No Kill Animal Shelter Research Paper

People support no-kill animal shelters because of their philosophical standpoint regarding overpopulation problems, euthanasia usage, and reputation issues. SICSA, a no-kill shelter, seeks to combat overpopulation by offering spay and neuter services at its shelters. Each year, SICSA spays and neuters over three thousand animals, which demonstrates its compassion and intention to help prevent animal overpopulation without killing the creatures (Jewell and Baxla). Also, in 1999, shelters in Utah euthanized around forty-five thousand cats and dogs; however, almost one quarter of these animals were healthy (Lucich 15). No-kill shelters save lives by euthanizing creatures with incurable, painful ailments and allowing other pets a second chance

To care for the animals instead of using euthanasia, the shelters depend on private donations and volunteers. This unreliable dependence on municipal support easily backfires if the community fails to reach out to their local no-kill animal shelter. According to a SICSA representative, SISCA, a no-kill animal shelter, has room for only thirty-five dogs and seventy-five cats; this demonstrates the limited space in shelters (Jewell and Baxla). No-kill shelters’ limited capacities force the organizations to use selective processes to ensure that they could care for the pets; in result, the shelters turn away numerous pets, and these creatures might face death in the kill shelters that accept all animals. Furthermore, no-kill shelters avoid euthanizing to retain their save-rates. Instead of granting incurable animals peaceful deaths, the shelters might allow the creatures to die without assistance; this possibility raises the concern surrounding the animals’ quality of life. In conclusion, the prospect of turning all Ohio animal shelters draws both encouragement and criticism for a variety of