My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« A better way | Main | The Changing Narrative »

August 13, 2010



>The solution is solely providing voluntary low-cost spay/neuter services and doing outreach into low-income neighborhoods and HELPING people to spay/neuter.

I totally agree with this. Spay/neuter help is what is needed the most! Most of the people that can afford to fix their pets are doing it. We need to help the ones that cannot afford the costs or don't know enough about spay and neuter and why it is good for their pets.


S/N only helps with one aspect of the homeless pet population - unwated litters. In KC we still see a lot of kittens in the shelter but people are getting on waiting lists for puppies.

What MSN is really about is punishing "irresponsible owners" which includes anyone that keeps their pet natural - regardless of why (money, health of pet, health implications of surgery, showing).


Agreed, Michelle. Here in GA, the West GA Spay-Neuter Clinic has reduced the annual intake at the county shelter by over 17% annually since the clinic opened in 2007. That amounts to 1500 fewer animals being placed in harm's way each year. Last quarter, the kill rate was a sickening 85%-- higher than any annual average for the past five years. Obviously crucial components of the NKE are missing and the Carroll county shelter is not doing its part to save lives, even though a private organization is doing a significant part of the job for them. People are being more responsible and the killing continues unabated because of what passes for leadership at the shelter.

I look at the graphs in this article and see how the 'euthanasia' rate closely tracks the intake rate, and that reveals where the biggest problem lies.


Thanks for your hard work Valerie. Low cost s/n is SOOOO important. And money spent on enforcment of MSN could be used to actually PROVIDE s/n services!

That is sickening...intake reduced and killing going up!?


I recently learned that the shelter nearest to the veterinary clinic in which I work is now offering low-cost spay/neuter. Unfortunately, this information upset and almost seemed to anger some people at work. I cannot comprehend why. Like Joni said, most people who can afford to and who are interested in altering their pets are going to do so, and likely at their trusted veterinarian's office. How many people are not altering their pets (and cats are by far the biggest concern around here) would do so if it were more affordable? I'm thinking quite a few.

When somebody calls on the phone and asks how much it would cost to alter the friendly stray cat who has been hanging around their house having kittens, I cringe to tell them that exam + mandatory rabies vaccine + spay = over $200. The shelter will do it with proof of rabies vaccine for $50. Good for them. That is what this area needs.


I think the reason why the vet clinic is objecting to the shelter providing low cost spay/neuter may be partly because the shelter won't necessarily have a vet available if there are complications following the operation. That potentially leaves the normal vet with an ethical problem if the owner phones to say their cat's stitches are coming out because that's an emergency in the way the original spay wasn't.

On the other hand if the shelter just handed out part-payment vouchers to use at the vet clinic they'd still have the same problem so I can't see they really lose anything by having the shelter on their patch.

The comments to this entry are closed.