The Danger of Mandating Transfers to Rescues

Laws like CAPA (Companion Animal Protection Act) typically include sections requiring shelters to transfer animals to rescues. Some include requirements such as simple as a 501c3 tax status, while other like New York's CAARA even include a provision that allows a shelter to inspect the premises of a rescue. The story below provides just a glimpse into why mandating transfers is so dangerous.

 

While I'm sure "no-kill" activists will claim that this case would not apply because the organization mentioned is not a 501c3, but Delaware saw a similar situation with a rescue that was a 501c3 within months of CAPA being enacted.

Even if the shelter is allowed to inspect as allowed under the CAARA legislation in New York, they would need an army to follow these rescues through various states.  This is another case of where funds will be spent on a bunch of investigators, rather than more productive programs like spay neuter and promoting adoption.

It's also further evidence that legislating transfers, rather than allowing shelters to make informed decisions, is costly to taxpayers, harmful to public confidence in adopting rescue animals, and costly to the animals who end up dumped on unsuspecting fosters and kennels.  This isn't an isolated case.  These types of cases are becoming more common every day.  I'm not saying shelters shouldn't work with rescues, because they should.  But they need to be allowed to make a professional assessment and be able to proceed cautiously with unknown rescues to ensure they're not sending animals into a worse situation.