Alacrity -> a virtual dog game | sim of the century

Signup

index

SPCA; good or bad?

Started By

I have been thinking about something quite a bit lately... And that is whether or not the SPCA is really as good as it would like people to believe.

Now I am sure the SPCA has done some wonderful things for animals in the years it has existed - I am definitely not denying this.

My point is, a lot of people seem to think that the SPCA is always about doing what's best for the animals, when in reality I know from experience that this is not always the case.

Some SPCA shelters send hundreds of dogs with 'irreversible' aggression issues to kill shelters where they are euthanized without a second chance. Such aggression issues are usually very easily trained out of a dog... I know of a friend who wanted to adopt a dog from the SPCA and was told that his aggression issues were irreversible when all that was wrong was the dog had mild resource guarding issues. (These can easily be trained out of a dog in 99% of cases - this dog was never properly given a chance.)

This friend was a dog trainer with a couple years of experience under her belt already, and she was denied the chance to give this dog a home and a new lease on life.

Isn't that what the SPCA is all about? Giving animals homes, and a new lease on life? That's what they would like you to believe, with their fancy commercials...

Also, I volunteered at the SPCA for about 6 months in the summer of 2007, and in that time I was asked to euthanize several dogs and cats. I am in no way certified to perform a euthanasia (I was only 13 at the time), however the vet overseeing this particular shelter not only encouraged me to do it, but told me that I had to. (This vet later lost his job and his veterinary license, if you were wondering.)

I think that while the SPCA does some good for animals in general, there are things that go on there behind closed doors that the general public doesn't see, or really think about...

While I may have had some bad experiences with the SPCA, I still think they are a crucial part of the stray dog/cat population control, and while they may not always do what is best, they do encourage people to adopt, which is a crucial part of encouraging responsible pet ownership.

What are your thoughts on the SPCA? Are they overrated, and why do you feel the way you do?

Looking forward to hearing your opinions. :)

08-12-2011 at 10:34 AM

I think it's hit-and-miss when it comes to SPCA's. The one by my house does an amazing job at homing its dogs and has a clean facility. The one dog we adopted from there years ago had very mild dominance agression and near-crippling hip pain, yet they gave him a second chance with us. And instead of being euthanized, he ended up in a loving home where he was properly trained and given joint supplements that almost completely alleviated his pain. That dog lived a long, happy life. We went there again years later and the facility had grown massively. It looked a lot nicer and they were having a big adoption drive, so they had found a home for almost all their dogs by the time we got there. But then there's also an SPCA where a certain pair of dogs were sent. The original owner passed away and the friend who promised to continue to care for the dogs put them in their local SPCA. My friend and her mom knew these two people and were trying to adopt the dogs from the SPCA (which was a kill shelter) so they wouldn't die. But instead of allowing the dogs to immediately find a very loving home, the SPCA flat out refused to adopt them out. One of the two dogs went kennel crazy and attacked the other(the two were kept together in the same kennel :\ ) and they never told my friends anything after that event. I have a feeling both were euthanized. So, the good ones do a great job of finding homes for good, sound animals and thus rehome most strays and unwanted pets that come through their doors. But the bad ones pretty much euthanize most pets that come into their facility, regardless of their soundness or desirability by prospective owners. I think we should only adopt pets from the ones that are more willing to adopt out instead of euthanize so the good ones can become more effective at what they do.

08-11-2011 at 5:22 PM

We got my Hue from the shelter and they lied about him. They said he would attack if someone touched his paws, but he practically put his paws in our hands. He reaches up and puts them in our hands. :P And there was an aussie there and they said it didn't like kids, but it was licking me all over my face, along with the littlee kids that walked by its' cage. Her name was Candace. They put her down. >:P

07-29-2011 at 7:02 PM

Kat - I tried to volunteer my time at my SPCA - and they rejected me. They stated that they don't accept volunteer trainers because they don't trust them to do what's right - if they wanted a dog trained they'd send it to a rescue group. So no - it's not different that way. I got around it by doing normal volunteer work and spending one on one time with the dogs and doing basics only - things that the staff wouldn't recognize as actual training. Most of the dogs I handled and trained were adopted within a week of me starting to work with them - because they learned the basics so very easily (and some already knew simple things like sit-stays - I was so proud!). Basically, they turned me down because it'd be a liability to claim the dogs were trained, when the trainer was a volunteer and not an employee. And they can't afford to pay for a trainer. Not to mention everyone and his sister's baby-daddy can claim to be a trainer, since you don't need any schooling to claim to be one (see: Cesar Milan - no training, no schooling, just some old outdated books on wolves and force-training military dogs, and having lived on a farm. Yeah. People with less expertise than him can start their own training business).

07-29-2011 at 6:25 PM

The thing is, the SPCA is non-profit, most and/or all care costs and medical costs comes from both donations and adoption fees. Good trainers cost a lot of money, I'm sure if some kind of trainer would volunteer their time then it would be a different story. (note: I haven't read the rest of this post)

07-25-2011 at 2:59 AM

I went to an animal shelter where there was a chocolate lab (I'm pretty sure that's what it was, anyway.) which was agressive towards every person who walked past its kennel. it tried to bite tons of people while i was there, which was only about thirty minutes. We had to leave because they were going to take the dog out to 'see if it was adoptable.' or at least that's what they told me when I asked what they were going to do. I know that they most likely killed it, though, even though I think it could have been trained. Everyone had to leave the building because the dog was too agressive, but I had walked past it earlier and noticed scars all over its back. It had to have been agressive because of something people had done to it in the past. I'm not sure if this was an SPCA shelter or not, though. The SPCA is not helping if they're just going to send dogs who are agressive to kill shelters to be killed. If they want to give dogs a second chance, then they can't be killing them for every agressive thing they do. I live with three dogs, two of them used to be very agressive, but we trained them, and they are fine now. THAT's what the SPCA should be doing.

07-10-2011 at 3:51 AM

i didn't your post im sorry my post was in response to the first lol. but "He has never been aggressive towards another dog, he has never been aggressive towards people and he has a loving home where he is well taken care of and safe. If the SPCA can't respect that, how can I respect them? :c" respect aspca or their cause but don't respect how they do their businness or don't respect corperate businnesses at all because that's what they do.

07-9-2011 at 9:33 AM

Edited my post, Meredith. :P

07-9-2011 at 7:39 AM

spca, is practically the largest and most well known animal rescue globally. frankly they have a Crap load of pressure on them, dealing with the majority of animal situations across the us. it costs a lot of money, doesn't pay much, Way more dogs are coming in then going out, having to feed and bathe and ect for All of them i can understand the fact that they have no choice but to cut corners. maybe one day, every family in america will have whole bunch of pets so aspca has less stress and work on its hands that it won't be forced to cut moral corners. i seriously hope that they just get more money and donations and volunteers and workers and more people will want pets. until then, it's a cruel world we live in, isn't it? that's all i have to say about that,

07-9-2011 at 12:42 AM

Kayla, I can't help but raise my eyebrow a little at your comment about the euthanasias I was asked to perform being a sign that my shelter was "organized". That was completely illegal for me to do. If you mean organized crime, then maybe. :P I think everyone here has made some good points, and I will say that I feel the SPCA generally does more GOOD than BAD**. (Edited. Oops! xD) My bad experiences all happened in the same general area, and I can't vouch for places outside my province/state... I will add that I completely disapprove of their attitudes toward any dog that contains wolf that ends up in their care... If my dog runs away, and the SPCA picks him up, chances are he'll be euthanized on the spot. He has never been aggressive towards another dog, he has never been aggressive towards people and he has a loving home where he is well taken care of and safe. If the SPCA can't respect that, how can I respect them? :c

edit history

2011-07-09 02:32:30 by #5636

07-8-2011 at 9:08 PM

I honestly believe that the SPCA does do good things for animals. Their message is clear and it's true that they wouldn't want to be in that organization if they didn't love animals. With that story of the vet making you euthanize that animal, Fyrella, it just goes to show how well organized they are. I love the SPCA and I respect what they do for animals, but there are only so many things that very few people can control all at once. If you think about it, there are so many SPCAs around the country, for one, and even the president of the SPCA wouldn't know what their doing. If you have a very broad organization with people helping you, even though they're 2,000 miles away, there is a slight chance that they could be doing whatever they want. The main reason shelters euthanize aggressive dogs, from what I've heard, is because the dog has probably bit someone and the staff needs to check for rabies. It's sad that those dogs that are healthy never had the chance to be rehabilitated before having to go through such extremes, but yet again, who ever said we had a perfect society. For all we know, the only corrupt people are the ones that can hide in plain sight. It's sad for all those animals.

07-8-2011 at 4:49 PM

I like the SPCA. Even if they do put some animals down, it's still a lot better than the animal starving to death. They're all the good things about PETA lumped into one orginazation. *WILL ADD MORE LATER*

03-19-2011 at 1:31 AM

I volunteer at my local shelter, Anderson Animal Shelter, and we are a low-kill shelter. I've been there for about 5 months, (working with cats) And only ONE cat had to be put down (FIP, in case you were wondering.) I also went on Yahoo, before applying to read some reviews. Horrrible reviews. Saying the people only go there for money, and that they are veeery critical of volunteers. Now, i'm ready to write a new response, Saying that these people were like, out of it. Because the employees at AAS are the nicest people I know. Sooo. I personally don't think shelters are a bad idea, As long as their kill rate is less than High. :)

03-5-2011 at 10:50 PM

I was gonna say something but Cuddles said everything I was gonna say. If they adopted out a dog with issues to someone who wasn't qualified to handle a dog like that, that could mean big trouble.

edit history

2011-03-05 14:51:21 by #5484

03-5-2011 at 5:28 PM

That could actually be a legal problem, Larth. A similar issues cropped up here with the SPCA that was very long and drawn out...but it wasn't exactly the rescue's fault. Their contracts (required to become 501 c 3 certified) specify that they have to adopt their animals to a home that will keep them for life or, if they cannot, will return the animal to the rescue. If the original breeder is looking to find a more suitable home for the dog, it would be a breach of the adoption contract...which could put the SPCA in a very tough position, legally. Plus, I could see a little extra confusion where breeders' contracts are concerned simply because of the home the dog was in prior. I know the breeder can't always keep an eye on every pup they sell all the time, but a terrier (like a Westie) should require some pretty serious promises from a new home...including to never leave the dog alone with infants, toddlers, or small children. I could understand why the SPCA would be reticent to send him back to her. Absolute refusal is probably a little overboard, but again...it could be a legal problem, and not entirely the fault of the SPCA. The laws surrounding 501 c 3 certification are very specific and very rigid. Even "special circumstances" are usually not excused for deviations, and that's decided by the state, not the rescue itself. Also, as said before, I'm sure that varies with location. Not all rescues are the same, by any means.

edit history

2011-03-05 09:28:29 by #4781

03-5-2011 at 11:25 AM

The SPCA could use some sort of policy on giving turned-in dogs with contracts back to the original breeders. :/ There's an issue in my area over a westie who was left alone with a toddler in the floor, with the westie's toys, and the dog bit the toddler on the hand. One little puncture wound. The owner is an old woman, whose son was watching the dog. The son took the dog to the SPCA to be quarantined, and was planning on leaving it there because "if they wouldn't keep the dog, he'd find some way to put it down, even if a vet wouldn't do it." The breeder was told of this by the owner. The son won't give the dog back to the breeder, but the SPCA won't release the dog to the breeder even though it's under contract. The breeder even told them that they could neuter the dog, and she'd go through the adoption process, but they refuse to let her have it back because she's a breeder (and obviously because of that, slime and filth and the reason all the dogs in the shelter are there *eyeroll*). They also need to learn more about their breeds. Seriously. I've seen SO many mislabeled dogs, it's not even funny. A tiny chihuahua puppy, not even the size of my hands cupped together (and my hands are small) was put in a kennel and labeled "LAB MIX." When I asked why they thought it was a lab mix, the response I got was "Well, it's black and has a white spot on it's chest. Only lab mixes look like that!" -_- So yeah. Despite the SPCA doing general good... they need some help. They need policies covering special circumstances, as well as they need to have maybe some sort of common sense test before you can work there. c.c

02-28-2011 at 11:41 PM

I like the SPCA. Like most of you guys have said they can't spend all their time working with one animal when quite a few animals come in each day. Any ways it wouldn't be good if someone adopted an aggressive dog and one day a young child did something that upset the dog. Then the kid has to get lots of stitches and the dog gets put down. That won't be good at all. The SPCA try their best but there is only so much effort that they can put into one animal. If lots of animals are aggressive and put up for adoption that wouldn't look good and they could possibly get shut down for that.

edit history

2011-03-19 12:31:53 by #3245

2011-03-19 12:31:44 by #3245

02-28-2011 at 10:34 PM

It's also a libility adopting out agressive animals to people the shelter doesn't have a history with. Let's say that person gets bit and they aren't an understanding person and sues the shelter for adopting them out. People say one thing and do another all the time. "Oh yeah I know she has resource guarding issues, we'll work on it" and then they get bit and "OMG they never told me this blah blah blah." Sadly this is the case, and if they kept and tried to rehab all these animals that takes away their money they could be using to save other animals that are adoptable setting in Kill shelters being euthanized because there was no spot for them in a No-Kill Rescue. How I wish this work was at a point where all shelters could be no kill and where EVERY animal had a chance. Sadly until everyone who isn't a "responsible" breeder get's their pets fixed and we have animals running the streets all the time, Kill Shelters are going to exist and dogs with known aggression problems and Feral Cats are going to be Euthanized.

02-27-2011 at 11:48 PM

See the shelter I volunteer at. Their issue with adopting out aggressive dogs is that they cannot trust the public to be responsible with dogs with such issues. Stating that we work to help dogs with aggression and have in the past. A lot of times the dogs are just acting out of the stress. Some shelters need a lot more education, but a lot of the public should be more understanding/educated as well, as to why to shelter does things. I've volunteered there for a year and have never been asked to euthanize. And I know they wouldn't unless I worked their as a kennel staff member. My shelter will not euthanize a perfectly healthy and sound dog. They do however euthanize dogs that have started going "kennel crazy". They don't have enough volunteers who are willing to come and take out the dogs. I can only take out dogs of a certain level (They temperament test and assign levels) because of my age.(15) I don't know much about the SPCA, but these are how I'd prefer shelters to work. I know a lot who are horrid, placing multiple dogs in kennels that are in bad condition. Then the staff members come back to dead dogs due to fights. And the dogs are never taken out, unless adopted. And like Nath said, it can be very expensive to train dogs with aggression issues. And take into consideration the amount of dogs that come in every day. We have a group that comes in on Tuesdays and works with as many dogs as we can. We take in the ones who have more of a chance.(The trainers work with the harder ones on the side) Say if you have 3 perfectly fine dogs, 6 who have been taught no boundaries, 2 with fear, and 1 with a high level of human aggression or dog reactiveness. The dog with the aggression would take a lot of effort, time, and people to work with him. And within that time the other dogs got no work and got sick or became kennel crazy so they were not adopted. In the time it took us to help the aggressive dog. We could of helped those other 8 dogs. I'm not saying this applies everywhere, this is just my personal experience with volunteering and training there.

02-27-2011 at 10:32 PM

I think this varies heavily from organization to organization. The local "humane society" is absolutely awful...they only take purebreeds, and they "adopt" them out for up to 300 dollars a pop. It's terrible. However, one thing you have to take into account are the costs of keeping aggressive dogs when you are a not-for-profit organization that lives on very limited funds and the kindness of strangers. Training costs money, even if you can find one to do it for free, because there's the time and effort of so many of your volunteers put into this one dog...when there are countless others without behavioral issues that they could be saving in his/her place. Now, this is in no way meant to imply dogs with behavioral problems are inferior. I certainly don't think they deserve a home any less. I, myself, have one neurotic pup who will never be okay with most people because of the way he was abused in his first few months of life...I wouldn't trade him for any other dog in the world, of course. But looking at this issue from the rescue's point of view, they are in this to save as many dogs and cats as possible. It's the same reason they can't pay for every, single parvo puppy they find to get expensive treatment: those resources have to be used in the most efficient way possible so as to benefit as many pets as possible. A dog who has even mild aggression tendencies is likely to remain at the shelter, using up space, time, food, blankets, etc. for months...whereas, they could potentially find homes for 3-4 other, more "adoptable" dogs in that time with the same amount of resources. There are rescues that focus specifically on dogs with behavior issues, but not all shelters can. (Actually, check out the series "Dogtown." I think you'll like it.) I'm glad the SPCAs and whatnot that are helping any dogs are there, and I'm thankful they take the time and make the effort to do what they do.

Login
Username:
Password:

Login