The first item was in Bark (yes, I read “the dog culture magazine.” Anyone surprised?) A new survey conducted by the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) found that 21% of all the dogs and cats in US households have been adopted from a shelter. Another 6% have been adopted from private rescue organizations. That means – and I was surprised at how surprised I was – that almost three-quarters of all pets come from pet stores, breeders, and other non-rescue sources.
The other item was another survey showing that “71 percent of pet owners feel that shelters should only be allowed to euthanize animals when they are too sick to be treated or too aggressive to be adopted. Only 25 percent said that euthanasia should be used as a means to control the animal population” (http://www.petside.com/no-kill-shelters).
Put these together: only about a quarter of people with pets have given a home to an animal from a shelter or rescue, but almost three quarters of them do not want shelters to kill homeless animals.
Houston, we have a problem.
The gap between expressed values and actual practice is not unique to animal welfare. These figures, and the gap between them, are remarkably close to those for environmental concern and practice. About 80% of survey respondents say they care about the environment and want to protect nature, but only about 20% actually do anything about it (e.g., recycle, use alternative transportation, alter their diets, donate, or volunteer for environmental reasons).
There is a huge gap between what we value and what we do. Part of the gap results from a lack of knowledge. People may care about dwindling rainforests without knowing that their fast food hamburger contributed to the problem.
While accurate, accessible information is necessary, it is not adequate. Sometimes people know what needs to be done and still cannot do it, for a variety of reasons. They may think that just one person cannot make a difference or that the required change is too hard.
People who love their pets are usually horrified to learn that millions of healthy, sociable dogs and cats are killed in the U.S. annually because they do not have homes. Hard as it is for those of us involved in animal advocacy to believe, a lot of people do not connect this monstrous statistic with their own lives. For example, I have an acquaintance who recently purchased two “teacup schnauzers” from an online dealer. She probably had never heard the term “puppy mill.” She loves her puppies and is already driving them two hours to a veterinary specialist who can deal with their dental problems. Ouch, on all accounts. The teachable moment may have passed in this case (though I do contemplate giving her a copy of the book Saving Gracie, about puppy mills). However, if nothing else, this is a reminder that good people with good intentions do not know everything that we know. In some cosmic balancing act, two healthy, friendly puppies died in a shelter because she bought guinea-pig sized dogs with chronic health problems. And she had no idea.
I have another colleague who told me, a few years ago: “I know you won’t approve.” (Whoa, I thought. This had better be good.) “I just bought a puppy from a breeder.” He was right. I didn’t approve. But we had never talked about it, so his sense of my disapproval came from more subtle sources. He knew that all my dogs were rescues and that I volunteered for rescue organizations. And most important, he felt there was a contradiction between rescuing animals and buying them from breeders. He was defensive because he had knowledge that he did not act on. (Sidenote: Although in general I do not approve of bringing more puppies into the world, I don’t believe that there is always a contradiction between breeding and rescue. I have learned about some breeders I respect a great deal, who rescue and foster and promote rescue and in general do a great deal of good for animals. But I don’t think my colleague went to that kind of breeder.)
His guilt and my disapproval are not getting us anywhere. We both love dogs. What can we do to close the gap between us? And more important, to close the gap between the dogs who need good homes and number of good homes looking for them? As my grandmother used to say, “you catch more flies with sugar than with vinegar.” Being judgmental does not change minds, hearts, or – most important – actions.
Here’s what I have learned from years of studying these issues in the context of environmental practice: We have to make the right thing easy and the wrong thing harder. It has to be easier to ride your bike to work and harder to park your SUV. (Sorry. It’s true.) And the right thing has to be not just easy but intrinsically rewarding, e.g., fun and meaningful. So it has to be not just more convenient but more enjoyable and rewarding to get a dog from a rescue or shelter than from a pet store.
Like all our battles, this one has to be fought on many fronts. There are a lot of great initiatives that work well to bring people into shelters and rescue organizations who would not otherwise have looked there for a pet. Some of the most effective strategies include off-site adoption events, foster volunteers who are also adoption advocates, and training and followup support for adopters. Studies show that positive images are more effective - happy pictures that let people imagine an animal as part of their family are more effective advertisements than sad "prison" pictures of miserable animals.
We know how big the gap is between what animals need and what they get from us. The answer is always the same: it takes a village. It takes creativity and dedication, evident in Beth's amazing pictures. It takes struggles on many different fronts and appreciation for the contributions every one of us makes.
No comments:
Post a Comment