It’s hard to imagine why any animal shelter wouldn’t want to be “no-kill.” The name alone impresses upon the public the fulfillment of a goal that all of us in animal welfare and the pet-loving public want to achieve. Unfortunately, many stand by the ideal of “no-kill” without having a good understanding of what it really means.

To better understand why many organizations aren’t making the transition to “no-kill,” one first needs to understand the realities of what is an open-admission shelter and what is a “no-kill,” or limited-admission, shelter.

Euthanasia doesn’t happen at open-admission facilities simply because they don’t want to take the time with animals in their care or because they’re under ill-guided management, as is often said. Euthanasia happens because they take on the responsibility of being a place for every animal in need regardless of its age, breed, temperament, appearance or medical condition compounded by an imbalance in the community where more people are surrendering animals than there are people electing to adopt. As a result they are faced with making difficult decisions about who is placeable and who is not.

Many limited-admission organizations don’t have to make those decisions. They screen animals at the door based on health, age, and behavior and turn away animals they can’t or choose not to help. In doing this, they prevent taking in animals that they can’t find homes or other placement opportunities for, which keeps their euthanasia numbers low. Oftentimes, they suggest the public take the animal(s) to open-admission shelters.

Many limited-admission shelters achieve great things for animals by specializing in specific breed lines and/or hard cases where extensive rehabilitation and/or treatment are needed. But because of this choice they are unable to operate in a manner that provides for all animals in their communities that need attention. Many insist that “no-kill” is the only option and mislead the public into believing there aren’t far more animals in need of homes in our communities than there are homes choosing to adopt them.

For years, organizations not operating under the limited-admission philosophy have been criticized and marked as “kill” shelters. The issue has spun so out of control in some communities that open-admission facilities are perceived as dangerous places for animals in need—oftentimes erroneously depicted as performing the very atrocities they work so very hard to prevent.

At Animal Humane Society, we are an open-admission facility. Each animal that comes into our care is considered for placement. Placement may be in one of our five adoption centers or with one of our rescue partners. Euthanasia is considered for one of the following three reasons:

1. An animal is unhealthy and untreatable suffering from a medical condition that adversely impacts its well-being and quality of life and from which it is not likely to recover, in accordance with Asilomar Accords.

2. An animal is suffering from a behavioral issue that poses too great a threat or safety risk to potential adopters and the community as determined by our behavioral evaluation process. The behavioral evaluation process employs scientifically validated procedures developed by Sue Sternberg and Emily Weiss, PhD.

3. The disparity between the number of cats in need of homes in our community and the number of homes willing to adopt them. In 2010, we took in 33,979 companion animals, of which 19,846 were feline. Unfortunately, the disparity means that during high intake periods capacity and population dynamics will also play a role in evaluating felines for adoption.

However, being open-admission does not mean that we don’t evaluate our processes and consider what more we can do for animals. Because of our Bound for Home initiative—which was designed to reduce euthanasia and further ensure placement of all healthy and treatable animals by working proactively with the community—we've been able to:

• Begin to correct the disparity between the number of animals that come into our care and the number of homes willing to adopt them, espeically for felines.

• Reduce the rate of euthanasia by 40% from January 1 to November 30, 2011 compared to the same time period in 2010.

• Increase the placement rate to 80% during the same time period. 

• Open Kindest Cut in partnership with a private practice veterinarian to provide a low-cost, high quality spay/neuter service for pets of people in need.

We also continue to work with our Minnesota Partnership for Animal Welfare (MnPAW) partners, some of which are limited-admission organizations, to ensure the reduction of euthanasia in our local communities.

Given the current challenges facing animals in our community, we believe it is imperative to continue to be a place for all animals in need by continuing to operate as an open-admission shelter.

Animal Humane Society believes there is room for differing philosophies in animal welfare and recognizes the incredible work of other rescues and shelters in our communities. Whether open-admission or limited-admission, our combined efforts are achieving more for animals now more than ever before.