Hi @TerriD,
Thank you for the compliment on my post, for inviting additional discussion on this topic and, most importantly, for believing there IS a solution. At the risk of complicating this issue further, I will add that the animals most at risk are the ones we DON'T see...never posted, no advocates, the only records of their existences being intake numbers and kill dates (if they ever enter a sheltering environment at all).
And, no, there is no single source of social media posts but there is a single reason: panic. As mentioned, 80% of animals at shelters in my service area rely on rescue for survival. Every week there are kill lists published which triggers begging for rescue placement, foster homes, pledges, shares, likes, etc all of which is further complicated by social media algorithms controlling who sees what & when. And, with 80% in need, the resources are consumed much more quickly than replenished. In the last 5 years here, there has been no meaningful reduction in intake nor has it been addressed. This cycle repeats weekly for us and I'm sure shelters with similar demographics (rural, low-income, higher than average per capita intake rate) share our dilemma. And, even with the myriad of posts from all manner of advocates, many still don't benefit from social media. An animal control in our state just killed a cat and her neonate kittens for lack of space. Anybody reading this would have found a way to get them out if we had known; for that AC, it was just another day of killing cats.
What does the solution look like? From my perspective, it requires transitioning "dog catchers" into animal welfare professionals. And the transition will require participation from all directions -- governing agencies, current advocates, future advocates we create, media, public policy.The tools needed to achieve No Kill are widely available and not particularly difficult to implement but I don't see them reaching "the front lines" of struggling municipal facilities because many of the decision makers in these facilities are ignorant, apathetic and hyper-focused on daily minutia. That is not intended to insult -- although some in these positions should not be in them -- but to create awareness that many in positions of authority over animals do not meet the "compassionate director" standard. It's very difficult for some people to break the "this is the way we've always done it" mentality. New ideas can be interpreted as criticism; add to that the emotional nature of animal rescue and it's not unusual for an "us vs. them" mentality to surface. Many volunteers have been banned for asking questions and are too afraid animals will suffer the consequences to enforce their constitutional rights. Moreover, ACs generally answer to Departments of Agriculture that are primarily concerned with population levels and administrative record keeping. We still have municipal ACs that don't allow public adoptions (??!!).
Some unfortunate examples:
A shelter manager that I was assisting/mentoring recently quit after months on the job because Department of Agriculture required training where she was forced to learn how to kill a dog. The dogs were provided by a "shelter" near the training. As I'm sure you are aware, depression & suicide rates are very high in animal welfare. She got out before it consumed her. I sincerely doubt the Department of Agriculture provides equal training on enrichment programs, community outreach, foster programs, etc. So, those who "survive" longer than a few months become desensitized to the killing, a broken system perpetuates and an advocate is lost. [I was unaware this training took place but our group is investigating].
A few years ago, I had an animal control officer tell me that she "hoped the animals kept coming in because it was job security" for her.
One of our own volunteers recently told me that spay/neuter prior to adoption "wasn't helpful". (Our local facilities rely on adopters to comply with s/n/rabies law).
A shelter employee complained to me that she had to drive "all the way to (a city 15 miles away)" for the holiday party; Same employee refused to allow an adoption return for a dog that was found abandoned a few days later.
Last year, a repeat dog fighting offender was finally convicted after 107 dogs were found on his property. Suffice to say that the conviction would have been less likely had agencies other than the local AC not been involved.
I'm sure we all have similar experiences but the point I'm trying to illustrate is that many areas are decades behind in animal welfare best practices and the people in authority will never take the initiative to ask for help, attend a No Kill conference or implement life-saving alternatives. And, while I understand donors want to ensure their funds are put to the highest & best use, many grant funders will not support "friends of" type organizations. In many places, it's the "friends of" that are the only No Kill voice.
I apologize for the length...as feared this is a conversation that will not end until the killing does. The only way I can think of to simplify my answer to your question about the solution is to say that the "dog catcher" transition may benefit from the "divide and conquer" approach. The No Kill tools are logical and have been proven enough times that objections can be overcome. Force No Kill concepts into the conversation at every opportunity...advertising, legislation, state-required training, prevalent in all phases of animal welfare...perhaps No Kill conferences could be held more frequently in strategic geographic locations and be required training through local governing authorities... perhaps funding for No Kill training in strategic geographic locations as many municipal agencies will not cover the cost for staff or volunteers...
The transformation will not come soon enough for this audience but, eventually, those who are hindering our progress because of their ignorance and apathy will come to see that No Kill is not optional. <3
#MarketingandSocialMedia