I hear that from my working partners in politics all around the nation as well. Because the animal people are so busy working on today's animals which stem from yesterday's problems, they don't take the time to recognize that it is actually tomorrow that can and will make the changes that everyone really wants." It's not through the large animal organizations that anything of any measurable amount can be achieved. I believe that has been proven substantially over the decades..

With the ever growing number of communities across the nation who are killing 80% of the animals that come into the city or county run pounds, how many of them have actually been approached by one of the larger animal orgs offering guidelines or financial assistance to make the necessary changes in local laws, implementing a humane education program or changing the elected officials to garner the necessary support required for these plans to work?

Politicians forget who out they in office - the people - and the people have concerns (when they learn about them) in which they are interested. They really do listen to the voters - it is, after all, how they secure re election votes. If enough people around the nation had suddenly begun to believe that the color red has negative properties and that blue was the better alternative, you better bet your last dollar that any and every candidate across this nation would be seen with blue in their outfit - completely void of any red. Politicians need to be educated as well.

Elected officials are always looking for ways to save money. So, it's up to us to show them the facts. In New Hampshire, a statewide program cut the cost of neutering pets to $10 for poor residents. The state saved $3 in animal control costs for every $1 spent on the program. And it saved animals' lives. Over an eight-year period between 1993 and 2001, the state recorded a nearly 75 percent drop in the number of dogs and cats killed.

Cities that manage to stem their animal kill rates don't stop with sterilization. They often pair those services with extensive public education. Those efforts let the public know the size of the problem and what happens to thousands of unwanted pets every year. Cities have taken out billboards, allowed euthanasia's to be recorded and shown by news media, and walked shelter dogs wearing the dates they'll be killed if they aren't adopted.

2004 is an election year. The question I hear most is "are you pro life or pro choice?" This is a good question for people running for national office, our U.S. Senates and U.S. Congressman. It has nothing to do with state, county and local government. Why are we not asking the state, county and local politicians if they are in favor of humane education in our schools and if they favor adoption programs as opposed to euthanasia of animals?.

Clearly stated by a county commissioner in Mohave County Arizona, if everyone in rescue and/or animal rights would ask these questions of their local politicians, we would change the face of local government. Clearly, there are millions and millions of people involved in rescue and rights across the nation. If we all voted for candidates who are in tune with our issues, we could change the face of local government. His brother is in government in another state as well as his brother in law. They would both tell everyone the same thing.

There is no other way to start the ball rolling. If the next generation grows up with the same ignorance that this generation has grown up with, then not only are rescuers going to be facing the same level of unwanted animals in the shelters around the nation and on the streets, they will likely be facing even more since the population is growing. Each effort is singular in nature, non communicative of other efforts, many times duplicated in corruptive overlaps and many times this combination simply fails to fill in the gaps that would make these efforts more cohesive and successful. Cities and counties which have seen successful results and saved tax-payers dollars as well have all implemented the following programs:

* Increase sterilizations and public education, especially in low-income areas.

• Increase the number of animals adopted from the shelter.

• Embed microchips in animals who leave the shelter so, if they're picked up as strays, the owners can be identified.

• Trap and neuter feral cats.

• Help pet owners train their adopted animals so they don't develop behavioral problems and get returned to the shelter.

Once we elect governments in tune with the issues, we can confront them and educate them that spending millions of dollars in shelter contract and euthanasia projects is money should be use for public education and no-kill shelter facilities. Maybe a little expensive at first but will pay for itself in the near future.

Example Clark County, Nevada is spending 1.2 million a year to run the current shelter. The new contact for 2005 (20 year contract) is 1.6 million per year. Multiply that by every shelter or pound in this nation. Yes, some have smaller budgets but the major cities are spending a lot more just to kill the animals. 2002 the city of Las Vegas and Clark County euthanized 24,500 animals. This county has no humane education in the schools at any level. So they will always be facing this same problem. This county also has no plan to attempt to adopt out more dogs and cats through programs that other cities have successfully implemented, so they are not operating anything less than a facility to kill animals. Clark County is Las Vegas. To spend this amount of funding on nothing more than killing animals is an unconscionable waste of life and a needless drain on public money." Not one of the animal orgs came forward with an offer to help or any real life suggestions. They are all worried about yesterday's problems today and securing funding to stay afloat.