The "no-kill" movement tries to reduce the number of pets entering public animal shelters, where, historically, large percentage
s of the pets are not adopted and wind up being killed, by encouraging people to spay or neuter (that is, surgically sterilize) their pets and thus reduce unwanted litters. Which approach would be most likely to increase spay/neuter rates?
Making rules that are in concordance with spaying and neutering
Explanation:
The "no-kill" movement tries to reduce the number of pets entering public animal shelters, where, historically, large percentages of the pets are not adopted and wind up being killed, by encouraging people to spay or neuter (that is, surgically sterilize) their pets and thus reduce unwanted litters.
Making rules in concordance with spaying will definitely improve spay rate
According to psychology experts such as Dr. John Dovidio, this is a form of unconscious racism. One may not discriminate in a situation where right and wrong are clearly stated but due to inner bias would discriminate in situations where there are no clear cut rules.
