Animals have been people’s companions and friends for thousands of years. In fact, pets are even considered to be a part of their family by most Westerners. Not surprisingly, some continue to maintain close relationships with their pets even after their death – according to Kleinfeldt, in the United States, there are around 600 pet cemeteries. However, not all animals are as lucky as to be able to leave this world in peace and surrounded by loved ones. Millions of them are subjected to euthanasia every year, and, as Kleinfeldt states, it is the most common cause of death for unwanted cats and dogs that are not ill. Animal euthanasia, much like human euthanasia, is a practice the legitimacy and ethicalness of which have been debated by many. When it comes to animal shelter euthanasia anywhere in the United States and California in particular, this paper argues that it is unnecessary and should not be legalized. There are several alternatives that can help euthanasia rates be reduced such as the optimization of animal shelter operation, the prevention of animal surrender to shelters, and the funding of no-kill shelters.
Before moving on to the main arguments, it is necessary to establish why animal euthanasia is unacceptable. Animal rights advocates tend to draw comparisons between animal euthanasia and the selective killing of people. They argue that if a person were homeless and poor, no one would think to request to euthanize them based on this fact; it would be equal to the request to kill them (Kleinfeldt). Moreover, those opposing the practice suggest that human euthanasia is the degradation of the one who is killed. That is, euthanasia makes it as if an individual performing it is superior to an individual on whom it is performed. This can be said of animal euthanasia as well, with animals being put in the position where they are subordinate to people.
Researchers even compare current requests for human euthanasia to the same procedure during World War II. According to Kleinfeldt, back then, particular groups of people were deemed ‘deficient’ and ‘unworthy of life’ and, as a consequence, euthanized. Therefore, one needs to understand the inherent inferences of euthanasia: the exercising of power and degradation. Furthermore, some state that the death of an individual means the definite loss of someone who cannot be replaced. A pet might not be as irreplaceable, and pet owners, even if not immediately after the death of their animal, might get a new one. However, it does not mean that pets’ life is not as intrinsically valuable as humans’.
Unfortunately, some pets will inevitably be given away, and from that moment, it is the mission of animal shelters to optimize their operation to reduce euthanasia. According to the case study conducted by Kang and Han, euthanasia rates can be decreased significantly by increasing the capacity of shelters and transferring animals between them (10). Their optimization model assumes that the initial number of animals is equal to shelters’ capacity and the number at the end of the planning period cannot exceed it. Over the planning period, with euthanasia reduced, the number of animals in shelters increases; however, when the planning period ends, shelter capacity is not exceeded. What contributes to this is the redistribution of animals from overcrowded shelters to less populated ones. It is important to note, however, that for meaningful euthanasia reduction, it must be concomitant with policies that encourage adoption, such as the abolition of adoption fees or increased publicity in the media (Kang and Han 11). If there is no increase in the number of adoptions, healthy animal euthanasia is inevitable considering limited shelter capacity.
In order for such a model to be implemented in actual practice, cooperation between shelters is an absolute necessity. However, in the United States, like in many other countries, each shelter remains independent and operates on its own account, which means that a platform to promote such cooperation is required. These platforms are to be managed by local authorities as they need central decision-making to monitor shelter operations. Most shelters are under the responsibility of municipalities, therefore, it will be relatively easy to make them a part of platforms. In terms of privately-owned shelters, various incentives are likely to be needed to involve them.
Korea is an example of a country where a platform is successfully utilized to share information on animals in each shelter. As per Kang and Han, the platform lets the public obtain information on shelter animal adoption and determine how many animals are protected and euthanized on a daily basis (11). It is a pleasant bonus that all of this is easily accessible due to it having an option to be viewed via a mobile application. It is expected that the improvement of the system will allow for the exchange of information between shelters, which will enable the implementation of the optimization model proposed by Kang and Han (11). Any country can embark on establishing a system of the same kind to reduce unnecessary euthanasia; as is evident from above, all that is needed is the desire of shelters to cooperate and government financing.
One more way to contribute to animals not being euthanized in shelters is to ensure that they do not get there in the first place. Healthy animals get surrendered for all kinds of reasons, which might include an animal having behavior problems, not being able to care for it anymore, or moving to another place. Despite the debates about the practice being ethically and morally incorrect, in most countries, the United States included, animals are people’s property, and an owner’s request for euthanasia even if their pet is healthy is legal. Yet there are numerous solutions for those who consider euthanizing their little companion, whatever the reason not related to their sickness might be. Focus of animal shelters must be on offering these solutions to pet owners, with the provision of all necessary resources.
Some of the most common reasons for not being able to keep a pet include their behavior issues, moving or not having adequate housing, not being able to afford care, or being in a domestic or disaster situation. In terms of pet behavior problems, it is true that these can seem overwhelming sometimes; however, many can be handled if a little knowledge and effort are employed. Animal Humane Society suggests that owners who want to better understand their dogs take classes such as its Dog Behavior and Training Classes. These utilize positive reinforcement techniques that are family-friendly and can be useful for interaction with a long-time pet as much as with a newly brought one. In addition to that, Animal Humane Society has an online Pet Behavior Library, which contains a great deal of information on the topic. It offers tried and tested methods of managing various problems with pet behavior and tools for assessing situations for which additional resources might be required. If there are still questions, Animal Humane Society is prepared to answer them through Behavior Helpline and help pet owners solve problems they experience.
In case of moving or not having adequate housing, there are also options other than surrendering a pet to a shelter. In searching for pet-friendly housing, it is important to consider a few things. According to Animal Humane Society, first of all, the search is to start early, and emphasis is to be put on places allowing pets. It is advisable to look for communities with guidelines for keeping pets and rules that specify resident responsibilities. Creating a pet resume that shows a pet owner is a reliable guardian might be helpful for successfully finding a new place. What will also help is the willingness to pay extra for any property damages that can be caused by a pet. Permission is to be obtained for all types of pets and not only dogs; it is wrong to assume that cats or pets in cages will automatically be welcome. When permission to have a pet is acquired, it is reasonable to get it in writing, alongside all financial agreements. Finally, it is essential to be honest about having a pet so as not to face eviction or any legal consequences.
Sometimes, families encounter difficulties that have an impact on how they care about their pets and whether they are able to at all. Animal Humane Society states that there is a plethora of resources that can help pet owners address their issues. There is assistance for homeless people, victims of domestic violence, senior citizens, soldiers, and veterans. Financial assistance resources offer help for veterinary bills and provide food and basic supplies for pets. In addition to that, there are organizations delivering low-cost veterinary care for those who cannot afford it. A way out can always be found, and it does not always have to be as radical as giving a pet away.
Another way to contribute to minimizing animal euthanasia is to fund so-called no-kill shelters. According to Best Friends, the no-kill movement was launched by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA). Despite having a very distinct name, ‘no-kill’ has different meanings for different shelters. In some of them, all animals are saved, and in others, up to 10% can be euthanized; however, both are deemed no-kill as in such shelters 90% of animals tend to be adopted (Best Friends). Their main advantage is that these shelters seek to keep animals alive and find them a new home. No-kill shelters do not euthanize when animals are old or not adopted or when a shelter is full. Euthanasia is only performed on those considered dangerous and/or terminally ill. In 2015, the SPCA in San Francisco had a live release rate of almost 95% (Best Friends). In their program, the overwhelming majority of animals were adopted, returned to their owners due to being lost, or transferred to another shelter of the same kind.
It means that no-kill shelters are worth investing in as an alternative to shelters euthanizing animals. According to Best Friends, for no-kill to become a widespread policy, a combination of methods is needed. First of all, it is collaborations and coalitions between animal shelters, animal rescue groups, and other members of communities wishing to help. Moreover, there needs to be tested programs and best practices constructed to save as many lives as possible and evidence-based decision-making strategies for every individual community. The importance of the latter cannot be overestimated: the collection of up-to-date and accurate data on every shelter individually helps its management identify precisely which programs are necessary for a particular community.
Granted, some might say that euthanasia is a procedure without which many shelters simply cannot do. Euthanasia is a method of combating the overpopulation of animals due to the number of them in shelters and minimum levels of adoption. Moreover, euthanasia might be an option due to economic and financial reasons. Shelters often do not receive sufficient funding or donations to provide quality care for all animals or hire enough personnel. However, all of that, while being understandable, is not an excuse to kill those who are healthy. While animals are not humans, their lives are just as valuable, and killing them simply because there is no way to care for them is cruel and unethical.
In conclusion, animal shelter euthanasia can often be unnecessary and, therefore, should be minimized. One strategy for it is the advancement of the prevention of animal surrender to shelters, which includes the provision of information and resources to pet owners. In addition to that, animal shelters can be optimized for euthanasia to be reduced by implementing a platform to promote shelter-to-shelter cooperation. Moreover, no-kill shelters are to be invested in and supported since they ensure that animals are cared for and adopted, and euthanized only in exceptional cases. As the result, euthanasia rates will be lowered, and more healthy animals will continue to live.
Works Cited
“Alternatives to Surrendering Your Pet.” Animal Humane Society.
Kang, Jun Hyeok, and Jinil Han. “Optimizing the Operation of Animal Shelters to Minimize Unnecessary Euthanasia: A Case Study in the Seoul Capital Area.” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 23, 2019, pp. 1-13.
Kleinfeldt, Alexandra. “Detailed Discussion of Animal Euthanasia”. Michigan State University College of Law, 2017.
“What No-Kill Really Means.” Best Friends.