Rescues “saving” adoptable dogs

[Anonymous]

Imo arguing about the adoption fees and the breeder prices is kind of silly because the cost of caring for a typical family pet is usually more than both. The way we do it out here in the burbs (boarding for vacations, specialty vet care when needed) it’s definitely more.

What we should be focused on is how we’re trying to achieve a sustainable system for reducing unwanted dogs and providing healthy, suitable pets for families in an ethical way. But nobody is doing that for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most rescues don’t operate like shelters. They’re not housing a bunch of dogs together in kennels in one central location, with a staff that cares for them. Most rescues rely on a network of volunteer fosters to house the dogs in their own homes temporarily. If a dog has a low likelihood of being adopted and will need care for the foreseeable future, how on earth do you think a rescue will line up fosters to take on the burden of care? It’s not that hard to line up a foster household for a highly adoptable dog that is only expected to need care for a short period. The same household can foster multiple dogs per year. However, finding fosters who are willing to house dogs who have known issues (whether medical or behavioral or breed issues) for years (potentially) is next to impossible. That’s why those dogs stay at the shelter and rescues take the dogs that volunteers can take into their own homes. Also, a lot of times rescues will take pregnant dogs so that these dogs can whelp their pups in a calmer, quieter environment than the shelter, and where they and their new puppies can get more individualized attention.

Rescues have to charge high adoption fees because they generally don’t have public funding that covers their operating expenses. There are expenses associated with transporting dogs, feeding them, providing flea and tick preventatives, making sure the dogs are up to date with vaccines, keeping them groomed, spaying/neutering them, providing any other necessary medical care, such as deworming them or treating parvo, possibly providing some training or behavioral analysis for dogs who adoptable, but come with some issues. They might also have to cover some maternity care or prescription medication or the occasional surgery.

When I adopted my dog from a rescue, they handed over his veterinary records. It was all there in black and white: the rescue spent more money on his medical care than they charged me for the adoption fee — but they didn’t just pay for his medical care, including neutering; they also transported him, fed him, provided him with a collar and leash, and sent me home with a week’s worth of food and a toothbrush and toothpaste. They lost money on the transaction.

They are rescues, not resellers so they should be taking those very dogs who need it the most.

You and they disagree about what the point of the rescue is - helping the largest number of dogs, vs helping the dogs that have no other chance.

If you want to start a farm where unadoptable dogs live out their lives, that's wonderful: i hope you do. But you don't get to decide what other people's charitable vision should be.

[Anonymous]

Rescues can’t always take the dogs that need help the most. It depends on their financial ability to care for who’s in their care already and what some predicted medical costs may be. Rescues will also send evaluators into the shelter to see if they have a foster that can foster that dog. I take tough cases and always tell my rescues to give me those dogs. I rehab and train them and can say all my fosters have been adopted out to the perfect families for them. Want to help the most needed dogs? Donate. Better yet, foster and let the rescue know you want to help the dogs that need it the most. All 4 of my rescues need fosters to pull the dogs they want from shelters. Even if you can’t take on a tough dog, ask for any dog. That alone makes a huge difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most rescues don’t operate like shelters. They’re not housing a bunch of dogs together in kennels in one central location, with a staff that cares for them. Most rescues rely on a network of volunteer fosters to house the dogs in their own homes temporarily. If a dog has a low likelihood of being adopted and will need care for the foreseeable future, how on earth do you think a rescue will line up fosters to take on the burden of care? It’s not that hard to line up a foster household for a highly adoptable dog that is only expected to need care for a short period. The same household can foster multiple dogs per year. However, finding fosters who are willing to house dogs who have known issues (whether medical or behavioral or breed issues) for years (potentially) is next to impossible. That’s why those dogs stay at the shelter and rescues take the dogs that volunteers can take into their own homes. Also, a lot of times rescues will take pregnant dogs so that these dogs can whelp their pups in a calmer, quieter environment than the shelter, and where they and their new puppies can get more individualized attention.

Rescues have to charge high adoption fees because they generally don’t have public funding that covers their operating expenses. There are expenses associated with transporting dogs, feeding them, providing flea and tick preventatives, making sure the dogs are up to date with vaccines, keeping them groomed, spaying/neutering them, providing any other necessary medical care, such as deworming them or treating parvo, possibly providing some training or behavioral analysis for dogs who adoptable, but come with some issues. They might also have to cover some maternity care or prescription medication or the occasional surgery.

When I adopted my dog from a rescue, they handed over his veterinary records. It was all there in black and white: the rescue spent more money on his medical care than they charged me for the adoption fee — but they didn’t just pay for his medical care, including neutering; they also transported him, fed him, provided him with a collar and leash, and sent me home with a week’s worth of food and a toothbrush and toothpaste. They lost money on the transaction.

They are rescues, not resellers so they should be taking those very dogs who need it the most.

You and they disagree about what the point of the rescue is - helping the largest number of dogs, vs helping the dogs that have no other chance.

If you want to start a farm where unadoptable dogs live out their lives, that's wonderful: i hope you do. But you don't get to decide what other people's charitable vision should be.

This. Whole lotta people on this thread telling those doing the work how it "should" be done, while not doing a damn thing themselves other than whingeing on DCUM about some utopia they're not helping create.

In short: STFU, wankers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like a lot of people now prefer getting a dog from a rescue/foster situation because they can provide some knowledge about the dog.
I know with my fosters i've had I can tell a prospective adopter if the dog is house trained, good with other animals, kids, age of kids, good on the leash, good off leash, food aggressive etc etc......its hard to get this accurate info from a dog in a shelter environment.

This is one of many advantages rescue volunteers give abandoned pets. Not only does time in a home instead of a shelter benefit the dog, it provides MUCH more information about how the dog might be in a home environment than can possibly be guessed by evaluating the dog in its overwhelmed/anxious state in a loud, smelly, scary shelter.

Ideally, we'd have enough fosters for all the dogs who didn't need medical supervision or behavioral concerns addressed to stay out of the shelter entirely. That labor is worth the minor increase in adoption fees, for sure.

Its cruel to bounce around these dogs and jump from shelter to rescue to fosters to a final home. Thats why they are so anxious.

It's cruel for a puppy/young dog to grow up in shelter environment.
I once fostered dog that spent about a year in TX non-kill shelter, then was transported here. It took almost 6 months for that dog to be her happy spanky happy self. First couple of weeks in my house was brutal - she refused to leave her crate, would not leave the house without my dog in tow, would not pee on leash (only off leash in the fenced yard), wouldn't use the stairs. List goes on and on. She was finally adapted after 8 month in foster care. She had zero chances of being adapted from the shelter.

I think this is the OPs point. Rescues are walking past the dogs you describe and scooping up newly admitted highly adoptable dogs that they can easily sell for a higher fee.

Well, rescue did pull that dog, eventually, and then it required 6+m rehabilitation.
That dog would be better off if someone would pull it out of the shelter as 7 month old puppy right after it was found, not as 1.5 yo young dog with behavior issues developed during long shelter stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shelter just wants animals out. It doesn’t matter to them which ones go.

Mostly this. Every day a dog is in the shelter, its chances of being adopted out sane decrease dramatically. A shelter is NO place for an animal. I'm glad they exist, and I respect the volunteers who work so hard to help the animals they can, but they'll all tell you the same thing. Shelters are loud and smelly, with hard floors. They're stuffy in the summer/chilly in the winter, and full of scared, anxious animals who spend most of their days (sometimes ALL of their day) in a very small pen, without much stimulation or individual care.

Rescues with available foster homes will pull some of the easier-to-manage cases out of the shelter environment, leaving space for shelters to handle more complicated cases, including animals with medical issues. Some breed-specific rescues coordinate with shelters, know their "dropoff days", and yes, get "dibs" on whatever breed(s) they're working with. Why? Because those animal have a better chance going straight to a foster than spending even a handful of days in a shelter, waiting for a new owner who may/may not show. Those same owners (I'm @ing you, pekinese person) can search a little bit harder to find a breed-specific rescue if they really want a particular type of dog. Other owners may be fine with getting a "whatever" mutt from a shelter. There are options, and they're not hard to find.

The bigger problem is that people have confused animal shelters and rescues with bargain shopping stores. They only want an animal they can adopt right now, for cheap. It's a mentality that frequently leads to animals coming back to the shelters. Good, Cheap, Fast - Pick two. You want a purebred cocker spaniel for cheap? You'll need to put your name in at shelter and wait (you'll get queue advantage if you sign up to foster, volunteer a bit, treat the people there like people...). You want a cheap dog and fast? Go to the shelter. I've never seen one empty; there's a dog there you can take home today. You want a specific kind/sort of dog right now? Be prepared to pay for it.

Pets are a privilege, not a right. If the upfront cost of acquiring one is too steep for you, you might need to consider whether or not your budget can truly afford the animal and its ongoing care. Anyone needing a pet RIGHT NOW will raise major flags for any responsible/ethical shelter, rescue, or breeder.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Why should people have to work for a pet?? What a pretentious take. This is why people hate rescues. They steal the best dogs and jack up prices. I’ve been a dog owner my whole life but I have children and don’t have a fenced yard so they’d likely tell me no (told my neighbors no).

I refuse to play this game and only believe in ethical breeders who are raising healthy, well socialized dogs that everyone loves. We need to encourage ethical breeding. My breed would never end up in the shelter. It’s actually in my contract that if I can no longer care for her, she goes back to the breeder who will take her instantly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Imo arguing about the adoption fees and the breeder prices is kind of silly because the cost of caring for a typical family pet is usually more than both. The way we do it out here in the burbs (boarding for vacations, specialty vet care when needed) it’s definitely more.

What we should be focused on is how we’re trying to achieve a sustainable system for reducing unwanted dogs and providing healthy, suitable pets for families in an ethical way. But nobody is doing that for some reason.

Isn’t that choosing breeders? Dogs from breeders are required to be neutered and spayed. Breeds have very specific traits, mutts don’t always and can be a wildcard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shelter just wants animals out. It doesn’t matter to them which ones go.

Mostly this. Every day a dog is in the shelter, its chances of being adopted out sane decrease dramatically. A shelter is NO place for an animal. I'm glad they exist, and I respect the volunteers who work so hard to help the animals they can, but they'll all tell you the same thing. Shelters are loud and smelly, with hard floors. They're stuffy in the summer/chilly in the winter, and full of scared, anxious animals who spend most of their days (sometimes ALL of their day) in a very small pen, without much stimulation or individual care.

Rescues with available foster homes will pull some of the easier-to-manage cases out of the shelter environment, leaving space for shelters to handle more complicated cases, including animals with medical issues. Some breed-specific rescues coordinate with shelters, know their "dropoff days", and yes, get "dibs" on whatever breed(s) they're working with. Why? Because those animal have a better chance going straight to a foster than spending even a handful of days in a shelter, waiting for a new owner who may/may not show. Those same owners (I'm @ing you, pekinese person) can search a little bit harder to find a breed-specific rescue if they really want a particular type of dog. Other owners may be fine with getting a "whatever" mutt from a shelter. There are options, and they're not hard to find.

The bigger problem is that people have confused animal shelters and rescues with bargain shopping stores. They only want an animal they can adopt right now, for cheap. It's a mentality that frequently leads to animals coming back to the shelters. Good, Cheap, Fast - Pick two. You want a purebred cocker spaniel for cheap? You'll need to put your name in at shelter and wait (you'll get queue advantage if you sign up to foster, volunteer a bit, treat the people there like people...). You want a cheap dog and fast? Go to the shelter. I've never seen one empty; there's a dog there you can take home today. You want a specific kind/sort of dog right now? Be prepared to pay for it.

Pets are a privilege, not a right. If the upfront cost of acquiring one is too steep for you, you might need to consider whether or not your budget can truly afford the animal and its ongoing care. Anyone needing a pet RIGHT NOW will raise major flags for any responsible/ethical shelter, rescue, or breeder.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Why should people have to work for a pet?? What a pretentious take. This is why people hate rescues. They steal the best dogs and jack up prices. I’ve been a dog owner my whole life but I have children and don’t have a fenced yard so they’d likely tell me no (told my neighbors no).

I refuse to play this game and only believe in ethical breeders who are raising healthy, well socialized dogs that everyone loves. We need to encourage ethical breeding. My breed would never end up in the shelter. It’s actually in my contract that if I can no longer care for her, she goes back to the breeder who will take her instantly.

Stop with this nonsense about jacked-up prices at rescues (you probably paid 3x time for a pup from ethical breeder).
Thing about fenced yard requirement is also quite wrong - most rescues don't have yard requirement, you can adopt even if you live in a condo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imo arguing about the adoption fees and the breeder prices is kind of silly because the cost of caring for a typical family pet is usually more than both. The way we do it out here in the burbs (boarding for vacations, specialty vet care when needed) it’s definitely more.

What we should be focused on is how we’re trying to achieve a sustainable system for reducing unwanted dogs and providing healthy, suitable pets for families in an ethical way. But nobody is doing that for some reason.

Isn’t that choosing breeders? Dogs from breeders are required to be neutered and spayed. Breeds have very specific traits, mutts don’t always and can be a wildcard.

Dogs from ethical breeders - yes (however there are really no ways to enforce it)
Backyard breeders and puppy mills care even less about future of the dogs they selling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imo arguing about the adoption fees and the breeder prices is kind of silly because the cost of caring for a typical family pet is usually more than both. The way we do it out here in the burbs (boarding for vacations, specialty vet care when needed) it’s definitely more.

What we should be focused on is how we’re trying to achieve a sustainable system for reducing unwanted dogs and providing healthy, suitable pets for families in an ethical way. But nobody is doing that for some reason.

Isn’t that choosing breeders? Dogs from breeders are required to be neutered and spayed. Breeds have very specific traits, mutts don’t always and can be a wildcard.

Personally I have no problem with breeders but no, getting your dog from a breeder doesn't do anything to reduce the population of unwanted dogs. It could, maybe, reduce the likelihood that you'll give up your dog, but plenty of purebreds are given up. I have a purebred now that I got from someone who couldn't keep it. Also, unlike rescue dogs, plenty of dogs from breeders are kept intact and end up having puppies.

The bigger issue IMO is that people are unready for or uninterested in the amount of training and exercise that is necessary to make a dog pleasant to have around. And as a secondary matter, they are unwilling to spend the money on a trainer, on medical issues, etc but also unwilling to euthanize, so they dump the dog when it's got issues that make it hard to adopt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any dog that gets out of the shelter is a good thing. That allows more dogs, resources and time to go to other dogs. Why is that bad?

This. All those rescue dogs left the shelter ASAP, freeing up spacefor more dogs and minimizing the trauma to adoptable dogs. Leaving then in the shelter in case OP wants them is not actually best for the dogs.

The legitimate rescues that I have experience with specialize in one breed. We rehomed a beagle to a beagle rescue after its owner passed away. These people were volunteers and very knowledgeable about beagles. They asked for a minimal donation for expenses and later found a great home with a veterinarian who could manage the dog's epilepsy (can run in the breed).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shelter just wants animals out. It doesn’t matter to them which ones go.

Mostly this. Every day a dog is in the shelter, its chances of being adopted out sane decrease dramatically. A shelter is NO place for an animal. I'm glad they exist, and I respect the volunteers who work so hard to help the animals they can, but they'll all tell you the same thing. Shelters are loud and smelly, with hard floors. They're stuffy in the summer/chilly in the winter, and full of scared, anxious animals who spend most of their days (sometimes ALL of their day) in a very small pen, without much stimulation or individual care.

Rescues with available foster homes will pull some of the easier-to-manage cases out of the shelter environment, leaving space for shelters to handle more complicated cases, including animals with medical issues. Some breed-specific rescues coordinate with shelters, know their "dropoff days", and yes, get "dibs" on whatever breed(s) they're working with. Why? Because those animal have a better chance going straight to a foster than spending even a handful of days in a shelter, waiting for a new owner who may/may not show. Those same owners (I'm @ing you, pekinese person) can search a little bit harder to find a breed-specific rescue if they really want a particular type of dog. Other owners may be fine with getting a "whatever" mutt from a shelter. There are options, and they're not hard to find.

The bigger problem is that people have confused animal shelters and rescues with bargain shopping stores. They only want an animal they can adopt right now, for cheap. It's a mentality that frequently leads to animals coming back to the shelters. Good, Cheap, Fast - Pick two. You want a purebred cocker spaniel for cheap? You'll need to put your name in at shelter and wait (you'll get queue advantage if you sign up to foster, volunteer a bit, treat the people there like people...). You want a cheap dog and fast? Go to the shelter. I've never seen one empty; there's a dog there you can take home today. You want a specific kind/sort of dog right now? Be prepared to pay for it.

Pets are a privilege, not a right. If the upfront cost of acquiring one is too steep for you, you might need to consider whether or not your budget can truly afford the animal and its ongoing care. Anyone needing a pet RIGHT NOW will raise major flags for any responsible/ethical shelter, rescue, or breeder.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Why should people have to work for a pet?? What a pretentious take. This is why people hate rescues. They steal the best dogs and jack up prices. I’ve been a dog owner my whole life but I have children and don’t have a fenced yard so they’d likely tell me no (told my neighbors no).

I refuse to play this game and only believe in ethical breeders who are raising healthy, well socialized dogs that everyone loves. We need to encourage ethical breeding. My breed would never end up in the shelter. It’s actually in my contract that if I can no longer care for her, she goes back to the breeder who will take her instantly.

"Why should people have to work for a pet??" sums up most of the problem succinctly, Veruca. Because they're not toys, you're not owed one, and the people doing the work required to rehome and rehabilitate them so they're good pets deserve to not be tasked with doing that labor for free.

But you revealed your real nature when you mentioned you "only believe in ethical breeders" which is kinda like believing in the tooth fairy, Easter bunny, Santa Claus... And your sweet little "My breed would never end up in the shelter" shows how little time you've actually spent volunteering at these places you're so swift to malign.

In short, take your little designer mutt for a walk because its crap is cuter than your crap take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imo arguing about the adoption fees and the breeder prices is kind of silly because the cost of caring for a typical family pet is usually more than both. The way we do it out here in the burbs (boarding for vacations, specialty vet care when needed) it’s definitely more.

What we should be focused on is how we’re trying to achieve a sustainable system for reducing unwanted dogs and providing healthy, suitable pets for families in an ethical way. But nobody is doing that for some reason.

Isn’t that choosing breeders? Dogs from breeders are required to be neutered and spayed. Breeds have very specific traits, mutts don’t always and can be a wildcard.

Dogs from ethical breeders - yes (however there are really no ways to enforce it)
Backyard breeders and puppy mills care even less about future of the dogs they selling

Most big dog breeders are puppy milks breeding lots of dogs at once. I’ll take a backyard breeder who only does one at a time and truely cares who the dogs who get adult and child socialization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any dog that gets out of the shelter is a good thing. That allows more dogs, resources and time to go to other dogs. Why is that bad?

This. All those rescue dogs left the shelter ASAP, freeing up spacefor more dogs and minimizing the trauma to adoptable dogs. Leaving then in the shelter in case OP wants them is not actually best for the dogs.

The legitimate rescues that I have experience with specialize in one breed. We rehomed a beagle to a beagle rescue after its owner passed away. These people were volunteers and very knowledgeable about beagles. They asked for a minimal donation for expenses and later found a great home with a veterinarian who could manage the dog's epilepsy (can run in the breed).

Why wouldn’t you keep the dog? That’s terrible for the dog to be bounced around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most rescues don’t operate like shelters. They’re not housing a bunch of dogs together in kennels in one central location, with a staff that cares for them. Most rescues rely on a network of volunteer fosters to house the dogs in their own homes temporarily. If a dog has a low likelihood of being adopted and will need care for the foreseeable future, how on earth do you think a rescue will line up fosters to take on the burden of care? It’s not that hard to line up a foster household for a highly adoptable dog that is only expected to need care for a short period. The same household can foster multiple dogs per year. However, finding fosters who are willing to house dogs who have known issues (whether medical or behavioral or breed issues) for years (potentially) is next to impossible. That’s why those dogs stay at the shelter and rescues take the dogs that volunteers can take into their own homes. Also, a lot of times rescues will take pregnant dogs so that these dogs can whelp their pups in a calmer, quieter environment than the shelter, and where they and their new puppies can get more individualized attention.

Rescues have to charge high adoption fees because they generally don’t have public funding that covers their operating expenses. There are expenses associated with transporting dogs, feeding them, providing flea and tick preventatives, making sure the dogs are up to date with vaccines, keeping them groomed, spaying/neutering them, providing any other necessary medical care, such as deworming them or treating parvo, possibly providing some training or behavioral analysis for dogs who adoptable, but come with some issues. They might also have to cover some maternity care or prescription medication or the occasional surgery.

When I adopted my dog from a rescue, they handed over his veterinary records. It was all there in black and white: the rescue spent more money on his medical care than they charged me for the adoption fee — but they didn’t just pay for his medical care, including neutering; they also transported him, fed him, provided him with a collar and leash, and sent me home with a week’s worth of food and a toothbrush and toothpaste. They lost money on the transaction.

They are rescues, not resellers so they should be taking those very dogs who need it the most.

And do what with them? Did you even read the post you’re responding to? Shelters are equipped to house or euthanize unadoptable dogs. Rescues are just volunteers who have offered whatever assistance they can manage.