In a perfect world...

no animal would be without a home.  No cat, no dog, no rabbit or other living, breathing creature with love to give, with feelings and wants and needs and a right to live a good life would suffer because of neglect, deliberate cruelty or the as heartless, lack of compassion or knowledge.

The ugly reality is that there is no such thing as a perfect world.  So we have to work with what we have - with the legions of individuals who DO care, who DO understand, who bring passion and dedication and a belief in jousting at the slow thwup thwup of windmills...

The Toronto Humane Society is metamorphasizing ... it is 'becoming' - and while the final product remains yet to be seen, there are some very positive indications that the direction in which it is heading is a positive, animal-friendly, caring one.  Slowly but surely the cages and pens are filling, the building itself expanding into animal-friendly environments, the staff learning, trying, training and caring.

It is inevitable that there are those who will compare the "new" THS to the "old" one; it is human nature to look behind and to colour with softness the memories of yesterday.  I have said and say again, not everything was as horrendous as claimed by the OSPCA and bolstered by the yellow journalism of the Globe.  Was there cruelty? Irrefutably, keeping animals from a humane and kind death due to a misplaced sense of authority was horrific.  There were times the cages were dirty, the animals neglected although with respect to the dogs, NEVER to the extent claimed (in my opinion) - and usually short-term.  I also always passionately embraced the THS' willingness to take all comers - dogs and cats and other creatures no one else - not individuals, not organizations, not groups - would touch. 

Yet the "new" THS appears to me to be embracing many of the 'good' things from the past management, while rejecting the 'bad' ones. 

It is inevitable, however, that controversy has, will and most likely, will continue to raise its head in terms of perceived injustices, decisions and policies.

Euthanasia is one of those subjects that create an outpouring of belief and passion, a subject almost impossible to reconcile between individuals and guaranteed to create dissension, controversy and anger whenever policy arises.  At the moment, the current arrangement at the THS requires a medical person (veterinarian), management and an animal expert (i.e. canine expert Shas vis-a-vis dogs) to concur on the need for euthanizing a particular animal.  While I reserve the right to retain some reservations until I see this policy actively working, I believe it is an excellent response to an arbitrary and sometimes arrogant decision on the part of one individual or one group of individuals retaining the sole right to make these kind of decisions.

With stated policy reflecting a concerted and determined movement toward a 'no kill' shelter (and I say again, that does not mean 'NEVER' kill), I believe the team making the decisions on who lives and dies are doing their best to keep compassion, reality and the best interests of the animal in question to the forefront.  The balance of decision-makers, by their very nature, provide a relatively sane mixture that will confront and deal with all arguments for and against - medical, quality of life, adoptability and the emotional and mental stability of the animal.

I have been assured - and believe - that every chance will be given to each and every animal from both medical and behavioural standpoints, that rehabilitation, behaviourial modification and medical intervention will all be provided in order to give an animal a viable and real chance at finding a home.

Sadly, reality can and does intrude and there are times that the issues which face an animal are beyond fixing - either from a medical standpoint but also from a behavioural and emotional one.  What happens then? What if everything possible has been done to redeem an animal who through no fault of its own, has medical issues that cannot be addressed, or behaviour problems that make it inevitable that it will never ever be in a position to be found a home?

IF every avenue has been explored, if serious and extended efforts have been made to rehabilitate the animal, if experts have concurred on courses of actions which are subsequently followed, if in fact, that animal has been given every chance and yet remains unable to be rehabilitated, what then?

Languishing in a cage in a back hall is not an answer - not to me anyway.

It is not that I am against long-term placement at certain types of shelters - given the animal has adjusted (and many do) and has a rich, caring environment, I think it entirely humane to keep any animal long-term and wait for that perfect home.  But that is given the animal is simply hard to adopt - not impossible to adopt due to medical or behavioural issues that make it impossible to even put them up for adoption.

And then, yes, then, hard decisions sometimes have to be made.

I do not for one moment believe that each individual making that decision does so lightly - but rather, with a heavy heart but the inevitability of reality intruding, must make that choice. The balance of individuals who must concur provides a reasonable certitude that the decision made will be a balanced one.  Until I see otherwise, I will continue to hope and put my trust in those individuals I DO know who are involved at the THS - for while I don't know all of them, I have enough knowledge of several that I have full certainty that the decisions they make will only be made as a last resort.