[JamesLefrere]

> A question still nags at me, and I pose it to the couple: “You have about fifty-eight residents now, but there are billions of animals that you can never save. Does this ever discourage you? Does it ever feel futile?”

> Jenkins looks instantly pained. His eyes well up. “Yeah, it’s tough,” he says. “That’s the hardest part. I try not to go there, because it’s overwhelming.”

Huge respect for these guys. From my perspective, nothing can be done about the animals already in the system, but the sooner we wind down the demand keeping them there, the more we'll save. Their efforts definitely help with that.

[cgopalan]

This is the quandary facing all animal activists. We have to be positive since there's proof that things are improving, but at the same time when you start thinking about the billions that are as intelligent (or some more so) than our pets and are being slaughtered, its hard not to be overcome by pessimism. But as Jenkins says, we should not dwell on that. Because besides making you pessimistic, it also hampers whatever little ability you have to contribute.

[ToddBurgess]

When I got started in animal rescue I was given this advise: "You can't save them all and you should not save them all. If you are going to do well in animal rescue you need to come to terms with this." Formally in rescue it is abbreviated to C4C or Capacity for Care. In a nutshell it means you don't take in more animals then you can care for.