In comments below, a critic opined that there was a 1/3 return rates on 2 for 1 sales of cats. The critic said this was hearsay from a volunteer, and the numbers could not be verified.
As I also stated below, the critics of these life-saving programs never have any hard evidence to back their speculations. They state their opinions are based on their own experience, and therefore true for everyone, everywhere, always.
Therefore I was delighted to receive the comment sent in by the CEO of the Philly shelter, Susan Cosby, who does provide statistical evidence to support the life-saving impact of 2 for 1's.
Susan Cosby said...
I am the Chief Operating Officer of the Philadelphia shelter mentioned and I would like to expand on this topic by noting that our "adopt one, get a second friend for free" program runs 365 days a year for cats and kittens of all ages. It is particularly beneficial for young, playful kittens who can expend energy playing with each other or adult cats who arrived together from a home and have a better chance of leaving together. Additionally, although it does not count cats who may have been adopted then surrendered to other shelters, our return rate averages less than 4%.
To use your refrain - Prove It!. Can you get any credible report to prove this? You know you can't. Why take the word of an organization that has to talk good of it's work in order to get donations? C'mon.
It seems like the program would work much better with two cats, or bunnies.
Two new dogs at the same time would be a handful for even the most experienced with dogs, especially if they are in need of training.
But I feel like with cats, two is definitely better than one.
I agree with that comment. Everyone knows that non profits don't say bad things about themselves. Just because a technique results in more shoe sales doesn't mean you can apply it animals. It lessens their value and that always comes down to a lessen life for those less than valuable pets. I have been a volunteer in a shelter that did this and the results were less than impressive with the animals being returned after a few days. Many times both animals were returned because they "didn't want to split them up". The perception of something "free" almost always means less care is taken. People take care of those things they pay for and work for.
Proof would be nice. We know we can't believe "nokill" Boks. Hard to believe others nowadays too.
I wish the Dept would show the effectiveness of each program.How many extra lives will the buddy program save? How many seniors4seniors? I have a feeling that these programs may save only 5 a month or so. Saving 5 is still a good thing but Boks is hyping these name only programs like they will instantly make LA nokill. I don't think so. It's all just PR like the "Million trees" program that has only planted a few thousand. It also sounds like the "no child left behind" program which actually failed.
I personally feel that LA will be nokill for animals when it is also nocrime, nomurder, notraffic, i.e. never. We can reduce the killing a little but there will always be some. Right now this "nokill" crap is just a myth, a PR stunt, a set up for failure.
According to what I can gather from LA COUNTY records... from Jan06 through Apr07 roughly 14% of adopted dogs were returned and 12% of adopted cats returned. Certainly no where near a 33% return. Regarding LAAS, I see no reason to dismiss the value of either the 2 for 1 program or the seniors for seniors program at this time. However, I feel there should be a method in place to measure the success/failure of these two programs unlike the measurement that NEVER took place of how successful LAAS's extended hours proved out to be.
Post a Comment