The Bee's editorial on the animal shelter ("A slum for animals," March 16) makes many good points, but it is wrong and irresponsible to flatly state it is impossible for an open-admission shelter to be no-kill. The statement that achieving a no-kill standard requires selective admission is also false. Open-admission shelters exist and work very well. Anyone who had done his or her homework would know this.
Blaming the shelter's problems on "irresponsible pet owners" is just a convenient way to shift attention away from outmoded and ineffective shelter management methods.
Animal rights advocates continue to pursue various pet ownership restrictions to reduce animal populations. That idea has never worked and negatively affects public support for animal services.
While the shelter is required to hold animals for five days before euthanizing them, it is not required to kill a single one once that time is up. It's just what they do, because they don't know how to get living animals through their system.
Applying known, successful no-kill methods here would solve that problem and in short order. Certainly if other shelters can do it, this shelter can too.