The No Kill Equation

KAILUA-KONA — Two decades ago, the no kill movement was just a dream, Today, the animal shelters in some 500 communities around the country are now saving 90 to 95 percent of the animals they take in.

Hawaii Island could be one of them.

That’s according to Nathan Winograd, an expert on the no kill movement, brought to the island for a day-long conference sponsored by Big Island Dog Rescue as that group squares off with the Hawaii Island Humane Society in a bitter legal battle that carried allegations of defamation and conspiracy from both sides.

Such struggles are nothing new as no-kill advocates around the nation grapple with ways to keep entrenched shelters from killing animals and blaming their euthanasia rates on the community, Winograd told the room of about 40 people on Saturday.

“We’ve all heard the excuses: “There are too many animals. If only people were responsible. How dare you criticize people who have dedicated their lives to saving animals?’” said Winograd, who takes his case to about 30 communities annually and is the author of the book “Redemption.”

Winograd, a former shelter director and founder of the No Kill Advocacy Center based in California, said there is no need for Hawaii Island to reinvent the wheel if the community is fed up with the euthanization of more than 3,200 dogs and some 5,300 cats annually. The Hawaii Island Humane Society euthanized about 50 percent of dogs and 80 percent of cats.

Success in reducing euthanasia has been proven to hinge upon pouring energy into pet foster programs; increased adoptions, including bringing the animals to the public through offsite adoption sites; high volume, low-cost neutering; trap-neuter-release programs for feral cats and medical and behavioral rehabilitation of animals, among 17 steps that Winograd term the No Kill Equation.

San Francisco has used a “Dial-A-Cat” program where people can call in and order an adopted pet to be delivered to their homes. The city has successfully employed offsite adoptions at convenient locations for the public. Austin Pets Alive! has adopted sick animals out to people who want to nurse them back to health.

Pet retention programs help overwhelmed owners to make better decisions about whether to surrender an animal, Winograd said. Animal control officers simply taking more time to find the homes of lost animals can help reduce the number of animals put down, he said.

Municipalities can pass laws prohibiting the killing of animals in shelters based on age, color or appearance, or killing animals as long as cages are available, or — like California, making it illegal to euthanize an animal that a rescue is willing to take.

It requires out-of-the-box thinking, and some of the most successful reformers had no experience as shelter managers, but they knew they had to reach out to the public, Winograd said. The state needs just one island to embrace the no kill paradigm, and that will put pressure on the rest, he said.

Austin’s animal control facilities were euthanizing 23,000 animals a year, or 65 percent of their intake, before a five-year long process in which no kill advocates pressed for change, held candidate forums and polled political hopefuls on their attitudes toward reform. Today, the facilities are 97 percent no kill, he said.

Increased public engagement helps create community buy-in, Winograd said, but change generally doesn’t come from within a shelter organization. And people who want to make changes should gear up for the long haul, given the legacy of resistance on the part of shelters and by politicians who support the status quo until their constituents force their hand.

“It’s going to have to come from people challenging it from the outside,” he said. “The success is a result of individuals and small organizations — people like yourselves.”

Cites across the nation have managed to embrace the no kill model regardless of demographics, income levels or location. But it’s a marathon, not a sprint, Winograd said, to change a paradigm that’s been in place for 150 years and really only challenged over the past 15.

“Every one of these successful communities was at one time as regressive in policy and had as high of a rate of killing as your community does,” Winograd said. “The biggest obstacle is the fundamental belief that change is impossible because they believe their community is particularly entrenched or peculiarly irresponsible.”

The claim that there aren’t enough homes for the animals misses the mark, Winograd said.

“We need to convince people to go to the shelters for an animal, and the shelters need to keep the animals alive long enough for people to adopt them,” he said.

During the conference, Winograd screened his film “Redemption,” which detailed the struggle the no-kill movement and the conditions that gave rise to it.

It was hard film for Paauilo mauka resident Cheryl Pascual to watch. She wiped away tears with a wadded up napkin during a break in the conference at the Courtyard King Kamehameha’s Kona Beach Hotel.

“I’m just an animal lover. They’re my children,” she said of the 10 rescued dogs and six horses on her farm.

Chairs set off to the side, labeled with the names of the HIHS leadership, stood vacant. Due partly to the legal battle, the society has repeatedly told the press it has no comment on BIDR.

Bridget Neher said the history of resistance to no kill reminded her of the situation on this island.

“We want to stop the killing, exchange ideas and set down a plan,” she said outside the conference.

A no kill petition circulating on the websites of most of the Big Island rescue organization contains 7,000 signatures. Maya Dolena, co-founder of Aloha Animal Advocates, said a follow-up meeting will be held July 16 in Waimea to formulate a plan and a core group to move the no kill initiative forward on this island.

“We want to know where we’re going to go from here, the next steps that we as a group can take,” said Tasi Autele, founder of BIDR.

Those interested in the meeting can email Dolena at mayadolena@gmail.com

Info: www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/shelter-reform.html