How is it that some of the biggest, well known, supposed animal welfare organizations, are actually causing more harm to the very animals they are supposed to be helping?
PETA won't be happy until there are no more domestic animals at all. And Best Friends is too busy with their numbers game to care what fates actually befall the animals. Theoretically, No-Kill means a shelter kills no more than 10 percent of adoptable animals. They are not supposed to kill animals due to space or time constraints. TNR, or Trap-Neuter-Return programs have helped these numbers, unfortunately, there are still too many cats being born and abandoned. Which leads to the latest ill advised trend, RTF, or Return-To-Field. With this approach, cats are literally dumped back on the street, in the "vicinity" where it was found. Many of these cats are tame, lost or abandoned, not all are true ferals, able to fend for themselves. Additionally, no one is contacted upon the return, to verify if there are more ferals, or an entire colony that needs containment, or to provide education as to the responsibility of caring for animals. RTF cheapens the value of these living, feeling beings, does not promote respect, empathy or compassion.
I find it hard to believe any animal rescue organization could condone abandonment as an option. They claim shelters don't have enough room or time to work with all the cats, but isn't that what No-Kill is about? Shelters are not supposed to kill animals for space or time constraints. With RTF, they can dump cats, claiming they weren't killed in the shelter, but who knows, they could very well die on the streets, especially if not street-savvy. But as long as the numbers are good, that's what counts?
Also, what about no more homeless pets? Isn't RTF just adding to the already unacceptable number of homeless pets?
I will never be a supporter of RTF, the criteria followed by shelters is arbitrary and ambiguous, the very concept is absurd. It is too easy for shelters to label a frightened cat as feral and therefore, unadoptable. Abandonment should not be considered an option.
All cats deserve better. There needs to be a concerted effort between shelters and rescue groups, (many of which are already doing most of the work by rescuing shelter animals or volunteering to do shelter adoptions), to provide education to the public. Many already provide funding for spay and neuter, much to their credit. But there needs to be more of a push in education, options for fixing, options for keeping pets. It can't continue to be so easy to dump cats, and should not be promoted as a solution, by anyone.
PETA won't be happy until there are no more domestic animals at all. And Best Friends is too busy with their numbers game to care what fates actually befall the animals. Theoretically, No-Kill means a shelter kills no more than 10 percent of adoptable animals. They are not supposed to kill animals due to space or time constraints. TNR, or Trap-Neuter-Return programs have helped these numbers, unfortunately, there are still too many cats being born and abandoned. Which leads to the latest ill advised trend, RTF, or Return-To-Field. With this approach, cats are literally dumped back on the street, in the "vicinity" where it was found. Many of these cats are tame, lost or abandoned, not all are true ferals, able to fend for themselves. Additionally, no one is contacted upon the return, to verify if there are more ferals, or an entire colony that needs containment, or to provide education as to the responsibility of caring for animals. RTF cheapens the value of these living, feeling beings, does not promote respect, empathy or compassion.
I find it hard to believe any animal rescue organization could condone abandonment as an option. They claim shelters don't have enough room or time to work with all the cats, but isn't that what No-Kill is about? Shelters are not supposed to kill animals for space or time constraints. With RTF, they can dump cats, claiming they weren't killed in the shelter, but who knows, they could very well die on the streets, especially if not street-savvy. But as long as the numbers are good, that's what counts?
Also, what about no more homeless pets? Isn't RTF just adding to the already unacceptable number of homeless pets?
I will never be a supporter of RTF, the criteria followed by shelters is arbitrary and ambiguous, the very concept is absurd. It is too easy for shelters to label a frightened cat as feral and therefore, unadoptable. Abandonment should not be considered an option.
All cats deserve better. There needs to be a concerted effort between shelters and rescue groups, (many of which are already doing most of the work by rescuing shelter animals or volunteering to do shelter adoptions), to provide education to the public. Many already provide funding for spay and neuter, much to their credit. But there needs to be more of a push in education, options for fixing, options for keeping pets. It can't continue to be so easy to dump cats, and should not be promoted as a solution, by anyone.
RSS Feed