Limited Resources: Choosing Whom to Save and How Many

Facts:

• Cold hard cash saves neglected, abused, and abandoned animals.
• There are never enough funds to save them all or even to save the majority. (HSUS estimates that 60% of animals entering a shelter are not rescued or adopted--which means, they die.)

Rescues and shelters perform creative and amazing fund-raising feats; but there are always more animals to be rescued, vetted, and boarded than there are funds to do so. How should funds be allocated, and who gets to choose?

For example, 1) A wonderful cat or dog is found stray with serious injuries but still has a chance for quality of life with proper vetting that will cost $3000 just for the injury remediation. This does not include any other costs of the rescue. 2) Ten to fifteen generally healthy companion animals might be rescued, vetted (spay/neuter and vaccinations), and boarded for that same $3000.

How do you choose? Do you save one, knowing that ten others will die because of that choice? The logical choice is apparent. On the other hand, I can't tell you how many times I have contributed with my heart and checkbook to an animal like in the first example.

Again I ask:  how do you choose?