Re the claim in this “letter” is true or false?
Shelter & Rescue Issues: A Shelter Manager’s Thankless Job
Ok, so… it definitely fails the sniff test. If that’s not the most highly sensationalized piece of… stuff… I’ve ever read, then it’s close to it.
I mean, seriously, animals smelling sad souls?
The description of the euthanasia event doesn’t ring true to me. Most vets here (and I assume elsewhere) ask the owner if they want to be present while the animal is put to sleep - and many owners accept. I don’t see how this would ever be an option if the claim was true.
I think what the writer is referring to as “your pet” means the dog or cat “you” surrendered to the shelter, thinking it would be adopted back out to some happy family and have a happy life somewhere else after “you” dumped a disposable pet onto the shelter. The event described is days or weeks or months after the pet has been surrendered and possibly needed time to re-socialize to the new stressful environment which at first freaked them out and made them shy or aggressive. If they never get over the shyness or aggressiveness, they are deemed unadoptable at traditional shelters and then put down, if they don’t get sick first. Some traditional (read: city, county, “kill”) shelters have a reasonable volunteer/foster program where these pets may be able to have a home environment in which to relax and show their true “home” personality, and then can get adopted that way, but that scenario is not typical.
That being said, the question from the OP being whether the euthanized animals are rendered as animal feed is utterly untrue. Generally, they are cremated either at the municipal facility that has its own crematory, or they are sent out to a crematory service. IIRC, the ashes are used as part of commercial fertilizer/compost, or spread around a crematory’s grounds if there’s enough acreage, though I would have to research that to verify for sure.
I’m also sad to report the core of the description of the actual injection process is darned close to the truth in a traditional shelter scenario. The procedure done for pets at the vet’s office, where it’s an issue due to age/disease/quality of life, and the owner holds their pet for the procedure and a catheter is put in first, is a much more gentle process.
Not to mention that not all shelters use that method (some still use gas). And that injecting barbiturates makes the meat unfit for rendering.
Seriously… am I the only one that has a huge red flag and flashing red lights going off in my head when I read, “…must smell like death or they can feel the sad souls that are left in there…”
Fair enough, however, if there’s a choice between a method of euthanising animals that is calm and safe, and another that involves the animal freaking out and possibly attacking, I think the first choice would be the sane one - and if it comes down to a question of economics or brutal utility, they’d just use a captive bolt gun or something.
I’ve heard of pet corpses being processed (according to regulation, which is too lengthy and wordy for me to bother with right now) along with other non-food animal byproducts (such as fallen cattle, roadkill animals, etc), for various purposes such as fertiliser or industrial fats, etc - and I don’t have any particular problem with that. A dead animal is a dead animal.
The article linked is over 5 years old. It is written in a manner that makes it hard to believe but in the not so distant past it was much more common for shelters to sell or give animal carcasses to meat rendering plants to be used in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and pet foods, and likely still occurs today to some extent.
From anEPA document about meat rendering: (*PDF)
St. Louis animal shelters practice of giving animal carcasses to meat rendering plants for pet food and other uses was the subject of a 2002 film. After public outcry, they agreed to discontinue the practice. Cremation was too expensive though, and the result was that mountains of animal corpses were dumped in landfills to rot and be picked apart by buzzards. (making one wonder if that is really a more suitable end for Fido than becoming an ingredient in chicken feed and other pet foods)
That was just one major city but the practice was presumably widespread and AFAIK is not illegal in any US state so may continue by companies not so worried about public relations. The FDA has detected trace amounts of phenobarbital in some dog foods. It was never clearly established if this is due to euthanized pets being rendered into dog food or not since horses and cattle may be given phenobarbital in non-lethal doses as an anesthetic.
Correct you are. My daughter is a vet and must put down animals very often. And yes the owners are asked if they want to be present. The bodies are then cremated.
They are incinerated here. 
Q
It’s describing a shelter process, not a veterinary process. The shelter environment is much more industrial, driven by volume, and the shelter is trying to economize and spend its limited money on adoptable animals, not those it has already “given up on” for whatever reason. Although it would be nice to have a gentle, thoughtful process, humans (especially after long exposure to the ugly situation of killing an endless stream of unwanted animals) often become emotionally hardened, and the quality and sensitivity of the care can break down.
So although the piece is emotionally overwrought, the process it describes can indeed be pretty horrible.
Even in the glurgy quote in the OP I wouldn’t take it as meaning that that is what happens.
More of a rhetorical question, i.e. anything could happen and you wouldn’t know, not “this is what actually happens”.
Soylent Woof?
Meow Mix.
I completely do not get the outrage at reusing the animals into pet food products. I am an animal lover, but a dead animal is a dead animal. Why NOT render it into pet food? Seems like a good use of an otherwise useless corpse. It’s even “green” and fits in with the concept of recycling. Obviously the whole “levels of barbituates in pet food” issue needs to be resolved, but other than that, what’s the problem?
Apparently some people, as stated above, would rather their beloved pet be picked apart by vultures and rats and maggots.
Losing a pet is a sad event. Putting it to sleep is a hard decision, I’ve had to do it. But once it’s done, it’s done. Do something useful with the body.
Heck, I seriously wouldn’t mind if my body was turned into dog food. Why not? It’s just generic meat and bone at that point.
Yes, but once you give Fido a taste of yummy, yummy human flesh, who knows what will happen? Will your infants and elderly relatives be safe?
From the AVMA guidelines on euthanasia.
State guidelines for animal euthanasia, including shelters. I’m glad the use of gas chambers is being phased out in many places. But it’s still kept as a method in others, as an alternative to injectable euthanasia.
The main problem of pets turning in food supply is that they may have received treatments and drugs that would not have been legal to administer to a food animal. Residues of those drugs may still be in the carcass. Heck, for some drugs in food animals, there is a withdrawal period, that the animal cannot be killed before a certain number of days pass the last treatment.
Hence the concern for barbiturates ending in the food supply.
This is a valid concern in horses, many of which are euthanized with large doses of barbiturates.
I have long thought that animal carcasses could be used to suplement the diet of the Ca condor. No doubt coyotes and other scavengers would join in but it could help,
Wouldn’t also have to worry though about a “mad cow” effect? I thought that cannibalism (which would be the case here) could sometimes be harmful in the long run – witness things like kuru in human beings.
Plus it’s just kinda messed up.
My dogs have never been good at sniffing out “sad souls”.
Treats hidden under layers of clothing - now that’s another story.