What is "No Kill"?
True No Kill? What is that?
We want to acknowledge that there are individuals who misuse the phrase "No Kill" or utilize it to engage in criminal activities. To clarify where this may fall under criminal activity:
1. Organizations that falsely claim to be "no-kill" in order to conceal their true actions. They manipulate statistics and reclassify healthy, adoptable pets to falsely label them as animals that require euthanasia. This deception occurs in municipal shelters that misuse taxpayers' funds, and when non-profits falsely claim to be "no-kill," it constitutes a misappropriation of funds.
2. Organizations that use the "no-kill" label to hoard, neglect, or abuse animals, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Such outcomes are inhumane and not acceptable.
3. Individuals or organizations that exploit the "no-kill" philosophy to steal pets.
Whether we work in the animal shelter industry or advocate for animal welfare, it is our responsibility to call out those who use the phrase to neglect, abuse, or manipulate statistics for their own benefit. Unfortunately, due to these individuals, we sometimes have to go beyond a simple definition of "No Kill" to explain what it truly means, not just for the public but also for ourselves.
No Kill is a culture where healthy and treatable animals are not killed in our shelters for reasons such as lack of space, convenience, or following outdated traditions including behavior assessments. In this culture, the only animals that are euthanized are those who are TRULY irremediably suffering, terminally ill, or genuinely aggressive (not simply scared or traumatized) to the point where they pose a threat to our communities and no sanctuary placement is available. Statistically, truly aggressive dogs are only 1-2% of the entire dog population. Legal considerations come into play in such cases.
No Kill does not imply that animals are never euthanized. It would be unethical and irresponsible to keep animals alive when they are truly suffering or have severe cognitive issues that make them a danger to the public. Euthanizing these animals is a compassionate act done out of mercy, not expediency.
No Kill is a philosophy that recognizes the inherent value of all companion animals and emphasizes treating them as individuals deserving of our time and attention in order to preserve their lives. Within this philosophy, homeless animals are regarded as having once been cherished companions or as capable of becoming cherished companions. They are given the benefit of the doubt, treated as adoptable, and not blamed for needing our help.
No Kill is not simply about keeping animals alive without regard to their living conditions. It does not permit compromising their physical, psychological, or emotional well-being just for the sake of saying "they are alive" and "we didn't euthanize them." They still need enrichment, socialization, training, love, etc.
It is important to note that collecting animals on rural properties without the knowledge or involvement of the public and law enforcement authorities does not align with the principles of No Kill. In such cases, it is essentially hoarding and often involves neglect, abuse, and sometimes even mental health issues. Likewise, when animals are kept at a "sanctuary" that lacks the necessary financial and physical resources to properly care for them and facilitate their placement into loving homes, it is not No Kill. Overburdened sanctuaries become little more than animal prisons, placing immense stress on both the animals and the caretakers and frequently resulting in disastrous outcomes. We often hear stories about so-called sanctuaries that have become the focus of law enforcement operations or have required intervention from national animal welfare organizations due to the inhumane conditions they maintain.
No Kill does embody values, hope, and compassion. It represents our commitment to providing the very best for companion animals because we genuinely care about their well-being. We don't kill simply because it's the easier option. We don't kill based on historical practices or out of ignorance, whether intentional or unintentional, of long-standing programs that have successfully saved shelter animals.
No Kill does not require more money. Claims that No Kill is too expensive are often used to deflect criticism and reduce life-saving expectations by regressive shelter directors, and government officials that oversee the budget. A multi-state study revealed no clear link between per capita funding for animal control and save rates. For example, one community saved 90 percent of animals with lower spending, while another saved only 40 percent despite significantly higher per capita spending. There are cases where well-funded shelters have seen increased killing rates, while others with reduced spending have decreased death rates. Notably, there is no consistent correlation between a shelter's budget and its save rate. Furthermore, the programs of the No Kill Equation are shown to be more cost-effective than killing, as killing animals costs money, while adoptions generate revenue.
No Kill does generate revenue and also includes cost-saving programs that are crucial for a shelter's success. Since most shelter costs are fixed, keeping additional animals alive does not significantly increase expenses. For instance, the time and effort required to clean a kennel is comparable to that needed for euthanizing an animal. However, cleaning requires less-skilled, less-expensive labor and can be supplemented by unpaid volunteer support, resulting in financial benefits. Communities take pride in having access to the safety of no-kill sheltering, leading to increased involvement of nonprofit organizations, volunteers, fosters, and donations. Additionally, a shelter that fully implements the No Kill equation would also promote low-cost spay, neuter, and microchip clinics, which can generate revenue for shelters with on-site veterinary care. These are just a few ways in which the No Kill approach promotes revenue.
Whether we like it or not, the phrase "No Kill" is here to stay. As long as we agree on the definition of euthanasia and share the common goal of saving shelter animals, there should be no confusion or controversy. Regardless of the choice of two words, we can surely unite in our dedication to doing everything within our power to keep shelter animals alive, while recognizing their individual worth and providing them with the time, attention, and care they deserve. We view the phrase "No Kill" as a declaration of our values, including transparency and clear statistic guidelines in reporting, which reflects a public expectation not only regarding the allocation of tax dollars but also our collective responsibility as a society to: 1) preserve the lives of healthy and treatable animals, 2) compassionately euthanize animals that cannot be saved, and 3) prioritize the safety of our communities.
