Explore the impact on animals, resources, and the community. Traditional animal shelters. Discover the ethical implications of no - kill vs. “ irremediable suffering ” means an animal who has a poor or grave prognosis for being able to live without severe, unremitting physical pain even with prompt, necessary, and comprehensive veterinary care. “irremediable physical suffering” means an animal who has a poor or grave prognosis for being able to live without severe, unremitting pain even with prompt, necessary, and comprehensive veterinary care. At its simplest definition , no kill shelters and no kill communities save all healthy and treatable pets. Some organizations define “ no - kill ” as a 90 percent live-release rate while others use less stringent standards. Learn what the benchmark means, why it matters, and how 2 out of 3 shelters are already there. But it can be challenging to understand how individual shelters put this concept into practice. Challenge your perceptions and ponder our societys moral compass. · before many of us within the no kill movement felt comfortable with the answer to questions of whether or not “feral” cats suffered on the street and whether or not no kill was possible, we had already rejected mass killing. There is no universally accepted definition for the term “ no - kill. ” however, it’s important to understand that “ no - kill ” does not mean no euthanasia. An end to the killing of all non-irremediably suffering animals. No - kill shelters save 90% or more of pets who enter.

📖 Continue Reading: