choose the wrong road, the body count gets bigger. And given the evidence before us, that is just unforgivable.

How do you enforce cat laws? You can’t ask a cat if it is desexed, so do you check the ear of the cat for a tattoo? Check the undercarriage for harblz?

Well, often you won’t be able to catch said cat, so you’ll just have to start heavying people you suspect may be the cat’s owners;

“The State Government’s cat registration laws will turn council workers into “feline fascists” by giving them more powers than police to collect evidence from suspects…

The legislation includes a clause that empowers council workers, once lawfully in a home, to “examine, seize, copy or take extracts from any documents relevant to an offence” or “take photographs, films and audio, video or other recordings”.

It also allows the worker to direct a person to answer questions and take “any other reasonable action” necessary to collect evidence.”

Do councils get these extraordinary powers based on enormous success with these laws in other states? Notsomuch…

Does anyone else see a trend towards extraordinary powers for use against pet owners?

See also: Cat laws are unenforceable
WA cat ‘advocates’ support programs to increase killing