A couple of days ago a fellow dog lover and rescue dog owner pointed the book "Redemption - The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America" by Nathan J. Winograd, out to get my opinion.

I haven't heard about the book till now and can't really comment on it because I haven't read it. But I sure have an opinion on the title.
Overpopulation myth? What? Where does that guy live? If he can show me one region in North America that has enough foster homes and good, I emphasize good, homes for all homeless pooches I'd love to see that with my own eyes. Does he think that euthanasia statistics from humane societies and animals shelters are propaganda so they can make money? Has the author ever worked or volunteered at a shelter? I doubt it because than he'd know that there is NO MONEY made at a shelter. The folks working there certainly don't do it to become rich. They do it because there is a need and for the love of the animals.

I wonder if the Author might be a puppy miller or large scale breeder, which is essentially the same, who sees his furs swimming away due to the negative publicity puppy mills get lately? Is he affiliated with folks that create life en mass for profit and needs to justify their cruelties? I'll keep my ears open and will probably also order the book and comment more on it once I have read it.

I also have an opinion regarding No Kill shelters - the second part of the books title.
Popular with the public because no-one wants to see a dog euthanized, I am not a supporter of No Kill shelters, even though I do think that every dog has the right to live and almost every dog with behavior problems can be rehabilitated under the right circumstances and with the right owners.
The sad fact is that there aren't enough monetary resources, space, and knowledgeable people out there to ensure that every dog has a safe place to park his leash at and help for him to become a content and safe for the public pooch. That is because there is an OVERPOPULATION!
DUH!

So the typical No Kill shelter either only accepts dogs that are easily adopted out or hangs on to dogs till they find a permanent home, sometimes for weeks/months/years. Because space is limited, they have to deny entrance to other homeless dogs till space becomes available. That means that many strays and ferals are left were they're at, may die, suffer and continue to procreate. Some no kill shelters abort puppies when they get a pregnant female. So turning away dogs that need a place to live; leaving dogs behind that need rescuing; aborting puppies that could live; and not accepting certain breeds or personalities of dogs because they are difficult to adopt out is killing them indirectly and the term No Kill shelter does not apply.

As a dog trainer and behavior consultant I also have had cases where the new owners euthanized the dog because he/she was too difficult to live with. Even if the adoption contract stipulated that the dog had to be returned to the shelter. Some No Kill shelters pass their problem on to others, which is especially sad when children are involved that bond to the dog but can't keep him because of severe behavior problems.

In addition the non-adoptable dogs live out there lives in a cage, which is mental and emotional abuse.

What I do like are No Kill sanctuaries that have enough space and no dog is turned away, no dog is kept in a cage, and no dog is expected to rehabilitate so that she fits nicely into suburbia. But unless we have more of those, for some dogs euthanasia is the most humane solution.

Or, we could all get that book and stop "believing" in overpopulation - and live happily ever after.