Humane Societies, Animal Rescue Groups and Veterinarians May Cause More Pain and Suffering Than They Alleviate
By Jeffrey Young, DVM
My name is Jeff Young, and I have been a veterinarian for over
twenty years. I have been on numerous humane society boards, have
been an animal control officer, and I speak and consult on companion
animal overpopulation issues all over the world. I have done over
165,000 surgeries in the last twenty years, and have established full
service training hospitals in Bratislava (Slovakia), and Merida (Mexico).
I have trained over 300 veterinarians in more efficient, safe surgical
techniques.
From the time I graduated veterinary school, I have had one simple
goal: to reduce the population of unwanted dogs and cats around the
world. As a veterinarian, I can reduce companion animal over-population
by simply providing and promoting low cost spay/neuter. Over
the last two decades, we have seen some difference in overpopulation
with the rise of educational groups like Spay USA, mobile spay/neuter
clinics like the Montana Spay Neuter Task Force, and the construction
of mega sterilization clinics like the Las Vegas spay/neuter clinic.
Each year, we will kill over a billion dogs and countless more cats
all over the world, simply because they represent ìsurplus wasteî. The
number one cause of death for companion animals is still euthanasia.
Large humane societies waste far too much money on housing of animals,
expensive facilities, and elaborate salaries. They tend to be run
like a for-profit business. Smaller rescue groups often lean toward the
ìanimal collecting business.î They tend to be poorly run and are set up
as self gratifying little chieftains.
Veterinarians donít view overpopulation as something our profession
needs to address. They treat a smaller percentage of companion
animals in our society each year. They provide more complex, advanced,
and expensive medicine to a very small percentage of financially
affluent owners. The reality is, as our level of technology and
medical knowledge goes up, the number of animals that benefit from
these advances goes down.
There is little debate that animal laws, and public awareness, especially
with regard to companion animals are changing. Twenty years
ago it was estimated (grossly underestimated) that we were killing
around 24 million dogs and cats per year in America. Now it is estimated
(grossly underestimated) that we are killing four to six million
dogs and cats per year in America.
In my professional opinion, humane societies, animal rescue groups,
and veterinarians cause more pain and suffering than they alleviate.
Humane organizations play with words and statistics to make you
feel better about overpopulation, euthanasia and shelters (animal
warehouses). They make it appear they have done or are doing so
much more than they really are. They boast that only 4 to 6 million
animals are killed because of all their hard work. They contend only
unadoptable animals are euthanized. Unadoptable means: broken leg,
ringworm, bad upper-respiratory disease, urinary issues due to diet
etc, etc, etc (a lot of treatable issues). It has been great marketing, to
make so much, out of so little. They get rich while pretending they
generally care about the plight of companion animals. I am here to ask
you, the public, to demand that these groups start making a real difference.
First, you must understand that you cannot, I repeat, cannot,
adopt, warehouse or rescue your way out of overpopulation! People
feel like they can help by donating to tangible things like brick and
mortar, ìnice new buildings.î The truth is that large kill shelters are
simply a waste of money. I canít argue they donít do some good, but
large shelters whether they are ìkillî or ìno-killî are not cost effective
for what society gets in return. I argue that euthanasia should never be
accepted as a form of population control. It is simply not the solution.
Donít get me wrong, there are things far worse than death for a lot of
animals. For example, being warehoused in a no-kill shelter can be far
worse than death! I have never seen a no-kill shelter that wasnít overtly
practicing cruelty to animals or at best, neglectful in their care. Yes,
this includes no-kill shelters worth millions of dollars.
It is the humane organizations that I find the most hypocritical. To
get totally radical, groups could literally take all their animals to animal
control/government agencies or refuse to accept any new animals.
This might force local officials and society to truly deal with the overpopulation
problem. If humane groups are truly interested in solving
overpopulation then their primary focus must be on spay/neuter. Even
if that means doing it for free, and even if that means offending veterinarians.
The secondary focus has to be education. Education not only
means reaching out to schools, education means providing behavioral
counseling and training classes to the public. Once again warehousing
and adopting will never solve the overpopulation problem. I believe
no-kill shelters are the most inhumane trend in animal welfare.
This trend has allowed for the warehousing of sick and dying animals,
while hording and collecting, have become the norm. No-kill does not
mean you love animals, it means you love the idea of animals, you love
the money it guarantees, and you love the idea of your great sacrifice
for the animals. What a joke! The only sacrifice is the physical, psychological
and general well being of the animals in your care. The saddest
part is we live in the richest country on earth, yet I see a lot of countries
that have already figured these things out. America is all about
marketing and perception with less and less emphasis on facts and results.
There are many things far worse than death. So, as you give your
money, be sure you know what you are getting in return. Far more of
you are contributing to the problem and not contributing to the solution.
I donít blame society in general but I most certainly blame the
so called animal welfare movement and the veterinary profession, as
they should be the true sentinels of animal welfare in America. They,
we, and I have failed miserably with this task. However, it is never too
late to correct the course we have chosen. It does take work, energy,
and desire to make the right decisions and be willing to stand your
ground. I implore anyone reading this to make a change and donít give
blindly. Give with conditions and give with true compassion. Give to
make a real difference and stop buying into all the marketing in the
animal community. Remember, while brick and mortar looks great it
does nothing in the long run to truly solve the problems we have. Also
remember that simply being alive does not infer quality of existence.
Veterinarians contribute to companion animal suffering with their
hypercritical opinions regarding the value of companion animals, and
their innate ability to routinely rationalize $3,000 - $5,000 for procedures
that can easily be done for far less. Okay, so itís the American
way, weíre all about market forces. Veterinarians canít be ìforcedî to
change what they do! Or better yet, veterinarians do not want to lower
the standard of care to their beloved clients. Now thatís a good one!
Letís see, if you canít afford a $3,000 surgery (say an exploratory for
a foreign body) then we have to put your pet to sleep? Where did the
value or compassion go? Iím not going to lecture you about low cost
alternatives; Iím not going to lower my price for this single mom with
two kids and a minimum wage job. Your animal is so valuable to veterinarians
and their level of medicine is so high, its better just to kill
your pet and get a new one? After all, new animals are a dime a dozen.
You can argue that some people should not have animals, but they do.
They probably should not have the children that they have either. The
reality is people and dogs/cats have evolved together for thousands of
years. There is great benefit to having companion animals both physically
and mentally. Having raised three kids with a yellow lab Iím here
to say that dog was very much a part of my family. I have always been
able to make the distinction between humans and animals. But, I canít
say that all humans are better than that dog of mine. My dog had more
to offer me and my little part of the world than a lot of humans in this
world. We have come to identify ìour petsî as part of the family and
yes they are very important to our little worlds. So telling a poor person,
an over extended person, a person of unfortunate circumstances,
that its $3,000 or death to their family member just isnít an ethical, a
moral, or a compassionate option.
The only light I see in the veterinary industry is that we graduate
more women than men these days- much to the dismay of all the old,
fat, white guys in the three piece suits. These women are actually
forcing compassionate changes in the industry. A lot of veterinarians
want it both ways, they want to believe their time and skills are highly
valuable, and that your companion animal is worthy of thousands of
dollars of investment but ñ and a very big but; if I happen to malpractice
or if you donít have enough money then the value of the animal
changes to virtually nothing. Clearly, value is not intrinsic to any given
animal but solely based on the owners perception and financial abilities.
There has never been a clear line in my mind when too much,
is in fact, too much. There has always been a clear line in my mind
that all companion animals have a true intrinsic value. If anyone believes
most veterinarians are in fact veterinarians because they ìloveî
animals or generally think about animal welfare on a level other than
financial, then I am here to tell you that you are sadly mistaken. Having
said all that, as a veterinarian, I can tell you in order to help others
you have to own a successful business. Of course money is a factor
in life, as are medical costs, educational costs and costs of running a
business. Unfortunately, very few veterinarians are as well trained in
business as they are in medicine. If animals were dying at the rate we
euthanize them the veterinary profession would be pouring tons of
money and energy into research to solve the problem.
Because veterinarians feel companion animal overpopulation is a
societal issue, they can turn a blind eye. I submit that we as veterinarians
are uniquely qualified to deal with this societal issue. I further
submit that if we as a profession deal with companion animal overpopulation,
we will elevate our status as professionals in our society.
Being recognized both nationally and internationally for my work
in the overpopulation debate, I promise to never waiver in my commitment
to reduce the number of unwanted companion animals worldwide.
I will never accept euthanasia as a form of population control. I
will never support no-kill shelters in any way. I will never support kill
shelters, unless they spend more money on spay/neuter and education
than they do on sheltering. We cannot adopt, shelter, warehouse or kill
our way out of companion animal overpopulation. We can demand
and change what we do, who we support and how we support them. If
veterinarians really want animals to be more valuable in our society
then, I submit, reducing the surplus of bodies will help accomplish this.
If the supply goes down and demand is the same then value increases,
pretty basic economics. Thus, if you donít do it for humane or ethical
reasons then you can obviously do it for long term monetary benefit. I
will continue to train vets from all over the world in safe, fast, efficient
spay/neuter techniques. I will continue to build clinics in other countries
to use as training centers. I will continue to spay and neuter every
companion animal that passes through my doors. Not the smallest of
birds, shall fall from the sky that the father does not know. We have a
moral and ethical contract with our companion animal friends that we
need to uphold in a more ethical way.