Nathan Winograd

A couple of weeks ago when I was scrolling through my Facebook feed I saw that two books were made available for free download on Amazon. Irreconcilable Differences and Redemption, both by Nathan Winograd.  Of course I had heard of Nathan Winograd and his "No Kill Nation" movement. I don't think you can volunteer in animal rescue and NOT know who he is and what he stands for. But, since I'm a realist when it comes to animal rescue and sheltering, I never bothered to delve into his world.

Since these books were free, and I'm not one to turn down things that are free if I might find them remotely interesting, I downloaded them and started on Redemption. I didn't get very far, though, because the first part of the book is a history lesson about the ASPCA, and I find history lessons boring on a good day. I find them to be absolutely mind numbing when dates and names start jumping around and getting all out of order. No biggie, I thought, since I downloaded two books, I'd just start with the other one.  Yeah, that one starts out as a giant history lesson too. Blah.

I skipped ahead in Irreconcilable Differences to the next chapter and settled in, expecting to read a fair assessment of how shelters are run and what challenges they face.  Instead all I saw was blame and ridicule and the tone was pretty nasty. He blamed shelter directors for being lazy and actually preferring to kill shelter animals rather than take care of them.  He blamed shelter staff for deplorable conditions as though they have any power to make them better.

I admit that I haven't gotten very far into either book, but I was LIVID by what I had read so far. I have no doubt that there are bad shelters out there, but for the love of God and all that is holy, he could have at LEAST spent a year of his life WORKING in one of those shelters and experienced how hard it is to make changes when those who approve them answer to "the people" and don't work exclusively in the shelter.

Mr. Winograd claims that any shelter can reach no kill status if they WANT to, but I can tell you, it takes more than just wanting to.  The shelter I volunteer in just happens to be in the category of "no kill", meaning that we don't kill for space, but we didn't get to be that way over night. It took YEARS of asking, begging, pleading, lobbying, researching, and following up to get the approval to make the changes needed to achieve that status.  The new director and management didn't just walk in on the first day and say "OK! This is how we're going to do things from now on!" and POOF! it was done.  For Mr. Winograd to suggest that municipal shelters can do that shows just how ignorant he is about his own cause.

I'm still angry on behalf of the shelter staff and volunteers out there that desperately want to see change within their own walls but can't.  The jurisdictions that have no budget and can't even take care of the animals they take in, let alone pay someone to seek the approval to make the changes they long for.

I'm angry on behalf of the shelters that are plagued by owner surrenders every day. Like BARCS in Maryland.  They have to kill EVERY DAY just to make room for the unwanted animals that come through their doors.  The numbers of intakes on any given day are staggering!  That shelter takes in over 12000 animals per year.  That's more than three times the number of animals my shelter takes in.

Mr. Winograd would have you believe that it's not the fault of the pet dumping public that are the force behind euthanasia in shelters, that it's strictly lazy directors and managers. I would LOVE to know exactly how a shelter like BARCS, with the numbers of surrenders they have, with the numbers of adoptions they manage to get, with the numbers of animals in foster care (200 on any given day), with the numbers of rescues that go in there each and every day, pull animals into their own programs, advocate and beg for the public to adopt the animals there...is supposed to achieve a live release rate of over 90%. What more can they do?  Is there something they're missing?  Because I can't see it if they are.  . 

Maybe the answers to my questions are in the books.  Maybe he does pipe down on the judgment and actually offers solutions to the real problems and obstacles that get in the way of shelter efforts to save as many as they can. If they are, maybe one day my anger will simmer down to a point where I can pick up the books and attempt to read them again and find out what they are.  Until that day comes I am GLAD my downloads did not line that man's pockets with any type of monetary gain.