Limited Admission vs. Open Admission (Animal Shelters)

[Lerxst]

I guess this would be the logical place to start this thread. Since I'm married to the field, I was wondering what the average person (on here anyhow) thought of this.

In terms of animal sheltering, "open admission" means that they take any animal that comes through their doors, but need to "make room" if they become over-crowded. Yes, that might mean adoption, but 99% of the time it means euthanasia.

"Limited admission" is usually synonymous with "No-kill". These shelters choose which animals to take in or not. They might still euthanize, but it's done primarily for medical reasons, not to make room.

This is an ongoing debate among most of the major animal welfare groups around the world. Some take one stance while some take the others and a few take the middle ground. It's also a hot topic for debate that some groups use against certain other organizations pointing out how "they kill animals".

My questions are:

Do/did you realize/know the difference between the two shelter types?
Are you are die-hard supporter of one over the other; can you rationalize that support?
Do you tend to go back and forth with your views?
Is euthanasia a "bad" thing that should be avoided by all shelters?
Are there benefits, and can you name them, to euthanasia other than to end an animal's suffering?

 

[mochi]

Do/did you realize/know the difference between the two shelter types?

No D: Oh no, what happened to my raccoon :C

Are you are die-hard supporter of one over the other; can you rationalize that support?

I guess the limited admission. At least they only kill for medical reasons and are honest with their purposes.

Do you tend to go back and forth with your views?

Well, I realize that limited shelters will fill up quickly, and maybe the open shelter is the only option left sometimes?

Is euthanasia a "bad" thing that should be avoided by all shelters?

Except for medical reasons, I think it is.

Are there benefits, and can you name them, to euthanasia other than to end an animal's suffering?

Population control, but it's just too cruel a way to do it.

 

[Kgal]

I guess this would be the logical place to start this thread. Since I'm married to the field, I was wondering what the average person (on here anyhow) thought of this.

In terms of animal sheltering, "open admission" means that they take any animal that comes through their doors, but need to "make room" if they become over-crowded. Yes, that might mean adoption, but 99% of the time it means euthanasia.

"Limited admission" is usually synonymous with "No-kill". These shelters choose which animals to take in or not. They might still euthanize, but it's done primarily for medical reasons, not to make room.

This is an ongoing debate among most of the major animal welfare groups around the world. Some take one stance while some take the others and a few take the middle ground. It's also a hot topic for debate that some groups use against certain other organizations pointing out how "they kill animals".

My questions are:

Do/did you realize/know the difference between the two shelter types?
Are you are die-hard supporter of one over the other; can you rationalize that support?
Do you tend to go back and forth with your views?
Is euthanasia a "bad" thing that should be avoided by all shelters?
Are there benefits, and can you name them, to euthanasia other than to end an animal's suffering?

Yes I know the difference between the two shelter types.

My emotions surge very strongly with regard to our society's disposal attitude which extends outward to sentient beings.

Right now I've got 4 dogs, all of which were thrown away, one literally left to die with a broken leg, and the others left on the side of the road.
A couple of months ago I contacted a shelter by email and they seem receptive towards receiving 2 of them. I've hesitated to call them for several reasons - but one is I have a hard time imagining these 2 young male dogs continuously living in cages. Some No Kill shelters are like that. They bunch them together in small pens and they rarely get a chance to get out and play. While my dogs wreak havoc every single day in my life - which is why I'm looking for a shelter for them - it's hard for me to let them go to a place like that. Here on my place they can fully be. a. dog. They play with each other, dig holes, chase and kill lizards and rabbits, and howl when they smell the deer.

There is a part of me that loathes giving them away to a shelter because all of that will stop. There is a part of me that says euthanasia is more humane because at least they will have died knowing the freedom to be who they are/meant to be.

If I decide euthanasia is a better choice - I will take them myself to a vet and love them every step of the way till their last breath.
I have a very hard time seeing any sentient being kept caged.

So I wait. I hesitate to make the call. I give them one more day of complete joy.