Getting to Zero

Getting to Zero (G2Z) aims to increase responsibility for companion animals so that every city and shire can achieve zero euthanasia of all healthy and treatable cats and dogs.

The G2Z model provides a framework for animal owners, breeders, pet shops, vets, dog trainers, governments, animal shelters, rescue groups, wildlife groups, teachers, students and community groups to work together on enabling access to, promoting and educating on desexing, microchipping, vaccinating, healing, socialising, fostering and adopting of  surrendered/stray companion animals.

G2Z website

The G2Z website explains the Getting to Zero model, outlines the role of legislation, lists organisations committed to ‘getting to zero’ and explains how you can play a part in reducing euthanasia rates of companion animals to zero.

More about Getting to Zero

The following is a list of documents relevant to the implementation of the ‘Getting to Zero’ model of animal management in South Australia.

Getting to Zero Summit

As you may be aware, a national ‘Getting to Zero’ (‘G2Z’) summit was held 7–9 September 2011 on the Gold Coast.

For those who were unable to attend, presentations are available on the website:

4 Responses to Getting to Zero

  1. Robert Campbell says:

    If CAWS is serious about promoting the G2Z model perhaps it should have an actual link to the G2Z website (at the very least) on their website not a link to the National Desexing Network. Although promoting the National Desexing Network on the CAWS website would also be a good thing. Perhaps CAWS could post the PDFs about G2Z that I posted on the forum on their website (under the Getting to Zero tab) also. Cheers. Bob.

    • ReneeN says:

      Hi Bob
      Many thanks for your suggestions! CAWS Inc has been so busy organising fundraising events and subsidised desexings that we have unfortunately neglected the website and forum a little. However, we do have development plans for the website and appreciate the time members take to participate in the forums.
      I have now added a short explanation of G2Z and provided a link to the website, which people can visit if they wish to download the attachments you provided in the forum about how to further G2Z in your community and the list of organisations involved in G2Z etc.
      CAWS Inc will certainly set about ensuring that we and any of our like minded associates get included on the SA G2Z register.
      Unfortunately, G2Z don’t seem to have any resources from the summit on their website, so we’ll leave the NDN link to the summit resources there for now.
      One of the plans for development of the website we have is to include providers of subsidised desexing, some of who are much less expensive than NDN referred veterinary services, so stay tuned for that.
      Kind regards
      Renee Naylon, Secretary, CAWS Inc

  2. Robert Campbell says:

    Thanks Renee :)

  3. Andrew Carter says:

    Although I applaud the idea of less healthy animals being euthanased each year I am concerned that cheap desexing and cheap veterinary treatment is seen as a solution. I agree that all rehomed pets should be neutered and ideally all pets going through petshops should also be neutered and ideally chipped and registered. That way there is a financial incentive to only have pets that are used for breeding programs left entire and an owner is identifiable for cases of mistreament and neglect.
    Setting up a clinic and employing vets to do cheap veterinary work may not be as easy as you think. Most normal clinics run at less than 10% profit margins and vets are one of the lowest paid professionals in Australia. So unless there are a lot of skilled volunteers involved in helping run a clinic then any significant decrease in costs has to come from charitable contributions or cutting corners. In addition it is often more time consuming to deal with the more needy members of our community on a day to day basis than the average educated and working pet owner. It may be better to support the RSPCA or AWL clinics to provide services to genuinely needy members of the public than try to establish separate community clinics. Remember any resources you spend duplicating the work of other charities will mean less resources available for education and support of those who are genuinely needy.
    In addition we need to be very careful not to rehome animals that are not suited to rehoming or to support pet hoarders who will often accumulate pets well beyond their capacity to care for them and can quickly consume any resources you manage to acquire.
    I do wonder if providing support for established charities that have similar aims is more appropriate rather than creating a new organisation with a specific neuter-centric approach. Currently the RSPCA SA has a program to provide for large numbers of owned pets to be neutered so I would suggest that this program could be amplified and supported rather than a separate program be established.
    Whatever programs are instituted it is essential that some effort is made to ensure that activity has an aim and a way to measure the effect otherwise we run the risk of putting a lot of effort into activities without knowing if there is an effect. The evidence from the Gold Coast supports the effect of an integrated program. I would love to hear any evidence that preventing pet shops selling cats and dogs actually decreases pets being surrendered. has this been done elswhere? and has it worked? My suspicion is that if we stopped pet shops selling dogs and cats the puppy farmers would be placing classified adds and bypassing any monitoring regimes completely. I would prefer to see all pets sold neutered, registered and microchipped. With special provisions for breeding animals

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>