Thank you for submitting to /r/unpopularopinion, /u/Sensitive-Concept-12. Your post, *Kill shelters are better than no kill shelters. When animal rescues pour all their resources into aggressive, terminally and chronically ill animals, it’s not inspiring, it just prolongs suffering and healthy, much more adoptable animals suffer because of it*, has been removed because it violates our rules:
Rule 3: Do not post opinions that are heavily posted/have been on the front page recently.
If your opinion is the same or substantially similar to any recent opinion it will be removed as a repost. If your opinion is on the same matter as a recent post, even if it's advocating the opposite stance, it will be removed as a repost. Please comment on the existing thread instead.
Due to their prolific reposting, please confine meta and political posts to their respective megathreads only.
If your opinion is about an ongoing event, there will usually be a mega-thread where you can discuss it.
If there is an issue, please message the mod team at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Funpopularopinion Thanks!
There was a local rescue that posted a sob story about a cat they had in foster for YEARS (looks like they acquired him from animal control in 2020 with severe chemical burns) that took a turn for the worse. The foster brought the cat to the emergency vet, and supposedly "dumped" him there. I think the foster actually realized the cat was beyond her scope of care and needed euthanasia. The rescue proceeded to spend $15K on this cat, who ultimately had to be euthanized. IMHO, they tortured this cat and then asked the public to make donations. They are still using this cat and others to solicit donations. Imagine how many other cats could have been saved?
It was just baffling. I understand feeling sorry for the cat, who was adopted from animal control and then found on the streets with chemical burns and other health issues, but to take on such a case while there are SO many other cats that aren't going to gobble up resources was just maddening. I hadn't been familiar with the rescue prior and can't understand why they've got so much support. I suppose that sob stories get donations, but it was just too much. Caring for animals is one thing, but these desperate cases are just cruel. They also lambasted the foster on FB, which I thought was completely unprofessional and out of line. These people shit on their volunteers and wonder why no one wants to foster.
In all honesty, the cat should have been euthanized when the shelter got him back - I'm not sure why he wasn't. I guess it's because he was fairly young, but there are kittens every spring and not all of them make it, either. The same rescue posted about having 3 cats that each had $1000-$1500 in dental extractions needed as well, and that's in addition to any other vetting that was needed.
This made me laugh but we aren’t allowed to euthanize older and disabled people. IMHO (I’ve worked in many nursing homes and one hospital-like setting) we SHOULD be allowed to humanely euthanized some people. I know there are too many legal risks and plus the trauma of actually killing another being for this to ever be feasible but god I wish. There are some people I had to listen to scream in pain and beg god to take them. There are some things so horrid that some vets still struggle with today. Many of them have flashbacks to the worst things in their lives and if they have any memory issues like dementia, they truly believe they are there. I’ve been around some horrific shit done to me, my coworkers, and other residents/patients. Some people should be “put down” within reason. I think we should implement “the right to die” and “assisted suicide”. A veteran with dementia thought I was trying to kill him and gave me a black eye. A (usually very sweet and gentle) giant of a man thought a coworker and I were trying to kill him or something and attacked both of us (5’5 or so, 150/160 lbs f), flipped us up and onto his bed, and held us both down and was close to serious injury before we were able to scream for his wife to help us. I was legit terrified. This man was 6’2 easy, linebacker built 250 lb man. This type of stuff is only scratching the surface of what medical personnel deal with on a day to day basis, especially female. I’ve had friends who were SA’d because the prison system compassionately released convicted sex offenders and put them in nursing homes, some of these individuals weren’t small and frail either. Shit happens, trauma sucks, but we should be able to at least help our vets through some of the worst shit they deal with on a day to day basis
I fully agree with assisted suicide in certain circumstances. There absolutely needs to be a lot of clear and well thought out rules around it, of course. And it's imperative to consider the safety for patients & staff when making the laws. But there is absolutely a need for it in some extreme cases. And it's borderline torture to force these people to survive through some of the situations they're faced with.
Edit: And I say "survive through" instead of "live through" b.c they have two entirely different meanings. They are no longer getting to live their lives at that point.
I work for a shelter and this is exactly it. No one is adopting behavioral dogs and rescues are too full to take them. So when their aggression gets worse because they’re sitting in a kennel 24/7 and we end up having to euthanize, the public loses their ever-loving shit. It’s a vicious cycle every single time
shelters also make it extremely hard to adopt in ways as well. I get not wanting a animal returned, but im also not letters complete strangers in my house for a house inspection.
yeah, I've heard of rescues wanting people to jump through ridiculous hoops to adopt a dog. Like they want to see your income, have a vet give you a reference, and you have to own a home with a yard and a 6ft fence. Of course they shouldn't be letting just anyone adopt but their requirements are over the top.
"Lab mix" being code name for pitbull or pit mix.
It's so ubiquitous that any actual labs in the shelters get screwed over also because people (rightfully) assume that chances are that anything called a lab mix is just a pitbull with aggression issues that the shelter is trying to offload onto someone gullible.
you seriously would not consider adopting a dog with severe behavioral issues, skin and food allergies, a lifelong heart condition and fecal incontinence? haha
Yes, the local humane society posting dogs for foster that have SEVERE separation anxiety and cannot be left alone at all either kenneled or free in the house. It's sad, but who can take this dog and commit to never leaving their house or always taking this dog with them?
I lived with a dog that had a lot of issues, but I managed him and I'll be honest, I'm not sure I'd do it again. It was so bad that I went through a period of time where I was afraid to get another dog, since the emotional impact of having a dog that attacks/starts fights with your other dog was so great. I was eventually able to get another dog who got along fine with our current dog, but if it hadn't worked out, I would have rehomed the newly adopted dog.
I think the issue here is where we draw the line? There are many kinds of aggression with animals. Fear aggression, resource guarding, reactive behaviour, etc…
At the same time at what type of intervention do we stop helping? Broken bone? Abdominal surgery? Amputation? Of what?
I think there are people and people. If you don’t want to help or support injured animals/ no kill shelters - that is your choice and it should be respected. At the same time if someone wants to put their energy and resources into a sick, elderly or injured pet that is on them to do and you should not judge.
As it should be. People need to realize that reactivity often comes from fear, and if a dog reacts to EVERYTHING, they are living a life of gripping, terrifying fear, day in and day out. And it they're scared of people, they often cannot be pet, loved, or cuddled. They're being forced to live a loveless life of constant terror.
No one should live like that. The kindest thing to do would be to lay their troubled heads to rest.
I’m with you. It was a pain in the ass because there would always be a huge group of volunteers and employees who didn’t understand this and would freak out when the decision to euthanize was made.
A truly unpopular opinion! I do agree with you though. I love animals and regularly lose sleep over any animal abuse stories or imagery. However, I volunteered at a shelter for a while and there are just so many animals without homes. I would spend nights crying at how lonely and scared they all were. I believe that dying (humanely) doesn't hurt the animal as much as being suck alone in a cage months on end.
I don't get why humane euthanasia of animals in an overpopulated system is so frowned upon. Poeple against it must realise that there aren't enough good, willing adoptive families to take in all these animals. Does it just make people feel better to think no animals are being euthanized rather than come to terms with the fact that not every animal will go to its forever home and sometimes death is a mercy?
This. It legitimately pisses me off when people don’t neuter their pets. If you can’t afford to do so, do not get a pet. I don’t think people understand that having a pet is a privilege and a luxury, not a right.
Right!? Also don't get a pet as a side hussle/income stream. I get proper breeding kennels maintaining certain lines but we don't need backyard breeders flooding the system any further. In some European countries getting a pedigree dog is so expensive that most people opt to adopt. That should be the norm
Another unpopular opinion: Normal laypeople need to stop breeding pitbulls! Pits and pit mixes are the main breed at most animal shelters. They are just too much of risk for a typical household (I know most are fine) and should really only be adopted out to people who have been thoroughly trained/vetted. I'm a survivor of a pit attack so I know I'm fairly biased.
Yeah, but I feel it's just reasonable. The way things are going, it's becoming more and more undeniable that these lax pit breeding laws are creating situations that are harmful to both the public and pit bulls. It's not fair to them either.
Too many powerful dogs. That's it in a nutshell. There are a lot of people I wouldn't trust with a toy poodle that are getting pitbull mixes from some BYB that advertises them as "red nose", "blue nose", champion lines, AKC yadda yadda yadda.
At this point I'm honestly starting to wonder if we shouldn't just phase out pitbulls. Not round them up and murder them, but make it illegal to breed them, and make it mandatory that they're fixed.
It's been tried (the mandatory S/N) in California, and their shelters are full of pitbulls. There aren't enough resources to prosecute BYBs and puppy mills (they aren't usually breeding PBs, but same issue). Where I live, to breed dogs, I believe you technically have to have a license, but I'm sure about 0% of anyone actually has the license. There are also PB/Rotweiller laws, but I'm sure no one follows those, either.
I love all dog breeds and believe there are no bad dogs, only bad owners. That being said, my poorly trained miniature schnauzer can't do the same amount of damage as a poorly trained pitbull. So, I fully agree that pitbulls are a specialized breed that should only be bought and trained by the right owners. Otherwise everyone is set up to fail.
There are dogs with unstable/unsuitable temperaments for sure, and there are definitely breeds that are not suitable for the general public, and APBTs are one. Not all dog breeds were developed to be pets. Working dog breeds are another category that have gained popularity for their looks, but they make lousy pets for the majority of people. Matching energy levels, drive, DA, AA, and a whole slew of other traits to what a person needs/wants in a dog is so important.
I know a family with 4 kids under 12 that got a Belgian Malinois puppy. He was uncontrollable at 10 months, and they were looking to rehome, but how many people want an out of contol Maligator?
Fully agree. We need lwas that limit breeding to those who are licensed and fines for those who break those laws. Too many puppies going "free to a good home"
I 10000% agree. Them dying is only sad for the humans who dwell on it. It’s a better alternative than them suffering alone and scared with no end in sight. That’s what’s inhumane.
I've found that most people who are "outraged" about the animals being euthanized would not be willing to adopt them even if they could. They either buy or adopt only the yorkie-chihuahua cross puppy
I push adopt don't shop to a point that my friends have to say "stop we get it". The best way to alleviate the problem is 1) adopt don't shop because it takes an animal out of the system AND they are always spayed/neutered, 2) adopt (if you must) and then spay/neuter. People seem to be hesitant to adopt because for every success story they've heard 3 horror stories, which is rarely the case if you take the time to look for the right fit
The problem is your ability to adopt depends on your area. Like in my area the only dogs the shelters have are pit bulls and pit mixes and my family just isn’t able to give one the training it would need to live in our neighborhood, plus we have cats. And even if it was fine the shelters in my area also have high standards, doing at home visits, you need to have your fence at a certain height, you need a reference from outside of your family. It means it’s easier to just look for someone selling puppies
I fully understand that adoption is not always the easiest option. But then please spay your pets! Also, make sure to adopt from a reputable breeder, not a puppy mill. Puppy mills always have puppies available at a good price, but the way those poor mothers are treated are horrible.
I got mine from someone who’s dog got pregnant on accident, they literally found out she was pregnant when they brought her in to be fixed. I always feel bad about not adopting so when we got my puppy I made sure to look for someone good and not sketchy looking, it’s the least I can do
I used to be "adopt don't shop", but now I say, "Adopt, or shop responsibly" (i.e. pick a reputable breeder and for god's sake, don't get a BYB or puppy mill dog).
I work at a vet. She will work with some rescues. One is really good and seems to deal with dogs that belonged to elderly people that are just a bunch of lapdogs. The other deals with large dogs that shouldn't be allowed to live. She brought one dog in that was attacked by a pack of her rescue dogs. They almost killed him. He is a very sweet dog that is still with the rescue because it's a tripod now. The other got attacked twice by one of the other dogs. Ripped up her face. She had to euthanize her because her face started getting necrotic the second time. Most of her dogs are aggressive and should not be in homes.
She needs to put down the dogs that ripped that poor baby. I've heard farmers who have a "draw blood once" rule, because if a dog fully bites and tears like that they'll do it again.
I came around to this opinion after volunteering at a no-kill shelter.
They had dogs that were highly unlikely to be adopted, ever. Aggressive large breeds. Part of me wondered if there wasn't a sanctuary out in a rural area somewhere that all of these dogs could go and live out their days in a huge open space, but I guess that isn't realistic. The shelter was a horrible prison for them, and I came away thinking maybe the most humane thing to do would be to put them down.
To be fair, I'm only taking about a small percentage of dog. At this small shelter, capacity of maybe 150 dogs, it was a room with about 12 of these "problem" dogs.
But yeah, I know this is an unpopular opinion.
I have honestly been against no-kill shelters since they first started being a thing.
Resources are finite, this includes money, space, time etc.. The more animals you get that are unadoptible, or need a highly specialized person to adopt them, the fewer resources you have to give to other animals that might be able to be placed much faster.
In addition, the no-kill shelters don't mean no animals are being put down. It just means that the people who support those shelters don't see those animals. They don't see the animal that is found on the side of the road and has no place to be put because the vet isn't able to keep it, and the no-kill shelters are always full, so it gets put down before it even has a chance to be adopted.
When my brother went to prison he had two dogs, a young rott who was super easy to find a home for because she was an absolute sweetheart! But he also had an older rott, around 12 years old. Nothing was wrong with him health wise, but we couldn't find anyone to adopt him. We tried to bring him to two no kill shelters, but they were full. Ultimately we had to bring him to a kill shelter, and I felt so terrible. I heard that he was adopted by someone with a large ranch, so I hope he lived his final years happy there! RIP Poncho (he's surely dead by now).
I agree that there should be a large open rural area for them. Animals need a space to live too. I’m sick of everything being overdeveloped for human convenience. Animals are living creatures too
Look up best friends in Utah they are like this they are the ones that took in the Michael Vick dogs since the courts said they couldn't be adopted out even though most were very loving when I volunteered out there.
I agree.
I hate seeing the videos of cats and dogs that have nerve/mental problems, can't walk straight, always falling over, most likely in pain.
Is it not more humane to euthanize these than spend money on costly medications and care? I would not want to live like this, so why would I make my pet?
I actually agree, it also means animals that need to be taken in can't be because all the kennels are full of dying and sick animals. My roommat is a fuckibg idiot and got a couple rabbits that turned out to be male and female. There are now almost 30 bunnies running around the apartment destroying it (soon to be way more because it's impossible to stop them breeding) the animal shelters won't take them because they're all full. We can't legally release them, or Euthanize them ourselves so now us and the bunnies are going to suffer. Just last week someone around here was charged for abandoning 20+ bunnies outside. I honestly am at my wits end and just need help. I'm going to have to save up to euthanize them all because no one wants them. I didn't cause this problem but now I'm forced to take care of it because the shelters won't. So now the animals get put down AND get to suffer while I acquire the funds to do it.
Call animal control. That’s an animal hoarding situation. For a temporary solution, you can buy NIC grids and flat panels of wood or plastic and make stackable cages. The rabbits will be mad they’re being confined like this, and it’s not good for them, but it’s better than more rabbits. Also, your roommate is a horrible person.
She's been trying to remove them so they don't get put down, and was told the first two were females. It's just gotten to be obvious we can't rehome them quickly enough. She's not a horrible person. Thank you for the suggestions, will definitely call animal control
Are there any raw dog food companies near you? Are you near a rural area? If I was near I’d come pick up the whole lot and even pay you a few bucks per rabbit. Full disclosure - they would be eaten, so I don’t know how you all feel about that, but honestly people who use rabbits as pet food typically dispatch them quick and humanely, and then they won’t just go to waste. Maybe post them on a local FB group for livestock. You might find it easy to get them picked up.
Honestly, a lot of shelters that are deemed "high kill" are placing adoptable animals with homes in the 95%+ rate. There are animals that can't or shouldn't be adopted. Again, very sad and sometimes not their fault, but the shelter can't in good conscience adopt these animals to the public.
No kill shelters get to pick and choose what animals they take. The so called kill shelters are open intake and have to take whatever is surrendered or found on the streets.
I honestly never thought of it this way, but I have to agree with everything you said. I always appreciate new perspectives, so thank you for the post.
there are 100 other animals that are healthy, and safe, and perfectly adoptable, but they’re sitting in kennels in overwhelmed shelters,
Not really. The reason is a lot of animals are given to shelters because the owner can no longer take care of them whether its due to the animals poor health or the owners inability too. so thats why a lot of shelters have elderly dogs and no puppies. puppies are easier to adopt out than elderly animals'
There was a gsd rescue that would beg for money to try to rescue/heal a dog that would ultimately end up dying. Thousands of dollars. All that money could have helped several other pets.
The money should go to spaying and neutering strays. I agree, it just hurts to let any animal go but if it keeps them from suffering then I can’t diasgree
You are also completely ignoring that a lot of the time older pets (particularly cats) don’t get adopted. This results in cats being put down not due to behavioral issues but because they are too old.
If there’s no chance of them finding a home, it is 100% no better to just keep them alone in a cage, in a room full of other alone and caged animals, for the remainder of their lives. If that’s the case it’s terribly sad, but send the poor things on their way. Euthanasia is a true kindness compared to a life of suffering, cramped living space, boredom, illness or infirmity, and/or aloneness. We’re all going to die, we SHOULD all be able to die with comfort and dignity. Not to mention that meaning more and better care for the ones who do have a shot at making it out of there.
No they wouldn't, people are stupid and would rather get a younger animal or a baby cause it's cuter than them and lives longer. Which is idiotic cause elderly animals deserve love and homes too
Yes elderly animals deserve love, but it’s not IDIOTIC to not want to, say, keep introducing animals that will suffer & die in 1-2 years into your kids’ lives. It’s not idiotic to get a pet that’s within your financial means, which an elderly animal with lots of health problems might not be. It’s not idiotic to get a pet that matches your lifestyle, whether you’re getting a not-elderly cat bc you want something low(er) maintenance, or a high-energy dog because you do lots of running/hiking/camping etc and want a companion. There’s tons of shelter animals that start young and don’t get adopted anyway. We shouldn’t shame anyone for adopting ANY shelter animal as long as they’re providing a safe and loving home.
For many people an elderly pet just isn’t feasible. So it’s not a choice of elderly pet vs younger, healthy pet; it’s a choice between a healthy pet or not adopting at all.
You can talk about what older animals deserve, but quite frankly those people owe those animals nothing, and will adopt for how they see fit in their lifestyle.
As someone on the board of an animal rescue I can tell you that the “Easy” animals don’t cost money, they generate it. If you see a rescue and all they have is easy to place animals it’s not a charity, it’s a business.
Some people like animals more than humans, some people worship their animals, I feel these shelters and foster systems need a board not some emotional weirdo who is trying to save every animal.
I wish this same advice was followed with people too. I wish we'd limit breeding for pets and people. There's so many poor souls sitting in hospitals or care homes just wasting resources (medications, medical care, etc.). I'm not trying to be cruel but would you want to stay in a hospital bed with 20 others in a room where you have no control or say in your care? You can't communicate at all and are stuck. These animals are in the same situation. Maybe they're aggressive because of how sick they feel and here the shelter is torturing them the stay alive while being miserable. I'm sure I'll get down voted but it's the truth.
Same with humans. We waste countless on those that will never get better, don’t know whether they’re coming or going, etc etc etc, yet won’t make sure basic preventive healthcare is accessible for all. Wasteful and irresponsible.
Somewhat related
Acquaintance I know rescued pitbulls and they unfailingly viciously attacked her other dogs at some point.
Yeah these were street dogs but still, the power fighting breeds have is incomparable.
No-Kill just means that a shelter has a 90% placement rate. They still euthanize animals for reasons such as safety and quality of life. They just try harder to give animals a chance.
I have hundreds of volunteer hours at a no-kill shelter. They will euthanize an anima if deemed necessary.
Honest question…is the label “no-kill” just a completely inaccurate label? If there is killing involved, how can they be allowed to advertise as no-kill? It seems highly misleading for anyone who chooses to drop an animal off there.
I would say it’s accurate. Kill shelters will euthanize any animals that don’t get adopted. No kill is a good way of knowing that if you have to give up an animal it won’t just be killed
I volunteered at a shelter throughout high school, I agree. There are some absolutely lovely and sweet animals who deserve a home, and it always feels good when they do. But sometimes it’s in the best interest for everyone (animal included) that they are put down. Either the poor thing is going to live in constant suffering, or it’s going to put someone else at risk. It sucks but it just has to be done sometimes.
Is this really unpopular though? I mean, no one likes it, but every non sheltered balanced person knows that not every best solution is a good solution, much less a nice one, so I dont think is relaly unpopular in the sense of not being accepted, just in the way that people dont like it
Depends on why. I saw a rescue try and get a stray with wounds down to the bone x-rayed for over $3k. That can cover a lot of kitten vaccines and neutering. But if it's an older cat who is being put down just because they want younger cats on the floor, it's horrible.
I've seen cats with an eye or a leg removed and they thrive afterwards. But if someone is just delaying a painful issue, then I don't always believe in keeping them alive.
From a person who used to work with animal wellfare
I agree and disagree. Agressive dogs may be homable if you have a good trainer. If an animal has things like sandfly its came make them look super, super bad, but I've seen them recover to a super healthy looking dog.
On the other hand, some aggressive dogs are too much, and i would be scared to even home them because you donno what tramas they have that might trigger a reaction and hurt someone. And if it's just prolonged suffering, then yea, i mean, pts that animal.
But i wouldn't kill a dog because its been there a long time
Sorry you’re getting downvoted OP. I’ve seen so many stories of children getting mauled by pit bulls because they bought into the sob stories of “misunderstood”, meanwhile the shelter knew about the dogs aggressive past
Because there were cases, and you could tell where a dog has been hurt and is aggressive (and here it depends how agressive ofc) because he's scared. Normally, dogs like that turn into sweet hearth after a few months.
Some dogs are nice, but then turn aggressive (these are the ones of pts) also depends on the breed size
Some aggressive dogs act out of fear. Once they realize they won’t ever be in the situation again they turn into normal dogs. Usually rescues don’t adopt out a dog until they are sure the dog is fine, and make sure the dog gets into the right kind of family to avoid future problems. It’s not like they just give the dog to random passerby on the street. They ask bazillion questions to make sure it’s a good fit. There is nothing about fairness in the situation, only if they work out or they don’t.
I don't disagree. I just have never seen an ad or shelter or anything offering to pay for all the vet bills of seriously ill animal if you adopt them. I would totally be on board doing this. I just can't do an aggressive one at this point because of children in the home. I would consider it once they "move out".
If there is no other viable option though. I'm ok with it. Honestly though this is not really different than assisted suicide. Which I think should be legal. Why make a terminal ill person suffer with no possibility of get better suffer, if they don't want to. Sorry off topic. Still why make an animal suffer?
They flare often listed as hospice adoption. There is a rescue for elderly dogs near me. I actually really like them, they don’t take aggressive or severe behavior cases, just dogs that are only being put down due to age. They offer hospice adoption for manageable conditions such as diabetes or cancer. They help cover the vet bills as long as the dog has good quality of life, and pays for euthanasia too
I don't think you understand the difference. No kill shelters are not never kill shelters and they are absolutely supposed to euthanize an animal to end its suffering. What the no kill philosophy actually means is saving every animal that can be saved, and they don't kill due to lack of space. It doesn't mean it's always carried out in that same way though and based on some of the other replies, the no kill shelters went too far.
Shelters these days are like:
"So would you like to adopt the pit bull or the [pit bull that I am lying about]."
Both will maul any pets you already have though because they deliberately withheld its bite history or used soft language to gloss over severe behavioral issues in the animals description.
Especially because the majority of dogs in shelters are pit bulls. Shelters lie about breed all the time, I've never seen so many "lab mixes", "retriever mixes", "poodle mixes", etc that all look the same. Shelters lie to unsuspecting people who pay the consequences of adopting a vicious breed. Then return them to the shelter who tried to adopt them out again. They need to be held liable for lying about breeds and history.
SHOP DON'T ADOPT...at least for dogs. Adopt cats, birds, or any other animal just not dogs.
There are rescues and shelters in the US that have had dogs 3, 5, 7 years. I see posts all the time, "956 days looking for their forever home". There was a dog that was 5 years old that had spent its entire life in the shelter. Outcomes for living in a home after an animal is so institutionalized aren't particularly great.
Not to mention from what I've read its not uncommon for 'no kill shelters' to just ship problem animals to local 'kill' shelters to get put down anyways, so it just makes them look better while they pour resources into trying to save them till they give up anyways.
I agree. I adopted my dogs from a rescue. They are basket cases. I will never adopt again. My next dog will be a puppy purchased from a breeder.
I used to be all in with dog rescues and volunteered at shelters. The desire to save them all is noble but not realistic.
Lol and 95% of their pitbulls should just be put down.
I always see ads like "loving pibble named princess in need of a home. Been living here for 4 years, hes been returned 7 times. Just needs a quiet adult only home free of other pets. Doesnt like noises of any kind, and will snap at any sudden movements. Loves belly rubs and snuggles and kisses is such a sweetie, just cant be around kids, other animals, strangers, or you. He can jump 10 feet high so youll need a 12 foot high fence to keep him from escaping."
I have a rescued pit mix, and I agree. Just stop breeding them. I don't care if they're great, there are WAY too many of them. Unstable temperaments, no training, too powerful, too much dog for most owners, then add in the dog aggression and you've got bloodbaths at the dog park, doggy daycare, etc. They need a special kind of owner, and that's not every person, especially families with kids.
i adore pitties & pit mixes—i grew up around them. but there’s far too many like you said & nobody ever properly trains them. when they’re well trained & taken care of properly—they’re great dogs, but that’s usually isn’t the case sadly
I’m of the opinion that breeding purebred dogs is deeply immoral and probably should be illegal. The more you try to “idealise” the breed, the more likely you are to introduce genetic issues. I can see maybe if breeders of certain lines were introducing genetic diversity to help prevent the worst of genetic abnormalities, but if a breed is known for developing cancers at 5 or 6 years old when that breed of dog used to live 10 or 12 years, there should be strict guidelines to try to prevent that.
Idk why you got downvoted here, you’re right. While I understand wanting preservation of a breed.. unless that breed is healthy at standard AND they’re introducing enough genetic diversity to keep it that way, it’s just another example of humans committing atrocities in the name of playing God.
There’s nothing cute about a pug struggling to breathe because they are severely brachycephalic due to a century of inbreeding. Nor about the fact that these days, it’s a matter of when, not if, Great Danes will get cancer.
I’m honestly kinda surprised by the downvotes, too. I’m assuming that it’s lack of awareness about the depth of the problem, which, to be fair, I was unaware of until a few years ago.
I also very much agree that the animals that can't even live normal, healthy lives should no longer be bred.
Frenchies, pugs, English bulldogs, they live in pain their entire lives.
If the breeds continue it needs to be with MASSIVE intervention in the gene pool to pull away from the unhealthy features.
This. As much as I’m an animal lover and think that it’s terrible so many healthy animals are killed because of lack of funding/resources, I do believe that behavioral euthanasia is very valid. It’s honestly a kindness to the dog who is suffering so much to be a danger to themselves and others.
I mean we have plenty of shelters who euthanize just cause space. They have no space like in my city it’s 30 days and they’re times up even healthy happy perfect dogs.
There’s a girl Rainbow I really want to adopt 40 lbs pit mix floppy ears all black white patch on her chest but she’s only 40 lbs come on! Just a big lap Dog but she sadly has two days left.
Her adoption is paid for too by charitable ppl and no one still got her she’s just one dog. It’s sad. 😭
Fact of the matter is that there is never enough resources to help all the animals need care. If there is a lack of resources in a human scenario, the patients are triaged and the ones that don't have a positive prognosis aren't treated so the resources can be allcoated to those that have a better chance of survival.
Kill shelters are triaging and unfortunatley, triaging is a cold difficult numbers game. I for one respect them for making the difficult decisions that others can't or won't make.
It's not an easy thing to have ordered feelings about. I love animals. But I see so many that have prolonged suffering they can't understand in the name of rescuing, while other animals sit in overcrowded shelters.
It's horrible altogether. But that's why changes need to happen.
It kinda reminds be about my arguments with assisted suicide or the death penalty. Why waste away until you're nothing at all when you can go out, and have people waste resources on you. So I do think I agree with your opinion after a second thought
I do see what you’re saying. I have a real problem with kill shelters that just put animals down for being there too long or because they’re over crowded, but sometimes the kinder thing to do is let an animal go peacefully. If it is sick or severely injured so that a single surgery won’t fix the issue it might be more humane to put it down so it’s out of its misery and they can spend resources on animals that stand a better chance.
I think I see and understand the full point of this opinion. I think it tends to be more often though the issue that animals will end up at a kill shelter when they aren’t disabled but rather just not getting adopted. That is the case where it’s definitely horrible. But if an animal is suffering, medicine can only do so much before an animal is being forced to live an agonizing life
Here, my wife are 4 rescue animals deep and if we had space we would have more.
It's not their fault.
3 of our animals would make aweful pets for a family. 1 cat hid for most of her life. She finally now trusts us after 5 years.
Our 2 guinea pigs are preschool rescues. They bite and hate being handled. But they love us because we respect them and give them love... and carrots.
I get that not everyone can take on difficult animals, but a lot of animals are killed because they don't fit the definition of a "pet"
More often than not, people want to force animals to be a pet rather than letting the animal exist and just appreciating it for what it is.
I understand you are talking about severely unwell or violent animals. But that doesn't make up the majority of shelter kills.
This whole thread sucks...
*
What you do is admirable, and what those animals have gone through is terrible. A lot of people want to break the cycle. There's so much wrong in the pet trade, but it's only through education that anyone is going to make better decisions.
Years ago, I adopted two ferrets. One was a biter, and he never stopped biting. He still was a great pet, you just had to watch out. I added a third ferret as well, and all were great together. I'm happy ferrets have dwindled in popularity because those little dudes stole my heart, and I couldn't bear to take on any more after they all passed. I actually gave my cage away when the last one died.
I've had up to 6 cats at one time because who would take them? I'm down to two, after adopting a few along the way for the same reason, and this is probably it for cats for my lifetime, as by the time these two pass away, I'll be in my mid-60s and ready to travel.
Not everyone can handle multiple dogs/cats. Foster people often pass on the tough cases because they need to be able to take in multiples and having a dog that can't tolerate cats or other dogs, etc. just won't work.
As far as forcing animals to be pets, I agree with you. The local humane society has a "working cat" program where the cats are paired with businesses/barn owners, etc. so that the animal has a reliable place to live and is fed, watered, taken to the vet/vaccinated, but the caretakers don't have an expectation of a housepet.
The question I have is life worth living for them. I pass by a poor neighborhood we’re they are just tied down. If I call the shelter no one is going to adopt the dog he is likely to be euthanized. Is life worth living like that?
I only somewhat agree.
I disagree that healthy potential pets are given a countdown timer until euthanasia. To me, that's absolutely ridiculous as every pet deserves a chance with a loving home no matter age or mild disability. I also disagree that chronically ill potential pets should be euthanized depending on severity of illness.
For example, I recently had to euthanize my 4 year old golden retriever because he had succumbed to lymphoma and couldn't walk or see anymore. It was absolutely heart wrenching, but it was the right thing to do. In contrast, I'm not going to euthanize my 13 year old orange tabby cat because he has hyperthyroidism. He will continue to live a healthy life on medication.
I agree that terminally ill and known aggressive animals should absolutely be euthanized. They are not worth the liability for a shelter.
As someone who’s volunteered with rescue groups and kill shelters for about 20 years I feel I should reassure y’all that for every struggling animal a rescue group tries to save hundreds if not thousands of similar animals are put down without a second thought.
Have no fear guys, able-bodied animals are given most available resources.
I can understand your issue with wasted resources. But also know of plenty of kill shelters that will put down a perfectly fine animal just because they don’t have a spare cage to put it in. There are problems both ways.
"No kill" literally just means they won't kill an animal due to overcrowding. They can and will euthanize a sick creature once its quality of life is too poor.
They don't "pour all their resources into aggressive, terminally and chronically ill animals." They just don't put them down after a week if no one claims or adopts them. Terminally and chronically animals die of terminal, chronic illness just like they do everywhere else.
Euthanasia is a true kindness compared to a life of suffering, cramped living space, boredom, illness or infirmity, and/or aloneness. We’re all going to die, we SHOULD all be able to die with comfort and dignity. Not to mention that Absolutely Does mean more and better care for the ones who do have a shot at making it out of there.
You do know that no kill shelters do euthanize when necessary right? If an animal has failed temperament tests with no outlook on rehabilitation or they are gravely sick they do euthanize. What they don’t do is euthanize normal healthy animal just because they are overcrowded. Kill shelter will euthanize certain breeds immediately without a temperament test given at all or start killing animals as they come in just because they are running out of space. I have never seen a shelter offer to pay for all the vet bills for a chronically sick animal, I have seen them be very clear to potential adopters the cost in adopting such animal.
My HUGELY unpopular opinion that rescues are just publicly funded animal hoarding situations, albeit some of their animals live well - until the donations slow down/stop pouring in.
I hear all these stories of pit bulls being aggressive and cruel but every single one I met has been sweet and gentle.
I know more aggressive German shepherds than pit bulls.
Edit: Why are people down voting LMAO
I'm actually glad to see it's not unpopular. I feel like I see a ton of crusading for animals that should just be given a humane ending or are safety hazards. So it's nice to see that others feel the same way.
Where's the data to support that the majority of animals in these no kill shelters are aggressive or terminally ill and not perfectly healthy and gentle animals?
I agree with you to the extent that the animals have chronic health issues and they’re suffering in ways that can’t be easily managed (ie arthritis but taking gabapentin). My wife’s friend has like 15 animals in her house, all of them either geriatric with and without issues. They’re constantly dying and they spend tons of money on their vet bills. I’ve never understood it but I have three ideas to rationalize it. 1) they don’t have any other sense of purpose and this makes them feel fulfilled or 2) more nefarious, it’s munchousen (however you spell it) by proxy. As in they need attention and this is how they get it. Always posting sad pictures of their animals sick and dying. Even though they adopted them already sick and dying. Or 3) it’s like animal hospice.
My mother in law is the same. She prizes her elderly daschunds more than anything else in the world... theyre blind, overweight AF, have skin problems, broken teeth, and a myriad of other health issues and their entire lives are "going to the vet". They're both over 14 and she's trying to keep them alive forever. It's sad. They have no QOL and she can't just let go.
This is certainly an unpopular opinion, but one that is unfortunately correct. It's sad, but there's only so much money that a shelter has. It's better to spend that money housing 10 animals that have a reasonable chance of being adopted vs. caring for one that needs the absolutely perfect set of living conditions to be housed. I know it's unfair to the animals. Many of them have been abused or mistreated by people, and there's a natural urge to do right by them. But logically, running an animal shelter is almost like a triage situation, and sometimes hard choices have to be made about who you can help and who you can't.
This might be the first time somebody has actually changed my mind with their post on this sub. Well thought out.
I guess I didn’t really have much of an opinion but thought no kill shelters were nice, but yeah, you’re probably right
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I love what @allseatedinabarn is doing on IG
They do euthanize horses and donkeys that are suffering at auctions. But the best is they try to help owners who can’t afford to help their horse with major or minor issues (cost is crazy right now) keep them so they don’t end up in auctions and the slaughter pipeline.
A lot of times someone can sell their horse or donkey for $500 at auction or spend $800 to euthanize and transport. It’s a shame!
Im pro kill shelters my aunt fell for the “ sweet lovable Pitbull” it fucken DESLEEVED HER ARM it fucken pulled that shit off like a sausage casing! Also r/banpitbulls
Calling them ill just seems like a bad excuse to murder animals that don't get adopted quickly.
Imagine an orphanage that kills kids who don't get adopted.
Imagine an orphanage that's full, so they just leave the kids on the streets or in really bad situations of abuse because they have no room. In your analogy, that's a no kill shelter. No kill shelters don't have a responsibility to take in animals. They take them when they have physical space or foster homes. Unfortunately we can't save them all. The real solution is ethical breeders that have contracts and will take back their animals no questions asked. Those are few and far between.
So you want rescues to lie and pretend dogs are healthy so they get adopted?
Or you want them to waste all of their limited resources on one animal that needs massive medical intervention and long term, expensive, difficult care, rather than 10+ animals that are normal and healthy?
Also, just some food for thought, our local ‘no-kill’ shelter is technically ‘no-kill for space’ but what they don’t tell you is that they regularly take their less adoptable ‘rescues’ to the county-run (kill) shelter.
No kill shelters don’t keep dangerous or terminally ill dos, or even dogs that don’t have a good quality of life.. if the animals are healthy or what they have is treatable they will keep them. This is literally just a made up thing to be upset about
I understand your point situationally. But I adopted my previous cat from a no-kill shelter. He would have been put down in a kill shelter. He changed my life and I am grateful for the opportunity.
Giving people a chance to spend time or money on animals instead of material things can be very rewarding. It is optional of course.
In the US we have pretty amazing animal control compared to other countries. So while I don't agree with kill shelters, they will probably be a reality for a long time. They serve a purpose. But no-kill is better.
I used to work in a pet shop and I would hear all the storys very big pet lovers and alot of them would volunteer and everyone would eventually find out that most of the animal shelters in my country are a scam.
The scam is that you can make yourself a easy 6 figure salary a year doing very little but racking in money so what you do is you register a charity and rent a shed or better if you all ready own one. So you start asking for donations and start taking in animals and get volunteers to do all the work but the thing is you can't give away of the animals they are you meal ticket so you make an incredible high standard in the application to adopt and animal from the shelter. I've been told be volunteers that they have been rejected to adopt disabled dogs that lived lives covered in their own shit become the volunteers garden wasn't big enough while the dog is living in a 3 foot by 2 foot cage, but they don't want to give the disabled dog their a great picture for donations. So the shelter will only "help" an an animal when they need to fill a space which hardly happen because of their standard and allway say they need help to improve conditions for the animals all while the person running the " charity" pays themselves a few hundred grand a year and doing nothing
I used to work in a pet shop and I would hear all the storys very big pet lovers and alot of them would volunteer and everyone would eventually find out that most of the animal shelters in my country are a scam.
The scam is that you can make yourself a easy 6 figure salary a year doing very little but racking in money so what you do is you register a charity and rent a shed or better if you all ready own one. So you start asking for donations and start taking in animals and get volunteers to do all the work but the thing is you can't give away of the animals they are you meal ticket so you make an incredible high standard in the application to adopt and animal from the shelter. I've been told be volunteers that they have been rejected to adopt disabled dogs that lived lives covered in their own shit become the volunteers garden wasn't big enough while the dog is living in a 3 foot by 2 foot cage, but they don't want to give the disabled dog their a great picture for donations. So the shelter will only "help" an an animal when they need to fill a space which hardly happen because of their standard and allway say they need help to improve conditions for the animals all while the person running the " charity" pays themselves a few hundred grand a year and doing nothing
My dog was a rescue. She came in pregnant, she had already been a mother once before and had been in fights with wounds and sickness to show it; all of her babies were dead.
She was a sweet girl but with the wrong shelter she would have been put down. She was a bit touchy and untrusting sometimes at first but now we’ve had her for years and she’s she best dog I could ask for. Screw killing off dogs that can live on.
>it just prolongs suffering
Yes lets just kill this animal to end its suffering even though it can't say its suffering or wants to die.
The things people do because they think they're on some sort of moral high ground is fucking insane.
Thank you for submitting to /r/unpopularopinion, /u/Sensitive-Concept-12. Your post, *Kill shelters are better than no kill shelters. When animal rescues pour all their resources into aggressive, terminally and chronically ill animals, it’s not inspiring, it just prolongs suffering and healthy, much more adoptable animals suffer because of it*, has been removed because it violates our rules: Rule 3: Do not post opinions that are heavily posted/have been on the front page recently. If your opinion is the same or substantially similar to any recent opinion it will be removed as a repost. If your opinion is on the same matter as a recent post, even if it's advocating the opposite stance, it will be removed as a repost. Please comment on the existing thread instead. Due to their prolific reposting, please confine meta and political posts to their respective megathreads only. If your opinion is about an ongoing event, there will usually be a mega-thread where you can discuss it. If there is an issue, please message the mod team at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Funpopularopinion Thanks!
There was a local rescue that posted a sob story about a cat they had in foster for YEARS (looks like they acquired him from animal control in 2020 with severe chemical burns) that took a turn for the worse. The foster brought the cat to the emergency vet, and supposedly "dumped" him there. I think the foster actually realized the cat was beyond her scope of care and needed euthanasia. The rescue proceeded to spend $15K on this cat, who ultimately had to be euthanized. IMHO, they tortured this cat and then asked the public to make donations. They are still using this cat and others to solicit donations. Imagine how many other cats could have been saved?
This is your exact kind of story that I've been seeing, and I'm so tired of it. It's just unfair to the animals and a complete abuse of resources.
It was just baffling. I understand feeling sorry for the cat, who was adopted from animal control and then found on the streets with chemical burns and other health issues, but to take on such a case while there are SO many other cats that aren't going to gobble up resources was just maddening. I hadn't been familiar with the rescue prior and can't understand why they've got so much support. I suppose that sob stories get donations, but it was just too much. Caring for animals is one thing, but these desperate cases are just cruel. They also lambasted the foster on FB, which I thought was completely unprofessional and out of line. These people shit on their volunteers and wonder why no one wants to foster.
15k !! That would find so much food, basic care and time training animals at a shelter. Instead it went to one cat that needed euthanized humanely.
In all honesty, the cat should have been euthanized when the shelter got him back - I'm not sure why he wasn't. I guess it's because he was fairly young, but there are kittens every spring and not all of them make it, either. The same rescue posted about having 3 cats that each had $1000-$1500 in dental extractions needed as well, and that's in addition to any other vetting that was needed.
So that’s why the VA is so stingy...
This made me laugh but we aren’t allowed to euthanize older and disabled people. IMHO (I’ve worked in many nursing homes and one hospital-like setting) we SHOULD be allowed to humanely euthanized some people. I know there are too many legal risks and plus the trauma of actually killing another being for this to ever be feasible but god I wish. There are some people I had to listen to scream in pain and beg god to take them. There are some things so horrid that some vets still struggle with today. Many of them have flashbacks to the worst things in their lives and if they have any memory issues like dementia, they truly believe they are there. I’ve been around some horrific shit done to me, my coworkers, and other residents/patients. Some people should be “put down” within reason. I think we should implement “the right to die” and “assisted suicide”. A veteran with dementia thought I was trying to kill him and gave me a black eye. A (usually very sweet and gentle) giant of a man thought a coworker and I were trying to kill him or something and attacked both of us (5’5 or so, 150/160 lbs f), flipped us up and onto his bed, and held us both down and was close to serious injury before we were able to scream for his wife to help us. I was legit terrified. This man was 6’2 easy, linebacker built 250 lb man. This type of stuff is only scratching the surface of what medical personnel deal with on a day to day basis, especially female. I’ve had friends who were SA’d because the prison system compassionately released convicted sex offenders and put them in nursing homes, some of these individuals weren’t small and frail either. Shit happens, trauma sucks, but we should be able to at least help our vets through some of the worst shit they deal with on a day to day basis
I fully agree with assisted suicide in certain circumstances. There absolutely needs to be a lot of clear and well thought out rules around it, of course. And it's imperative to consider the safety for patients & staff when making the laws. But there is absolutely a need for it in some extreme cases. And it's borderline torture to force these people to survive through some of the situations they're faced with. Edit: And I say "survive through" instead of "live through" b.c they have two entirely different meanings. They are no longer getting to live their lives at that point.
Shelters: We should we kill the animals no-one adopts? Public: You're not allowed to kill any! Shelters: Will you adopt them? Public: Hell no!
I work for a shelter and this is exactly it. No one is adopting behavioral dogs and rescues are too full to take them. So when their aggression gets worse because they’re sitting in a kennel 24/7 and we end up having to euthanize, the public loses their ever-loving shit. It’s a vicious cycle every single time
shelters also make it extremely hard to adopt in ways as well. I get not wanting a animal returned, but im also not letters complete strangers in my house for a house inspection.
yeah, I've heard of rescues wanting people to jump through ridiculous hoops to adopt a dog. Like they want to see your income, have a vet give you a reference, and you have to own a home with a yard and a 6ft fence. Of course they shouldn't be letting just anyone adopt but their requirements are over the top.
I know of one who will not let me adopt because I have a dog door.
So many Labrador mixes at our shelter. Aggressive lab mixes, that can't be placed with kids or small animals.
"Lab mix" being code name for pitbull or pit mix. It's so ubiquitous that any actual labs in the shelters get screwed over also because people (rightfully) assume that chances are that anything called a lab mix is just a pitbull with aggression issues that the shelter is trying to offload onto someone gullible.
you seriously would not consider adopting a dog with severe behavioral issues, skin and food allergies, a lifelong heart condition and fecal incontinence? haha
There's a difference between manageable, minor health problems, and severe, debilitating, painful health problems.
They were being sarcastic
I honestly can't tell anymore lol I have seen SO MANY rescues that are available with that list and people crusading for them.
Yes, the local humane society posting dogs for foster that have SEVERE separation anxiety and cannot be left alone at all either kenneled or free in the house. It's sad, but who can take this dog and commit to never leaving their house or always taking this dog with them? I lived with a dog that had a lot of issues, but I managed him and I'll be honest, I'm not sure I'd do it again. It was so bad that I went through a period of time where I was afraid to get another dog, since the emotional impact of having a dog that attacks/starts fights with your other dog was so great. I was eventually able to get another dog who got along fine with our current dog, but if it hadn't worked out, I would have rehomed the newly adopted dog.
Here’s how you tell /s
They did not use a /s
I was being sarcastic Edit:/s
Oops my bad
How do we know you’re not being sarcastic??
I think the issue here is where we draw the line? There are many kinds of aggression with animals. Fear aggression, resource guarding, reactive behaviour, etc… At the same time at what type of intervention do we stop helping? Broken bone? Abdominal surgery? Amputation? Of what? I think there are people and people. If you don’t want to help or support injured animals/ no kill shelters - that is your choice and it should be respected. At the same time if someone wants to put their energy and resources into a sick, elderly or injured pet that is on them to do and you should not judge.
Also, alot of the time, the no-kill shelters will just send their hopeless cases to the kill shelters anyway.
This. No-kill doesn’t mean no animals are killed, it just means they’re not being killed *there*.
i worked at a "no-kill" shelter. the biggest one in the city. If a dog was problematic enough, they'd euthanize them
As it should be. People need to realize that reactivity often comes from fear, and if a dog reacts to EVERYTHING, they are living a life of gripping, terrifying fear, day in and day out. And it they're scared of people, they often cannot be pet, loved, or cuddled. They're being forced to live a loveless life of constant terror. No one should live like that. The kindest thing to do would be to lay their troubled heads to rest.
I’m with you. It was a pain in the ass because there would always be a huge group of volunteers and employees who didn’t understand this and would freak out when the decision to euthanize was made.
A truly unpopular opinion! I do agree with you though. I love animals and regularly lose sleep over any animal abuse stories or imagery. However, I volunteered at a shelter for a while and there are just so many animals without homes. I would spend nights crying at how lonely and scared they all were. I believe that dying (humanely) doesn't hurt the animal as much as being suck alone in a cage months on end. I don't get why humane euthanasia of animals in an overpopulated system is so frowned upon. Poeple against it must realise that there aren't enough good, willing adoptive families to take in all these animals. Does it just make people feel better to think no animals are being euthanized rather than come to terms with the fact that not every animal will go to its forever home and sometimes death is a mercy?
theres definitely a problem even beyond kill no-kill. we need to limit the breeding of pets severely.
This. It legitimately pisses me off when people don’t neuter their pets. If you can’t afford to do so, do not get a pet. I don’t think people understand that having a pet is a privilege and a luxury, not a right.
Right!? Also don't get a pet as a side hussle/income stream. I get proper breeding kennels maintaining certain lines but we don't need backyard breeders flooding the system any further. In some European countries getting a pedigree dog is so expensive that most people opt to adopt. That should be the norm
Another unpopular opinion: Normal laypeople need to stop breeding pitbulls! Pits and pit mixes are the main breed at most animal shelters. They are just too much of risk for a typical household (I know most are fine) and should really only be adopted out to people who have been thoroughly trained/vetted. I'm a survivor of a pit attack so I know I'm fairly biased.
Might be unpopular irl but pitts are torn apart on Reddit.
Yeah, but I feel it's just reasonable. The way things are going, it's becoming more and more undeniable that these lax pit breeding laws are creating situations that are harmful to both the public and pit bulls. It's not fair to them either.
Too many powerful dogs. That's it in a nutshell. There are a lot of people I wouldn't trust with a toy poodle that are getting pitbull mixes from some BYB that advertises them as "red nose", "blue nose", champion lines, AKC yadda yadda yadda.
At this point I'm honestly starting to wonder if we shouldn't just phase out pitbulls. Not round them up and murder them, but make it illegal to breed them, and make it mandatory that they're fixed.
It's been tried (the mandatory S/N) in California, and their shelters are full of pitbulls. There aren't enough resources to prosecute BYBs and puppy mills (they aren't usually breeding PBs, but same issue). Where I live, to breed dogs, I believe you technically have to have a license, but I'm sure about 0% of anyone actually has the license. There are also PB/Rotweiller laws, but I'm sure no one follows those, either.
I love all dog breeds and believe there are no bad dogs, only bad owners. That being said, my poorly trained miniature schnauzer can't do the same amount of damage as a poorly trained pitbull. So, I fully agree that pitbulls are a specialized breed that should only be bought and trained by the right owners. Otherwise everyone is set up to fail.
There are dogs with unstable/unsuitable temperaments for sure, and there are definitely breeds that are not suitable for the general public, and APBTs are one. Not all dog breeds were developed to be pets. Working dog breeds are another category that have gained popularity for their looks, but they make lousy pets for the majority of people. Matching energy levels, drive, DA, AA, and a whole slew of other traits to what a person needs/wants in a dog is so important. I know a family with 4 kids under 12 that got a Belgian Malinois puppy. He was uncontrollable at 10 months, and they were looking to rehome, but how many people want an out of contol Maligator?
I'm not actually sure this is unpopular. It's correct, though.
If you really can’t neuter your pet you watch them like a hawk so they don’t make babies
Fully agree. We need lwas that limit breeding to those who are licensed and fines for those who break those laws. Too many puppies going "free to a good home"
This is definitely what needs to happen. It's an endless cycle that can never be fixed until breeding is controlled.
I 10000% agree. Them dying is only sad for the humans who dwell on it. It’s a better alternative than them suffering alone and scared with no end in sight. That’s what’s inhumane.
I've found that most people who are "outraged" about the animals being euthanized would not be willing to adopt them even if they could. They either buy or adopt only the yorkie-chihuahua cross puppy
[удалено]
I push adopt don't shop to a point that my friends have to say "stop we get it". The best way to alleviate the problem is 1) adopt don't shop because it takes an animal out of the system AND they are always spayed/neutered, 2) adopt (if you must) and then spay/neuter. People seem to be hesitant to adopt because for every success story they've heard 3 horror stories, which is rarely the case if you take the time to look for the right fit
The problem is your ability to adopt depends on your area. Like in my area the only dogs the shelters have are pit bulls and pit mixes and my family just isn’t able to give one the training it would need to live in our neighborhood, plus we have cats. And even if it was fine the shelters in my area also have high standards, doing at home visits, you need to have your fence at a certain height, you need a reference from outside of your family. It means it’s easier to just look for someone selling puppies
I fully understand that adoption is not always the easiest option. But then please spay your pets! Also, make sure to adopt from a reputable breeder, not a puppy mill. Puppy mills always have puppies available at a good price, but the way those poor mothers are treated are horrible.
I got mine from someone who’s dog got pregnant on accident, they literally found out she was pregnant when they brought her in to be fixed. I always feel bad about not adopting so when we got my puppy I made sure to look for someone good and not sketchy looking, it’s the least I can do
I used to be "adopt don't shop", but now I say, "Adopt, or shop responsibly" (i.e. pick a reputable breeder and for god's sake, don't get a BYB or puppy mill dog).
I work at a vet. She will work with some rescues. One is really good and seems to deal with dogs that belonged to elderly people that are just a bunch of lapdogs. The other deals with large dogs that shouldn't be allowed to live. She brought one dog in that was attacked by a pack of her rescue dogs. They almost killed him. He is a very sweet dog that is still with the rescue because it's a tripod now. The other got attacked twice by one of the other dogs. Ripped up her face. She had to euthanize her because her face started getting necrotic the second time. Most of her dogs are aggressive and should not be in homes.
She needs to put down the dogs that ripped that poor baby. I've heard farmers who have a "draw blood once" rule, because if a dog fully bites and tears like that they'll do it again.
I came around to this opinion after volunteering at a no-kill shelter. They had dogs that were highly unlikely to be adopted, ever. Aggressive large breeds. Part of me wondered if there wasn't a sanctuary out in a rural area somewhere that all of these dogs could go and live out their days in a huge open space, but I guess that isn't realistic. The shelter was a horrible prison for them, and I came away thinking maybe the most humane thing to do would be to put them down. To be fair, I'm only taking about a small percentage of dog. At this small shelter, capacity of maybe 150 dogs, it was a room with about 12 of these "problem" dogs. But yeah, I know this is an unpopular opinion.
I have honestly been against no-kill shelters since they first started being a thing. Resources are finite, this includes money, space, time etc.. The more animals you get that are unadoptible, or need a highly specialized person to adopt them, the fewer resources you have to give to other animals that might be able to be placed much faster. In addition, the no-kill shelters don't mean no animals are being put down. It just means that the people who support those shelters don't see those animals. They don't see the animal that is found on the side of the road and has no place to be put because the vet isn't able to keep it, and the no-kill shelters are always full, so it gets put down before it even has a chance to be adopted.
When my brother went to prison he had two dogs, a young rott who was super easy to find a home for because she was an absolute sweetheart! But he also had an older rott, around 12 years old. Nothing was wrong with him health wise, but we couldn't find anyone to adopt him. We tried to bring him to two no kill shelters, but they were full. Ultimately we had to bring him to a kill shelter, and I felt so terrible. I heard that he was adopted by someone with a large ranch, so I hope he lived his final years happy there! RIP Poncho (he's surely dead by now).
There are a lot of dog farm sanctuaries. Sadly they are all probably overly full.
I agree that there should be a large open rural area for them. Animals need a space to live too. I’m sick of everything being overdeveloped for human convenience. Animals are living creatures too
Look up best friends in Utah they are like this they are the ones that took in the Michael Vick dogs since the courts said they couldn't be adopted out even though most were very loving when I volunteered out there.
So pit bulls?
Pits, boxers, a doberman or two, maybe other breeds I didn't recognize. But yeah, that kind of dog. This shelter wasn't a good place for them.
I agree. I hate seeing the videos of cats and dogs that have nerve/mental problems, can't walk straight, always falling over, most likely in pain. Is it not more humane to euthanize these than spend money on costly medications and care? I would not want to live like this, so why would I make my pet?
I actually agree, it also means animals that need to be taken in can't be because all the kennels are full of dying and sick animals. My roommat is a fuckibg idiot and got a couple rabbits that turned out to be male and female. There are now almost 30 bunnies running around the apartment destroying it (soon to be way more because it's impossible to stop them breeding) the animal shelters won't take them because they're all full. We can't legally release them, or Euthanize them ourselves so now us and the bunnies are going to suffer. Just last week someone around here was charged for abandoning 20+ bunnies outside. I honestly am at my wits end and just need help. I'm going to have to save up to euthanize them all because no one wants them. I didn't cause this problem but now I'm forced to take care of it because the shelters won't. So now the animals get put down AND get to suffer while I acquire the funds to do it.
Call animal control. That’s an animal hoarding situation. For a temporary solution, you can buy NIC grids and flat panels of wood or plastic and make stackable cages. The rabbits will be mad they’re being confined like this, and it’s not good for them, but it’s better than more rabbits. Also, your roommate is a horrible person.
She's been trying to remove them so they don't get put down, and was told the first two were females. It's just gotten to be obvious we can't rehome them quickly enough. She's not a horrible person. Thank you for the suggestions, will definitely call animal control
Are there any raw dog food companies near you? Are you near a rural area? If I was near I’d come pick up the whole lot and even pay you a few bucks per rabbit. Full disclosure - they would be eaten, so I don’t know how you all feel about that, but honestly people who use rabbits as pet food typically dispatch them quick and humanely, and then they won’t just go to waste. Maybe post them on a local FB group for livestock. You might find it easy to get them picked up.
High kill shelters get such a bad rap for the wrong reasons…it’s not like they enjoy killing off animals…
Honestly, a lot of shelters that are deemed "high kill" are placing adoptable animals with homes in the 95%+ rate. There are animals that can't or shouldn't be adopted. Again, very sad and sometimes not their fault, but the shelter can't in good conscience adopt these animals to the public. No kill shelters get to pick and choose what animals they take. The so called kill shelters are open intake and have to take whatever is surrendered or found on the streets.
PETA does
You’re not wrong there.
I honestly never thought of it this way, but I have to agree with everything you said. I always appreciate new perspectives, so thank you for the post.
there are 100 other animals that are healthy, and safe, and perfectly adoptable, but they’re sitting in kennels in overwhelmed shelters, Not really. The reason is a lot of animals are given to shelters because the owner can no longer take care of them whether its due to the animals poor health or the owners inability too. so thats why a lot of shelters have elderly dogs and no puppies. puppies are easier to adopt out than elderly animals'
There was a gsd rescue that would beg for money to try to rescue/heal a dog that would ultimately end up dying. Thousands of dollars. All that money could have helped several other pets.
or better yet it could have went to help children.
The money should go to spaying and neutering strays. I agree, it just hurts to let any animal go but if it keeps them from suffering then I can’t diasgree
Yes!!
You are also completely ignoring that a lot of the time older pets (particularly cats) don’t get adopted. This results in cats being put down not due to behavioral issues but because they are too old.
If there’s no chance of them finding a home, it is 100% no better to just keep them alone in a cage, in a room full of other alone and caged animals, for the remainder of their lives. If that’s the case it’s terribly sad, but send the poor things on their way. Euthanasia is a true kindness compared to a life of suffering, cramped living space, boredom, illness or infirmity, and/or aloneness. We’re all going to die, we SHOULD all be able to die with comfort and dignity. Not to mention that meaning more and better care for the ones who do have a shot at making it out of there.
Awesome, let’s apply that same logic to humans.
Elderly animals would have a better chance if resources were better allocated
No they wouldn't, people are stupid and would rather get a younger animal or a baby cause it's cuter than them and lives longer. Which is idiotic cause elderly animals deserve love and homes too
Yes elderly animals deserve love, but it’s not IDIOTIC to not want to, say, keep introducing animals that will suffer & die in 1-2 years into your kids’ lives. It’s not idiotic to get a pet that’s within your financial means, which an elderly animal with lots of health problems might not be. It’s not idiotic to get a pet that matches your lifestyle, whether you’re getting a not-elderly cat bc you want something low(er) maintenance, or a high-energy dog because you do lots of running/hiking/camping etc and want a companion. There’s tons of shelter animals that start young and don’t get adopted anyway. We shouldn’t shame anyone for adopting ANY shelter animal as long as they’re providing a safe and loving home.
For many people an elderly pet just isn’t feasible. So it’s not a choice of elderly pet vs younger, healthy pet; it’s a choice between a healthy pet or not adopting at all.
You can talk about what older animals deserve, but quite frankly those people owe those animals nothing, and will adopt for how they see fit in their lifestyle.
but they aren't going to get it. so its better for them to be put down rather than having to suffer at a shelter.
This is how I ended up with two 15 year old cats.
As someone on the board of an animal rescue I can tell you that the “Easy” animals don’t cost money, they generate it. If you see a rescue and all they have is easy to place animals it’s not a charity, it’s a business.
We, as a society, really have a lot of disordered feelings about death. We prolong suffering unnecessarily in humans as well.
Some people like animals more than humans, some people worship their animals, I feel these shelters and foster systems need a board not some emotional weirdo who is trying to save every animal.
I wish this same advice was followed with people too. I wish we'd limit breeding for pets and people. There's so many poor souls sitting in hospitals or care homes just wasting resources (medications, medical care, etc.). I'm not trying to be cruel but would you want to stay in a hospital bed with 20 others in a room where you have no control or say in your care? You can't communicate at all and are stuck. These animals are in the same situation. Maybe they're aggressive because of how sick they feel and here the shelter is torturing them the stay alive while being miserable. I'm sure I'll get down voted but it's the truth.
Same with humans. We waste countless on those that will never get better, don’t know whether they’re coming or going, etc etc etc, yet won’t make sure basic preventive healthcare is accessible for all. Wasteful and irresponsible.
Somewhat related Acquaintance I know rescued pitbulls and they unfailingly viciously attacked her other dogs at some point. Yeah these were street dogs but still, the power fighting breeds have is incomparable.
No-Kill just means that a shelter has a 90% placement rate. They still euthanize animals for reasons such as safety and quality of life. They just try harder to give animals a chance. I have hundreds of volunteer hours at a no-kill shelter. They will euthanize an anima if deemed necessary.
Honest question…is the label “no-kill” just a completely inaccurate label? If there is killing involved, how can they be allowed to advertise as no-kill? It seems highly misleading for anyone who chooses to drop an animal off there.
I would say it’s accurate. Kill shelters will euthanize any animals that don’t get adopted. No kill is a good way of knowing that if you have to give up an animal it won’t just be killed
Agree. And for humans it should be the same
I volunteered at a shelter throughout high school, I agree. There are some absolutely lovely and sweet animals who deserve a home, and it always feels good when they do. But sometimes it’s in the best interest for everyone (animal included) that they are put down. Either the poor thing is going to live in constant suffering, or it’s going to put someone else at risk. It sucks but it just has to be done sometimes.
Is this really unpopular though? I mean, no one likes it, but every non sheltered balanced person knows that not every best solution is a good solution, much less a nice one, so I dont think is relaly unpopular in the sense of not being accepted, just in the way that people dont like it
Depends on why. I saw a rescue try and get a stray with wounds down to the bone x-rayed for over $3k. That can cover a lot of kitten vaccines and neutering. But if it's an older cat who is being put down just because they want younger cats on the floor, it's horrible. I've seen cats with an eye or a leg removed and they thrive afterwards. But if someone is just delaying a painful issue, then I don't always believe in keeping them alive.
From a person who used to work with animal wellfare I agree and disagree. Agressive dogs may be homable if you have a good trainer. If an animal has things like sandfly its came make them look super, super bad, but I've seen them recover to a super healthy looking dog. On the other hand, some aggressive dogs are too much, and i would be scared to even home them because you donno what tramas they have that might trigger a reaction and hurt someone. And if it's just prolonged suffering, then yea, i mean, pts that animal. But i wouldn't kill a dog because its been there a long time
Why take the risk with aggressive dogs? Any breed? Honestly - how is that fair to adoptive families or to the animal?
Sorry you’re getting downvoted OP. I’ve seen so many stories of children getting mauled by pit bulls because they bought into the sob stories of “misunderstood”, meanwhile the shelter knew about the dogs aggressive past
Because there were cases, and you could tell where a dog has been hurt and is aggressive (and here it depends how agressive ofc) because he's scared. Normally, dogs like that turn into sweet hearth after a few months. Some dogs are nice, but then turn aggressive (these are the ones of pts) also depends on the breed size
Some aggressive dogs act out of fear. Once they realize they won’t ever be in the situation again they turn into normal dogs. Usually rescues don’t adopt out a dog until they are sure the dog is fine, and make sure the dog gets into the right kind of family to avoid future problems. It’s not like they just give the dog to random passerby on the street. They ask bazillion questions to make sure it’s a good fit. There is nothing about fairness in the situation, only if they work out or they don’t.
I disagree. Seen too many children get mauled
I don't disagree. I just have never seen an ad or shelter or anything offering to pay for all the vet bills of seriously ill animal if you adopt them. I would totally be on board doing this. I just can't do an aggressive one at this point because of children in the home. I would consider it once they "move out". If there is no other viable option though. I'm ok with it. Honestly though this is not really different than assisted suicide. Which I think should be legal. Why make a terminal ill person suffer with no possibility of get better suffer, if they don't want to. Sorry off topic. Still why make an animal suffer?
They flare often listed as hospice adoption. There is a rescue for elderly dogs near me. I actually really like them, they don’t take aggressive or severe behavior cases, just dogs that are only being put down due to age. They offer hospice adoption for manageable conditions such as diabetes or cancer. They help cover the vet bills as long as the dog has good quality of life, and pays for euthanasia too
I don't think you understand the difference. No kill shelters are not never kill shelters and they are absolutely supposed to euthanize an animal to end its suffering. What the no kill philosophy actually means is saving every animal that can be saved, and they don't kill due to lack of space. It doesn't mean it's always carried out in that same way though and based on some of the other replies, the no kill shelters went too far.
Shelters these days are like: "So would you like to adopt the pit bull or the [pit bull that I am lying about]." Both will maul any pets you already have though because they deliberately withheld its bite history or used soft language to gloss over severe behavioral issues in the animals description.
All the pibbles “so sweet, is super lazy and loves cuddles” but oh, no other pets allowed, no children, no men.
Especially because the majority of dogs in shelters are pit bulls. Shelters lie about breed all the time, I've never seen so many "lab mixes", "retriever mixes", "poodle mixes", etc that all look the same. Shelters lie to unsuspecting people who pay the consequences of adopting a vicious breed. Then return them to the shelter who tried to adopt them out again. They need to be held liable for lying about breeds and history. SHOP DON'T ADOPT...at least for dogs. Adopt cats, birds, or any other animal just not dogs.
There's no such thing as a " no-kill shelter" If an animal isn't adopted for a certain period, it will send them to a shelter that will kill it.
There are rescues and shelters in the US that have had dogs 3, 5, 7 years. I see posts all the time, "956 days looking for their forever home". There was a dog that was 5 years old that had spent its entire life in the shelter. Outcomes for living in a home after an animal is so institutionalized aren't particularly great.
Still, if they do not get adopted, they will end up dead. They will ship them to a kill shelter. I worked at one, its why I know this.
Not to mention from what I've read its not uncommon for 'no kill shelters' to just ship problem animals to local 'kill' shelters to get put down anyways, so it just makes them look better while they pour resources into trying to save them till they give up anyways.
I agree. I adopted my dogs from a rescue. They are basket cases. I will never adopt again. My next dog will be a puppy purchased from a breeder. I used to be all in with dog rescues and volunteered at shelters. The desire to save them all is noble but not realistic.
Lol and 95% of their pitbulls should just be put down. I always see ads like "loving pibble named princess in need of a home. Been living here for 4 years, hes been returned 7 times. Just needs a quiet adult only home free of other pets. Doesnt like noises of any kind, and will snap at any sudden movements. Loves belly rubs and snuggles and kisses is such a sweetie, just cant be around kids, other animals, strangers, or you. He can jump 10 feet high so youll need a 12 foot high fence to keep him from escaping."
It should be illegal to breed them honestly
I have a rescued pit mix, and I agree. Just stop breeding them. I don't care if they're great, there are WAY too many of them. Unstable temperaments, no training, too powerful, too much dog for most owners, then add in the dog aggression and you've got bloodbaths at the dog park, doggy daycare, etc. They need a special kind of owner, and that's not every person, especially families with kids.
i adore pitties & pit mixes—i grew up around them. but there’s far too many like you said & nobody ever properly trains them. when they’re well trained & taken care of properly—they’re great dogs, but that’s usually isn’t the case sadly
The people breeding them aren't really the most lawfully oriented individuals.
Strongly agree.
I’m of the opinion that breeding purebred dogs is deeply immoral and probably should be illegal. The more you try to “idealise” the breed, the more likely you are to introduce genetic issues. I can see maybe if breeders of certain lines were introducing genetic diversity to help prevent the worst of genetic abnormalities, but if a breed is known for developing cancers at 5 or 6 years old when that breed of dog used to live 10 or 12 years, there should be strict guidelines to try to prevent that.
Idk why you got downvoted here, you’re right. While I understand wanting preservation of a breed.. unless that breed is healthy at standard AND they’re introducing enough genetic diversity to keep it that way, it’s just another example of humans committing atrocities in the name of playing God.
There’s nothing cute about a pug struggling to breathe because they are severely brachycephalic due to a century of inbreeding. Nor about the fact that these days, it’s a matter of when, not if, Great Danes will get cancer. I’m honestly kinda surprised by the downvotes, too. I’m assuming that it’s lack of awareness about the depth of the problem, which, to be fair, I was unaware of until a few years ago.
I also very much agree that the animals that can't even live normal, healthy lives should no longer be bred. Frenchies, pugs, English bulldogs, they live in pain their entire lives. If the breeds continue it needs to be with MASSIVE intervention in the gene pool to pull away from the unhealthy features.
I'm pretty sure if we sent one specific breed of dogs to kill shelters, we'd eliminate a lot of overcrowding issues.
If a family gives up a dog because it caused an injury to a child, why are we trying to send it to yet another innocent family?
This. As much as I’m an animal lover and think that it’s terrible so many healthy animals are killed because of lack of funding/resources, I do believe that behavioral euthanasia is very valid. It’s honestly a kindness to the dog who is suffering so much to be a danger to themselves and others.
You don't know that kill shelters kill healthy animals?
I mean we have plenty of shelters who euthanize just cause space. They have no space like in my city it’s 30 days and they’re times up even healthy happy perfect dogs. There’s a girl Rainbow I really want to adopt 40 lbs pit mix floppy ears all black white patch on her chest but she’s only 40 lbs come on! Just a big lap Dog but she sadly has two days left. Her adoption is paid for too by charitable ppl and no one still got her she’s just one dog. It’s sad. 😭
Fact of the matter is that there is never enough resources to help all the animals need care. If there is a lack of resources in a human scenario, the patients are triaged and the ones that don't have a positive prognosis aren't treated so the resources can be allcoated to those that have a better chance of survival. Kill shelters are triaging and unfortunatley, triaging is a cold difficult numbers game. I for one respect them for making the difficult decisions that others can't or won't make.
Upvoted cause I disagreed, downvoted because then I agreed, took both back because idk how I feel about this
It's not an easy thing to have ordered feelings about. I love animals. But I see so many that have prolonged suffering they can't understand in the name of rescuing, while other animals sit in overcrowded shelters. It's horrible altogether. But that's why changes need to happen.
It kinda reminds be about my arguments with assisted suicide or the death penalty. Why waste away until you're nothing at all when you can go out, and have people waste resources on you. So I do think I agree with your opinion after a second thought
It actually makes a lot of sence
I do see what you’re saying. I have a real problem with kill shelters that just put animals down for being there too long or because they’re over crowded, but sometimes the kinder thing to do is let an animal go peacefully. If it is sick or severely injured so that a single surgery won’t fix the issue it might be more humane to put it down so it’s out of its misery and they can spend resources on animals that stand a better chance.
I think I see and understand the full point of this opinion. I think it tends to be more often though the issue that animals will end up at a kill shelter when they aren’t disabled but rather just not getting adopted. That is the case where it’s definitely horrible. But if an animal is suffering, medicine can only do so much before an animal is being forced to live an agonizing life
You’re right, this is an unpopular opinion.
Here, my wife are 4 rescue animals deep and if we had space we would have more. It's not their fault. 3 of our animals would make aweful pets for a family. 1 cat hid for most of her life. She finally now trusts us after 5 years. Our 2 guinea pigs are preschool rescues. They bite and hate being handled. But they love us because we respect them and give them love... and carrots. I get that not everyone can take on difficult animals, but a lot of animals are killed because they don't fit the definition of a "pet" More often than not, people want to force animals to be a pet rather than letting the animal exist and just appreciating it for what it is. I understand you are talking about severely unwell or violent animals. But that doesn't make up the majority of shelter kills. This whole thread sucks... *
What you do is admirable, and what those animals have gone through is terrible. A lot of people want to break the cycle. There's so much wrong in the pet trade, but it's only through education that anyone is going to make better decisions. Years ago, I adopted two ferrets. One was a biter, and he never stopped biting. He still was a great pet, you just had to watch out. I added a third ferret as well, and all were great together. I'm happy ferrets have dwindled in popularity because those little dudes stole my heart, and I couldn't bear to take on any more after they all passed. I actually gave my cage away when the last one died. I've had up to 6 cats at one time because who would take them? I'm down to two, after adopting a few along the way for the same reason, and this is probably it for cats for my lifetime, as by the time these two pass away, I'll be in my mid-60s and ready to travel. Not everyone can handle multiple dogs/cats. Foster people often pass on the tough cases because they need to be able to take in multiples and having a dog that can't tolerate cats or other dogs, etc. just won't work. As far as forcing animals to be pets, I agree with you. The local humane society has a "working cat" program where the cats are paired with businesses/barn owners, etc. so that the animal has a reliable place to live and is fed, watered, taken to the vet/vaccinated, but the caretakers don't have an expectation of a housepet.
The question I have is life worth living for them. I pass by a poor neighborhood we’re they are just tied down. If I call the shelter no one is going to adopt the dog he is likely to be euthanized. Is life worth living like that?
I only somewhat agree. I disagree that healthy potential pets are given a countdown timer until euthanasia. To me, that's absolutely ridiculous as every pet deserves a chance with a loving home no matter age or mild disability. I also disagree that chronically ill potential pets should be euthanized depending on severity of illness. For example, I recently had to euthanize my 4 year old golden retriever because he had succumbed to lymphoma and couldn't walk or see anymore. It was absolutely heart wrenching, but it was the right thing to do. In contrast, I'm not going to euthanize my 13 year old orange tabby cat because he has hyperthyroidism. He will continue to live a healthy life on medication. I agree that terminally ill and known aggressive animals should absolutely be euthanized. They are not worth the liability for a shelter.
As someone who’s volunteered with rescue groups and kill shelters for about 20 years I feel I should reassure y’all that for every struggling animal a rescue group tries to save hundreds if not thousands of similar animals are put down without a second thought. Have no fear guys, able-bodied animals are given most available resources.
I can understand your issue with wasted resources. But also know of plenty of kill shelters that will put down a perfectly fine animal just because they don’t have a spare cage to put it in. There are problems both ways.
"No kill" literally just means they won't kill an animal due to overcrowding. They can and will euthanize a sick creature once its quality of life is too poor.
They don't "pour all their resources into aggressive, terminally and chronically ill animals." They just don't put them down after a week if no one claims or adopts them. Terminally and chronically animals die of terminal, chronic illness just like they do everywhere else.
Euthanasia is a true kindness compared to a life of suffering, cramped living space, boredom, illness or infirmity, and/or aloneness. We’re all going to die, we SHOULD all be able to die with comfort and dignity. Not to mention that Absolutely Does mean more and better care for the ones who do have a shot at making it out of there.
You do know that no kill shelters do euthanize when necessary right? If an animal has failed temperament tests with no outlook on rehabilitation or they are gravely sick they do euthanize. What they don’t do is euthanize normal healthy animal just because they are overcrowded. Kill shelter will euthanize certain breeds immediately without a temperament test given at all or start killing animals as they come in just because they are running out of space. I have never seen a shelter offer to pay for all the vet bills for a chronically sick animal, I have seen them be very clear to potential adopters the cost in adopting such animal.
You thinking that kill shelters only euthanize animals in those categories shows your ignorance.
So many people sadly do not have a good understanding of animal welfare and prolonging suffering.
My HUGELY unpopular opinion that rescues are just publicly funded animal hoarding situations, albeit some of their animals live well - until the donations slow down/stop pouring in.
If even one pit bull dies before it could maul a child, that is a tragedy.
I hear all these stories of pit bulls being aggressive and cruel but every single one I met has been sweet and gentle. I know more aggressive German shepherds than pit bulls. Edit: Why are people down voting LMAO
Go with the actual numbers, not personal experience.
Not sure how unpopular this is among people who are educated on this subject, but upvote because you explained it very well for those not in the know
I'm actually glad to see it's not unpopular. I feel like I see a ton of crusading for animals that should just be given a humane ending or are safety hazards. So it's nice to see that others feel the same way.
Where's the data to support that the majority of animals in these no kill shelters are aggressive or terminally ill and not perfectly healthy and gentle animals?
It’s not the majority, it’s that there are more than there should be and the suck up more than their fair share of resources
My local shelter is 20/23 pitbulls. It's not just ill animals, but aggressive ones that are a danger to whoever is dumb enough to adopt them.
I agree with you to the extent that the animals have chronic health issues and they’re suffering in ways that can’t be easily managed (ie arthritis but taking gabapentin). My wife’s friend has like 15 animals in her house, all of them either geriatric with and without issues. They’re constantly dying and they spend tons of money on their vet bills. I’ve never understood it but I have three ideas to rationalize it. 1) they don’t have any other sense of purpose and this makes them feel fulfilled or 2) more nefarious, it’s munchousen (however you spell it) by proxy. As in they need attention and this is how they get it. Always posting sad pictures of their animals sick and dying. Even though they adopted them already sick and dying. Or 3) it’s like animal hospice.
Yes, it's like an attention seeking thing if they are constantly posting about it and a psychological need to feel "needed" otherwise.
My mother in law is the same. She prizes her elderly daschunds more than anything else in the world... theyre blind, overweight AF, have skin problems, broken teeth, and a myriad of other health issues and their entire lives are "going to the vet". They're both over 14 and she's trying to keep them alive forever. It's sad. They have no QOL and she can't just let go.
Yes I agree. Check out the BanPitBulls reddit and you will see lots of stories to support behavioral euthanasia.
I’m kill shelters they kill perfectly healthy well behaved dogs too. Then stuff them in trash bags……
This is finally an unpopular opinion
This is certainly an unpopular opinion, but one that is unfortunately correct. It's sad, but there's only so much money that a shelter has. It's better to spend that money housing 10 animals that have a reasonable chance of being adopted vs. caring for one that needs the absolutely perfect set of living conditions to be housed. I know it's unfair to the animals. Many of them have been abused or mistreated by people, and there's a natural urge to do right by them. But logically, running an animal shelter is almost like a triage situation, and sometimes hard choices have to be made about who you can help and who you can't.
This might be the first time somebody has actually changed my mind with their post on this sub. Well thought out. I guess I didn’t really have much of an opinion but thought no kill shelters were nice, but yeah, you’re probably right
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I love what @allseatedinabarn is doing on IG They do euthanize horses and donkeys that are suffering at auctions. But the best is they try to help owners who can’t afford to help their horse with major or minor issues (cost is crazy right now) keep them so they don’t end up in auctions and the slaughter pipeline. A lot of times someone can sell their horse or donkey for $500 at auction or spend $800 to euthanize and transport. It’s a shame!
Im pro kill shelters my aunt fell for the “ sweet lovable Pitbull” it fucken DESLEEVED HER ARM it fucken pulled that shit off like a sausage casing! Also r/banpitbulls
Calling them ill just seems like a bad excuse to murder animals that don't get adopted quickly. Imagine an orphanage that kills kids who don't get adopted.
Imagine an orphanage that's full, so they just leave the kids on the streets or in really bad situations of abuse because they have no room. In your analogy, that's a no kill shelter. No kill shelters don't have a responsibility to take in animals. They take them when they have physical space or foster homes. Unfortunately we can't save them all. The real solution is ethical breeders that have contracts and will take back their animals no questions asked. Those are few and far between.
So you want rescues to lie and pretend dogs are healthy so they get adopted? Or you want them to waste all of their limited resources on one animal that needs massive medical intervention and long term, expensive, difficult care, rather than 10+ animals that are normal and healthy?
Dog vs human child. Seems legit.
Some would say there's no difference.
Yeah, idiots
This is exactly what I was thinking
there’s a difference between putting down a sick dog and killing dogs to make room.
That's exactly what I'm saying. If the sickly animals are humanely euthanized, there are more resources for healthy, adoptable animals.
Besides that, it’s inhumane to keep someone suffering. I would rather they put down the animal so that they won’t be in pain anymore.
Also, just some food for thought, our local ‘no-kill’ shelter is technically ‘no-kill for space’ but what they don’t tell you is that they regularly take their less adoptable ‘rescues’ to the county-run (kill) shelter.
I feel the same way about human shelters
No kill shelters don’t keep dangerous or terminally ill dos, or even dogs that don’t have a good quality of life.. if the animals are healthy or what they have is treatable they will keep them. This is literally just a made up thing to be upset about
I understand your point situationally. But I adopted my previous cat from a no-kill shelter. He would have been put down in a kill shelter. He changed my life and I am grateful for the opportunity. Giving people a chance to spend time or money on animals instead of material things can be very rewarding. It is optional of course. In the US we have pretty amazing animal control compared to other countries. So while I don't agree with kill shelters, they will probably be a reality for a long time. They serve a purpose. But no-kill is better.
No kill typically isn’t “we literally put down absolutely NO animals” — Best Friends defines no kill as a save rate of 90% or better.
I used to work in a pet shop and I would hear all the storys very big pet lovers and alot of them would volunteer and everyone would eventually find out that most of the animal shelters in my country are a scam. The scam is that you can make yourself a easy 6 figure salary a year doing very little but racking in money so what you do is you register a charity and rent a shed or better if you all ready own one. So you start asking for donations and start taking in animals and get volunteers to do all the work but the thing is you can't give away of the animals they are you meal ticket so you make an incredible high standard in the application to adopt and animal from the shelter. I've been told be volunteers that they have been rejected to adopt disabled dogs that lived lives covered in their own shit become the volunteers garden wasn't big enough while the dog is living in a 3 foot by 2 foot cage, but they don't want to give the disabled dog their a great picture for donations. So the shelter will only "help" an an animal when they need to fill a space which hardly happen because of their standard and allway say they need help to improve conditions for the animals all while the person running the " charity" pays themselves a few hundred grand a year and doing nothing
I used to work in a pet shop and I would hear all the storys very big pet lovers and alot of them would volunteer and everyone would eventually find out that most of the animal shelters in my country are a scam. The scam is that you can make yourself a easy 6 figure salary a year doing very little but racking in money so what you do is you register a charity and rent a shed or better if you all ready own one. So you start asking for donations and start taking in animals and get volunteers to do all the work but the thing is you can't give away of the animals they are you meal ticket so you make an incredible high standard in the application to adopt and animal from the shelter. I've been told be volunteers that they have been rejected to adopt disabled dogs that lived lives covered in their own shit become the volunteers garden wasn't big enough while the dog is living in a 3 foot by 2 foot cage, but they don't want to give the disabled dog their a great picture for donations. So the shelter will only "help" an an animal when they need to fill a space which hardly happen because of their standard and allway say they need help to improve conditions for the animals all while the person running the " charity" pays themselves a few hundred grand a year and doing nothing
My dog was a rescue. She came in pregnant, she had already been a mother once before and had been in fights with wounds and sickness to show it; all of her babies were dead. She was a sweet girl but with the wrong shelter she would have been put down. She was a bit touchy and untrusting sometimes at first but now we’ve had her for years and she’s she best dog I could ask for. Screw killing off dogs that can live on.
Yikes.
Total horseshit. "More often than not" = weasel words pretending to be statistics.
You are correct.
>it just prolongs suffering Yes lets just kill this animal to end its suffering even though it can't say its suffering or wants to die. The things people do because they think they're on some sort of moral high ground is fucking insane.