Why Are So Many Cats And Dogs Being Pts In Pounds?

[sheena]

I've ticked quite a few boxes. I have many years experience of rescue - getting dogs from pounds and from owners who no longer want or can keep them. I like to find out where they got the dog the first place and why.

So, from my experience, I would recommend the following:

1. Close down petshops.

2. Compulsory desexing for all cats/dogs (apart from breeder's breeding dogs and show dogs)

3. Attendance at a course on responsible pet ownership BEFORE adopting

This sounds harsh of course but when you know the statistics in Australia, something really radical needs to happen or it will just continue unabated. We are not only up against petshops now but the internet "quick fix" sales. We are up against morons cross breeding and creating fancy names and claiming they are "breeders" and the average idiot doesn't know that they haven't got a purebred dog because the "breeder" mated their female Shepherd to a male Husky and created a "Snow Shepherd" with associated b---shit, making someone think they have something special ... when they've got a mongrel.

I dont know how you address the greed in society (making money from breeding animals and selling them for a ridiculous amount of dollars - having money doesn't appear to make people more discerning unfortunately) or the lack of commitment to animals - far too many dump their older and sick dogs in the pounds for someone else to rescue and find out it's all too late so that they can go and get a "new" dog.

I've heard and seen it all, too many times. I despair of people.

I've been wondering what these are..This One Comes with "pedigree papers" & was bred by REGISTERED BREEDERS OF THE AUSTRALASIAN SNOW SHEPHERD SOCIETY

AND THE INTERNATIONAL DESIGNER CANINE REGISTRY And is just in time for Christmas So now we have an "International Designer Canine Registry"

Edited November 29, 2011 by sheena

[Dame Aussie]

I've ticked quite a few boxes. I have many years experience of rescue - getting dogs from pounds and from owners who no longer want or can keep them. I like to find out where they got the dog the first place and why.

So, from my experience, I would recommend the following:

1. Close down petshops.

2. Compulsory desexing for all cats/dogs (apart from breeder's breeding dogs and show dogs)

3. Attendance at a course on responsible pet ownership BEFORE adopting

This sounds harsh of course but when you know the statistics in Australia, something really radical needs to happen or it will just continue unabated. We are not only up against petshops now but the internet "quick fix" sales. We are up against morons cross breeding and creating fancy names and claiming they are "breeders" and the average idiot doesn't know that they haven't got a purebred dog because the "breeder" mated their female Shepherd to a male Husky and created a "Snow Shepherd" with associated b---shit, making someone think they have something special ... when they've got a mongrel.

I dont know how you address the greed in society (making money from breeding animals and selling them for a ridiculous amount of dollars - having money doesn't appear to make people more discerning unfortunately) or the lack of commitment to animals - far too many dump their older and sick dogs in the pounds for someone else to rescue and find out it's all too late so that they can go and get a "new" dog.

I've heard and seen it all, too many times. I despair of people.

I've been wondering what these are..This One Comes with "pedigree papers" & was bred by REGISTERED BREEDERS OF THE AUSTRALASIAN SNOW SHEPHERD SOCIETY

AND THE INTERNATIONAL DESIGNER CANINE REGISTRY And is just in time for Christmas So now we have an "International Designer Canine Registry"

This is where the problem is Unfortunately people are greedy and thoughtless and I don't think this will ever change.

[Aphra]

As I said, I don't think the reasons for animals ending up in pounds are the same as the reasons why so many die in pounds.

There is quite a lot of good research about why animals end up in pounds; it's often about a misfit between the animal in question and its family, where the animal fails to meet expectations.

I am also convinced that there are a lot of animals who die in pounds who actually have homes, but their owners haven't been able to find them, or if they found them can't afford to get them out of the pound.

Frankly, I think puppy farm dogs are the least of the problem. While I'm sure its context-specific, pounds are not usually over-run with cute fluffy dogs. In the pounds we work with the majority of dogs are clearly from backyard breeders, either accidental litters or farmers breeding a litter to get a couple of working dogs for themselves. Honestly, if I was going to point the finger at anyone it would be Stafford breeders, registered or otherwise. Some days I want to yell, like Bob Newhart, "JUST STOP IT".

In fact the existence of puppy farms is a good argument for the myth of pet over-population. It's clear that there are lots of homes available for dogs or puppy farms wouldn't be in business. As a rescuer I know that I could place many more animals than I do if I had more resources; the homes are there if we could take more animals.

I am not a fan of the idea that buying from a pet shop, ipso facto, makes you a bad owner. That flies in the face of all the evidence and in the face of common-sense. Of course some people who buy dogs from pet shops are irresponsible, but then so are some people who buy dogs from shelters or their next door neighbour.

I believe that good owners far out-weigh the other kind, and the statistics are there to show us that. We know, for example, that the over-whelming majority of pet owners desex their pets (about 97%); we know that Australians spend billions every year on their pets; we know that rescue is developing an increasingly high profile and more and more rescue groups are placing more and more animals.

We know that compulsory desexing leads to an increase in death rates, not a decrease, and those statistics are available from those places who have instuted the legislation. What does work extremely well is heavily subsidised desexing. In Victoria the Mt Alexander Shire has been subsidising desexing for the last couple of years. In that time, the number of kittens being killed at the Castlemaine RSPCA has decreased by an enormous magnitude (somewhere around 80%).

Most cats who end up in pounds are not owned cats, they are cats who once had owners but no longer belong to anyone. If you are good person and have such a cat around you might not wish to make a commitment to it in a magnitude of $250 for desexing, but you might be willing to spend $25 to have it desexed; and in fact that's what happens. So those community cats are no longer reproducing, so the numbers of unowned kittens entering the shelter have decreased as well.

The answer to the second question about why so many animals die in pounds is a lot easier. It's because as a community we have decided that death is the answer. The death of animals in pounds is the responsibility of the pound; of it's council and of the community. If I am standing in front of you with a gun deciding whether to shoot you or not, how you got there is irrelevent to my decision, I can choose to kill you, or I can choose to keep you alive.

I think the numbers of animals dying in pounds could be reduced by at least a quarter if pounds made it easier for people to find their pets and easier for them to get them out. The removal of punitive fines would go a long way to getting more animals home; people who provide very well for their animals can't afford several hundred dollars in fines for a lost dog, so the dog stays in the pound and dies instead of going home.

Many council pounds are not open at times which allow people to go and look for their animals; if you're a working stiff and the pound is only open for a couple of hours during the week, how do you go and look? Added to that is the often peculiar breed identifications; irregularly updated (if at all) pound websites and pound services which operate a long distance from the community they serve (such as the Lost Dogs Home having pound contracts with Bendigo).

And if those pound websites were frequently updated with good photos and descriptions of the animals looking for homes, more animals might be adopted back into their local communities. And when those measures fail, if more pounds saw working with rescue as a priority, more animals would escape death by green needle.

So for my money, all the hand-wringing about the public (people have to realise/if only people would/people are so cruel/greedy/irresponsible) is basically pissing in the wind. Why would we fling resources (including emotional energy) at a problem which is pretty intractable and completely beyond our control, when there are things which are relatively easy to implement which can make a difference.

We all live in communities, we all get to influence our local councils, so we can make a difference. When it comes down to it, if our council is killing companion animals if we care enough it's up to us to lobby for change. Whatever the reason for an animal ending up in the pound, the reason it dies in the pound is because the pound decides to kill it.

If I had three wishes they would be:

• Heavily subsidized or even free desexing.
• Making it easier for animals to return to their homes (no huge fines/improved pound opening hours and services).
• Pounds working closely with rescue to place all healthy, rehomable animals.

[Dame Aussie]

I agree with most of what you said Aphra, but in my experience a lot of people don't bother to come and look for their pet.

We were open 7 days a week including some late nights and would be calling owners over and over with no response, I mean if I lost my dogs I'd be out scouring every pound possible.

It's fine to say pounds should be open longer but that doesn't change the fact a lot, of course not all, but a lot of people still don't bother to look.

[Greytmate]

If people don't want to pay a couple of hundred dollars to retrieve their pet, they are probably not going to spend money on much veterinary care either.

If there is no fine for a roaming dog, what incentive is there for people to keep their dogs behind good fences?

I would rather see an undervalued dog euthanised painlessly in a pound than see it living miserable and painful existence with people that don't believe in spending any money on food, vet care or fencing.

People often can afford to retrieve a dog from a pound, but they sometimes choose to spend their money on other things instead. It is all about priority.

I am all for the local governments increasing spending, but I don't want to see irresponsible ownership subsidised and encouraged , and I am guessing most ratepayers wouldn't either.

[Dame Aussie]

If people don't want to pay a couple of hundred dollars to retrieve their pet, they are probably not going to spend money on much veterinary care either.

If there is no fine for a roaming dog, what incentive is there for people to keep their dogs behind good fences?

I would rather see an undervalued dog euthanised painlessly in a pound than see it living miserable and painful existence with people that don't believe in spending any money on food, vet care or fencing.

People often can afford to retrieve a dog from a pound, but they sometimes choose to spend their money on other things instead. It is all about priority.

I am all for the local governments increasing spending, but I don't want to see irresponsible ownership subsidised and encouraged , and I am guessing most ratepayers wouldn't either.

Exactly. We would have people complaining about $22 fees and then driving away in a $50k car.

[Aphra]

I'd want to know what percentage of people overall choose not to redeem their dogs. We remember the bad things, but not the good. We all remember the dog owner who dumps their dog because they can't be bothered paying for boarding, ignoring the thousands who quietly get on with taking care of their animals. Because some people choose not to reclaim their dogs isn't an argument for making it harder for everyone else.

That's my argument, we focus so heavily on the people doing the wrong thing all the time on the assumption that they are majority, which is clearly not true.

I agree with most of what you said Aphra, but in my experience a lot of people don't bother to come and look for their pet.

We were open 7 days a week including some late nights and would be calling owners over and over with no response, I mean if I lost my dogs I'd be out scouring every pound possible.

It's fine to say pounds should be open longer but that doesn't change the fact a lot, of course not all, but a lot of people still don't bother to look.

[Greytmate]

I'd want to know what percentage of people overall choose not to redeem their dogs. We remember the bad things, but not the good. We all remember the dog owner who dumps their dog because they can't be bothered paying for boarding, ignoring the thousands who quietly get on with taking care of their animals. Because some people choose not to reclaim their dogs isn't an argument for making it harder for everyone else.

That's my argument, we focus so heavily on the people doing the wrong thing all the time on the assumption that they are majority, which is clearly not true.

I agree with most of what you said Aphra, but in my experience a lot of people don't bother to come and look for their pet.

We were open 7 days a week including some late nights and would be calling owners over and over with no response, I mean if I lost my dogs I'd be out scouring every pound possible.

It's fine to say pounds should be open longer but that doesn't change the fact a lot, of course not all, but a lot of people still don't bother to look.

You are the one that has said that people not reclaiming dogs from pounds is an issue. Is it or isn't it?

If most people do get their dogs out of pounds and pay the fee then the fee is clearly not too expensive. Why are you arguing for subsidisation for irresponsible people that do refuse to pay? As Aussie said, even $22 would be too much for some people.

You are not going to be able to collect reliable statistics on why somebody doesn't bother to reclaim a dog. But the problem is that all these dogs that are left in the pound after 7 days are unclaimed, they came from somebody didn't they? Somebody that has chosen not to reclaim them.

I see it coming back to a problem where people do not value their dogs. By lowering reclaiming costs you do nothing to increased the perceived value of the dog, and instead it devalues the dog as well as the important work that councils do in collecting and holding strays and keeping them safe.

[Dame Aussie]

I'd want to know what percentage of people overall choose not to redeem their dogs. We remember the bad things, but not the good. We all remember the dog owner who dumps their dog because they can't be bothered paying for boarding, ignoring the thousands who quietly get on with taking care of their animals. Because some people choose not to reclaim their dogs isn't an argument for making it harder for everyone else.

That's my argument, we focus so heavily on the people doing the wrong thing all the time on the assumption that they are majority, which is clearly not true.

I agree with most of what you said Aphra, but in my experience a lot of people don't bother to come and look for their pet.

We were open 7 days a week including some late nights and would be calling owners over and over with no response, I mean if I lost my dogs I'd be out scouring every pound possible.

It's fine to say pounds should be open longer but that doesn't change the fact a lot, of course not all, but a lot of people still don't bother to look.

I don't have factual figures, but I was the one releasing the dogs so I know how many people didn't bother coming in, it may not be the majority but it was more than most people would think.

In fact when I tell people about my experiences working there they are shocked.

[Tim'sMum]

This option...."Trap, neuter, release programs for unowned cats."

NO, NO, NO!

They may not breed, but they will kill to survive....and kill native animals and birds.

They can get killed or injured on roads.

They may suffer malnutrition, illnesses and injuries and have no vet care.

I am sure that the life of a feral cat is not a happy one.

[Trisven13]

I am also convinced that there are a lot of animals who die in pounds who actually have homes, but their owners haven't been able to find them, or if they found them can't afford to get them out of the pound.

This point of Alpha's is very, very true. Sadly, whilst I understand the need for registration etc, an undesexed dog of any age winding up in a pound in NSW and spending a couple of days in there before it is found is going to be an expensive animal to have released. Costs of microchipping (say $30), costs of registration of an undesexed dog ($150), impound fees, fines and boarding costs (say $200.00) totals a figure way out of reach of many good dog owners. Sure they're not ideal owners as they didn't microchip or register their dog but LOTS of families who love their dog are not able to raise the money to get their dog released from the pound. Sad but true.

ETA - an article from Albury Pound 5 years ago. My link

Sadly this guy was dodgy as, had outstanding warrants and the Sheriff chasing him for unpaid Judgments and never paid back the Good Samaritan who paid for his dog to get out of the pound.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Trisven13

[~Anne~]

Aphra, I agree so much with what you have posted. I see so much energy wasted with many current campaigns, meanwhile, dogs keep ending up in pounds and dogs keep dying in pounds.

I think the issue of cats in pounds and dogs in pounds is very different too. They share some commonalities but the strategies to correct the issue would neeed to suit each species, and not smething that is lumped together for both.

[BJean]

As I said, I don't think the reasons for animals ending up in pounds are the same as the reasons why so many die in pounds.

There is quite a lot of good research about why animals end up in pounds; it's often about a misfit between the animal in question and its family, where the animal fails to meet expectations.

I am also convinced that there are a lot of animals who die in pounds who actually have homes, but their owners haven't been able to find them, or if they found them can't afford to get them out of the pound.

Frankly, I think puppy farm dogs are the least of the problem. While I'm sure its context-specific, pounds are not usually over-run with cute fluffy dogs. In the pounds we work with the majority of dogs are clearly from backyard breeders, either accidental litters or farmers breeding a litter to get a couple of working dogs for themselves. Honestly, if I was going to point the finger at anyone it would be Stafford breeders, registered or otherwise. Some days I want to yell, like Bob Newhart, "JUST STOP IT".

In fact the existence of puppy farms is a good argument for the myth of pet over-population. It's clear that there are lots of homes available for dogs or puppy farms wouldn't be in business. As a rescuer I know that I could place many more animals than I do if I had more resources; the homes are there if we could take more animals.

I am not a fan of the idea that buying from a pet shop, ipso facto, makes you a bad owner. That flies in the face of all the evidence and in the face of common-sense. Of course some people who buy dogs from pet shops are irresponsible, but then so are some people who buy dogs from shelters or their next door neighbour.

I believe that good owners far out-weigh the other kind, and the statistics are there to show us that. We know, for example, that the over-whelming majority of pet owners desex their pets (about 97%); we know that Australians spend billions every year on their pets; we know that rescue is developing an increasingly high profile and more and more rescue groups are placing more and more animals.

We know that compulsory desexing leads to an increase in death rates, not a decrease, and those statistics are available from those places who have instuted the legislation. What does work extremely well is heavily subsidised desexing. In Victoria the Mt Alexander Shire has been subsidising desexing for the last couple of years. In that time, the number of kittens being killed at the Castlemaine RSPCA has decreased by an enormous magnitude (somewhere around 80%).

Most cats who end up in pounds are not owned cats, they are cats who once had owners but no longer belong to anyone. If you are good person and have such a cat around you might not wish to make a commitment to it in a magnitude of $250 for desexing, but you might be willing to spend $25 to have it desexed; and in fact that's what happens. So those community cats are no longer reproducing, so the numbers of unowned kittens entering the shelter have decreased as well.

The answer to the second question about why so many animals die in pounds is a lot easier. It's because as a community we have decided that death is the answer. The death of animals in pounds is the responsibility of the pound; of it's council and of the community. If I am standing in front of you with a gun deciding whether to shoot you or not, how you got there is irrelevent to my decision, I can choose to kill you, or I can choose to keep you alive.

I think the numbers of animals dying in pounds could be reduced by at least a quarter if pounds made it easier for people to find their pets and easier for them to get them out. The removal of punitive fines would go a long way to getting more animals home; people who provide very well for their animals can't afford several hundred dollars in fines for a lost dog, so the dog stays in the pound and dies instead of going home.

Many council pounds are not open at times which allow people to go and look for their animals; if you're a working stiff and the pound is only open for a couple of hours during the week, how do you go and look? Added to that is the often peculiar breed identifications; irregularly updated (if at all) pound websites and pound services which operate a long distance from the community they serve (such as the Lost Dogs Home having pound contracts with Bendigo).

And if those pound websites were frequently updated with good photos and descriptions of the animals looking for homes, more animals might be adopted back into their local communities. And when those measures fail, if more pounds saw working with rescue as a priority, more animals would escape death by green needle.

So for my money, all the hand-wringing about the public (people have to realise/if only people would/people are so cruel/greedy/irresponsible) is basically pissing in the wind. Why would we fling resources (including emotional energy) at a problem which is pretty intractable and completely beyond our control, when there are things which are relatively easy to implement which can make a difference.

We all live in communities, we all get to influence our local councils, so we can make a difference. When it comes down to it, if our council is killing companion animals if we care enough it's up to us to lobby for change. Whatever the reason for an animal ending up in the pound, the reason it dies in the pound is because the pound decides to kill it.

If I had three wishes they would be:

• Heavily subsidized or even free desexing.
• Making it easier for animals to return to their homes (no huge fines/improved pound opening hours and services).
• Pounds working closely with rescue to place all healthy, rehomable animals.

Spot on Aphra

[tdierikx]

The one and only time a dog I owned ended up in the pound (some 25 years ago), the release fee was $40. There were no microchips back then and her collar had been removed by the person who took her to the vet after he'd hit her with his car. If I hadn't called the local council that 4th time about the location of the pound, I would never have got her back at all - the previous 3 calls had some airhead admin person tell me she didn't know where the pound was... grr!

What I learned from that experience was that I always made sure my animals were securely housed inside if the lawn mowing man was coming (he'd left the gate open when he left that day), and as we now have microchips, all of my furkids have those with all details kept current. I also make sure that all of my fencing is escape proof. I'd pay anything to release one of my babies from a pound if they ever wound up in one... even beg, borrow, or steal to get them back.

Pound release fees are quite high nowadays - and are often also followed by a fine notice as well. This can put reclaiming out of the immediate financial reach of some families, even if they are desperate to get their pet back. I know of at least one instance where a family has actually adopted their dog back from the pound as it was cheaper than paying a release fee and a fine - the dog wasn't chipped or registered, so they played dumb about being the actual owners...

T.

[Leema]

Regarding release fees, I have similar emotions to both sides.

On one hand, I am so angry at individuals for letting their animals roam at large, I want them to pay through the nose to release their animal.

On the other hand, I know that is not in that animal's best interest. I rather the animal go back home than spend days in a pound to then be PTS.

Perhaps the one solution is to have a pay-back-over-time scheme. Owners who are on a concession card could perhaps pay back so much per week, instead of being expected to pay one big fine.

I think it's easy for us 'dog people' to be quite judgemental about people who wouldn't pay for vet fees unless their dog couldn't stand up, and doesn't notice their dog is gone until 2 days later, but it's still a home. Embracing an animal's current home is one way to reduce euthanasia rates.

Frankly, I think puppy farm dogs are the least of the problem. While I'm sure its context-specific, pounds are not usually over-run with cute fluffy dogs. In the pounds we work with the majority of dogs are clearly from backyard breeders, either accidental litters or farmers breeding a litter to get a couple of working dogs for themselves.

I agree so much with this statement, and the suggestion that puppy farms existence quantify the argument that there aren't too many dogs.

[Crisovar]

Whilst Pounds are at the end of the road and have to make that final choice for the animals that end up there, it is because as a society we demand that they fix the roaming dogs, fighting cats, starving strays. Irresponsible, ignorant choices by owners is what creates the mess the pounds clean up.

Pound fees can be expensive, but so are the costs associated with Animal Control. We demand 24hour ranger response, we have to pay for it. Society is to blame and whilst we all moan and shake our heads at how the job is done it is a job we as a society have created.

[Dame Aussie]

Whilst Pounds are at the end of the road and have to make that final choice for the animals that end up there, it is because as a society we demand that they fix the roaming dogs, fighting cats, starving strays. Irresponsible, ignorant choices by owners is what creates the mess the pounds clean up.

Pound fees can be expensive, but so are the costs associated with Animal Control. We demand 24hour ranger response, we have to pay for it. Society is to blame and whilst we all moan and shake our heads at how the job is done it is a job we as a society have created.

[jacqui835]

Whilst Pounds are at the end of the road and have to make that final choice for the animals that end up there, it is because as a society we demand that they fix the roaming dogs, fighting cats, starving strays. Irresponsible, ignorant choices by owners is what creates the mess the pounds clean up.

Pound fees can be expensive, but so are the costs associated with Animal Control. We demand 24hour ranger response, we have to pay for it. Society is to blame and whilst we all moan and shake our heads at how the job is done it is a job we as a society have created.

This is very true except for one part. Luckily not everyone contributes the problem, but unfortunately, it is often only these same people not causing the issues in the first place that care about the issues there. There are far too many people who can't really think of anything wrong with buying a pet on a whim, abandoning it a few weeks/months/years later and buying a new one on the way home... I've no doubt in my mind that there are lots of repeat offenders and then lots of other people who could never imagine dumping their pets.

[mita]

An opinion poll... Don't think too hard. Opinions over facts.

Leema, you have my for advocating the evidence-based.

UQ has the problem of so many cats & dogs being PTS in pounds, as a major research study. Already one major reason why dogs are 'dumped' has been teased out. Owner expectations & reality didn't match up.

It's also been teased out that early socialisation of puppies (& the extent of socialisation of the mother dog) is strongly linked with degree of risk for dogs being dumped due to the effects on their behaviours. Registered breeders were found to do better in relation to this, than unregistered breeders.

Interestingly, UQ put the knowledge about 'expectation's into their screening of new owners in their own Adoption Program (of rescued dogs & cats). Questions presented new owners with the realities of dog or cat ownership and probed attitudes/knowledge.....as well as any past pet ownership (best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour). Done via Adoption Application Form....followed by face-to-face interview, based on the replies.

That Vet School now includes a Shelter Medicine hands-on subject for all vet students.

http://www.uq.edu.au/graduatecontact/general/alumni-support-animal-welfare/

(Also very good work on this issue comes from Monash University.)

Edited December 1, 2011 by mita

[megan_]

mita - how are they determining the reasons that dogs are dumped though? In my very limited experience, people often lie about why they are getting rid of their dog to ease guilt/get more social acceptance. People rarely say "I was in no position to get a dog but got one anyway, it was an impulse buy etc". I often wonder how there are any people even left in Vic given the number of people who are "moving interstate and can't take the dog".