I am really confused about any opposition toward "no kill."
Everyone who loves animals should be really excited about this. Wow, hundreds of other cities, whole communities, open-admission shelters are saving over 90 percent of the animals that come in. (Ever hear of Reno, Nev.; Austin, Texas; Seattle?)
Why would anyone, especially the board of directors of Maui's main shelter, rather defend the status quo instead of embracing 21st-century ways of saving them?
No kill is doing all that can be done to help every healthy and treatable animal that comes through the door while figuring out how to prevent others from coming in, including those labeled as feral.
It's not trying a couple things and quitting because you realize it takes effort. It's wholeheartedly committing to a new way of looking at these animals and figuring out what needs to be done to help them.
It takes a community but it starts with those in charge of the main public shelter, which has shown why it is so necessary to get a new chief executive officer and BOD who really understand the no-kill philosophy and are dedicated to implementing it.
If anyone reading this doubts that no kill can happen here, I am betting they have never actually looked into the subject. Don't take my word for it, educate yourselves. Go to www.nokilladvocacycenter.org or www.nokillmaui.org.
Aren't the lives of these animals worth it?