I volunteer at my local kill shelter and it is heartbreaking when I see I dog I befriended killed because of space, However when you look at a young energetic pup that has been there for a while in a small kennel 24 hours a day with no stimulation except to be taken out every other day, they go crazy and no one wants to adopt a energetic out of control pup so they stay there even longer, I think no kill shelters are good to but unless they give the pups in the kennels exercise everyday it does them no good to be kept there until they get "adopted" or die of old age that just does not seem fair to me. don't get me wrong I get so sad my heart hurts when I see another pup killed but there are just IMO not enough homes that can see through the pup that jumps and howls in his/her kennel will be the best house dog with just some exercise and training. people from what I see just want a dog that is trained and behaved already.

(Today I spent the whole day at a adopt a thon that was held at my shelter and 60 were adopted today 98% of them were in the shelter for least then two weeks yet the one's that have been here forever and are energetic fools were bypassed time and time again)

I wish there were more foster homes available. It can do so much for the perception of the animal when they have been well exercised in a home environment with some basic OB. Kennel Crazy to me is (almost) another form of neglect.

 Quote: connie sutherland

"Allowing owner drop-offs just encourages the problem, allows relatively normal people to believe it is an acceptable solution to their problems."

Then what takes their place?

We know the dogs WILL be dumped, one way or another. One of my dogs had on his surrender papers this reason, "Don't want no more."

Private rescues

There are a lot more of them around then there used to be. They also have the liberty of saying whatever they like to the owner, including "Sorry, we don't have the space." I believe more people would be willing to open their wallets to rescues if they knew the government wasn't providing a safety net. If my parents had known of one I really doubt they would have taken Cookie to the pound.

I believe if people realize nobody is going to automatically take their problem dog off their hands or rehome those "oopsie" puppies for them, normal people will think much harder before getting that next impulse pet and consider spaying Sprinkles. Normal people aren't sociopaths and they will realize just how much of a hassle it really is. But institutionalizing it gives abandoning pets a form of legitimacy to normal people. It's a "service" provided by their tax dollars or whatever. They can also lie through their teeth about how great the dog is and choose to believe that their dog might win the lottery.

Like I said, I'm not totally sold on it, that's just the argument that keeps rattling around inside my brain.

"I believe more people would be willing to open their wallets to rescues if they knew the government wasn't providing a safety net."


The local SPCA, for example, which operates one of the two shelters where I live, receives no government funding.


I know what you mean about ideas and thoughts rattling around .... it's a painful topic.

 Quote: Cat Richter

The fact is life happens to all of us, there are 2 kinds of people, the kind where giving up their animal is an option and the other kind where giving up their pet just simply isn't an option or something to even be considered or would ever cross their minds.

This is absolutley true. Giving up one of my dogs would be like giving up a child. And believe me I've had it rough with my rescues, and issues often pop up. Kelly and all who rescue you are a Blessing to the animals. That's why I try to help rescue because I have two of my own who would be dead if they hadn'tr been given a chance at their forever home. I can't imagine NOT having them.

 Quote: ben mcdonald

Quite honestly, our wonderful government and their many rules for transporting animals between states is part of the "problem". A volunteer picks them up and transports them to the next volunteer etc. Until they arrive at their destination.

In fact this does happen. I drove a leg of the "midwest Transport" (I think that's what she calls it.) Anyhoot these dogs went from Ohio to Minnesota. I did the Lafayette to Merrillville In leg. There were two cars on my leg and we got all the dogs into a van for the next leg. It's really awesome how it works. i think she tries to arrange a run every weekend. That's what I thought of when I read the post from Kelly's sad event but it was too late by the time I read it for me to offer any suggestions and it looks like time was the issue. Our ACO will hold the dog over if she knows there is a rescue and it's just timing. She's held them for weekends and over Holidays. But when she's on vacation all *ell breaks loose and many dogs are PTS as the other ACO's aren't as caring. One had a hard time getting us release dates and remembering who came in when, even reading the cards, and quite frankly it fightend me that this man is allowed to carry a gun.

I'm not aware of any federal or state regulations restricting the interstate transport of pet animals. Mine have traveled to most of the lower 48, and no government agents stopped us at state borders asking for their papers.

Most of the rescue organizations I know of are private non-profits. There may be many reasons to dislike "the government," but I don't believe any "government" above the level of city ordinance has any involvement with pets. In my city, St. Louis, even the local city-owned shelter was recently closed due to lack of funds; all rescue and adoption in this area is handled by a network of private citizens operating with no public funding.

The only thing I do when traveling or transporting a dog is to make sure that I have proof of rabies with me. Certificate from the vet not a tag.

Here's an example of how a good thing can have a drawback:

I only adopt problem animals and encourage everyone to visit shelters or bona-fide rescues when looking. (I volunteer and am on the board of a multi-rescue.)

My last two canine adopts were both owner-surrendered--both Dutch shepherds...very problematic, and although a challenging breed, these wonderful dogs didn't pop out of the womb the way I got them, either.

The kicker is, surprisingly, that now people are turned off when I suggest adopting after the problems I've worked through every day over a period of time with them, regardless that this is MY preference. Despite stressing that not all dogs are extreme...nope, they call a breeder or those who call themselves "rescue" because they have oops-litters. And then how many of these dogs end up in shelters or kicked from one person to another.

I don't understand owner-surrender, but I'm glad for my animals and me that they were.

My experience is similar to Tracy's. We have also traveled all over the continental US with our dogs. I do carry their vaccination certificates as a precaution. We have crossed countless state borders, stayed overnight at hundreds of campgrounds, including federally owned (national parks), state owned and privately owned, as well as a handful of motels. We've also been through Border Patrol checks in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. They always know we have dogs with us, but we have never been asked to provide any "papers."

I also personally know of several instances where dogs have been transported across several states to be placed in a rescue organization in Michigan or Ohio. This has been accomplished through a network of volunteers with their own vehicles or through Pilots N' Paws. I think I even remember hearing about a network of over-the-road truckers who were helping with rescue transports.

So, Ben, your fantasy does already exist, though, of course, more volunteers are always needed.