- Those that do pretty much what they always did, and endeavor to not euthanize animals, but clearly have to sometimes, when injured or so anti-social they could never be adopted out.
- Mostly tiny, new shelters run by nerdy, short-sighted do-gooders with no actual ability to euthanize, and limited space. So they simply do not accept unadoptable animals, and send those they can't get rid of to the first type to deal with. No animal is euthanized on site, so they are "no kill," get it?
...Since we are a no-kill shelter and have limited space, we can’t take in all animals that need help, even though we would want to...So, what happens to those other animals they can't care for? They clearly don't just roam the streets. Other shelters (contracted to the County) take them in, because someone has to. Which is fine, until shelters like Pet Connection make a big point of how lovey and happy and right they are, and how evil all the others are. Again, from their own site:
...Most families cannot feel good about placing their pet in a traditional shelter setting, especially if euthanasia is a risk...They didn't point to any specific facility, but the implication sure is there. They claim to "save" (no definition, but I presume "adopt out") around 800 animals a year. Our favorite shelter is Animal Haven in Merriam, who are on track to deal with 4,000 animals this year. The KCK city/county shelter handled over 4,200 last year. There are dozens of other facilities. I don't like people who wear their morals on their sleeve, and don't actually /do/ anything about the larger problem. But aside from that I have grown to have a more active dislike, and it's now gone to the point I am comfortable telling everyone. And that's because: