Animal Sheltering’s Outdated Practices Contribute to Overcrowding

At the end of December, The Washington Post published an article, “America’s animal shelters are overcrowded with pets from families experiencing economic and housing woes,” detailing the increase of animal shelter populations and economic pressures due to housing instability and vet costs as contributing factors. What is not said in the article is that a significant contributing factor to this problem is the animal sheltering system itself and the undefined role of the shelter in communities, including Austin. When pet owners are in crisis, shouldn’t the government funded animal shelter be able to raise their hand and say “we can help you keep your pet,” particularly given the current burden of caring for so many homeless pets and countless studies in a number of fields documenting the value of the human-animal bond? Why not work to help keep pets in homes where they’re already cared for and loved? Right now, the only way most shelters “help” those in need is by taking in pets, forcing separation from loving homes and fostering the idea that pets are better off disposed of.?

The sheltering system as it exists in most communities today was created over a century ago, largely to protect the public from rabies concerns by removing stray animals from the streets and then discreetly euthanizing unclaimed pets behind closed doors. It was never meant to care long term for homeless pets, so it’s no wonder so many shelters are overwhelmed and overburdened. Instead of asking why there are so many pets in shelters, let’s instead ask why there aren’t more available resources to help pet owners in crisis, which is often temporary, to keep their pets. Investing resources back into the community to help pets is a much more effective and efficient use of resources than housing, caring for, and trying to adopt out pets over the long term. Running large shelters is costly. Part of what perpetuates this is the outdated and inaccurate belief that pets are surrendered to shelters by irresponsible people who they’re better off without. In reality, many pets are surrendered to shelters because their owners cannot access the resources and help they need to be able to keep their pets. If we worked to better support pet owners, fewer pets would enter the shelter.

In nearly any other industry, the expectation would be to adapt programs and services to meet real challenges and emerging trends. However, the exact opposite is happening in shelters across the nation, including right here in Austin; the most basic animal services have been cut back and the public is blamed for overburdening the shelter. If our government wants to make an impact on human crises then understanding that 75% of vulnerable human populations have pets has to be part of the equation. Shelters and communities need to practice true case management support for pets at risk of losing their homes, offer safety net programs to support pet owners through temporary crisis and work toward reunification, and empower community members to advocate and support pets in whatever ways work for them instead of taking a one size fits all approach of either open door intake or closed door turnaways.

Austin was long seen as an innovative leader in animal services programs – both at the city shelter and in non-profit community partners. Whether the current crisis was unavoidable or the product of something else is immaterial – there is an opportunity to lead here and create stronger animal services that support pets and people and make Austin a stronger, more resilient community. There is an opportunity to better serve people and pets, reduce intake and the corresponding stress on shelter operations by establishing stronger safety net programs and advocacy to keep people and pets together.

While our city wrestles with trying to decide if it should permit the city shelter to save fewer lives and scale back protections that made Austin one of the safest communities in the country for dogs and cats, it’s our duty as community members to communicate our expectations. We expect pets to be safe in the city shelter. And we expect the city to continue leading the progressive humane movement, which means recognizing that including people as part of the equation. We expect our city to value pets as we do and to recognize the value and importance of the? relationship between people and their pets.