# Ridiculous adoption requirements



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

I think sometimes rescues go overboard with trying to find the "perfect" home. I won't name names, but one particular rescue IMO has some (not all) over the top requirements. It doesn't surprise me that they have 17 pages of dogs for adoption, because they probably very rarely adopt any out. Here are the requirements:

*Dogs will not be placed in homes with children under the age of 10.

*Dogs will not be placed with an adult that is planning on having children in the next few years.

*Applicant must have current or previous pet ownership to verify vet history and care.

*Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard.

*Dog will not be placed in a home with an invisible fence.

*Young dogs will not be placed with elderly adults.

*Applicant must be 25 years or older.

*An adoption fee is required and is non negotiable and non refundable.

*Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications.

*Applicant must undergo reference checks and a home visit.

*The person submitting the application must be the person adopting.

*Applicant must have a vet reference.

*All pets must reside in the applicant's home.

*All current pets must be spayed/neutered, and current on all vaccinations (or current vaccination titer test), heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative.

*Puppies will not be placed in a home where they are left alone more than 2 hours without adult supervision.

One other thing that rubs me the wrong way is that they feed raw and have in each dog's description that they hope the next dog's owner will "love them enough" to keep feeding it. There are plenty of reasons to not feed raw that don't have anything to do with not loving the dog enough!


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

It says a lot about some rescues when _*I*_ don't meet their standards. Not that I consider myself a Spicy/trumpetjock/nekomi/lovemygreys, but I do believe I'm a pretty damn good dog owner.


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

harrise said:


> It says a lot about some rescues when _*I*_ don't meet their standards. Not that I consider myself a Spicy/trumpetjock/nekomi/lovemygreys, but I do believe I'm a pretty damn good dog owner.


I'm flattered you include me on this list of awesome dog owners (not sure I deserve it, but I'll take what I can get), but I don't even satisfy that list!

I have no fenced in yard.
I am 24.
I rent.
I don't keep my dogs on heartworm year round.
I most definitely would leave a puppy home for more than 2 hours after he's about 10 weeks old.

Honestly, I'm not sure there's anyone on these boards who fits all these criteria.

That being said, this is not a typical rescue (unless it's for wolf hybrids!). I've seen the application requirements for dozens, and they may have a few of these but never all of them. People have a tendency to pick the most egregious cases and use them to represent the norm. This really isn't the case here. Most rescues have what I deem to be pretty reasonable requirements.


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

This is the most extreme example that I've ever seen, but I think a lot of them are a little too invasive- vet references, several personal references, home visits, etc.


----------



## Rottieluv (Oct 11, 2009)

That is crazy!!! They must never find any dogs new homes. 

There is a group here like that. My papa lives way out in the middle of nowhere and he couldn't get a dog because his 4 acre yard isnt fenced. Then I heard the lady saying to another lady "I just dont want to give him dog because its not the perfect home, but I guess they cant all go to the perfect home....". Now this lady had just met me and said that when I was only about 3 feet infront of her. Then when I said something about it to the group she works for they just said "That wasn't us, it was a diff. group". Now my papa had just spent over $4000 trying to keep his last dog alive. He loved that dog like she was his child...and he doesn't have the "perfect" home. That same group has been rude to me because Porter came frm a breeder and his tail is docked. 

Some of them really are taking it WAY to far.


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

luvntzus said:


> This is the most extreme example that I've ever seen, but I think a lot of them are a little too invasive- vet references, several personal references, home visits, etc.


Really? Those are pretty standard. Even the most run down shelters I've ever seen ask for vet references and some even a personal reference.


----------



## Labsnothers (Oct 10, 2009)

Our son wouldn't have gotten a dog from them. The shelter did require a note from his landlord.


----------



## nekomi (May 21, 2008)

> It says a lot about some rescues when I don't meet their standards. Not that I consider myself a Spicy/trumpetjock/nekomi/lovemygreys, but I do believe I'm a pretty damn good dog owner.


Wow, when did I make it on this list?  Harrise, I look up to YOU and I think you are pretty much the ideal dog owner!

I wouldn't pass the application posted... I'm under 25, and because Jasper is an outside boy, I wouldn't pass their "all pets must reside in the house" rule. I'm sure they'd be appalled that he's forced to live in his own comfy, custom zoo-quality digs with daily enrichment and playtime with me and the other dogs...


----------



## DJsMom (Jun 6, 2008)

What's sad is that I know any number of people that fit those requirements that certainly would NOT make a good dog owner.
IMO, it would be very hard to know for certain you're adopting to someone who will make a good dog owner, I don't care how strict, or lenient you make them. 
Hopefully, you've got a contract that legal & binding enough to get the dog back if needed & keep track of the dog, which would also be very hard to do, as well as time consuming.


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

Aside from the age and raw thing, my experience trying to obtain a Malamute was met with a similar set of stringent demands. Sprinkled with a nice serving of breed stereotypes and myths. 

"Male malamutes can not live peacefully with other male working breed dogs." 

Things went completely downhill when the lady looked at pictures of Lakota and said "I thought you had experience with this breed. That is not a Malamute." They also didn't like the fact that I would work towards keeping the dog in the yard and not always in a secure chain link kennel. Didn't matter which dog, they wanted them kenneled. The whole finding a dog thing three years ago soured me on rescues, most likely forever.


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

harrise said:


> "Male malamutes can not live peacefully with other male working breed dogs."


Didn't know sled teams only had one male on them!

When the breed specific rescues spread breed myths, you know something is wrong.


Out of curiosity, what is the breed that this rescues deals in?


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

trumpetjock said:


> Out of curiosity, what is the breed that this rescues deals in?


Small breed dogs.


----------



## digits mama (Jun 13, 2007)

I think there are some awesome rescues out there but they are far and few between. I adopted my son when I was 21 years old and we had the basic homestudy, drug test, physical, counseling session which was 3 at an hour a piece.. 5 references and medical emergency class and I got my son.

Getting a dog seems to be too stringent in some rescues

I also know of people that buy land, have it written up as a non profit, steal pics of dogs off of other rescue sites and DONT HAVE DOGS TO ADOPT OUT. Just for the tax break. They list these things to make it almost impossible to adopt from them, because it is impossible, cause they have no dogs.

I have 6 acres, fenced..all my dogs are on either raw or high quality kibble, I own my home, I work from home a majority of the time, I have awesome kennels and doggie condos out the yaya...And I was turned down by rescues because I lost my Dog some years back. So instead I go to the county shelters and foster for them instead. All they want is for you to provide a loving home for them. They do check vet references which to me should be standard procedure. But that is all they ask.


----------



## looneyfish (Nov 11, 2009)

That list sounds pretty standard for my area, except the raw thing. No children under 10 is generally not overtly stated, but once you go through their dog listings, you notice the trend that no dog in their opinion should be with a child. Small dogs don't do well with children and big dogs can be too rough.


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

While I don't agree with it, I can understand the no children under 10 policy.

The personality of a dog in the shelter is usually no reflection of what it will be when it gets into a home, gets some decent food in it's belly and has some tlc. So the dog that seemed to be really calm and bomb-proof at the shelter can really quickly turn into a maniac that jumps up on your kids and knocks them over. All of the sudden you're back at the shelter chewing them out for giving you this bonkers dog that injured your child. Or worse yet, a lawsuit lands on their desk. If someone can win a suit against McDonalds for making them fat, you could win a suit against a shelter for giving you a dog that injured your kid.

Again, I don't agree with it as a blanket policy.... but I see the logic at least with big dogs.


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

My dogs are a Chihuahua and Shih Tzu, so I definitely understand the big dogs and small children thing. Even though there are exceptions to both.


----------



## RaeganW (Jul 14, 2009)

The one I really object to is the one that you have to have previous dog experience. So, what, your first dog can't be a shelter/rescue dog? Do you know where most people go after checking the shelters? BYB's. Not through any fault of their own, but just because they're uneducated. Shelters turning people to BYB's does not seem ideal to me.


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

RaeganW said:


> The one I really object to is the one that you have to have previous dog experience. So, what, your first dog can't be a shelter/rescue dog? Do you know where most people go after checking the shelters? BYB's. Not through any fault of their own, but just because they're uneducated. Shelters turning people to BYB's does not seem ideal to me.


Keep in mind, this is a rescue, not a shelter. Pretty big difference


----------



## MoosMom (Sep 15, 2009)

We had a rescue in my area I used to live that would come to the store weekend after weekend with same dogs and I will say MANY of these things were on their application. They didn't have a very high adoption rate and I saw many people leave frustrated or some even heartbroken after a 2 week process and they were told no. Some of it is a bit overboard IMO.


----------



## DJsMom (Jun 6, 2008)

RaeganW said:


> The one I really object to is the one that you have to have previous dog experience. So, what, your first dog can't be a shelter/rescue dog? Do you know where most people go after checking the shelters? BYB's. Not through any fault of their own, but just because they're uneducated. Shelters turning people to BYB's does not seem ideal to me.


That's mainly to "*verify vet history and care*." When I adopted Coco from the rescue, I had to give my vet info & the rescue did contact them just to verify that my previous dogs did receive routine vet care. That makes sense to me.


----------



## moots (Oct 26, 2009)

That form is a joke tbh

Pretty much requires you to have your own home while at the same time not having a job. Judging by the form you pretty much have to be a stay at home mother who never got back into the work force who has a husband that earns enough that only one of them have to work with kids in their teens or a very old person. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if they considered some people too old. I can see it now "People over the age of 55 with medical issues are not allowed to adopt as the dog may out-live you" Seriously...millions of other dogs live a great life with hardly any of those things listed so I don't see what the big deal is.


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

I agree with most, but not all of those posted requirements. If you don't like the rules of one adoption group, there are plenty more. I don't like when people use one adoption group's rules to justify going ot a byb or pet store.

I have generally found that groups put rules in place because they've been burned in the past by not having a specific rule...and having stricter guidelines helps them place dogs successfully in the best homes possible. For many groups, it's about quality placements, not quantity placements. Since it's their time, money, effort and responsibility I say more power to 'em. They can make whatever rules they see fit to meet their group's goals.

I've also found that people who have the biggest issue with adoption group rules are those who have never fostered or worked extensively in rescue. When it's YOUR blood, sweat and tears put into saving a dog's life you don't want to just hand it over to someone simply because "they want it." That's not always the case...but I've found it to be true more often than not.



harrise said:


> It says a lot about some rescues when _*I*_ don't meet their standards. Not that I consider myself a Spicy/trumpetjock/nekomi/lovemygreys, but I do believe I'm a pretty damn good dog owner.


OMG, I was totally shocked to see my name, but totally flattered! Thanks!! (and I think you should include yourself on that list too!)


----------



## RaeganW (Jul 14, 2009)

trumpetjock said:


> Keep in mind, this is a rescue, not a shelter. Pretty big difference


How would you define the difference? (curious, not snarky) I always thought of it as kind of a fostering/kenneling line. While a foster is going to know more about the dogs individually, I thought of them as also pretty accessible to the public.

I stand by my statement though, in fact more so since the rescue in question is for small breed dogs. They get no dogs that are suitable for the first time dog owner? 

Anyway, I think that beyond requirements for legal reasons (I can understand the no renting policy even if I don't like it, the over 25 one, etc), a rescue's list should be guidelines, not hard-and-fast. Because how many threads have we had now about there being no "perfect dog owner"? And hey, if they aren't on DF, they clearly don't exist


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

luvntzus said:


> but I think a lot of them are a little too invasive- vet references, several personal references, home visits, etc.


 
There are very good reasons for ALL those! I rescue and even with all the background checks and referrals things go wrong, I've had military families dump our dogs when they moved six months after adoption (I'm military a mil dependent so not bashing here), had far too many dogs returned due to someone losing their lease and not being able to find a place that allows the breed (giant breed). 

Our rescue does not adopt to MIl families now UNLESS they are homeowners and in their last station, We do not adopt to most people who rent or have housemates, we do home inspections to be sure the home is safe and what the applicant claims it to be and that they aren't hording (yes, I've come across it several times). We seldom adopt to people with small children as the breed can accidentally injure little ones JUST with their tail wagging. (Many small breed rescues are the same way because small children can injure the dog)

Trust me, if you saw half the things I have, you'd completely understand WHY rescues are strict. It really seems anytime we've ever tried to relax the rules, things go horribly wrong for the dog.


----------



## Zeus and Sheba (Nov 17, 2009)

Wow, that is extreme. I would think that these dogs are in desperate need to find a home and most people do not fit that criteria. I think that a home without a fenced yard is better than a kennel. Dogs just want love and care, they want to be part of a family.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

cshellenberger said:


> There are very good reasons for ALL those! I rescue and even with all the background checks and referrals things go wrong, I've had military families dump our dogs when they moved six months after adoption (I'm military a mil dependent so not bashing here), had far too many dogs returned due to someone losing their lease and not being able to find a place that allows the breed (giant breed).


I can understand some about the home visits and the vet references...

Although, like someone said, it pretty much makes it so that someone can't have their first dog be a rescue - which I think is silly. (A first time owner is going to get a vet reference from....where?)

But - personal references? What does that have to do with being a good potential dog owner? I can think of far more things that would be more indicative of potential dog ownership than what a couple of someone's friends say. (Not to mention if you're someone like me who tends to few if any true friends - there may not be many IRL friends I'd even have to give you for references. I'd come off better pointing them to people here on this forum. I guess that makes me a bad potential dog owner in a rescues' eyes, though I'd hope Wally would say otherwise.)

And renting? What's wrong with renting? Especially in THIS economy? I mean, it's not like homeowners never dump dogs or have crap happen (all it takes is one income maker to lose their job these days) but only renters do. Seems like an unfair assumption that renters would make crap rescue dog owners. What about homeowners who have other people besides themselves? Aren't dogs sometimes returned because someone in the family doesn't want a dog or doesn't want to deal with the dog? Does that mean only homeowners who live alone should have rescue dogs?


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

Basically I just feel those type of adoption guidelines rule out almost all potential adopters. This forum is full of awesome dog owners. How many of them are over 25, own their home, have a fenced yard, no kids under 10, no plans to have kids in the next few years and are home all the time? Come on.

Next they'll have potential adopters allergy tested, a credit check and income proof to make sure that you're financially stable and a physical to make sure you're in good general health so you won't kick the bucket anytime soon.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Renting means less stable MOST of the time, you are subject to leases and what happens if your building goes co-op or changes management, Your neighbor decide he doesn't like you dog and continuously complains about the dog barking to try to force you to get rid of it (happens all the time) or the house you're renting gets sold and the new owners want you out (happened to me). You then have to find a new place that allows your dog (which can be very hard with dogs over 30#), and move. Far more renters give up dogs, even in THIS economy just a fact of life. 

Personal references, you are taking a life I'm responsible for into your hands, I want to talk to those around you to find out what you are like. How responsible you are, I want the dog to have a forever home, in many cases the dog we are adopting is already grieving it's last family and I want to be sure you will be it permanent home. Your vet only sees you occasionally, your friends/family are far more likely to see you on a day to day basis and know what type of person you are. 


With most rescues the dogs are IN our homes and we get to know them, we care far more about their placement than the shelter that cycles through hundreds or thousands of dogs a year. It's truly far more personal trying to find the RIGHT home for the dogs in our care.


----------



## ruckusluvr (Sep 20, 2009)

I was force to get my shelties from a breeder. the sheltie rescue requires an 8 foot privacy fence, and you must live at least 500 feet from the road. and you cannot live on a major road. 
Also they check to be sure that you get heart worm AND flea prevention every single month. I skip both in the winter months....
I have a five foot chain link fence, I live 300 feet from the road, but its a major highway.
they didnt care to hear that I do agility with my dogs, nor care to heart that I was a dog groomer and I have loads experience in dogs.


----------



## looneyfish (Nov 11, 2009)

> Renting means less stable MOST of the time, you are subject to leases and what happens if your building goes co-op or changes management, Your neighbor decide he doesn't like you dog and continuously complains about the dog barking to try to force you to get rid of it (happens all the time) or the house you're renting gets sold and the new owners want you out (happened to me). You then have to find a new place that allows your dog (which can be very hard with dogs over 30#), and move. Far more renters give up dogs, even in THIS economy just a fact of life.


I beleive that the the requirements quoted were for a small dog rescue. It isn't that hard to rent with a small dog. During my last dogs life, we rented 3 different places and owned 2. Dogs live a long time, I think a history of dealing with issues would be more important then owning a home at the moment of adoption. Most people are not going to live in the same place the whole time they have the dog.

I'm not renting now BTW, so this is in no way me just disagreeing with rules that I don't meet. I meet everything but the kid one.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Doesn't matter the size of the dog, small dogs bark, howl and whine and are given up just a frequently because of these things. They are also far more easily injured by young children (probably the reason for the no children under 10 rules). I myself was been bitten as a child frequently by small dogs (mom had a Peke that hated me when I was 2-3 years old and would bite me if I came near it and I'm sure I may have given the dog good reason). It's hard to find a decent rental with ANY pets, and larger dogs make it more difficult. 

The rules are there for the DOGS well being which is the PRIMARY concern of the rescue. If you do time volunteering for a rescue you might understand better. There have been times that I've done a home inspection and have left the house and immediately called AC and or FS to report a hoarder or abuser (including child abuse and neglect). There is far too much out there that you don't see and we do. I get re-homing calls all the time, at all hours of the day even those trying to re-home aggressive dogs, I know the reasons (and excuses) people give for getting rid of their dogs, of all sizes. I try to make sure people who adopt the dogs we've accepted into our rescue will never be calling me or another rescue to give up their dogs or taking them to the pound. THAT is my job on the behalf of the dog. 

Many times we've put tons of money (far more than what we charge for adoption) into the dog we're adopting. Frequently when a dog comes into rescue it will need some type of medical attention, sometimes it's only for a S/N (which for my breed can run $350.00-700.00 depending on the age, weight and health condition of the dog) some times there are more serious condition such as Heart-worm, tapeworm, HD ect) we have to treat. We've kept the dog in our home and nursed them and trained them (they nearly all need training to some extent). This is true of nearly every rescue I know of, no matter the size of the dog. Therefore placement becomes a very personal thing for us.


----------



## sheltiemom (Mar 13, 2007)

ruckusluvr said:


> I was force to get my shelties from a breeder. the sheltie rescue requires an 8 foot privacy fence, and you must live at least 500 feet from the road. and you cannot live on a major road.
> Also they check to be sure that you get heart worm AND flea prevention every single month. I skip both in the winter months....
> I have a five foot chain link fence, I live 300 feet from the road, but its a major highway.
> they didnt care to hear that I do agility with my dogs, nor care to heart that I was a dog groomer and I have loads experience in dogs.


Same here, both sheltie rescues in my area denied my application even though I had two shelties from breeders and DH and I have both had shelties since we were kids. At the time we were denied for not having a fence and for having kids under a certain age. We have since put up a fence. I was especially livid when one of the dogs we applied for spent another year in rescue after we were denied, and another was lost from her foster home and never recovered.

I ended up getting a third dog from an aussie rescue that did not have fence/kid requirements, and another from the pound though, so I'm good.

I completely understand home visits and vet checks though. I'd rather someone come into my home and see how I keep my dogs than to make arbitrary rules without ever meeting me.


----------



## deege39 (Dec 29, 2008)

Well, I can somewhat agree and understand _most_ of those rules... But certainly not the one hinting that you don't love the dog if you're not feeding RAW. That's absurd. Just because it is a good diet, doesn't mean it's the best one, and doesn't mean you have to.

I understand that all these rescue groups and foster-homes want each dog to have the *perfect* home... The perfect home, to them, is one with a big back yard, a safe fence, and so on; But on the flip-side, a dog doesn't need all of that to _have_ the perfect home...


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

FYI, no rescue can tell you what to feed your dog, the courts have already ruled on that one thanks a 'rescue' that tried to reposses dogs because of what the owners were feeding.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

luvntzus said:


> *Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard.
> 
> *Applicant must be 25 years or older.
> 
> ...


I guess I would fail because of these, lol! That's pretty ridiculous. What makes me mad about this kind of thing is that they're keeping all of their fosters and refusing to adopt them out to GOOD owners, while shelter dogs are rotting in the city pound. If they would lower their standards just a little, they could adopt out more dogs and save more dogs on death row. 

However, I still think it's pretty ridiculous that some places only require a photo ID and $15 

BTW, What is defined as "elderly?" My mom's boyfriend's mom (Lol, complicated relations) is in her late 60's, and she's the healthiest, most active person I've ever met. She's got a personal trainer, and runs for like 10 miles every day. It's flippin' nuts XD Plus she's retired and could spend all day with a young dog. That's kind of dumb that they wouldn't adopt a young active dog out to her. Plus, Basil's young, but he'd still probably do fine with most elderly people, because he's relatively mellow and doesn't need a whole ton of exercise.


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

Nargle said:


> I guess I would fail because of these, lol! That's pretty ridiculous. What makes me mad about this kind of thing is that they're keeping all of their fosters and refusing to adopt them out to GOOD owners, while shelter dogs are rotting in the city pound. If they would lower their standards just a little, they could adopt out more dogs and save more dogs on death row.


Many rescues acknowledge that they can't save all the dogs and the focus on doing the BEST placements they can for the dogs in their program. Not just throwing sh*t at the wall and seeing what sticks...that's not good for dogs. I support quality placements, not quantity placements. Though it is nice if you can do both.




> BTW, What is defined as "elderly?" My mom's boyfriend's mom (Lol, complicated relations) is in her late 60's, and she's the healthiest, most active person I've ever met. She's got a personal trainer, and runs for like 10 miles every day. It's flippin' nuts XD Plus she's retired and could spend all day with a young dog. That's kind of dumb that they wouldn't adopt a young active dog out to her. Plus, Basil's young, but he'd still probably do fine with most elderly people, because he's relatively mellow and doesn't need a whole ton of exercise.


I'm not sure if it was here or another board, but someone just posted about an 85 year old getting a 2 year old dog. IMO, that's not a good placement. It's a fact of life that we don't live forever and 85 is out on the edges of our life expectancy.

That said, age is a relative thing...I've never seen a group have a hard and fast 'no one over X age' but I've seen them strive to place senior dogs with senior humans....I think it's a great match lots of times. I've processed plenty of returns when the human has to go to a nursing home or they die....then you have an older dog that is much harder to re-home.


----------



## BluesGuy (May 9, 2009)

Hense why I will not waste my time with rescue orginizations.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

LOL. Other than not being 25, I fit all their requirements.



BluesGuy said:


> Hense why I will not waste my time with rescue orginizations.


This _organization_ does not cover all organizations. There are lots of awesome rescues out there. Hence why some of us have adopted.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

BluesGuy said:


> Hense why I will not waste my time with rescue orginizations.


Many good breeders are just as 'nosy', if not moreso.


----------



## Yui (Sep 12, 2009)

There was this one adoption application that required this: "Please enter one of your Drivers License (with State) or your Social Security Number." I could be wrong, but isn't that over doing it a bit...


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

lovemygreys said:


> Many rescues acknowledge that they can't save all the dogs and the focus on doing the BEST placements they can for the dogs in their program. Not just throwing sh*t at the wall and seeing what sticks...that's not good for dogs. I support quality placements, not quantity placements. Though it is nice if you can do both.


Honestly I don't think denying people who would be perfectly good owners and keeping the dog for another year is in the dog's best interest. Plus, silly things like "no one under 25," "must have a fenced yard," "must have previous dog experience" are terms that if not satisfied won't necessarily decrease the dog's quality of life. You can still be the BEST possible home for that dog, but get turned down because of something trivial like being 24 and a half.  (I know that some requirements MAKE SENSE, like home visits and consent from your land lord and stuff, but definitely not every requirement does.)

Instead of trying to weed out people with all sorts of crazy rules that prevent almost everyone from adopting, why don't rescues, I dunno, get to know the potential adopters and find out who they are as individuals? You can still meet all of those requirements without being a good owner, and there are LOTS of good owners that don't necessarily meet all of the requirements. But if you were to say, go out to lunch with them and talk about how they plan on raising and caring for their future dog I'm sure you'd be able to tell how competent they are, instead of just worrying about their age and yard. I can guarantee you that if I suddenly owned a home with a fenced yard and gained a few more years Basil's life would still be just the same as it is now.



lovemygreys said:


> I'm not sure if it was here or another board, but someone just posted about an 85 year old getting a 2 year old dog. IMO, that's not a good placement. It's a fact of life that we don't live forever and 85 is out on the edges of our life expectancy.
> 
> That said, age is a relative thing...I've never seen a group have a hard and fast 'no one over X age' but I've seen them strive to place senior dogs with senior humans....I think it's a great match lots of times. I've processed plenty of returns when the human has to go to a nursing home or they die....then you have an older dog that is much harder to re-home.


That's absolutely absurd.  That's completely ridiculous to say someone can't have a dog because you think they're going to die soon. How do you know you're not going to get in a car crash tomorrow, or choke on dinner? That doesn't mean you shouldn't have dogs!! What, are you going to order a complete physical from them next? Ask how many times they cross the street in a week? Oh my gosh, this has got to be one of the craziest things I've ever heard. If anyone ever tries to tell me I can't live the last portion of my life with dogs... oh my gosh... 

I agree that extremely high-energy dogs might not be best for elderly people, and MAYBE they should have some sort of back-up plan if they do die (As in, a family member that's willing to take the dog) But saying elderly people shouldn't have young dogs is still nuts in my opinion. Basil is 2 and he's not high energy at all. I'm sure if I was 85 I'd be able to care for him just fine. Plus, several of my relatives have lived well into their late 90's and into their 100's (Still doing farm work right up until the end!), so there's a chance I'd still outlive him!


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Yui said:


> There was this one adoption application that required this: "Please enter one of your Drivers License (with State) or your Social Security Number." I could be wrong, but isn't that over doing it a bit...


 
Perhaps for a criminal background check to be sure you've not been convicted of animal cruelty. I think it's a little over the top, but can understand the desire to be sure someone doesn't have a history of hoarding or abuse of animals. You'd be surprised what some sick people will do to get their hands on an animal. If you saw some of the things that turn up in our DNA (Do Not Adopt) communications you'd understand better.



Nargle said:


> .)
> 
> Instead of trying to weed out people with all sorts of crazy rules that prevent almost everyone from adopting, why don't rescues, I dunno, get to know the potential adopters and find out who they are as individuals? You can still meet all of those requirements without being a good owner, and there are LOTS of good owners that don't necessarily meet all of the requirements. But if you were to say, go out to lunch with them and talk about how they plan on raising and caring for their future dog I'm sure you'd be able to tell how competent they are, instead of just worrying about their age and yard. I can guarantee you that if I suddenly owned a home with a fenced yard and gained a few more years Basil's life would still be just the same as it is now.


 
Because we have lives, jobs, families ect. I get an average of 15-20 apps a month. I don't have time to sit down and have lunch with all those people. I have to be able to screen the best possible candidates in as little time as possible. We don't get paid for this work, it's ALL voluntary. we do get some reembursments, my rescue tries to reemburse to 100% (food, pull fees, vet care) if there's funding.


----------



## foxthegoldfish (Apr 15, 2008)

I hate how so many places have very set rules on fences, age, home ownership etc

I understand references and things like that

but in reality it all depends on the dog and the individuals.

When I foster I don't have set requirements at all and I have found amazing homes for all the dogs

One was very high energy (my first foster, I got in way over my head), chased cats, canstantly escaped my yard (6 foot privacy fence) and some times got into fights with other dogs.
I let everyone know about it and most people turned her down and after 6months I found her an amazing home. But they didn't have a very good fence, or a huge yard, they had 5 cats, another dog and both worked full time.
But after I got to know them 
I found out that;
their current dog came from a home where she was beaten and they never gave up on her, they spent years making her trust people again.
They owned horses and rode for 2+ hours a day, plus time at the paddoc with the horses
The guy ran for over an hour every day
They had the dogs sleep inside in their bed.
Their cats were used to dogs and fought back
the dogs went beside the horses on rides, they went running with the guy, they went to the river a couple of times a week.

They turned out to be perfect; we went to visit her and she was solid muscle, she ran flat out for about 3 hours a day and played with the other dog the rest of the time as well as training and fetch. She was so so so happy. and she never chased their cats after a week and she never jumped their fence.
They would not have passed on that list as their fence was not great, they planned to have kids in a few years, they were under 24, they did not own their own home.

Then I had Stan, he had medical issues and I only had him a week before a loving family wanted to adopt him. They had two kids under 10 and he was a big dog. but his medical isssues meant he couldn't jump on them. Their kids had also been around a lot of dogs and were very well behaved with him. I trusted them and he is still happy living with them.

Set rules don't work for every dog
But it is important to make sure people are the right fit.


----------



## Valentino (Oct 13, 2008)

When I was looking to get a Pomeranian there was a rescue that I came across, and one of their rules were you must be in a relationship. You may not adopt if you are single or a widow. You may also not have kids. But how many relationships or married people will you find that don't have kids?

Pretty ridiculous IMO..


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

cshellenberger said:


> Because we have lives, jobs, families ect. I get an average of 15-20 apps a month. I don't have time to sit down and have lunch with all those people. I have to be able to screen the best possible candidates in as little time as possible. We don't get paid for this work, it's ALL voluntary. we do get some reembursments, my rescue tries to reemburse to 100% (food, pull fees, vet care) if there's funding.


You could still at least email them for a while. I seriously fail to see how refusing people who are under 25 or don't own fenced yards is helping you find good dog owners. It seems so utterly pointless to me. I hope you don't think people who still meet those requirements are automatically good dog owners. Either way I still think it's important to get to know them before giving them the dog you worked so hard on, cared for, and poured hours/days/weeks of effort into.


----------



## Taz Monkey (Sep 2, 2007)

I think sometimes rescues go overboard with trying to find the "perfect" home. I won't name names, but one particular rescue IMO has some (not all) over the top requirements. It doesn't surprise me that they have 17 pages of dogs for adoption, because they probably very rarely adopt any out. Here are the requirements:

*Dogs will not be placed in homes with children under the age of 10. Agree in case by case basis

*Dogs will not be placed with an adult that is planning on having children in the next few years.

*Applicant must have current or previous pet ownership to verify vet history and care.

*Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard.

*Dog will not be placed in a home with an invisible fence. Agree. I do not agree with invisible fencing.

*Young dogs will not be placed with elderly adults. Agaian, case by case, but I agree.

*Applicant must be 25 years or older. Totally agree. And I adopted most of my animals before the age of 25, yet I still agree. 

*An adoption fee is required and is non negotiable and non refundable. Agree

*Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications.

*Applicant must undergo reference checks and a home visit. totally agree

*The person submitting the application must be the person adopting. totally agree

*Applicant must have a vet reference. Totally agree

*All pets must reside in the applicant's home.
Totally agree
*All current pets must be spayed/neutered, and current on all vaccinations (or current vaccination titer test), heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative. agree except in cases where the animal has a medical condition where it cannot be altered/have vaccinations/be on HW preventative

*Puppies will not be placed in a home where they are left alone more than 2 hours without adult supervision.

One other thing that rubs me the wrong way is that they feed raw and have in each dog's description that they hope the next dog's owner will "love them enough" to keep feeding it. There are plenty of reasons to not feed raw that don't have anything to do with not loving the dog enough!


----------



## trumpetjock (Dec 14, 2007)

If I may ask, why do you think age 25 is required for adopting a dog? I know college graduates who make 70k a year and are only 23. I was 22 when I got Rocky and I don't think anyone can fault me for being a bad owner to him. We got Mesquite when I was 22 as well, and she's done swimmingly here.

Why should I have been denied a dog?


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

I think some groups confuse having a 'high denial rate' with 'high screening standards'. The two things are not automatically the same.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

trumpetjock said:


> If I may ask, why do you think age 25 is required for adopting a dog? I know college graduates who make 70k a year and are only 23. I was 22 when I got Rocky and I don't think anyone can fault me for being a bad owner to him. We got Mesquite when I was 22 as well, and she's done swimmingly here.
> 
> Why should I have been denied a dog?


I think it's because of stereotypes and people trying to cut corners instead of ACTUALLY finding out if a potential adopter would be a good dog owner or not.


----------



## Smithcat (Aug 30, 2008)

If you dont like those rules, then you would not like the requirements for adopting a retired or career-changed Guide dog either.
All they are trying to do is to protect the investment they have in their dogs.

While some of the requirements listed may seem to be a bit overboard, it is a lot better than having any Joe-dokes show up, take a rescued dog that was lovingly brought back from the brink........and sell it to an animal research lab.

Same for a retired or career-changed Guide dog. The requirements are there to try and "weed-out" unacceptable potential adopters who would not properly care for these dogs that have a significant financial investment in them as well as having been lovingly raised and trained to be the best of the best.

It is a simple matter of trying to be the best steward of what has been entrusted to your care.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

cshellenberger said:


> Perhaps for a criminal background check to be sure you've not been convicted of animal cruelty. I think it's a little over the top, but can understand the desire to be sure someone doesn't have a history of hoarding or abuse of animals. You'd be surprised what some sick people will do to get their hands on an animal. If you saw some of the things that turn up in our DNA (Do Not Adopt) communications you'd understand better.
> 
> Because we have lives, jobs, families ect. I get an average of 15-20 apps a month. I don't have time to sit down and have lunch with all those people. I have to be able to screen the best possible candidates in as little time as possible. We don't get paid for this work, it's ALL voluntary. we do get some reembursments, my rescue tries to reemburse to 100% (food, pull fees, vet care) if there's funding.


It works both ways for me.

Are all volunteers screened for criminal backgrounds in all 50 states?

Why would I give all the information necessary to completely steal my identity (name, address, SS#, DL#, phone number, etc.) to a total stranger, to likely be kept in an insecure file cabinet, some desktop computer, or god only knows where, to adopt a dog?

A file cabinet with that info on all those apps would be an absolute gold mine and free pass to a shady character. Not to mention the hours that person is home or away, whether their yard is fenced, and how their dog is kept (assuming they got one).

Is the rescue and person who comes on a home visit bonded? Insured?

My plumber and AC repairman are.

I keep less information on my customers than that, and have to pay thousands quarterly to a third party firm to certify it is all kept securely.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Actually having done rescue for so many years, I am pretty much in favor of that list. The only 2 things that I think are a bit over the top is the 2 hours away limit to adopt a puppy. Let's face it, most folks work and even the best person will need to leave the house more then 2 hours on occasion.

The other thing was the raw feeding. In that person's opinion raw might be best but there are plenty of others that would disagree with that. I always suggested to people to get a good quality food but I wouldn't expect them to feed raw.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

trumpetjock said:


> If I may ask, why do you think age 25 is required for adopting a dog? I know college graduates who make 70k a year and are only 23. I was 22 when I got Rocky and I don't think anyone can fault me for being a bad owner to him. We got Mesquite when I was 22 as well, and she's done swimmingly here.
> 
> Why should I have been denied a dog?


Yeah, the 25 thing doesn't bode well with me. I suppose I am an exception to most kids my age, but I wouldn't rule out on AGE alone. I adopted Smalls when I was 20, and I'm 23 now with three other dogs and I've been fostering since I turned 21. I own my own home with a large yard, do what I think is best for my dogs, and am financially secure. Not sure why I should have had to wait.

Edit: Not to mention if that was a set in stone rule, Smalls would have definitely been euthanized, Magpie most likely, and who knows what would have happened to Jack and Jonas.


----------



## FilleBelle (Aug 1, 2007)

RaeganW said:


> Anyway, I think that beyond requirements for legal reasons (I can understand the no renting policy even if I don't like it, the over 25 one, etc), a rescue's list should be guidelines, not hard-and-fast.


I think many rescues' "requirements" _are _guidelines...they just don't say that to the general public. The spcaLA has a list very similar to this one, but we look at people's answers and ask them to explain anything we don't think is quite right. If their explanation is satisfactory, they can have the dog. If not, we have a reason to turn them away other than, "We just have a bad feeling about you."


----------



## ruckusluvr (Sep 20, 2009)

oh yeah, I was 2 hrs away from the sheltie rescue, so they wouldnt consider me because of that also.

so i have a bad taste in my mouth about breed rescues. the dog I applied for in 06 is STILL in that rescue. Her name is blossom she is 3 fourths sheltie, 1 fourth cocker.


----------



## Taz Monkey (Sep 2, 2007)

trumpetjock said:


> If I may ask, why do you think age 25 is required for adopting a dog? I know college graduates who make 70k a year and are only 23. I was 22 when I got Rocky and I don't think anyone can fault me for being a bad owner to him. We got Mesquite when I was 22 as well, and she's done swimmingly here.
> 
> Why should I have been denied a dog?


By the age of 25 I had owned my own home for 6 years and had 3 dogs and probably 8 cats. 
I just think the majority of people are more settled by the age of 25.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

Kay, just curious, but what would a rescue think of this person? No kids (All grown up and moved out, and won't be having anymore), owned dogs in the past and can provide a vet reference, has a large fenced yard (6ft privacy fence), Early 50's, owns home, and is retired?

This person fits every requirement on the list posted by the OP. Does that make them a good dog owner? Absolutely not. The person I described is my boyfriend's mother, and while my boyfriend's sister was living there, she also had her australian shepherd Sasha. My boyfriend's mother would neglect Sasha (Boyfriend's sister was always at school or partying, so she wasn't there to care for her either) and has beaten her on several occasions with things like shoes and ladles. My boyfriend's sister moved out (Everyone did) but Sasha is still staying there because her "owner" is too busy with her new boyfriend. She still gets free fed Ol' Roy kibble so she's very overweight, probably hasn't been on a walk in forever, and probably gets whacked every now and then with a kitchen utensil. And she's the kind of person that if you were to do a home visit, she'd probably send Sasha away to her "real" owner's house for the day and make it look like she doesn't even have a dog. And this person wants a mastiff puppy.

And for some reason she's better suited to adopt a dog than a college student, someone under the age of 25, or is "too old," someone who rents, doesn't have a yard, or lives in an apartment. She passed the set of requirements! She must be a good dog owner! If you don't have enough time to get to know the person, all you have to go on is whether or not they meet the set of requirements. Yup, I see that system must be working out pretty nicely.


----------



## foxthegoldfish (Apr 15, 2008)

Valentino said:


> When I was looking to get a Pomeranian there was a rescue that I came across, and one of their rules were you must be in a relationship. You may not adopt if you are single or a widow. You may also not have kids. But how many relationships or married people will you find that don't have kids?
> 
> Pretty ridiculous IMO..


What?!? you have to be in a relationship?


----------



## StarfishSaving (Nov 7, 2008)

I think the bottom line here is that a rescue reserves the right to ask whatever it wants of its potential homes. I don't agree with blanket rules- in fact, my rescue has none, I sit down with potential adopters on a case-by-case basis and determine whether or not they're a good fit, but doing so has left me with a bit of a need to keep my rescue organization small enough to handle that. I am comfortable with it- I was manager at two shelters and I hated that the screening was so minimal that I never knew what kind of homes they were going to. Meeting someone for half an hour while they fill out paperwork and collecting personal information which may or may not be true (because even with personal references, you can be lied to easily) just wasn't good enough for me.

If you do not like how a particular rescue group is run, you have the option of moving on. Petfinder is a great tool for finding dogs and there are purebreds in shelters, too- many shelters do not have the type of guidelines that rescues might, nor the ability to verify that you meet their guidelines.

My adoption process starts with a simple application. If you removed the fancy tables that make it easier to read, it turns out to be about 2 pages, only half of that actual questions and the other simply gathering information about your living situation and references. Do I collect enough information in two pages to know if a home is the best fit for a dog? Not usually, but that's what the phone is for- and the home visit which is a requirement as well. I like to sit down and have real conversations with my applicants, find out what they're looking for, and assess WITH THEM whether or not they're making a good choice. We have no blanket rules. I have adopted to 18 year olds, people with toddlers, families several states away, single moms, renters, handicapped people, parents with autistic children, and even people with a less than perfect vet history (with HISTORY being the emphasis there, willingness to change or be educated having impacted my decisions.) Recently we had a dog who had been in our rescue almost a year, had had two failed adoptions in the past (not with our rescue) and we thought for sure he needed someone very experienced in dog training because he was so stubborn, intelligent, and difficult. Still, when the application came in of a family who just really wanted an active retriever mix and they loved Ozzy's description, I didn't dismiss them because they'd only ever had one dog. He is now the happiest, most loved dog that we've placed in quite some time and these "amateur" dog owners love him for all his faults and quirks.

If you don't like that I want to come to your home to see where you plan on keeping this animal- the one that MY money, MY time, and MY heart and soul have gone into rescuing- move on. There are plenty of shelters who just want to see an empty kennel at the end of the day. But if you can appreciate that I am not trying to be NOSY, just make sure that in a world full of all kinds of people, you are who you say you are and live where you say you live and you have a good heart and the ability to provide a loving home for one of my fosters, then I beg you to give us a try.

I provide references (peer, vet, adopter, volunteer and personal) upon request. Believe it or not, you don't have to be the only one getting scrutinized here, you have every right to ask the rescue for more information. All rescues are not created equal. Heck, some "rescues" aren't even rescues.

Edited to add: Just want to say that I don't meet some of that criteria, and I OWN a rescue organization...


----------



## Shaina (Oct 28, 2007)

On one hand, I know of several rescues that flat out refuse to adopt dog to anyone outside of a 30-45 minute drive of their rescue. Talk about severely limiting!

On the other hand, Kim was a nearly trouble-free adoption from a rescue and she is a one-in-a-million...they don't come much better than Kim (totally biased, yes).

Of course several months later when I was relatively experienced and she had been through obedience class and earned her CGC, I was then turned down by 4-5 rescue/shelter organizations before finding Webster. Funny how things work out like that.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

I would actually meet all the listed criteria except that I couldn't/wouldn't adopt a puppy 'cause it would be home alone for a lot more than two hours.

Oh, and I couldn't adopt a young dog 'cause they might consider me elderly.

I could never deal with an organization that considers me elderly, anyway. I've been ignoring AARP fir about ten years.


----------



## Thracian (Dec 24, 2008)

I think I know what rescue this is. They have had some dogs there for years because they list when the dog came into rescue. If I remember right, many of the senior dogs have the same adoption fee as younger ones, which was another thing that struck me as odd. Yes, they need more vet care, but that need for care continues after they are adopted. I know I would be reluctant to pay that fee.

I'm certainly in favor of screening, but I think this particular one is excessive. And the raw comment struck me the wrong way.

They did look like they really cared for the dogs and got to know them as individuals.


----------



## GottaLuvMutts (Jun 1, 2009)

Here's the ones I fail at:

I might have children in the next few years, depending on the definition of "next few years". Hopefully within the lifetime of the dog.

Current or previous pet ownership? Really? Why? Because only people who've already owned pets can make good owners?

Applicant must be 25 years or older. Just gimme another couple of weeks.

I rent. There _are_ no renting complications if you check with the landlord first, obtain permission, and pay a pet deposit.

Define reference check. Cause almost anyone can provide the name and number of someone who will sing their praises. Doesn't prove a thing.

Applicant must have a vet reference. Again, what if you have no previous pets?

Heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative. Vet told me not to bother, as long as I don't leave the area with my dog.

Guess I'm a bad owner, too. I know they're looking out for the best interest of the dog, but they're losing a lot of great potential owners in the process. It's requirement lists like these that make me glad that some organizations (most shelters, really) have less stringent requirements. Otherwise the puppy mills and BYB's would profit a lot more than they already do.


----------



## mrslloyd09 (Jul 12, 2009)

We've only looked into two shelters/rescues, one that we actually adopted thru and the local human society. Our adoption group (I call them ours because we'll pretty much go back to them for the rest of our lives) asked pretty standard questions. They asked if we were renting and we had to provide the name of our property management company. Asked about previous experience but didn't require it (what happens when only one of you has previous experience? My husband does but I don't). Asked about vet reference (we didn't have one, no pets, but I think put down the one we were thinking about using). Asked how long the dog would be home alone (she's left alone at four hour intervals; I come home at lunch). 

The humane society asks the same questions but they actually call your landlord if you're renting and confirm; the rescue didn't do that. However, it's more expensive to adopt from the rescue by $75.00 so maybe they figure if you're willing to pay that much you must be serious.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

What I have been told clearly when discussing this in depth is that many rescues purpose is not to save as many dogs as possible, but to make sure they find the best quality of life for the dogs that they can without exception.

It's a choice, and one I can understand. It's the same choice I make as an owner. I would never want to rehome my dogs, but if I had to I would know the person who took them would care for them well.

Some of the rules do rule out good homes, but so be it. I raised a very high energy dog when I was 18, with no fence, didn't own a home, and she lived a very long and very happy life.

I would not submit to handing out all my personal info, nor would I submit to a home visit. Just not going to happen. But there are plenty of organizations where you don't need to do that so it's all good, they need to adopt out their dogs too.


----------



## jbray01 (Dec 26, 2007)

the ones from the OP look pretty standard. there is actually one rescue in my area that requires an invisible fence (never looked into it, but probably a pretty expensive investment), and they can drop in to check on the dog without notice whenever they want. 

the sad thing is that this can turn people off and the dogs end up suffering. there was a gorgeous aussie at this particular rescue that was there for years instead of in a good home sans invisible fence


----------



## Terrie (Sep 11, 2009)

Talking about adoption fees. One of the rescues I've looked into would charge more if the dog is purebred. And this was 'all' dog rescue. Big, small, all breeds and mixes. I would understand a price difference from a breeder, but not from an 'any kind of dog' rescue. The difference was only 50 bucks but still the idea of it seemed odd to me. Fortunately for me I tend to go after the mutts. 

I've also looked at random application for fun and I have to admit some of them are a little intimidating. And a little discouraging at that, such a process to get a good doggie, lol. If I was a little less educated, I'd say to hell with it and go to the petshops!! DUN DUN DUN.

JK!!! I would never go to a petshop, they smell and are overpriced despite the puppymill issue.


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

Thracian said:


> I think I know what rescue this is. They have had some dogs there for years because they list when the dog came into rescue. If I remember right, many of the senior dogs have the same adoption fee as younger ones, which was another thing that struck me as odd. Yes, they need more vet care, but that need for care continues after they are adopted. I know I would be reluctant to pay that fee.


As someone who adopts a lot of senior hounds, I always hate to see them discounted. The "price" of a dog isn't dependent on the number of years you might have with them. Dogs can die at 3, 5, 6, or 16...you never know.

When we brought Quilty home, as an emaciated 13 year old, the adoption group told us to just take her and give her a good home for as long as she has left. I whipped out my check book and informed them that they were taking the same adoption fee for her as they would any of the other dogs in their program because Quilty has value, just as much as those other dogs did. I didn't care if she died the day we brought her home...just because she was old and sick doesn't mean she was worthless.

Now she's fat and sassy and healthy as any 13 year old greyhound can be!

Sorry...pet peeve of mine when people devalue or discount an older dog as if they were a piece of old garbage or something no one would possibly want to pay money for b/c they aren't as bright and shiny as a new puppy.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

I agree, oldies rule.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

lovemygreys said:


> As someone who adopts a lot of senior hounds, I always hate to see them discounted. The "price" of a dog isn't dependent on the number of years you might have with them. Dogs can die at 3, 5, 6, or 16...you never know.
> 
> When we brought Quilty home, as an emaciated 13 year old, the adoption group told us to just take her and give her a good home for as long as she has left. I whipped out my check book and informed them that they were taking the same adoption fee for her as they would any of the other dogs in their program because Quilty has value, just as much as those other dogs did. I didn't care if she died the day we brought her home...just because she was old and sick doesn't mean she was worthless.
> 
> ...


I agree, this irritates me, too. The way I see it, adoption fees should be there to try to cover whatever medical expenses the dog has cost the rescue, and the cost it has taken to care for them. Trying to move the "less desirable products" by making them discount price, and raising the price on puppies or purebred dogs which are in higher demand is not right. Basil was discount price, not because he's old or a mix, but because he had been returned to the rescue several times on account of his SA. I didn't adopt him because he was $75, though, I would have still adopted him if he was $300! Just because he's a tougher dog to work with doesn't mean he's any less valuable than the other dogs.


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

Nargle said:


> That's absolutely absurd.  That's completely ridiculous to say someone can't have a dog because you think they're going to die soon. How do you know you're not going to get in a car crash tomorrow, or choke on dinner? That doesn't mean you shouldn't have dogs!! What, are you going to order a complete physical from them next? Ask how many times they cross the street in a week? Oh my gosh, this has got to be one of the craziest things I've ever heard. If anyone ever tries to tell me I can't live the last portion of my life with dogs... oh my gosh...
> 
> I agree that extremely high-energy dogs might not be best for elderly people, and MAYBE they should have some sort of back-up plan if they do die (As in, a family member that's willing to take the dog) But saying elderly people shouldn't have young dogs is still nuts in my opinion. Basil is 2 and he's not high energy at all. I'm sure if I was 85 I'd be able to care for him just fine. Plus, several of my relatives have lived well into their late 90's and into their 100's (Still doing farm work right up until the end!), so there's a chance I'd still outlive him!


I never said old people should be prevented from having dogs. I said I understand why adoption groups would want to try to place older dogs with older people.

Yes, any of us could be hit by a bus at any time or drop dead. Probably won't though...but, no matter how you cut it, 85 is old...is that the BEST placement for a 2 year old dog? Not in my opinion.

That said, I've never been a big believer in "hard and fast" rules...groups should have flexibility to make exceptions to some of their rules.


----------



## BluesGuy (May 9, 2009)

People want everyone to stay away from BYB yet at the same time think all these rules to adopt a pet are for the most part ok.

Kind of silly to me and just serves to drive people to BYB in my opinion.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

BluesGuy said:


> People want everyone to stay away from BYB yet at the same time think all these rules to adopt a pet are for the most part ok.
> 
> Kind of silly to me and just serves to drive people to BYB in my opinion.


 If you have a hard time finding ANY rescue to adopt from, there is a good chance you're not fit to own a dog. Or you can find a GOOD breeder. There is no reason to think people should just feel resigned to buying from a BYB.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

Foyerhawk said:


> I agree, oldies rule.


Thank you. Wvasko and I appreciate that.

I have mixed feelings about all of this but, in general, I don't think it should be too terribly easy to adopt a dog.

I know some shelters who will turn over a dog to anyone who plunks down the adoption fee. They may well be throwing the dog from the frying pan into the fire.

I don't think shelters and rescues should drop their requirements to stay in line with BYBs. I think BYBs should raise their requirements to be in line with better shelters and rescues.

And I think pigs should fly.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> If you have a hard time finding ANY rescue to adopt from, there is a good chance you're not fit to own a dog. Or you can find a GOOD breeder. There is no reason to think people should just feel resigned to buying from a BYB.


It's not that they feel resigned to, it's just made so much easier and way less hassle to do.

You have a choice.

Use a rescue, hassle from the word go, application, references, home visit, contract that basically says the dog is never really yours..

Go with a GOOD breeder, same deal.

Or go BYB route, pay a fee, go home with dog on the spot. A dog that actually belongs to you, hassle free.

Many if not most people don't want to become an expert on rescues, an expert on what a good vs bad breeder is, to be inspected including their home, they just want a pet. Many would prefer to give a dog needing a home at rescue a good home, but not at the expense of a 3rd degree investigation into their private life.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

TxRider said:


> It's not that they feel resigned to, it's just made so much easier and way less hassle to do.
> 
> You have a choice.
> 
> ...


If it's because it's just easier to do, then that is a people problem, then, not a good rescue/breeder problem. Not all rescues are Fort Knox and impossible to adopt from. Petfinder makes finding a rescue the easiest thing in the world to do, in fact, no "becoming an expert" required. People have to understand that rescues have a huge burden as it is. They take in dogs that don't have a home already, vet them, and care for them. Then they have to minimize the risk of the dog ending up in a bad situation, which is hard in itself, because people can put whatever they like on applications and unless you're psychic you can't know what exactly is going to go on in that home. I don't see any problem with having to fill out an application about pet care and your intentions, provide vet references if you have them, or a simple home check. I don't understand the "dog that isn't really yours" part. All of my dogs are rescues, and the contract I signed only stated I need to return the dogs to them if I can no longer care for them. Rescues find their adopted out dogs in AC and on craiglist being sold even with that contract.

And I'm saying this as a foster parent, a foster parent who has had dogs returned, and a person who has had applications rejected.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

There is a happy medium between 'paranoid requirements' and 'giving away dogs to anybody'. Not every rescue or shelter gets it right, but I don't think it's fair for people to write off _all _rescues just because some are not perfect. They're all different.


----------



## Terrie (Sep 11, 2009)

I suppose also that since most rescues ask so many questions and they don't even need to be too strict or obscure. Just the amount of questions and references and such, that some people might feel like "Darn, are they going think I'm good enough?" 

I've seen some where they ask not only if you have a yard and if it's fenced but how big is your yard and how tall is your fence and is the fence made with metal links or is a wood fence? They even ask if it will be possible for the dog to dig under the fence! Not everyone has that information handy. 

On the other hand, I've seen some rescue applications where they only ask basic things like contact info(duh!) and where the doggie will sleep at night.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> If it's because it's just easier to do, then that is a people problem, then, not a good rescue/breeder problem. Not all rescues are Fort Knox and impossible to adopt from. Petfinder makes finding a rescue the easiest thing in the world to do, in fact, no "becoming an expert" required. People have to understand that rescues have a huge burden as it is. They take in dogs that don't have a home already, vet them, and care for them. Then they have to minimize the risk of the dog ending up in a bad situation, which is hard in itself, because people can put whatever they like on applications and unless you're psychic you can't know what exactly is going to go on in that home. I don't see any problem with having to fill out an application about pet care and your intentions, provide vet references if you have them, or a simple home check. I don't understand the "dog that isn't really yours" part. All of my dogs are rescues, and the contract I signed only stated I need to return the dogs to them if I can no longer care for them. Rescues find their adopted out dogs in AC and on craiglist being sold even with that contract.


I agree.
But then, I've never really bought into the 'tough shelters drive people to BYBs' argument. Regardless of how strict some rescues run, everyone is still a person with free choice. If you know BYBs are bad then that's it, bottom line. The fact that you didn't get the desired outcome from a shelter doesn't mean you suddenly have a free pass to support irresponsible practices.

If someone makes the choice to go to a BYB there's really nothing that can be done about it. But it's still their choice, their actions, and ultimately their responsibility.

As for the original topic of this thread - I think strict or unreasonable is really in the eye of the beholder. If they have a bunch of dogs sitting for years on end unadopted then yeah, something probably does need to be revised. But if their animals are being adopted successfully (so they aren't being returned frequently) then as far as I'm concerned, they can be as strict or thorough as they like. Shelters and rescues are like breeders in that different ones are going to meet the needs of different people. That doesn't necessarily mean the ones you passed over are 'bad'...they just didn't fit what you were looking for or what you were comfortable with.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

RonE said:


> I have mixed feelings about all of this but, in general, I don't think it should be too terribly easy to adopt a dog.
> 
> I know some shelters who will turn over a dog to anyone who plunks down the adoption fee. They may well be throwing the dog from the frying pan into the fire.
> 
> ...


I agree. I think some shelters are making it too easy and also making it big business. Raising adoption fees and "selling" dogs rather then re-homing to the best possible home.

I know there are many people that fall through the cracks on the posted list of requirements but I also know if the person is willing to go the extra mile to adopt, then often times the rescues will give a little on the rules.



TxRider said:


> It's not that they feel resigned to, it's just made so much easier and way less hassle to do.
> 
> You have a choice.
> 
> ...



The thing is, most good owners are willing to deal with a little hassle to get the right dog for them and the best situation as a whole.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

I am curious as to how many here who criticize certain adoption procedures by rescue groups actually do "rescue work" and try to find loving families for animals themselves?

You could have an attitude of "it's just a dog, who cares who it goes to as long as it's off the streets", or one of "you'll never be good enough so don't bother applying".

I can assure you, it's a hard medium to find (kind of like those "too light"/"too hard" beer commercials, kind of funny btw).

We utilize an application form which must be filled out.

We do a verbal interview.

We check vet references and personal references.

Person then can meet the animal.

We then do a home visit.

The animal can stay at the adoptive families home after the home visit if the person wishes.

We take the animal back at any time if for whatever reason the adoptive person/family feels like it's not working out.

Currently, we have a young man coming in from over four hours away for the holidays next week to look at a dog in our care. Currently he rents, and he has no yard.

Now, that could be two strikes against him for some organizations (and at first it does not give me the "warm fuzzies"), but that is one big reason why you do personal interviews. Yes, a questionaire form is "black and white", but you don't get to actually know the person and their expectations until you talk with them and meet with them in person.

Now, if a person writes down on the questionaire that their last five dogs have been run over by a car, that should give you some indication of the odds the dog may have in their care.

By the same token, when someone talks to us, we inform the person of every single bad trait we can think of that we have noticed with the animal in our care (yes, we do try to train, however, with full time jobs and a bunch of animals in our care, there is only so much time you can spend with each animal). Of course, we also inform the people of the positive attributes, but we figure if the person wanting to adopt knows EVERYTHING about the animal, they can make a better informed decision if the animal is the right choice for them (remember, we take the animal back, so it makes no sense to us if we adopt the animal out and then find out two weeks later the person wants to bring the dog back because the dog has shown behavior that they weren't expecting). 

All that said, and I'm sincere when I say this, there are some seriously interesting people (AKA nut cases) out there looking to adopt animals. I've had people accuse me of stealing money when someone else didn't want to adopt their animal out to them (we do courtesy listings for people), wanting to barter their animals with animals in my care, have more animals than us and still want to adopt more, have no money to afford an animal, live in places that don't take animals, want to tie the animal to a tree 24/7, want an animal for protection only, want an animal for a Christmas present, want an animal for a birthday present...

The list could go on and on.

The fact is I don't think ANYONE thinks they are a bad pet owner. 

AND, keep in mind, both my wife and I have full time careers and everything we do is on our own time. Sorry, I learned my lesson a long time ago after driving three hours one way only to find a family has changed their mind AT the time I get to their house. Guess what, I'm the one who is paying for my gas. Hopefully, you learn from your mistakes. Doing rescue work, I sincerely beleive my wife and I have learned from ours.

Overall, I'd rather be safe than sorry, and ANYONE trying to find an animal a home is at least trying.


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

That's all well and fine, but the two rescues I dealt with have me going other routes next time. I understand that they come from a more stringent and emotional mindset. The rescue thing is not something I want to chance going through again. 


Eh, I'll probably still use craigslist for the dogs that don't come from breeders.


----------



## Terrie (Sep 11, 2009)

Some of us mentioned it could be a hassle to adopt a dog from a rescue and then some one else said it should be worth the hassle. I think most of us DF people will agree with that because we are all crazy dog lovers. But I think if for example my grandparents wanted a nice little companion dog. They don't need to be super dog lovers just regular old folk, then it probably wouldn't be worth the hassle. Know what I mean?


----------



## FilleBelle (Aug 1, 2007)

Terrie said:


> Some of us mentioned it could be a hassle to adopt a dog from a rescue and then some one else said it should be worth the hassle. I think most of us DF people will agree with that because we are all crazy dog lovers. But I think if for example my grandparents wanted a nice little companion dog. They don't need to be super dog lovers just regular old folk, then it probably wouldn't be worth the hassle. Know what I mean?


This has already been said, but the answer to that problem is to go elsewhere. My current dog and my deceased dogs and cat were all rescues. Two were from different private rescue organizations and two were from the county shelter. None of them were a hassle to obtain. Just because they're asking for my vet's phone number doesn't mean it's a hassle. How hard is it to get out the address book and look it up? They want to do a home check? Well...I'm home anyway, so drop on by!

If one is finding an experience with a rescue to be too much of a hassle, one should go to another rescue.


----------



## Thracian (Dec 24, 2008)

> Sorry...pet peeve of mine when people devalue or discount an older dog as if they were a piece of old garbage or something no one would possibly want to pay money for b/c they aren't as bright and shiny as a new puppy.


I don't think older dogs are worthless or "old garbage." Far from it. And I certainly understand the need for a rescue to cover the expenses.

My position is simply that if I adopt a senior dog, I expect he or she will *likely* (notice the qualifier) have more medical expenses (and many that I've seen on Petfinder have medical conditions mentioned) in a shorter period of time. I appreciate a rescue's understanding this likelihood by offering reduced fees. Lowering an adoption fee by $50 or $100 is a nice gesture when I'm likely going to spend hundreds more at the vet in the coming months or years. It's not a declaration of a pet's unworthiness.

(And yes, I fully expect to pay hundreds at the vet in the coming months or years for any dog, senior or not.)

A slightly lowered fee doesn't devalue or diminish or whatever a dog in my mind as long as it's going to a good home.

On a related note, November is Adopt a Senior Pet month at Petfinder. So it's a good time to check out some pets.  I would get Sylvia if I could, but I have too many stairs for her, and I think she would find my puppy a bit too annoying. (Sometimes I find him too annoying.)


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

Inga said:


> I agree. I think some shelters are making it too easy and also making it big business. Raising adoption fees and "selling" dogs rather then re-homing to the best possible home.


And I think we both know who we're talking about.

I love pistachios, but they can be a lot of trouble. Some of the shells are difficult to crack and it's a pleasant surprise when you find a pistachio kernel already out of the shell.

So the other day I bought a 12-ounce bag of pistachio kernels, without the shells. I figured, "This will be great. All the reward without the effort."

It was a major disappointment. It turns out that the effort is an essential part of the enjoyment.

Most things that are truly worthwhile are like that. Getting a dog is like that. It shouldn't be so easy that anyone can do it - especially on a whim.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

Yes, I do rescue work. Tons of it.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

Dakota Spirit said:


> I agree.
> But then, I've never really bought into the 'tough shelters drive people to BYBs' argument. Regardless of how strict some rescues run, everyone is still a person with free choice. If you know BYBs are bad then that's it, bottom line. The fact that you didn't get the desired outcome from a shelter doesn't mean you suddenly have a free pass to support irresponsible practices.
> 
> If someone makes the choice to go to a BYB there's really nothing that can be done about it. But it's still their choice, their actions, and ultimately their responsibility.
> ...


I don't buy the "rescues are hard, so people will go to a BYB" argument either. Why do people buy from BYBs in the first place? I assume they either don't know any better and think that buying a dog is buying a dog, and they're cheaper (I've seen pups in the paper for 50 bucks). My sister turned down reputable Pug breeders I offered her for basically no reason other than "OMG they're so expensive and I need the puppy right NOW!!" I don't think I've ever even heard anyone say that rescues required too much so they gave up, even people who know what BYBs are. I doubt most of those people even made an attempt to apply at a rescue.

I can't say I don't have a beef or two with the application process, as we were denied a GSD a couple years ago for not being married. The dog was at that shelter another year. But I didn't get soured and believed that no one would ever adopt to me so I clearly had to find a dog by different means. I think most rescues make it too EASY to get a dog. The shelter that we adopted Jack and Jonas from basically said "Cash? Thanks, here is your dog!" and left me dumbfounded, looking for even an application. Luckily, I think I make a good owner, but what about all the other dogs? And quite frankly, if they were an up and up shelter, they would have found Jonas not suitable for any home, and certainly not to whoever ponied up the cash first.


----------



## ruckusluvr (Sep 20, 2009)

I foster herding dogs.


----------



## upendi'smommy (Nov 12, 2008)

*Dogs will not be placed in homes with children under the age of 10. *I'm good with that one.*

*Dogs will not be placed with an adult that is planning on having children in the next few years.*Once again good.*

*Applicant must have current or previous pet ownership to verify vet history and care.*Good*

*Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard.*No fenced yard here.*

*Dog will not be placed in a home with an invisible fence.*No invisible fence either.*

*Young dogs will not be placed with elderly adults.*I can kind of understand this one, but I think it should go more off the individual.*

*Applicant must be 25 years or older.*Nope, I'm only 19.*

*An adoption fee is required and is non negotiable and non refundable.

*Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications.*I don't own my own home, but I live with family and am very stable. Does that count?*

*Applicant must undergo reference checks and a home visit.*Reasonable.*

*The person submitting the application must be the person adopting.*I can understand that.*

*Applicant must have a vet reference.*Completely understandable. *

*All pets must reside in the applicant's home.*Sure.*

*All current pets must be spayed/neutered, and current on all vaccinations (or current vaccination titer test), heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative.
*I can understand this.*
*Puppies will not be placed in a home where they are left alone more than 2 hours without adult supervision.*Eh, anyone who works is going to have to leave the pup for more than two hours.*

The only ones I don't agree with are absolutely having to have a fenced yard, having to be 25 (seriously, that means nothing when it comes to how good of an owner you're going to be), having to own your own home, and the two hour rule with puppies as it rules out more or less anyone with a job. 

It's still not too bad.


----------



## tigress (Feb 6, 2008)

*Dogs will not be placed in homes with children under the age of 10.*I don't think this should be hard and strict, but I can see the reason*

*Dogs will not be placed with an adult that is planning on having children in the next few years. *I could see this. You hear way too many of people giving pets away due to having a kid, even cats. And cats don't require near as much time as a dog. Having a kid is a hectic time and requires a lot of adjustment and time to kid. Not eveyrone will find they have enough time for the dog. My mom rescued two cats that got neglected after lady had kids. The lady felt bad and finally rehomed them*

*Applicant must have current or previous pet ownership to verify vet history and care. *Erm, kinda reasonable. Everyone has to have a first pet sometime cause no one is born with pet ownership experience. But I can see it does make it easier to predict how good an owner they are by how they treat current pets. So, I'd say this should be flexible*

*Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard. *I'd say have a fenced yard or plans to have a fenced yard. But once again, should be flexible. Actually, given that this was a small dog rescue, I'd say this is less important honestly.*

*Dog will not be placed in a home with an invisible fence. *Reasonable*

*Young dogs will not be placed with elderly adults. *I'm sorry, I agree with this. Call me ageist if you will. Yes, no one can predict when they are going to die, but if you are 85, chances are very much higher that you are going to die before the dog if you adopt the dog when it's still got plenty of years to live. Plus the energy level of a young dog is probably going to be more overwhelming. I'd say the only compromise I'd make here is maybe if you are elderly and want a young dog, show you have a contingency plan if you die. Besides, older dogs need homes proabbly even more so than the younger dogs. A dog with less energy and less likely that you'll die before it I think is a better idea. When I get older I definitely plan on sticking to senior pets*

*Applicant must be 25 years or older. *This isn't so important honestly. I knew some one in college who had dogs and I would say is one of the better pet owners I have known and has total commitment to her animals. I'd say maturity level is more important which varies from person to person*

*An adoption fee is required and is non negotiable and non refundable. *reasonable*

*Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications. *Understandable. Renting means you are in less stable of a situation. And I rent. But when renting, you can't control everything. What happens if your apartment's management changes, they decide they no longer want to accept dogs, and you can't afford to move? I've seen a 15 year old GSD listed in a rescue that that is exactly what happened.*

*Applicant must undergo reference checks and a home visit. *I really don't think this is unreasonable. A dog is a big commitment. Is it really that hard to let them talk to some references and see how the dog will be living for themselves?*

*The person submitting the application must be the person adopting. *This is an absolute given and I think should be common sense!*

*Applicant must have a vet reference. *Really not unreasonable. Though raelly shouldn't be the only reference check. I work at a vet clinic. No, I can't vouch for how good an owner some one is, I only can say how often we see them. I have no idea what the home life of the dog is*

*All pets must reside in the applicant's home. *In general yes. But I just don't see the point of an outside dog. Guess I grew up with inside dogs only so I can admit I'm biased here. But, I just fail to see how well of care a dog can have if they are only relegated to the outside and never allowed to be with the family. On the other hand, the one exception I could see is if you want a dog for working purposes like hunting or herding because the dog is still living an enriching ilfe, probably better than most family dogs, heh. They get to have a job and do stuff that they love. But I have a feeling those people tend to go to breeders, not rescues*

*All current pets must be spayed/neutered, and current on all vaccinations (or current vaccination titer test), heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative. *Reasonable*

*Puppies will not be placed in a home where they are left alone more than 2 hours without adult supervision. *How do they home a puppy with these requirements? I could see having a strong suggestion/preference for people willing to take some time off to get puppy adjusted or who have plans on how to train puppy while working around their work schedule, but honestly, if you want to afford a dog and you aren't retired/rich, you gotta be able to go to work*


----------



## CLF (Feb 26, 2009)

RaeganW said:


> The one I really object to is the one that you have to have previous dog experience. So, what, your first dog can't be a shelter/rescue dog? Do you know where most people go after checking the shelters? BYB's. Not through any fault of their own, but just because they're uneducated. Shelters turning people to BYB's does not seem ideal to me.


I agree, it would be much better it they required/offered a dog ownership education class for people who don't have any previous dog experience. 

Another thing I really object to is that a person who is getting THEIR first dog (first dog on their own but had dogs in their family growing up) is considered as someone who hasn't had any dog ownership experience.


----------



## StarfishSaving (Nov 7, 2008)

FilleBelle said:


> None of them were a hassle to obtain. Just because they're asking for my vet's phone number doesn't mean it's a hassle. How hard is it to get out the address book and look it up?


I once joked with an applicant that while there is a process involved, adopting a dog from me is a heck of a lot more work for me than it is you. 

I like that our process usually takes a few days to complete, and by the time we can schedule a mutually convenient home visit/potential adoption meetup, the family has had a bit of time to really weigh the situation they're getting into. It HAS helped folks realize they're just not ready to commit yet, before the risk of getting the dog to their home and having to bounce it right back.


----------



## CLF (Feb 26, 2009)

tigress said:


> *Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications. *Understandable. Renting means you are in less stable of a situation. And I rent. But when renting, you can't control everything. What happens if your apartment's management changes, they decide they no longer want to accept dogs, and you can't afford to move? I've seen a 15 year old GSD listed in a rescue that that is exactly what happened.*


If your apartment's management changes they are required by law to adhere to the lease as it was written. Even if your lease was up the new management would have a hard time justifying kicking out a good tenant because they no longer wanted to be dog friendly.

However, I do think it is completely reasonable for a rescue to require that they speak to your landlord to verify consent.


----------



## ChimiLamu (Nov 19, 2009)

Im in the middle on this one... I myself got my dog from a rescue with a similar (though not quite so long) list of requirements, and while I more or less met them all, there were certain things, like the home visit and even vet reference that they never actually did (I did put down the number of the vet I was going to use on the adoption form, but they never called her). I was a "first time dog owner" at the time but I did grow up with a dog, worked at an animal hospital throughout HS and had a very good interaction with the prickly woman in charge so I guess that weighed in my favor. 

I think tough "requirements" help discourage people who really don't know what they are getting into and hopefully make them think a bit harder about what it takes to properly take care of a dog before jumping in the deep end, even if they DO (sadly) go with a BYB.

On the other hand, having worked at a vet for 3 years I've certainly seen the other side where the requirements/ placement methods of some rescues are completely insane! there was one privately run rescue that we did work at cost for, so they would often leave dogs (after they had been spayed/neutered or other treatments) for months and months at our hospital (as much as a year) because it was just as cheap for us to keep them as them. They had the same "fenced yard/inside dog" requirements, but guess what- those dogs lived in little vet CAGES for the year. We'd walk them 2-3 times a day, but only for a few minutes at a time because we had so many other dogs (esp sick and injured ones) we needed to care for. The worst was the puppies, because we had no time in which to give them the attention they deserved, let alone any training. We ended up with stir-crazy untrained dogs who were practically un-placeable. 

This rescue was also infamous for inappropriately placing dogs. we never saw the young ones go out the door- only the old and/or behaviorally 'challenged'. Don't get me wrong- I think the oldies are great, and they certainly deserve good homes! And I say "behaviorly challenged" because it is just that: a challenge, and with patience, training, and most importantly experience almost any challenge can be overcome. HOWEVER, when our hospital was full of this rescue's friendly, good natured, young dogs (and puppies), the only ones we ever saw get adopted were the aggressive ones or oldies, and often to families who really couldn't handle them.

My friend told me her family tried to adopt a dog from them once when she was younger- her parents had had dogs before, but this was a first for the kids (who were all over 10, etc., etc.). They were pretty much forced to 'choose' a specific dog who was severely fear aggressive and badly bit a family member as soon as they got home. this family was not able to handle a dog who needed that much special care and training, and so brought it back to the rescue group who then banned them 'for life' from adopting another dog.

I remember a wonderful cocker spaniel (cross?) who was sweet, loving, about 1 year old, super eager to please, and already knew basic commands. A really nice family came to the hospital to look at him, fell in love with him, but were given some lame excuse why they couldn't adopt him. they were told they could adopt another (older, slower, not good for an active family) dog instead - so I know my friend's experience isn't just a one-time thing.

I think there is a fine line to walk when you are doing rescue work- you want the dog to have a good home- but tricking unwary families into adopting dogs you otherwise couldn't find a home for is not the way to make either dog or person happy!!


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

luvntzus said:


> This is the most extreme example that I've ever seen, but I think a lot of them are a little too invasive- vet references, several personal references, home visits, etc.


Why are the above too invasive? I expect a reputable rescue to visit my home, call my vet and my personal references. I also expect them to want to meet everyone who lives in my home, to have the adoptee meet all other animals in my home etc.

That's quite a list. I agree with some of it, disagree with others. I'm middle of the road when it comes to renters, how do you know that they will lose whatever it is they rent and how do you know they're adopting a dog for life? Of course, this can be said for homeowners. Hard call.
My best adoption was with Foxhound Rescue. I filled out an online application, the rescue lady contacted me and I went to meet Emma. We loved her, she loved us, we wanted each other. They called my vet, my personal references (I think these are a joke, anyone in their right mind is going to put down someone who they know will give them a glowing reference) and made two home visits. We didn't have a backyard, only a huge downhill frontyard so we had a kennel attached to our house. Rescue said it was too small so we had to enlarge it. We did, they came to check it out and left Emma with us. 
Almost 2yrs ago, we adopted a then 11yr old sheltie from our local shelter. We had to show proof we owned our home, filled out the app (they did not call anyone), paid the money and Katie was ours. That was it.
I'll take a reputable rescue over a shelter anyday. Emma came to us completely vetted, she was living with the rescue head, we knew everything possible about her & her health. Adoption fee, because she was 8, was $75.00 but we gave more.
Katie, from the shelter, came to us with a few obvious health issues but the rest was a surprise to us. We knew nothing other that she came here to NH from Texas and that's it. $100 fee and she was ours. Almost 2yrs later, she looks like a new dog.
By the way, oldies rule!!


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

*Dogs will not be placed in homes with children under the age of 10.* and* *Dogs will not be placed with an adult that is planning on having children in the next few years. *Stupid. I have a baby and five dogs. I'm a dog person, though- with showing and rescue background, and FAR from the average person who wants a pet. If they wouldn't make an exception for someone like me, then IMO they're idiots*

*Applicant must have current or previous pet ownership to verify vet history and care. *Ridiculous IMO. I also do not do most stuff at a vet. I disagree with over-vaccination, and I give Ivermectin for Heartworm. I have similar thoughts as to the above. Comparing me, who has the capability to do a lot of stuff myself, to someone who just doesn't take care of his dogs is ridiculous. Maybe they wouldn't, though.*

*Applicant must have a fenced yard. There are exceptions to this, but 95% of our fosters require a fenced yard. *REALLY stupid. This rule makes me super pissed. I actually prefer non-fence homes. They have to actually interact with their dog and WALK it!*

*Dog will not be placed in a home with an invisible fence. *I will tell them that IMO invisible fences suck and are worthless, and they'll need to supervise, leash, and train the dog, but I wouldn't say no because one is installed*

*Young dogs will not be placed with elderly adults. *Uh, case by case. I wouldn't give a one year old Golden to someone who was 87 and used a walker and had no family, but... yeah. Common sense?*

*Applicant must be 25 years or older. *Speechless...*

*An adoption fee is required and is non negotiable and non refundable. *Fair enough. I don't give refunds, either. I explain they're making a donation towards the NEXT dog, not buying a dog from me.*

*Applicant must be a homeowner due to leasing renting complications. *Stupid, and rules out many fine homes*

*Applicant must undergo reference checks and a home visit. *References are lame to me, for reasons others have stated. Home visit I am indifferent to. I usually ask if I can do one. If they seem at ALL wary of it, then I insist. If they say, "Of course!" immediately then I usually feel pretty good about them. I do it case by case.*

*The person submitting the application must be the person adopting. *Well, duh*

*Applicant must have a vet reference. *See my above thoughts on this*

*All pets must reside in the applicant's home. *Of course. I 100% agree with this one, and it is my only blanket policy. I'll put a normal, interactive dog down before I'd let it go live outside to rot in a yard or be tied up. However, I would make an exception for the rare dog that would truly NOT be happy indoors. I have never met that dog yet, but I know some do exist. The dog would have to have climate controlled shelter (Air conditioning) available at all times since I am in Florida, and would have to be kept clean, groomed, and free of parasites. I'd discuss this with them, should this ever come up. It never has.*

*All current pets must be spayed/neutered, and current on all vaccinations (or current vaccination titer test), heartworm tested annually and on heartworm preventative. *Um, no. I don't agree with any of that, except dogs must be on HW prevention. That one is a no-brainer. But Ivermectin is fine, and I don't care about annual tests. I also don't care about annual shots. As long as they do rabies as legally required, I don't care. It's a personal choice. The rescue dog won't leave my house intact, so what do I care if they have an intact dog? I'd do it case by case. If they have a show dog, or a dog they are waiting until an appropriate age to get neutered, then so what? I DO require a meeting in the home (mine or theirs) with any other dogs to make sure they appear like they do or will eventually and pretty easily get along.*

*Puppies will not be placed in a home where they are left alone more than 2 hours without adult supervision. *So only the independently wealthy who don't go see movies? This is stupid.*

One other thing that rubs me the wrong way is that they feed raw and have in each dog's description that they hope the next dog's owner will "love them enough" to keep feeding it. There are plenty of reasons to not feed raw that don't have anything to do with not loving the dog enough! *I tell people I hope they will feed raw, and I do verbally tell them very strongly not to feed Pedigree or anything similarly gross, but I don't require it in writing, and don't word it like the above.

BTW I do TONS of rescue. I've fostered some 200 dogs, almost all of them privately and at my own expense. So I come with a voice of experience from both sides.*


----------



## tigress (Feb 6, 2008)

CLF said:


> If your apartment's management changes they are required by law to adhere to the lease as it was written. Even if your lease was up the new management would have a hard time justifying kicking out a good tenant because they no longer wanted to be dog friendly.
> 
> However, I do think it is completely reasonable for a rescue to require that they speak to your landlord to verify consent.


It happens. And when your lease runs out they can very happily decide to change it. A lease isn't forever. They may not be able to change it in the middle of the lease, but that doesn't mean they can't once the lease runs out.

And, well, people are unreasonable. As I said, I did see an example of it happening (and the lady really didn't want to give up the dog, she was elderly and from what the rescue wrote, it seems they felt sorry for her so it seems they even thought she had no fault in it but it was a sucky situation).


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> If it's because it's just easier to do, then that is a people problem, then, not a good rescue/breeder problem. Not all rescues are Fort Knox and impossible to adopt from. Petfinder makes finding a rescue the easiest thing in the world to do, in fact, no "becoming an expert" required.


The reason rescues and shelters exist, as well as breeders back yard or not is a people problem.

I used petfinder.

Then I read adoption policies at rescues I saw a dog I might like listed under.

I have always rescued any stray I come across, keep it, find a new home for it, never have I taken even a stray to a shelter. At 50 I had never chosen a dog for myself, only ever taken in dogs someone didn't want or was a stray. For the first time I had to, or got to, actually choose the dog I would have.

When I decided I wanted a dog after not having one for several years I hit up petfinder. The requirements shocked me. A home visit? For real?

I had no issue with a fee, or even an application. I was ok with calling references even though I thought it a bit much. But a home inspection? Are these people for real?

Needless to say no rescue with a home visit requirement was even looked at after that. It became the first thing I checked for and screened out on any dog I saw listed I might like. Just not going to happen. I assume many if not most normal people feel the same.

A rescue has every right to decide any requirement they want to, but I think some in rescue have no idea how over the top those requirements appear to the majority of regular people out there.

Luckily there are rescues without such strict requirements, and shelters as alternative to BYB people. So I had a choice and found a rescue without such insane requirements.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

cshellenberger said:


> Personal references, you are taking a life I'm responsible for into your hands, I want to talk to those around you to find out what you are like. How responsible you are, I want the dog to have a forever home, in many cases the dog we are adopting is already grieving it's last family and I want to be sure you will be it permanent home. Your vet only sees you occasionally, your friends/family are far more likely to see you on a day to day basis and know what type of person you are.


Well, I guess I'm screwed because I'm not a social butterfly and don't really talk to a bunch of neighbors or what not. They don't know me (even if they see me walking Wally every day), so I don't know how they would go about telling you what kind of person I am.

I mean, the only family I talk to is my mother. I have no father, am an only child, and the rest of my family doesn't even think we exist (and don't even live in the same state anyway, much less 'see me every day') and I don't have many "IRL" friends. Most of them are over the internet or on places like this.

I guess that makes me a bad dog owner?


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

> I guess that makes me a bad dog owner?


It doesn't make you a bad owner - just an unverifiable one.


----------



## wolfsnaps (Apr 27, 2007)

I understand that people have invested their time, money, and emotions into their rescues. I get it. But this is why I ended up BUYING my mastiff. I was looking for a specific kind of dog. I looked at shelters within 100 mile radius. I found a great dog but the rescue said I lived too far away and they required a home visit  I tried a local large breed rescue but none of their dogs worked for me (like, they had to live in an only dog home or were too young/too old, etc) and their requirements were so strict that I was denyed. I searched and searched, really wanting to "save" a dog like I saved my other dog. 

I was browsing Craigslist when I found Dozer. I don't reccomend it really but it worked for me. He turned out to be an AWESOME dog.People tell me they are jealous that they didn't find him first. He was being rehomed, the fee was doable, and we lucked out.

My point is that I had the best intentions, but because I was looked at not being an ideal owner, I missed out on some dogs (and a cat) because someone wrote me off as a denial. It kind of hurt at first but I know I am an awesome owner. My dogs may live in a small home, but they have a large yard to play in, a high quality diet, more toys than some children, good grooming, and are treated as family. My dogs have won the lottery with me. 

I think potential owners should be evaluated on a case by case situation and not be classified on such rigid terms.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

TxRider said:


> The reason rescues and shelters exist, as well as breeders back yard or not is a people problem.
> 
> I used petfinder.
> 
> ...


I can understand how it's over board of a rescue to demand you feed your dog a certain way or issues like that, but how is a home visit that invasive? We don't go through your laundry hamper, mail, or scour each room. My home visit is basically just seeing that you live where you actually say you live, and your circumstances are what you said they were, and we bring the dog you're looking to adopt.
People do lie, too, and sometimes a simple home visit catches that. I had a Rat Terrier foster whose lengthy description specifically said no children under 12 because she would nip if cornered or frightened. The woman who applied for her said she had no children. When we showed up for the home visit, three kids (one being a toddler) were being put in the car with dad. She threw up her hands and immediately admitted they were her kids but they really liked her picture. We've also had people lie about the number of animals they have and where they ACTUALLY live. Not to mention the whole Magpie fiasco, which has made me smarter and MORE strict about my adoption requirements. Having a dog you helped nurse back to health show up in AC with four days left to live will do that. 

You're basically just repeating what I've said, though. Not all rescues have such strict rules, so there is no reason for people to give up a seek out a BYB or something to that effect. I think where we disagree is about how strict rescues can be.


----------



## looneyfish (Nov 11, 2009)

> I had no issue with a fee, or even an application. I was ok with calling references even though I thought it a bit much. But a home inspection? Are these people for real?


I guess everyone is different. I understand the need for a home visit. Without it, people would lie to make it appear that they meet the requirements. I don't think they should be doing the white glove test, but making sure things are as the application stated seems fine. I also don't like people in my house, but I am willing to deal with it.

I think references are a joke. Most people have at least 2 people who are willing to lie for them and say they are the greatest. Also how is the rescue going to know they aren't talking to a family memeber. My family has about 10 different last names.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

I meant to say this this morning...I was supposed to do a homecheck for Jack Russell rescue...I don't have a JRT but live in the stat the adopter lives in. It fell through but they had sent me a list of things to look for. One was that I needed to ask for proof that they owned the home. Turns out the person who asked me to do the home visit has been to a few homes where the people borrowed the house and said it was theirs. Pretty sad


----------



## Pit_Bull_Lady (Feb 4, 2009)

lovemygreys said:


> I've also found that people who have the biggest issue with adoption group rules are those who have never fostered or worked extensively in rescue. When it's YOUR blood, sweat and tears put into saving a dog's life you don't want to just hand it over to someone simply because "they want it." That's not always the case...but I've found it to be true more often than not.


Agreed....The only requirement on that list that our rescue doesn't have is 
"no children under 10".

This is because we do sometimes get a dog that can be around young children.

All of our other requirements are the same as the posted list, and I don't think any of those requirements are ridiculous.
We just want these dogs to have the most stable homes possible.

However, we don't provide raw food for all of our foster dogs, but we do allow foster homes to feed raw if they wish to.
And we certainly don't insinuate that an adoptive owner doesn't love their dog if they don't feed a certain food.

Yes, we do turn down quite a few applications, but we have also adopted out a lot of dogs to people who met all of the requirements, and passed the home visit.

Our rescue takes any breed or mixed breed, and our adoption fee is the same for all of our dogs, purebred or mixed, puppy or senior.
.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

looneyfish said:


> I think references are a joke. Most people have at least 2 people who are willing to lie for them and say they are the greatest. Also how is the rescue going to know they aren't talking to a family memeber. My family has about 10 different last names.


The only people I could use as a reference are my family members! I have a few acquaintances at my college, but I don't think they know me well enough to be able to tell someone if I'm a good dog owner or not. Most of them don't even care about dogs, they just think the pictures of Basil on my phone are pretty cute. The only people I know that I believe actually know me, and how well I care for my dog is my mom, her boyfriend, and my boyfriend. My mom is family, and her boyfriend is almost family because of their relationship. And my boyfriend will also be owning whatever dog I own, so he can't really be a reference. 


Also, just kind of a general statement to add to the discussion: I certainly think there's a big difference between trying to find a good home for the dog you're fostering, and just turning your nose up at everyone because you don't think they're good enough, and end up keeping the dog for another year or two. Rescues who generalize and have ridiculous blanket requirements are doing the latter. I don't have any problem with being strict, but I don't think there should ever be any kind of generalizing. Not only does generalization eliminate many otherwise great owners, it also is way too easy for someone to lie on their application if you don't actually try to get to know the person. Each person is their own case, and it's not that hard to read some emails and get to know their philosophy on dog ownership. I know it's important to find your foster the best home possible. But keep in mind that you shouldn't forget the part that the dog NEEDS A HOME! It's unbelievable how many dogs are denied perfectly good homes because of something frivolous like a person's age. I agree that if you have two people applying for the dog, and they are both equally qualified, except that one has a yard (And the dog would be happier with a yard) then the one with the yard should get the dog. But people who are being stingy just for the sake of being stingy, and think no home is better than a perfectly fine home without a yard or an owner who's under 25... that's just wrong. After I graduate college, I plan on fostering dogs, and I plan on being strict, and only adopting dogs out to those that I think will be good owners. However, I'll never ever have a list of blanket requirements, or set of standards applicants must pass before proceeding. If I don't have enough time to process all of the applications and hear everyone's individual case, then I'll foster less dogs, or even take a break from fostering until I have more time. There's no formula for good dog owners, and I don't ever plan on trying to use one to judge people.


----------



## Prudence_Pekes (Jul 19, 2009)

I think most of these requirements are fine too. I would question a Rescue that didn't want to know at least that much info. before turning a dog over to someone.


When we only had 2 dogs and were looking to adopt a rescue, we looked into several small breed Rescues and I found it could be somewhat discouraging because of the fact that I have a 10 yr old child.

A few of the breed specific rescue groups, I came across, a couple of years ago, had some pretty strange ideas / prerequisites for placement, in my opinion. 

(one of them might even be the same one that the OP is referring to because they were using the "If the new owner LOVES them enough, they'll continue to feed this certain brand of pre-made raw food, that they have now become a "Distributor" of )

What I took exception to, was the NO KIDS rule. I understand that some or I might even agree with "many" rescue dogs who have been turned over to them for having issues or who have been abused may not do well with Children. I get that, but what I couldn't understand is that *ALL* of the dogs listed, said looking for a home without children. 

There were about 17 pages of dogs listed with this particular group (Pekingese, Shih Tzu, Maltese, Brussels Griffon and Mixes as well) about 10 dogs per page. That is* 170 *dogs in this one rescue and NONE of them were allowed to be with Children??? WOW I think at least, some of those dogs could have done very well in a home with a well behaved child(ren) who were taught the do's and don'ts of being a good dog owner. Supervision with very young children is just basic common sense.

Makes me wonder what extensive testing was done, for them to arrive at the NO KIDS conclusoin for 100% of the 170 dogs in there care who are in need of a home. None of the foster homes had children in them either?

I'm glad that not all Rescues are created equal.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Terrie said:


> I suppose also that since most rescues ask so many questions and they don't even need to be too strict or obscure. Just the amount of questions and references and such, that some people might feel like "Darn, are they going think I'm good enough?"
> 
> I've seen some where they ask not only if you have a yard and if it's fenced but how big is your yard and how tall is your fence and is the fence made with metal links or is a wood fence? They even ask if it will be possible for the dog to dig under the fence! Not everyone has that information handy.
> 
> On the other hand, I've seen some rescue applications where they only ask basic things like contact info(duh!) and where the doggie will sleep at night.


You'd think so, but it isn't true. People lie on adoption apps all the time, they fake referances, often using people with the same interests at heart or who they know will lie for them. That's why the inspection and interview processes are both so important. It's also why the follow-up visits are important as well as the microchips we place that come back to US, not the owner if the is found as a stray or taken to the shelter for any reason.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> You'd think so, but it isn't true. People lie on adoption apps all the time, they fake referances, often using people with the same interests at heart or who they know will lie for them.


One nice thing about a Vet reference. Don't know of many Vets who would lie for someone so that person could obtain an animal.



> And my boyfriend will also be owning whatever dog I own, so he can't really be a reference.


Your boyfriend will no be owning the dog, YOU will be. I've never known an application for an animal to include your lover.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

It is wrong to imply I don't care for dogs I save from the pits of hell on earth simply because I don't agree with ridiculous blanket policies. Perhaps it is because I have the free time to do it, and I work alone- but I take the time to work on a case by case basis. Out of a large number of adoptions, I've taken VERY few dogs back, and usually because of something like a death or major illness. I have regular contact with many of my adopters, and a good number of them are repeat adopters, which is my favorite kind


----------



## txcollies (Oct 23, 2007)

It's true, a lot of rescues do go overboard. Some in my area are good, but some I'd never touch.

I know of a collie rescue that won't adopt a dog to someone who wants an indoor/outdoor dog - it has to be a 24/7 indoor dog - gotta treat it like a lappy doggy. Crazy...

I do help out with both collie and Irish setter rescue - I know how it all works.

I just don't care to go through some of the hoops some rescues like to throw at you.


----------



## ruckusluvr (Sep 20, 2009)

I had vet, trainer, and even canine chiropracter listed as refrences. they still didnt consider me.


----------



## the_mighty_khan (Nov 10, 2009)

.308 said:


> Your boyfriend will no be owning the dog, YOU will be. I've never known an application for an animal to include your lover.


If she and her boyfriend cohabitate, he should be included. Yes, she would be the owner, but he would be living with the dog too and likely involved with its care. When I adopted my dog, the application did ask about the other members of the household and whether they were in agreement with the decision to adopt. Their reasoning was obviously that if all family members weren't on board with the decision then it could cause a lot of problems.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> If she and her boyfriend cohabitate, he should be included. Yes, she would be the owner, but he would be living with the dog too and likely involved with its care. When I adopted my dog, the application did ask about the other members of the household and whether they were in agreement with the decision to adopt. Their reasoning was obviously that if all family members weren't on board with the decision then it could cause a lot of problems.


In most states, a dog is considered personal property. 

When people "live" with each other and have no children together, the "legal standards" which commit those two people together is a whole other ballgame for better or worse.

Now, if two people were living together and one applied for an animal, yes, that person who is applying would be considered the owner of the dog.

However, this is yet another reason why it is imperative to have both verbal/personal interviews and a home visit.

Common sense dictates that both people living together should want the animal, however, only ONE person will OWN the animal.

Example in real life

A girl wants to adopt a dog. You go to her place and you find out she's living with a guy, but the guy is never around, nor is he listed anywhere on the application for the animal. You have a girl living with a guy sharing their life together, but this guy is never in the "picture" and you've never met him? Sorry, that is one big strike in my book as to the chances of the girl getting the animal. Actually, one person here contributed their experiences getting a dog back from a girl because apparently her boyfriend didn't want the animal and the woman intentionally got pregnant.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

cshellenberger said:


> You'd think so, but it isn't true. People lie on adoption apps all the time, they fake referances, often using people with the same interests at heart or who they know will lie for them. That's why the inspection and interview processes are both so important. It's also why the follow-up visits are important as well as the microchips we place that come back to US, not the owner if the is found as a stray or taken to the shelter for any reason.


Which is why you will never even see people like me contact you. I'll just go to a shelter where such ridiculous requirements aren't the norm.

I suppose you would want my mortgage papers or tax records to show I own my home and I'm not lying as well?

I don't need or want to talk to anyone who seems to believe I am a liar at face value until I can prove to that degree I am not.

I find it quite repulsive, offending, especially from a total stranger that seems to have no issue with fully expecting me to trust them that they are insured, can keep that personal information securely, does criminal background checks on anyone with access to that information etc.

I am expected to extend complete trust, while being offered no trust whatsoever. And in the end the dog is not actually legally mine, and the chip information leads to someone else? No thanks.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> I don't need or want to talk to anyone who seems to believe I am a liar at face value until I can prove to that degree I am not.


I have to laugh, I felt the EXACT same way you did BEFORE I started doing rescue work.

I also felt BEFORE doing rescue work that people had common sense.

Yeah, people in our county go down to the local shelter where they will adopt out to ANYONE who walks through their doors, but ironically enough, it really doesn't solve the problem of the large unwanted pet population in our county because having the animal spayed/neutered isn't a requirement from the shelter. 



> I suppose you would want my mortgage papers or tax records to show I own my home and I'm not lying as well?


Nah, that's why we have a home visit. Tax records are usually available online


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

The shelter that I used to train dogs and raise funds for used to have an adoption application that had 3 areas that we checked.

1. Vet reference (if you had animals in the past 5 years)

2. Proof of home ownership or landlord permission for the animal you were applying for.

3. Card cataloger of "DO NOT ADOPT" list. ( Your name might be in there if you were ever prosecuted for animal or child abuse. IF you adopt and return or brought several past pets in to surrender them. 

I never thought that was too much to ask for. On the adoption form it would ask if you where you would house the dog inside/outside. If you wanted the dog for outside they would do a home inspection or rather, yard to make sure you had adequate housing for the dog in question. They also wouldn't adopt a dog that was used to living inside to an outdoor only home.

Now, anyone with money can adopt whether you have a history of abuse or not, if you have the money, you get the dog.

I am all for some checking on people. People lie and it shouldn't be a "right" to own a dog, it should be a privilege. I can't tell you how many people would say "we were just driving by and thought we would stop" and then they adopt a dog. Guess how many of those were dumped back off a few weeks later?


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

.308 said:


> I have to laugh, I felt the EXACT same way you did BEFORE I started doing rescue work.
> 
> I also felt BEFORE doing rescue work that people had common sense.


Yeah perspective is a funny thing. Like say if I was a soldier in Iraq, I would likely start seeing everyone there as a threat and and insurgent after a couple of bad experiences.

I see it a lot with EMT's and ER doctors. I ride motorcycles, have for 35 years. They just can't believe I haven't been killed or badly injured in that time. They see a skewed reality and and up with a skewed perspective.

As do we all depending on our experiences.



> Nah, that's why we have a home visit. Tax records are usually available online


But you'll never even see or hear from people like me with common sense, A house, a privacy fence, and all because I check things out like the adoption process, and just avoid what I don't like. Not really a problem.

It also keeps me from wanting to volunteer or donate to a rescue as well though, or wanting anything at all to do with it.

Though both my dogs came from rescues, they required just an app.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

.308 said:


> One nice thing about a Vet reference. Don't know of many Vets who would lie for someone so that person could obtain an animal.
> 
> Your boyfriend will no be owning the dog, YOU will be. I've never known an application for an animal to include your lover.


 
I've had people give fake vet office names in other towns with the number being that of a friend with NO vet experience. I tend to google the vets name BEFORE I call it as wel as the reverse look up on the number. 

Yes, the app and adoption will include ANYONE in the household as responsible and part owners. My home inspection include all roomates/family members to be sure they're in agreement as well as any SO (engaged and above) the person may have, living there or not everyone HAS to be on the same page for the adoption to go through.



TxRider said:


> Which is why you will never even see people like me contact you. I'll just go to a shelter where such ridiculous requirements aren't the norm.
> 
> I suppose you would want my mortgage papers or tax records to show I own my home and I'm not lying as well?
> 
> ...


 
No, I would not check your mortgage papers, I trust far more than you think. I don't think anyone is a liar, but I also can't take certain chances, I'm responsible for this life. I don't do SS checks at all, but I consult the DNA logs. I do reverse look up on the referances to be sure they're who they are supposed to be (see above) *it's the basic stuff most employers do when you apply for a job*, in this case it's the job of taking care of an animal for life.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> I ride motorcycles, have for 35 years. They just can't believe I haven't been killed or badly injured in that time. They see a skewed reality and and up with a skewed perspective.


Not really. Your chances of getting injured or killed riding a motorcycle increases. Know why? Because there are so many idiots driving cars. A car wins everytime.



> It also keeps me from wanting to volunteer or donate to a rescue as well though, or wanting anything at all to do with it.


I thought a little more of you as a person. Just because you may not like something shouldn't prevent you from trying to help or make a difference.

Actually, you should try to do some rescue work and you'll get to see all the wonderful people and perhaps your perception will change as well.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

.308 said:


> Not really. Your chances of getting injured or killed riding a motorcycle increases. Know why? Because there are so many idiots driving cars. A car wins everytime.


Sure it does. As a 35 year rider I know this very well.

But you get a different perspective being in a statewide group of hundreds of riders, the vast majority of which have never been seriously hurt, vs an ER where all you see are the hurt people and think it's a 100% inevitability to get seriously hurt in a rather short timespan.



> I thought a little more of you as a person. Just because you may not like something shouldn't prevent you from trying to help or make a difference.
> 
> Actually, you should try to do some rescue work and you'll get to see all the wonderful people and perhaps your perception will change as well.


Doesn't mean I won't help or make a difference, I just won't apply my resources to those organizations. It's not like there is a shortage of ways to help, starting with taking on two myself.

Rescues are certainly the hardest place to get a dog it seems, and the place you will encounter the highest hassle factor. Why wouldn't a reasonable, intelligent person perceive this and just avoid the hassle and intrusion altogether?

If very many intelligent honest people with common sense just avoid even looking or applying because we see the process and just avoid it, who would you expect to be left for a rescue to see and screen? Would that skew the rescues perspective after a while?

I dunno, I tossed the application to foster for the rescue I talked to, they put me off with their attitude. If I want to help I'll look elsewhere instead just as I did to adopt.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

TxRider said:


> I suppose you would want my mortgage papers or tax records to show I own my home and I'm not lying as well?


How else is a rescue to know that you do indeed own the home you claim is yours? I had no issue showing my tax bill to foxhound rescue, to prove our home was indeed our home


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Wow, I never thought a home visit and some referrals was such a terrible thing. Compared to getting a dog to fit my lifestyle for the next decade or two, the 1-2 hours I spent with the app process, referral checks, and home visit was barely noticeable. 

I never felt the rescue was calling me a bad owner. I always perceived it to be them doing it out of their love for the dogs they place, wanting to know they are going to go to a happy place.

Tell me, would you give any of your dogs to the first person to call you up asking to adopt one of your dogs? Or would you try to make sure they are going to a good home? Don't tiptoe around it by saying you'd never give up your dogs. That's not the point. 

Most of the people at rescue are not trying to judge you. They are trying to help the dog.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

InkedMarie said:


> How else is a rescue to know that you do indeed own the home you claim is yours? I had no issue showing my tax bill to foxhound rescue, to prove our home was indeed our home


It's ridiculous IMO.

How am I supposed to know the rescue worker isn't scamming for my address, SS#, DL# birth date, everything needed to open credit accounts in my name and rip me off in the worst way? Or store it in such a way so someone else can?

It's called trust.

They don't give an inch of it, so why should I?

I take less info than that from customers and I'm required to have a third party certify me and that I keep that info securely on a quarterly basis. And I'm insured in case it's stolen or an employee steals or sells it etc.

Is the average rescue so responsible with much more information? I sincerely doubt it.

It's their choice to do whatever they want. It's my and others choice to pass them by and deal with reasonable organizations.



RBark said:


> Wow, I never thought a home visit and some referrals was such a terrible thing. Compared to getting a dog to fit my lifestyle for the next decade or two, the 1-2 hours I spent with the app process, referral checks, and home visit was barely noticeable.
> 
> I never felt the rescue was calling me a bad owner. I always perceived it to be them doing it out of their love for the dogs they place, wanting to know they are going to go to a happy place.
> 
> Tell me, would you give any of your dogs to the first person to call you up asking to adopt one of your dogs? Or would you try to make sure they are going to a good home? Don't tiptoe around it by saying you'd never give up your dogs. That's not the point.


Not even a fair argument, it's not all or nothing.

There is more than a huge gulf between handing a dog to the first caller and doing the 3rd degree complete with tax records and SSN.

Somewhere in that wide difference lies "reasonable".

If I had dogs I had for the singular purpose to save from euth and find a home for I would reasonably do so yes. An app, references, and reasonable information to match them with a dog.



> Most of the people at rescue are not trying to judge you. They are trying to help the dog.


They are indeed judging, and demanding and reserving the right that they be able to judge, not just now but in perpetuity. Judging whether I am fit to take care of the dog properly. Not to own it, as the contract specifies you do not own it legally.

And doing it in an irresponsible manner IMO, not keeping important information given to them securely or being bonded or insured for visiting people's homes and taking that kind of information.

No thanks.


----------



## Jordan S (Nov 21, 2009)

In response the the raw requirment. thats ridiculous to say you don't love your dog if you don't feed raw. So someone who fed their dog a top notch food like Wellness CORE would be denied a dog!? too extreme


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

TxRider said:


> It's ridiculous IMO.
> 
> How am I supposed to know the rescue worker isn't scamming for my address, SS#, DL# birth date, everything needed to open credit accounts in my name and rip me off in the worst way? Or store it in such a way so someone else can?
> 
> ...


I'm sort of speechless and that's a first. None of what I'm about to say has to do directly with you btw. You mentioned trust. I said earlier in this thread that I was asked to do a homevisit and was told I had to see proof that they lived in the home they were meeting me in and that they owned said home. That's reasonable. Dogs are living, breathing beings. Reputable rescues are trying to find the best home for dogs, if thats a rental, they need proof that it's okay with the landlord that they have a dog. If they own the home, they need proof the adopters actually own the home. The rescue person who contacted me told me she has gone on home visits only to find out the people "borrowed" the home to use for the home visit. Thats not honest, that's abusing the trust of the rescue. I;m sure most of us are honest but one bad apple and all that. 
I'm sure there are less scrupulous (sp) rescue workers out there, just like adopters but I'd bet my house the bulk of them, and us, are good people. Some of us who have adopted thru rescue may think we're jumping through hoops to get a dog but it's so worth it, at the end. I dont know where you get the idea they're using our SS numbers...we only had to show our tax bill, they looked, saw it was our names, our addresses and that;s it. No info was copied down.


----------



## DJsMom (Jun 6, 2008)

Jordan S said:


> So someone who fed their dog a top notch food like Wellness CORE would be denied a dog!? too extreme


No, I don't think that's what they were saying. The original post states
"One other thing that rubs me the wrong way is that *they feed raw and have in each dog's description that they hope the next dog's owner will "love them enough" to keep feeding it.* There are plenty of reasons to not feed raw that don't have anything to do with not loving the dog enough!"
That is different from requiring the person feed raw.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

InkedMarie said:


> I'm sort of speechless and that's a first. None of what I'm about to say has to do directly with you btw. You mentioned trust. I said earlier in this thread that I was asked to do a homevisit and was told I had to see proof that they lived in the home they were meeting me in and that they owned said home. That's reasonable. Dogs are living, breathing beings. Reputable rescues are trying to find the best home for dogs, if thats a rental, they need proof that it's okay with the landlord that they have a dog. If they own the home, they need proof the adopters actually own the home. The rescue person who contacted me told me she has gone on home visits only to find out the people "borrowed" the home to use for the home visit. Thats not honest, that's abusing the trust of the rescue. I;m sure most of us are honest but one bad apple and all that.
> I'm sure there are less scrupulous (sp) rescue workers out there, just like adopters but I'd bet my house the bulk of them, and us, are good people. Some of us who have adopted thru rescue may think we're jumping through hoops to get a dog but it's so worth it, at the end. I dont know where you get the idea they're using our SS numbers...we only had to show our tax bill, they looked, saw it was our names, our addresses and that;s it. No info was copied down.


That's all well and good, it's a rescues decision how they want to operate. I have no ill feelings toward them, I just want nothing to do with them if they go past what I consider reasonable is all.

But all decisions have consequences, one of which is for every intrusive requirement demanded the less average people will even look at that rescue for a dog.

Obviously some believe those consequences are worth it, some don't, and none of us really know the ramifications of them. We only have a feeling from our respective perspectives.

I dealt with two that did not require a home visit, and did not call references (though I gave references to one), and I and they and my dogs are all happy, and there are two spots open now for another dog slated for death.

I brought the subject up at the local dog park once, because I wondered how people felt and not a single person had home visit, and most all were rescue/shelter dogs, and every single person thought it was a ridiculous requirement and said they wouldn't look at a dog at a rescue that required it.


----------



## Jordan S (Nov 21, 2009)

And the kid thing is a bit ridiculous too. I guess you can always tell them "nope I hate kids" and then when you get the dog, reproduce away.  .


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

Heres my two cents .. I rescued 2 both different places. I went to an event they had many to place I came over with my 38 lb border and the girl said I am not a good fit.. I said are you phsycic cant spell. she said no this dog cant be with others. NOW I realize bad things happen but give it a chance. I tried 5 different dogs there out of 15 they all said no.. ?? this is dog adoption right.
I went to there headquaters and to complain and found a great dog. I had to argue with them sit thru 2 different dog phscologist and 2 on and off leash deals. Took 4 hours NEVER AGAIN.. I ve had this girl for over a year no issues

went to another rescue operation had bunch dogs found nick she said well maybe we have to observe your home . We will get back with you. She asked a thousand ??????? on phone came over and I obliged her let her in. SHe proceeded to open every door in my house snoop thru everything asked about food I fed etc.. Then called on follow ups. After getting him and he dug up my back yard and ate the couch. She didnt seem to answer the phone. Now I am stubborn and eventually he relaxed and I am so happy with him. 

EXTREMist are the problem. A lot of this is warranted to protect the dog. I get it... People hurt dogs or dog fight them in extreme cases.. In my experience they think they are holly er than thou . I dont get it.. The shelters here are full , the human society is full and nobody wants to put a dog down even if it bites the neighbors kid. THen why not make this just a little bit easier ... I would possibly like another but not doing that again..


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> But you get a different perspective being in a statewide group of hundreds of riders, the vast majority of which have never been seriously hurt, vs an ER where all you see are the hurt people and think it's a 100% inevitability to get seriously hurt in a rather short timespan.


True, however, as mentioned, statistically speaking, your chances of getting hurt increase riding a motorcycle. 

I do see your point though. Sort of like all those wonderful people the police come into contact with every day.

However, when a LEO pulls someone over for a possible DUI and they ask if you've been drinking, I know of very few LEO's who will just let a person go just because the person pulled over says "no, didn't have a single drink"



> Doesn't mean I won't help or make a difference, I just won't apply my resources to those organizations. It's not like there is a shortage of ways to help, starting with taking on two myself.


May I ask where do you apply your resources to help make a difference? 

Sad fact is, wherever you go to voulenteer, there are usually some sort of rules and procedures you must follow.

I have found the "I don't like this so I'm going to take my blocks and go home and not play" attitude with people who don't like something. 

I would like to know what requirements you would expect of a family wanting to adopt an animal?

Thinking about it from my past experiences with all the adopted families we've found with only two animals coming back into care because things "didn't work out", that is not including the "overnight stays" where the family told us they didn't think the animal would work out. Can't help but think what would happen to the animal if it was picked up from a shelter that had a no return policy.



> How am I supposed to know the rescue worker isn't scamming for my address, SS#, DL# birth date, everything needed to open credit accounts in my name and rip me off in the worst way? Or store it in such a way so someone else can?


Never needed a SS #. However, I probably do have better things to do with my time than to work with a registered 501c3 organization. Added the fact that usually the first encounter the family has an animal in our care is come to our home (if they so wish) to observe and interact with the animal. If I was going to try and rip you off, letting you know where I live and letting you come into MY home wouldn't be such a great idea. 



> It's called trust.
> 
> They don't give an inch of it, so why should I?


One reason why all of the dogs behavior is given to the prospective family (good behavior/bad behavior) so they can make the best decision as to the animal being a good "fit". Also have a open door return policy on any animal that for whatever reason isn't working out with the family. Family can take the animal for a day, night or even a week if they so wish to see how the placement feels for them. As mentioned previously, potential adoptive familes who are interestd in an animal are more than welcome to come and interact with the animal either at their chosen location or our home. What more can we do to show some trust?

For better or worse, business transactions are rarely done with a handshake anymore.



> I love pistachios, but they can be a lot of trouble. Some of the shells are difficult to crack and it's a pleasant surprise when you find a pistachio kernel already out of the shell.
> 
> So the other day I bought a 12-ounce bag of pistachio kernels, without the shells. I figured, "This will be great. All the reward without the effort."
> 
> ...


Beautifully said.


----------



## tigress (Feb 6, 2008)

TxRider said:


> How am I supposed to know the rescue worker isn't scamming for my address, SS#, DL# birth date, everything needed to open credit accounts in my name and rip me off in the worst way? Or store it in such a way so someone else can?
> 
> It's called trust.


So they hsould just adopt the dog to anyone who comes up and claims they have a perfect home for the dog without actually making sure the person is telling the truth?

Are you serious?!

It's nothing personal. Most likely they believe you. But there are people out there who do lie, and they can be very good and look lke those who don't. So instead of just trying to go by instincts (which could be very wrong. The person they think is lieing could be telling teh truth and vice versa), they just verify everyone. 

All they are doing is trying to find a good home for the dog.

I'm guessing you get pissed if you use a credit card and they try to verify you are the credit card owner thinking that you telling them that it's you some how verifies it despite the fact they don't know you, they don't know your personality, they have no idea if you lie or not because, well htey don't know you! It is nothign personal. Would you be happy if they accepted your credit card to some thief who looked just as honest and said, "It's you, really." And if you wouldn't be, how do you expect them to know if it is you or the thief without finding some verification?

It doesn't have to do with trust. It has to do with playing it safe.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Well I have spent many years in rescue and I can say first hand how people lie on applications. You wonder why they don't automatically trust everyone? Well, after you have caught countless people in bold face lies it is pretty hard. 

I do not think a rescue has any right to ask for anyones social security number and honestly I wouldn't give it. I would offer to show proof of ownership of my home, my vet records and would be happy to allow a criminal background check. Heck, they can come to my house any day and check me out. I have nothing to hide.

It always makes me more suspicious of people who are so opposed to any background checks. Guess it was all those lies from the previous potential adopter.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

tigress said:


> So they hsould just adopt the dog to anyone who comes up and claims they have a perfect home for the dog without actually making sure the person is telling the truth?
> 
> Are you serious?!


Again with the knee jerk personal reactions and misrepresentation.

I have no problem with a photo ID application or references, especially a vet reference though a first time owner may not have one. I have clearly said so.

Can you have a real honest discussion without misrepresenting what I say to try to paint me as something I am not to further your agenda?



> The person they think is lieing could be telling teh truth and vice versa), they just verify everyone.


Do they really? Is every volunteer fully background checked? Are they bonded/insured to be inspecting people's homes? Things any responsible business does?



> All they are doing is trying to find a good home for the dog.


That's all I am doing as well.



> I'm guessing you get pissed if you use a credit card and they try to verify you are the credit card owner thinking that you telling them that it's you some how verifies it despite the fact they don't know you, they don't know your personality, they have no idea if you lie or not because, well htey don't know you! It is nothign personal. Would you be happy if they accepted your credit card to some thief who looked just as honest and said, "It's you, really." And if you wouldn't be, how do you expect them to know if it is you or the thief without finding some verification?


You would guess quite wrong. I generally do not get "pissed" about anything. Especially anything so trivial.

And I have never been asked for references or a home inspection just to use a credit card at a store. Photo ID works nicely for that. I also know the merchant at a minimum should be complying with PCI DSS requirements for handling my CC data, and carries general business insurance should an employee misuse it etc.

I have no problem showing a rescue a photo ID and providing references, as I have said, and done.



> It doesn't have to do with trust. It has to do with playing it safe.


Playing it safe is all about trust, or rather lack of it.

I run a business I founded. I am responsible for millions of dollars of people's money, and tens of thousands of people's credit card information.

I know a thing or two about trust and playing it safe.

This is all about what is "reasonable"... Nothing more.

I find some intrusive standards unreasonable. I choose to avoid them. Nothing personal.



.308 said:


> May I ask where do you apply your resources to help make a difference?


Currently by taking in two dogs, one from a rescue that ended up with so many they had to close the doors. I'll be passing $3,000 in expenses getting them healthy this month.



> I have found the "I don't like this so I'm going to take my blocks and go home and not play" attitude with people who don't like something.


Nothing of the sort. You can't take your blocks and go home, if you never play the game in the first place. I see the rules and avoid that particular game is all.



> I would like to know what requirements you would expect of a family wanting to adopt an animal?


I think an application, photo ID, and a vet reference should be enough to know someone is who they say they are, take decent care of their animals, and the app providing enough info to know whether the dog would be a good fit.



> One reason why all of the dogs behavior is given to the prospective family (good behavior/bad behavior) so they can make the best decision as to the animal being a good "fit". Also have a open door return policy on any animal that for whatever reason isn't working out with the family. Family can take the animal for a day, night or even a week if they so wish to see how the placement feels for them. As mentioned previously, potential adoptive familes who are interestd in an animal are more than welcome to come and interact with the animal either at their chosen location or our home. What more can we do to show some trust?


Excellent policies, all rescues should have them.

But you have avoided all my concerns entirely.



> For better or worse, business transactions are rarely done with a handshake anymore.


Which is irrelevant, We're not talking about a handshake, we're talking about photo ID and references. We're talking about what is reasonable. Can you not see the difference?


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> But you have avoided all my concerns entirely.


Your primary concearn seems to be a home visit and the amount of personal information a person has to give.

At least with us, a vet reference will usually verify who the person is who they are saying they are.

Sincerely, you seem like you have common sense. Likewise, I feel I do as well. 

All I can say is after doing this more than a couple of years, a home visit on our end is mandatory for more than a couple of our past experiences (having common sense dictates that you learn from your mistakes).

Now, when we do a home visit, we don't "snoop around" the house, but part our adoption procedure is that we observe the animal in their new home enviroment as well (just as the prospective adoptive family can observe the animal in our home enviroment or on "neutral" grounds).

I can assure you, with my real job and the time it takes, it's not like I go "whoopie, I get to go visit a prospective families home!"



> Excellent policies, all rescues should have them.


Thank you. Actually, the rescue organization we started with had no real policies to begin with as far as "policies and procedures" in adopting out animals. Since we started this like most do, not knowing a darn thing, we tried to learn from our mistakes and set up guidelines to follow so we don't make the same mistake twice.



> Nothing of the sort. You can't take your blocks and go home, if you never play the game in the first place.


I would respond by saying that if you want to make a real difference, you need to get into the game and play it yourself instead of just paying to watch.



> Which is irrelevant, We're not talking about a handshake, we're talking about photo ID and references. We're talking about what is reasonable. Can you not see the difference?


I mentioned "business transaction". For a non profit to function and grow, it must be run like a business IMO (and I realize some may disagree with that opinion). 

Finding a home for an animal is just hopefully one of many fuctions that a rescue organization performs. However, part of your repsonsibility IMO when trying to find an animal a home is to ensure that the "fit" is a good one. Just having someone want an animal in your care to take it off your hands does not always ensure that the animal will not be "back on the streets", in which case you could be spinning your wheels.

I highly doubt that in your business you set up an account with a client by just shaking their hand and trust that they will pay you.


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

In the interest of more crazy comparisons...

If I have two bad experiences with a car dealership, what are the odds that I'll visit that business again? There are many ways to obtain a vehicle. Sure, some are great place to do business. But others, not so much. It really doesn't take too many bad experiences floating around to change the public perception of an industry.

As far as I'm concerned, rescues can do whatever the hell they want to do. I, as a consumer, can find another route to my goals.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

harrise said:


> In the interest of more crazy comparisons...
> 
> If I have two bad experiences with a car dealership, what are the odds that I'll visit that business again? There are many ways to obtain a vehicle. Sure, some are great place to do business. But others, not so much. It really doesn't take too many bad experiences floating around to change the public perception of an industry.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, rescues can do whatever the hell they want to do. I, as a consumer, can find another route to my goals.


True, but the "product" is a living animal, and the organization trying to find a home usually does not make money by finding a home for the animal.

Your attitude strikes me as if you can buy what you want, which may be true, but that will not ensure that you will make a good home.

You did give me an idea though...

A toaster that comes with every dog adopted!


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

.308 said:


> Your attitude strikes me as if you can buy what you want, which may be true, but that will not ensure that you will make a good home.


HA! Not quite. But when I have a bad experience with something I will avoid that something to the best of my ability. They may be dealing with living beings, but they are providing a service and I can choose to judge how they delivered that service to me. If rescues are dealing with such a large segment of shady individuals trying to obtain dogs. Then those people are the ones that have ruined my rescue interactions. Between craigslist and breeders, I have no need for their services.


----------



## FilleBelle (Aug 1, 2007)

harrise said:


> In the interest of more crazy comparisons...
> 
> If I have two bad experiences with a car dealership, what are the odds that I'll visit that business again? There are many ways to obtain a vehicle. Sure, some are great place to do business. But others, not so much. It really doesn't take too many bad experiences floating around to change the public perception of an industry.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, rescues can do whatever the hell they want to do. I, as a consumer, can find another route to my goals.


I think the problem with this is that people feel compelled to share their negative stories while taking for granted their neutral (and sometimes even positive) ones. 

How many times a month do you go to the grocery store? When do you ever report to your spouse on your experiences there? Presumably when they are very negative. Just because those are the only experiences you share doesn't mean that those are the only experiences you have...you just don't report every time you walk in, buy what you need, have a pleasant chat with the checkout clerk, and get home in a timely fashion. When things go as we expect them to, we rarely comment.

My last dog, Cammy; my cat, Spot; Clifford; and Alvin were all from different rescues or shelters. The hardest to obtain was Clifford because, after filling out an online application (which did not ask for a social security number...I've never seen this on a rescue app before) I received a call from the foster mom who said she couldn't deliver Cliffie for a week, but if I wanted him before that, I could come get him. I did want him before that, so I volunteered to pick him up, but the foster mom lived an hour from me. I was not thrilled by my two hour drive, but it was my choice and it was worth it to have the extra week with Clifford.

I didn't share any of these rescue stories with anyone because they went as they were supposed to and were totally uninteresting. Filled out an online application and shortly thereafter received a call or email letting me know when I could come see the dog. Once I'd met the dog, a time was arrange for it to be dropped off at my home (or picked up, in the case of Clifford and the shelter animals). Check signed and handed over. Done.

Anyway, to make a long story short, if the only reports being made are negative ones, then any conclusions drawn from those reports are going to be negatively skewed.


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

Unfortunately, I'm not going to have a good rescue experience. I've had two bad and that's my limit. That is a decision the wife and I have made. 

My bad grocery experiences (the once a year I go) are due to other consumers and not the business itself. I very rarely have bad experiences being a consumer. The only one I can think of in the last five years was DirecTv this year. They went above and beyond to rectify the experience from my point of view. One more problem with them and they're toast. There are other ways to get TV as well.


----------



## mrslloyd09 (Jul 12, 2009)

FilleBelle said:


> How many times a month do you go to the grocery store? When do you ever report to your spouse on your experiences there? Presumably when they are very negative. Just because those are the only experiences you share doesn't mean that those are the only experiences you have...you just don't report every time you walk in, buy what you need, have a pleasant chat with the checkout clerk, and get home in a timely fashion. When things go as we expect them to, we rarely comment.



This is so true. I hate grocery shopping so when I come home my stories are filled w/ the ridiculous. 

I also had a great experience w/ our rescue and I take every opportunity to tell people. Oh you're looking for a puppy? Rescue just had a litter brought in. Oh you'd like a new companion? Rescue does in-home fostering and could probably steer you in the right direction. I realize that adopting isn't for everyone but I refuse to let other people who've made agencies adopt stricter policies keep me from getting my perfect pet.


----------



## FilleBelle (Aug 1, 2007)

harrise said:


> It really doesn't take too many bad experiences floating around to change the public perception of an industry.


I wasn't actually referring to personal bad experiences. I was referring to this comment you made, which I quoted previously. 

You are correct when you say that a couple of bad reports can sour public opinion. I am saying that people very often only make reports _if _they are bad, meaning the pool of reported experiences is skewed.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

In all of my years of rescue and adopting from other rescues/shelters. I have only had one really bad experience. It was due to the new director of the local shelter. This does not mean I have any bad feelings toward any rescue animals. They all need homes too and EVERY SINGLE DOG that I have rescued have been worth their weight in gold. I couldn't have asked for better dogs. Healthier in some cases, yes.

I agree with you completely FilleBelle. People tend to talk loudest with negative experiences. Not to many people will write letters to company heads telling them what a wonderful experience they had when in their business but they certainly complain loudly when something bad happens.


----------



## harrise (Jan 9, 2008)

Hey, I sold cars for a decade. I fully understand how perception of a business is formed in the public. All those industry reports saying bad experiences are told seven to ten times versus good experiences being told one to three times. Skewed, sure. But it doesn't make the bad experiences any less relevant. You won't see me setting foot in a dealership for a car. Just as I went about doing my job giving a variety of experiences to people, I expect the rescues will continue with what they do.

ETA: I just thought it would be fun to run this thread around the ol' maypole one more time.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

.308 said:


> Thank you. Actually, the rescue organization we started with had no real policies to begin with as far as "policies and procedures" in adopting out animals. Since we started this like most do, not knowing a darn thing, we tried to learn from our mistakes and set up guidelines to follow so we don't make the same mistake twice.


I would welcome a try it policy especially if you have kids or other pets, extending 3-4 weeks until you see what a dog is actually like.



> I would respond by saying that if you want to make a real difference, you need to get into the game and play it yourself instead of just paying to watch.


Right now I have 2 3yr old untrained GSD's, one just getting healthy and taken care of, the other still in heartworm treatment with more to come.

Taking care of them, and getting them trained and socialized is all I have time for, and can spend money on. I chose two dogs that needed help, and were pretty unadoptable to try to make room for dogs that are more easily adopted out. Knowing I would incur the costs involved.

Maybe when these two are healthy, happy and trained to a decent companion level I will. Maybe even open my own rescue one day.





> I mentioned "business transaction". For a non profit to function and grow, it must be run like a business IMO (and I realize some may disagree with that opinion).


I agree, with proper legal issues taken care of and properly insured.



> I highly doubt that in your business you set up an account with a client by just shaking their hand and trust that they will pay you.


Nope, it's pay up front.

People are posting about bad experiences, I have had no bad experiences with rescues. The two my dogs came from didn't have intrusive policies and I chose them and have no complaint.

I simply learned the process and avoided any I thought were too intrusive for me. Which led me to wonder how many other good owners do the same thing I did?

The first took references and an application, xeroxed my ID when I picked her up, signed a contract (that I did not like, but signed) they may have called my old vet I don't really know. They did not call my personal references. They did ask for a picture a month after adopting, which I was glad to give. I would have gladly given the the number of my current vet as well.

The second was bankrupt and closing the doors with 400 dogs to place, and the only process was filling out an application, promising to have her heartworms treated, and walking away with her without even an adoption fee. Would less strict requirements have prevented the closure? I can't say but I have to wonder.

I just question whether such far reaching requirements does more than good in the number of dogs saved from euth.

But I have been straightened out that rescues with these policies place quality of life for the individual dogs they have in hand and can save, as a higher priority then simply saving more dogs at cost of some going to bad homes.

A perfectly reasonable position to take, just not one I need or choose participate in.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> I would welcome a try it policy especially if you have kids or other pets, extending 3-4 weeks until you see what a dog is actually like.


We normally go one week. After that time, if the dog is returned, you only lose your adoption fee of $100 which included having the animal spayed/neutered and up to date on all it's shots. Reason for that is because we have our own lives to deal with, and we feel within a week you should be able to get a good idea of if it will work or not.

However, keep in mind, if the family does have the dog, we, as well as the family feel like it will be a good fit and any potential problems should be minimal.



> Right now I have 2 3yr old untrained GSD's, one just getting healthy and taken care of, the other still in heartworm treatment with more to come.


Tells me a lot about you as a pet owner. This is where everything on the questionaire (about house/fenced property/own/rent...) is elastic and there is no right or wrong answer. The whole idea for us through the "adoption process" is to get an idea of what kind of life the animal will have and if there are any chances of it being back out on the streets for whatever reason. If a vet reference comes back that the owner had it's animal on heartworm treatment for it's care, that pet owner is almost assured of getting an animal from our care.



> Maybe when these two are healthy, happy and trained to a decent companion level I will. Maybe even open my own rescue one day.


I sincerly hope you get to that day.



> I just question whether such far reaching requirements does more than good in the number of dogs saved from euth.


I can assure you, both my wife and I have had that exact same philosophical discussion many nights.

We've come to the conclusion that those dogs in our care, which are socialized, trained (to the best of our ability), loved on, given "love" in return and have turned out to be great animals deserve a little more than a person who is able to breathe.

You will also find it heartbreaking when you have a dog in your care for over a year (some take a long time to get socialized in a home) and you find it a good home (and in all honesty, we don't get than many people that don't "qualify").

We honestly feel that a animal that is socialized, house trained, and you knowing all of it's behavior is worth a little paperwork and a home visit.

Ironically enough, the two people who I really wasn't sure about (just having a feeling for whatever reason but not enough to say "no") are the two families who returned animals (one after two months, the other after six months.



> I was not thrilled by my two hour drive, but it was my choice and it was worth it to have the extra week with Clifford.


You should try driving three hours one way to leave a dog with a family for 2 hours and then have them tell you that the dog is too active when you've mentioned that to them numerous times during the adoption process and they've observed the dog in your care and they've seen how active the dog is.


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

tx rider ? 
I simply learned the process and avoided any I thought were too intrusive for me. Which led me to wonder how many other good owners do the same thing I did?


I would have to argue the vast majority of the rescue dogs go to first timers .Not first time dog owners [rescue] There fore I told my 2 yes 2 sep. rescue experiences not to complain. But so others will change there policy perception etc to make it easier. This is about keeping dogs from dieing , getting quality long term new owners. Making it a bad exp. or way way to complicated and or difficult tarnishes the experience. NOT because us less professional dog rescuers dont do enough research. Ya know what I am trying to point out right. I love dog just make it simple , maybe like someone said try the dog for awhile and if there is an issue do a home follow up to resolve. And if someone is horrible lets really crack down on the morons that abuse the dogs. If you want positives my dogs were good shape , for the most part and glad I have them . Still bitter .

I see it like this you have so so many dogs on the list to die. 
and not enough people to take them all. Meanwhile breeders keep on breeding and selling and irresponsible breeders also that breed and what they dont sell dumped at the pound. Making this a cycle not a one time fixable problem. 
SO It seems it would behoove all the overprotective rescue people [that do a wonderful never ending job] to make it a little easier. 

There is always gonna be dogs to find homes for. This is cyclical it is getting so much better with spay neuter programs and such. But in places like Cleveland they are killing some 12 1300 pits a year along with Denver and L.a and Miami just to name a few. On the local pound for maricopa county it says right on there web site we are completely over flowing with dogs and cats.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

.308 said:


> Now, when we do a home visit, we don't "snoop around" the house, but part our adoption procedure is that we observe the animal in their new home enviroment as well (just as the prospective adoptive family can observe the animal in our home enviroment or on "neutral" grounds).
> 
> .


When foxhound rescue came to our home, they looked at our yard, told us we needed to enlarge the kennel, which we were more thank willing to do. Otherwise, we had coffee, they sat on the couch and we played with Emma. I guess they looked around from where they sat and on the way to the livingroom from the door but I don't remember. We also showed our tax bill so they knew we owned the home. That's it, no snooping, no nosiness.



Inga said:


> In all of my years of rescue and adopting from other rescues/shelters. I have only had one really bad experience. It was due to the new director of the local shelter. This does not mean I have any bad feelings toward any rescue animals. They all need homes too and EVERY SINGLE DOG that I have rescued have been worth their weight in gold. I couldn't have asked for better dogs. Healthier in some cases, yes.
> 
> I agree with you completely FilleBelle. People tend to talk loudest with negative experiences. Not to many people will write letters to company heads telling them what a wonderful experience they had when in their business but they certainly complain loudly when something bad happens.


I've talked a few times on this thread about my positive experience with a rescue. I've had a bad experience with our local humane society. Two years ago next month, we went there to look at a certain dog, who ended up having a hold on him. I mentioned that we had a sheltie at home and the shelter employee told me they had a senior aged one who would be available as soon as the vet saw her. Long story short: dog arrived on a Saturday. We saw her face, thru the window, that Wednesday. The vet never saw her til the following Monday, we adopted her that Tuesday. Long time for a dog who had an ear infection that was obvious and a UTI, also obvious, to sit in a shelter with no meds. I dealt with that, we wanted the dog. Heck, we knew we wanted her before we met her, as long as she got along with our other two dogs, she was coming home with us. Before we even met her, the kennel manager told us she'd reduce her fee to $90. We met her, wanted her, they refused to give the dog her evening dose of both ear meds and UTI meds, nor would they give us a dose to take home. I called my vets from the shelter, as long as she could see her the following day, we were taking her otherwise we would have left her there, as she'd have gotten her meds. We ended up working with another kennel person who told us her fee was $140. Umm, sorry but no, we had a nice crisp $100 bill for them but that was it. She told us we couldn;t adopt her then, we argued, who else was going to take a sick 11yr old sheltie? We paid the $100 and left. 
So, good experience with rescue, bad shelter experience. I see it from both levels but can honestly say, IMO, this shelter is out for the money, not for the wellbeing of the dogs.


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

good and bad : I am currently in florida wanna get a little dog for my niece 
so I applied online . home ownership papers , vet name number etc bills
thousand questions etc etc home visit and follow up. I have learned from you guys . After 2 or 3 of these I found 

floridalittledogrescue.com wow they called same day very very nice , easy to talk to . She said they look at your house online few questions , little match making and one on one thats about it. . also said they give you a week in your own home to evaluate the dog with your kids ..Then decide 
So will see  Glad to find one that cares but not rediculous


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

solow said:


> good and bad : I am currently in florida wanna get a little dog for my niece
> so I applied online . home ownership papers , vet name number etc bills
> thousand questions etc etc home visit and follow up. I have learned from you guys . After 2 or 3 of these I found
> 
> ...


From experience...

You're in a state other than the one in which you reside looking for a dog not for yourself, but for your niece.

First question would be is what does your niece niece want?

Second question is if your niece is of legal age, why does she need you to find a dog for her?

Third question would be is if your niece is underage, what does your niece's parents actually want?

Fourth question would be is that if your niece is underage, why are you doing something her parents should be doing and be willing to accept the responsibility for?

You start to learn these questions from experience.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

This thread is about adopting _rescue dogs_, not children...

EDIT: Ok, the post was deleted, nvm...


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

.308 said:


> From experience...
> 
> You're in a state other than the one in which you reside looking for a dog not for yourself, but for your niece.
> 
> ...


What are you talking about ... my niece is 3 ... IT is her parents job to ask all these questions. And if I have to ask all this they can go get a dog themselves . No sense in suprising her at all. I wanted to just suprise her for christmas not adopt a child .U know what I find funny people wont offer a helping hand to a stranger but will mortgage there house and kids future to save a dog. I love dogs a lot. Just seems we are all losing touch with reality. The local shelter said they are killing dogs by the thousands .. better to take a chance on saving one then not adopting at all dont ya think.. I am sure you are being nice this way of thinking seem strange to me.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> IT is her parents job to ask all these questions. And if I have to ask all this they can go get a dog themselves


You are correct, it is the PARENTS responsibility to get their family a dog, not yours.



> Just seems we are all losing touch with reality. The local shelter said they are killing dogs by the thousands .. better to take a chance on saving one then not adopting at all dont ya think..


Kind of like what came first, the chicken or the egg. 



> I am sure you are being nice this way of thinking seem strange to me.


Yes, but keep in mind I've just seen to many idiots who can't think, and who want to get other people animals as gifts, or as surprises. 



> I wanted to just suprise her for christmas not adopt a child .


And that is the same reasoning why some people keep losing dog after dog after dog. It's only a dog.

Why do you think there are so many unwanted children, even here in the U.S up for adoption? Because it's easy for anyone to have sex. Problem is, people don't THINK.

Ironic...

http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/65603-xmas-puppy-guilt-rant.html


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

o.k. no dog Ill buy her a christmas card . They have a huge house a fenced yard own there own bussiness .I ll pass I just had visions of a smiling little girl and her dog.. They are talkling about buying one thought rescue was better. Such as life cant do the right thing .. I am now frustrated and well hope they get a good breeder and not a mall dog. another death row dog bites the dust


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> They are talkling about buying one thought rescue was better


I happen to agree with you. However the decision isn't yours to make IMO, it's the parents decision to make. 

If the parents were thinking of buying a dog, did you think that surprising them with a rescue would change their mind?



> another death row dog bites the dust


Then I'd suggest you try to make a change and become involved.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

solow said:


> o.k. no dog Ill buy her a christmas card . They have a huge house a fenced yard own there own bussiness .I ll pass I just had visions of a smiling little girl and her dog.. They are talkling about buying one thought rescue was better. Such as life cant do the right thing .. I am now frustrated and well hope they get a good breeder and not a mall dog. another death row dog bites the dust


I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea to make a dog a present provided it's NOT a surprise the the family - ie. her parents. As long as they are on board and prepared to take care of the dog if/when the Christmas newness wears off...then it's not quite as big a deal. 

The problem with surprises is they often result in families with dogs/pets they weren't ready for. The little GIRL can be surprised about her new puppy...but the parents and other household members definitely need to be prepared.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

solow said:


> o.k. no dog Ill buy her a christmas card . They have a huge house a fenced yard own there own bussiness .I ll pass I just had visions of a smiling little girl and her dog.. They are talkling about buying one thought rescue was better. Such as life cant do the right thing .. I am now frustrated and well hope they get a good breeder and not a mall dog. another death row dog bites the dust


Why not just try talking to the parents and attempt to convince them to adopt? Just showing up with a dog on Christmas isn't the only or the best way to go about things. It's not even a good way. What if you showed up with a new rescued dog, and her parents are like "Oh, well we just made a deposit on a new puppy from a breeder. We don't want this dog." What happens then? The poor dog goes straight back to the shelter on "death row," but had to be uprooted and stressed out a bunch first.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

solow said:


> o.k. no dog Ill buy her a christmas card . They have a huge house a fenced yard own there own bussiness .I ll pass I just had visions of a smiling little girl and her dog.. They are talkling about buying one thought rescue was better. Such as life cant do the right thing .. I am now frustrated and well hope they get a good breeder and not a mall dog. another death row dog bites the dust


So.. because you were asked a few (very appropriate) questions that didn't suit your plan, we should now feel guilty that they might (somehow as a direct result of us internet strangers) go out and purposely do the wrong thing? I don't see why anyone would lose sleep over that.

I can tell you as a foster mom that the one thing I hate to hear from someone interested in adopting a dog in my care is "It's a Christmas/birthday/insert holiday here present for ___!" and I detest that statement even more when the person in question is a minor child. Now, if said person has done their homework and was simply interested in adopting the dog around that time, fine. But solely the idea of a dog as a gift does not fly with me because dogs aren't sweaters. Unfortunately, they get treated that way, grabbed up because they're cute in the store and returned when they don't fit. Get the girl a stuffed puppy, and let her parents deal with major life decisions like a dog.


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> So.. because you were asked a few (very appropriate) questions that didn't suit your plan, we should now feel guilty that they might (somehow as a direct result of us internet strangers) go out and purposely do the wrong thing? I don't see why anyone would lose sleep over that.
> 
> I can tell you as a foster mom that the one thing I hate to hear from someone interested in adopting a dog in my care is "It's a Christmas/birthday/insert holiday here present for ___!" and I detest that statement even more when the person in question is a minor child. Now, if said person has done their homework and was simply interested in adopting the dog around that time, fine. But solely the idea of a dog as a gift does not fly with me because dogs aren't sweaters. Unfortunately, they get treated that way, grabbed up because they're cute in the store and returned when they don't fit. Get the girl a stuffed puppy, and let her parents deal with major life decisions like a dog.


 I think that if taking a chance although limited risk is a bad idea or possible way to difficult for others. I will not take the chance. Because of the adoption process and others always saying it could go bad or it might be a bad dog or the wrong one. I have a doubt. It is not fun and doesnt seem like a suprise at all now because I had to involve the parents. IT is not my gift or idea. I washed my hands of it. I have all the tree huggers saying poor dog wrong move and the family thinking rescue is all the bad dogs. GOOD IDEA gone astray . I will stick with the card . It is my decision I take responsibility for it. I was all in had the dog picked rescue is weird process like adopting a kid and I posted my thoughts read responses . NOW I have just one small doubt and it is all spoiled to me.. LIFE goes on .



Nargle said:


> Why not just try talking to the parents and attempt to convince them to adopt? Just showing up with a dog on Christmas isn't the only or the best way to go about things. It's not even a good way. What if you showed up with a new rescued dog, and her parents are like "Oh, well we just made a deposit on a new puppy from a breeder. We don't want this dog." What happens then? The poor dog goes straight back to the shelter on "death row," but had to be uprooted and stressed out a bunch first.


 I appreciate your concern . I was genuinely so excited and gave it lots of thought and planning . I am staying in there house know the situation but I wash my hands . all the overly concerned it might be the end of the world puppy police have me spooked . I will enjoy my dogs at home I will never advise rescue . I would rather just purchase heres the money heres the dog.

The shelters are killing at staggering rates yet if a dog doesnt have
" exactly" The right setting. They would rather keep them ? Euthanize over placement ? weird to much drama for me. My dog of 12 years has never been happier and I dont really know what else to say. My 2 rescues are perfectly balanced and happy SO I dont get it.


----------



## sagira (Nov 5, 2009)

I fit all except a biggie: I have two kids under 10 

LOL Time to retract my decision to get my dog from the breeder, eh?


----------



## meandean (Aug 31, 2009)

our first attempt to adopt a german shepherd from a rescue was not approved because we don't have a doggie door leading from the garage to the backyard. we had a raccoon in our garage one morning and got rid of it. seems like a pretty lame way to dissalow someone adopting rights. i guess all works out, we received our riley about a month later from a rescue through a friend.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

solow said:


> I appreciate your concern . I was genuinely so excited and gave it lots of thought and planning . I am staying in there house know the situation but I wash my hands . all the overly concerned it might be the end of the world puppy police have me spooked . I will enjoy my dogs at home I will never advise rescue . I would rather just purchase heres the money heres the dog.


Honestly I don't understand what this has to do with what I posted.



solow said:


> The shelters are killing at staggering rates yet if a dog doesnt have
> " exactly" The right setting. They would rather keep them ? Euthanize over placement ? weird to much drama for me. My dog of 12 years has never been happier and I dont really know what else to say. My 2 rescues are perfectly balanced and happy SO I dont get it.


I'm not saying they wouldn't make a great home for the dog. I don't think you need the "exactly" right setting. In fact I was one of the ones who disagreed with ridiculously high standards that a lot of rescues seem to have. I'm all for rescuing dogs, and I hope your neice's parents DO decide to adopt.

The problem is, surprising them with a dog is a bad idea. It's not because shelter dogs don't need homes, or that their home isn't "good enough," it's because if you don't make sure everyone is 100% clear in wanting a new dog, they can decide to send the dog right back to the shelter. If they decide they don't want the dog, not only are you not helping any dogs, but you're uprooting a dog from what it "knows," and causing a great deal of stress, for absolutely no reason. Being brought into a new home is stressful for dogs, and it's completely unecessary to stress them out like that if they're going straight back into the shelter. 

I think you should go ahead and talk to her parents, and try to convince them to adopt a dog. I think it's a great idea to try to surprise your neice, and she'll have a wonderful, happy christmas with her dog. However, her parents need to be on-board, or else it's not going to be a very happy situation for anybody.

Just imagine how your niece might feel if on Christmas day you come home with a new dog. She's absolutely delighted, and she immediately becomes attached to the dog. But her parents say no. You're going to have to pry that dog out of that poor child's arms, and dump him back in the shelter. However, if you make sure her parents are okay with it first, it can be as special as you want.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> It is not fun and doesnt seem like a suprise at all now because I had to involve the parents. IT is not my gift or idea. I washed my hands of it.


Interesting, what you should be concearned about is the placement of the animal. What it seems like you're most concearned about is that it's your suprise and your idea. 

To increase the odds of a good placement for a resuced animal, the person receiving the animal into care is the one who should take the steps to adopt the animal.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

solow said:


> I think that if taking a chance although limited risk is a bad idea or possible way to difficult for others. I will not take the chance. Because of the adoption process and others always saying it could go bad or it might be a bad dog or the wrong one. I have a doubt. It is not fun and doesnt seem like a suprise at all now because I had to involve the parents. IT is not my gift or idea. I washed my hands of it. I have all the tree huggers saying poor dog wrong move and the family thinking rescue is all the bad dogs. GOOD IDEA gone astray . I will stick with the card . It is my decision I take responsibility for it. I was all in had the dog picked rescue is weird process like adopting a kid and I posted my thoughts read responses . NOW I have just one small doubt and it is all spoiled to me.. LIFE goes on .


It doesn't matter if it seems like a surprise or not. A dog should never be a surprise. Nothing that lives and breathes and requires care should be a surprise, especially not for a 3 year old child. If the parents want to adopt a dog, they'll do it themselves. I'm sorry if you thought it was a great idea, but it really isn't. My dad would very much like a Saint Bernard, but my mother does not. I know it would make him very happy if I were to get him a Saint, and man wouldn't it make a great Christmas surprise? No. Because my mother does not want a Saint and happens to be apart of the household, too. She would not be willing to care for the dog in any way. I am grown and do not live there, so what I think might be nice makes no difference.
I have to apologize though, I don't understand much of what you're saying beyond that point, so that is why I only responded to that.


----------



## GypsyJazmine (Nov 27, 2009)

The reason rescues can seem unreasonable in their adoption requirements is because, somewhere along the line, they found reason to be...They see horrors everyday & do not want to see these poor dogs coming back into rescue or worse!...With that said, I haven't worked with a rescue yet who wouldn't bend the rules for the right home...It never hurts to ask!


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> It doesn't matter if it seems like a surprise or not. A dog should never be a surprise. Nothing that lives and breathes and requires care should be a surprise, especially not for a 3 year old child. If the parents want to adopt a dog, they'll do it themselves. I'm sorry if you thought it was a great idea, but it really isn't. My dad would very much like a Saint Bernard, but my mother does not. I know it would make him very happy if I were to get him a Saint, and man wouldn't it make a great Christmas surprise? No. Because my mother does not want a Saint and happens to be apart of the household, too. She would not be willing to care for the dog in any way. I am grown and do not live there, so what I think might be nice makes no difference.
> I have to apologize though, I don't understand much of what you're saying beyond that point, so that is why I only responded to that.


extremist are the problem here ... I am not tieing the dog to a tree for a gator to eat .. This is aloving home I currently have two rescues of my own, the family is mine. I Know these people this whole thing about the rediculous req. is being played out her with all this non sense about my situation. funny I am not doing it now. I am over it for entertainment I am posting one of the documents below I think is to much non sense . I am sure there will be 1000 reasons this is appropriate.

City: Dunedin State: Fl. Zip: 34698 
Email:	[email protected] Driver's License:.........
1. Why do you want to adopt a dog? 

We used to have a Golden and I love having a dog. I also want my kids to grow up with at least 1 dog in the house. 

2. What do you think are the most important responsibilities of being a guardian to a dog?
Making sure the dog is healthy & happy.

3. For whom are you adopting the dog? My whole family
4. Have you ever been a guardian to a pet before? Yes

a. Please describe those pets who are currently with you (type, age, sex, altered status).
I don't have any at this time.

b. Please describe those pets that are no longer with you (type, age, sex, altered status).
Golden Retriever Male got hin at 8wks old & he lived until he was 10



c. What happened to the pets who are no longer with you?
He got hip displasia and was in so much pain we unfortunately had to have him put down. Is this wrong too.....

5. Please provide the name and phone number of the veterinarian for your pets.

6. How many people reside in your household? 3 adults & 2 kids ??

7. Are there any children in the household? a. If yes, what are their ages?
Yes a 6 yr old & a 3 yr

8. Does anyone have allergies? No

9. Who will be responsible for feeding, housebreaking and training? myself ?

10. Do you own or rent your residence? Own
a. If you rent, please provide the name and phone number of your landlord.

11. What type of home do you live in (1 family, 2 family, Condo, Apt., Farm)? 1 family

12. Does your residence have a yard? yes
a. If yes, please state the size. We have almost an acre

13. Is your yard fenced? yes
a. If so, what type of fence? Wood fence a secure fence is a secure fence ?? 

b. What portion of the yard is fenced and how high is the fence? About 1/2 of it. also not enough info ???????????

14. Where will the dog stay during the day (inside, outside, both)? Inside

15. Where will the dog stay during the night (inside, outside, both)? Inside

16. How much time will the dog spend outside? As much as we can to play & walk.

17. Will anyone be home during the day? Sometimes????????? Will the dog get to lonely ? for a puppy this is good for a dog I think he ll make it 8 rs

18. How many hours will the dog be left unattended? It varies everyday. 

19. When no one is home, where will the dog be kept? In the house in a crate if it is being crate trained.

20. Where will the dog sleep? In the house

21. What do you intend to feed the dog? ????????? REALLY ! feeding it and loving it is not enugh ?????????????

22. How will you housebreak the dog? Crate training if needed.

23. Please provide the company name, address and phone number for the place of employment
for each adult in the household. My husband owns an A/C business ??????????? by the way this is not enough info here ????????? 


24. How frequently will the adults be gone away from home on business/ vacation/ trips?
It varies & the dog will go with us or stay with friends.


25. Please list any preference you have in adopting a dog (age, sex, breed, personality).


References:
Name:
Address:

Phone:

I represent that the information that I have provided on this form is the truth to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

Signed: _.......... .............._____________________ Date: _12/06/09_____

this ?????? SEEMS a bit over the top along with the follow ups they want and the home visit which I understand to see if folks are lieing I guess. along with several phone calls many emails and everything else


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> this ?????? SEEMS a bit over the top along with the two follow ups they want and the home visit which I understand to see if folks are lieing I guess.


Just curious as to what seems "over the top" with you?

Questions are pretty straightforward and dosen't seem to intrusive.

God forbid if you have to answer more than a couple of questions if you want to adopt an animal.


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

solow said:


> extremist are the problem here ... I am not tieing the dog to a tree for a gator to eat .. This is aloving home I currently have two rescues of my own, the family is mine. I Know these people this whole thing about the rediculous req. is being played out her with all this non sense about my situation. funny I am not doing it now. I am over it for entertainment I am posting one of the documents below I think is to much non sense . I am sure there will be 1000 reasons this is appropriate.


Alright, no one is questioning your ability to care for the dog. When will you get that? The problem is _you don't know if your niece's parents actually want the dog you bring home, and he may end up right back in the shelter._ Getting all upset because it's not "your surprise" is really selfish, and isn't helping the dog at all. It doesn't matter if you live in a mansion with 100 acres of land, and a personal in-home dog walker that will wait on the dog night and day. Because you don't have the consent of every adult in the family, there is a huge chance that someone will disagree with your descision, and the dog will suffer for it, and end up back on "death row." 

Also, I agree with .308. How is answering a few questions so offensive and ridiculous? Those questions sounds reasonable to me. What's _your_ idea of reasonable?


----------



## mrslloyd09 (Jul 12, 2009)

solow said:


> extremist are the problem here ... I am not tieing the dog to a tree for a gator to eat .. This is aloving home I currently have two rescues of my own, the family is mine. I Know these people this whole thing about the rediculous req. is being played out her with all this non sense about my situation. funny I am not doing it now. I am over it for entertainment I am posting one of the documents below I think is to much non sense . I am sure there will be 1000 reasons this is appropriate.
> 
> City: Dunedin State: Fl. Zip: 34698
> Email:	[email protected]com Driver's License:.........
> ...


Hey that looks exactly like the adoption form I filled out for Mandie!  And I would gladly do it again.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

solow said:


> extremist are the problem here ... I am not tieing the dog to a tree for a gator to eat .. This is aloving home I currently have two rescues of my own, the family is mine. I Know these people this whole thing about the rediculous req. is being played out her with all this non sense about my situation. funny I am not doing it now. I am over it for entertainment I am posting one of the documents below I think is to much non sense . I am sure there will be 1000 reasons this is appropriate.
> 
> this ?????? SEEMS a bit over the top along with the follow ups they want and the home visit which I understand to see if folks are lieing I guess. along with several phone calls many emails and everything else


I'm not sure how you read what I wrote and figured out I meant "You are going to kill the dog!" Dogs shouldn't be surprises doesn't mean that. I'm not going to repeat myself there, because I don't know how I can be any more clear. 

Don't understand why that application form is so over the top. The rescue wants to know your intentions, if you're capable of caring for the animal, and how to get a hold of you? Imagine that. All other questions, like allergies, children, fenced yard, etc. is so that they can match you with a dog that would fit your family. If all of that seems wrong to you, you need to read up on what it is rescues do.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

Solow: I see nothing intrusive at all in that questionaire. It sounds like you may have an issue with them asking about the height of a fence and how much is fenced in...if this is a larger dog, a teeny area might not be enough, especially if this rescue requires the yard to be fenced. As for the height, if it;s a 4' fence, that is not high enough for alot of breeds


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Solow: besides what everyone else said, I think you might be reading too much into the questions. Like the question about what you'll feed the dog......you're taking it personally. It's not a personal question, they just want to know. If you said "Purina Dog Chow", they'd probably still adopt to you, although if the dog is eating something else they might suggest you stay on that. Now, if you said you'd feed the dog hay pellets and corn, or tofu and rice, they might have an issue with that. Some people honestly do not know how to feed a dog.

Really, I see nothing intrusive about those questions. You're just reading entirely different meanings into them.


----------



## AnnaO (Dec 7, 2009)

My husband and I just recently had an experience with a no-kill shelter that seemed unwilling ot adopt out their dogs. We met our dog, Oscar, at a function for local shelters that we were helping with. We talked with the representatives of the shelter and they were very encouraging. After clearing everything with our landlord (we an apartment) we filled out the application which had many of the questions on the questionaire above. I couldn't see the relevance of some of the questions, but I'm sure the shelter had their reasons for asking them. We had to call the shelter a few times to make sure they had actually recieved the application and were actively reviewing it. We finally heard from them and set up an interview. When I went for the interview (my husband had to work) they sat Oscar in my lap while we talked for about an hour. I just fell more and more in love with him and his "adoption councilor" made it sound like everything was going to work out just fine. But then the next day she called and told me that she didn't think he was "right dog for us" because I had mentioned that we had a crate that we planned to use for training and to keep him in when we couldn't be around. She said, "he just can't be crated. Sorry." I was left wondering why she couldn't have told me this during our interview before letting me hold him for an hour. My husband and I didn't give up as we continued to enquire about the dog the shelter began telling us tales about how distructive he was and how he had torn up other people's homes, tearing down drapes and such. Finally we convinced them that we understood the responsibility adopting him would require, but that we at least wanted to try a home visit. His councilor begrudgingly allowed this telling us to "please, PLEASE don't keep him in a crate all his life!" as though that had been our expressed intention. Since we have had our little Oscar he has barely so much as chewed the corner of a photo album. Sure he turns his food over when we're gone for a few hours, but we haven't seen any of this extremely distructive behavior they warned us about and we've had him for over a month now. It's my theory that they had all become too attached to him and they didn't really want to see him adopted.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

Solow, you live 30 minutes from me. If you want to adopt a dog, let me know what you are looking for. I would, however, require that every adult in the household is on board with the choice. It's unfair to not do so.


----------



## CLF (Feb 26, 2009)

I don't think those questions are too intrusive at all. When I adopted my JRT this past April the first thing they did was call my landlord to verify that he was on board with the adoption and dog living at his property. After he gave his consent they spoke with my two references (two friends that both have JRTs) 

After the adoption coordinator spoke with my references she spoke with me and then I spoke with Ripley's foster mom. They didn't do a home visit (though they were more than welcome to do so if they wanted to)

For vet references I listed the Vet that my parents use (and have for the past 24 years) but I don't know if the actually called them

Personally, I don't like the whole idea that adoption requirements are a black and white thing. 

In my situation...

I may not have a yard, but my dog is only alone for 2-3 hours a day

I may not have had my "own" dog before, but I grew up with dogs (parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles and friends...as well as owning/showing horses for years where everyone has at least one dog!)

I may not own my own home, but I have lived in my apt for 3 years and if they were to kick my dog out they would be kicking me out too.


Its one thing for a rescue to have general guidelines and to want to match their dogs with the right home, but I don't think its right to rule people out based on something that is a very gray area.


----------



## Bones (Sep 11, 2009)

I'm really a private person so when I decided to get a dog I looked at local rescues and decided that their checklist was just too much for me. Its not even half as bad as the one listed, but for me, it was too much. However, I happened to run into a humane society volunteer when I took one of the cats to vet and he gave me some good advice. He said that most of their rescues were animals they took from the local animal shelter. However, they can only take a certain number monthly. He informed me that they (the local kill shelter) do a lot of checks on the animals to see if they are aggressive and if they have any health problems before they are eligible to be adopted from the shelter. I went there and as chance had it I found my best friend. Though if I had a lot of money I probably would have left with half the kennel  I felt sorry for all those poor animals.

In the end it depends on the person whether or not a rescues requirements are too much. Coming to check the house and then random check ups is too much for me personally. I don't fault them, they want to know how the animal is doing. I'm sure some people would be happy to deal with that continuous hassle, but not me. I guess also one of my biggest fears would be getting denied on an animal I really wanted. Rescues do a lot of good work so I don't have issues with them. However- they are not the only places where you can get a good companion. I don't know if Bones was up to be euthanized (the shelter does not inform people about that) however, I know he will live out his life well fed and happy  I couldn't have found a better pet.

I guess what I'm saying is, if the rescues standards/requirements are too much go down to your local shelter. You might find the perfect pet there  Might require a little extra work (mine has) but it is well worth it.


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

mrslloyd09 said:


> Hey that looks exactly like the adoption form I filled out for Mandie!  And I would gladly do it again.


 fill out mine would ya .. I am on the way outta the state tomorrow.. no rescue no problem .. on with life .



Bones said:


> I'm really a private person so when I decided to get a dog I looked at local rescues and decided that their checklist was just too much for me. Its not even half as bad as the one listed, but for me, it was too much. However, I happened to run into a humane society volunteer when I took one of the cats to vet and he gave me some good advice. He said that most of their rescues were animals they took from the local animal shelter. However, they can only take a certain number monthly. He informed me that they (the local kill shelter) do a lot of checks on the animals to see if they are aggressive and if they have any health problems before they are eligible to be adopted from the shelter. I went there and as chance had it I found my best friend. Though if I had a lot of money I probably would have left with half the kennel  I felt sorry for all those poor animals.
> 
> In the end it depends on the person whether or not a rescues requirements are too much. Coming to check the house and then random check ups is too much for me personally. I don't fault them, they want to know how the animal is doing. I'm sure some people would be happy to deal with that continuous hassle, but not me. I guess also one of my biggest fears would be getting denied on an animal I really wanted. Rescues do a lot of good work so I don't have issues with them. However- they are not the only places where you can get a good companion. I don't know if Bones was up to be euthanized (the shelter does not inform people about that) however, I know he will live out his life well fed and happy  I couldn't have found a better pet.
> 
> I guess what I'm saying is, if the rescues standards/requirements are too much go down to your local shelter. You might find the perfect pet there  Might require a little extra work (mine has) but it is well worth it.


thank you ... I agree 100 % the rescue saves dogs that is the good thing . I think it is way to intrusive. So for the next on I will be going this route or purchase myself. The florida thing is a done deal . bought her a nice shinny card with a puppy on the cover.. thank you. I was ranting but this stuff makes my blood boil I get carried away. Have a good holiday.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> fill out mine would ya .. I am on the way outta the state tomorrow.. no rescue no problem .. on with life .


You strike me as a person with either very low convictions, being lazy, or having childish tendancies, I'm not sure which, or perhaps all three.

You take a course of action (adopting a dog for a surprise) then gripe online how difficult it is for you.

The majority of repsonses to your thread (about your gripe) inferred that perhaps you're taking the wrong course of action.

Then it seems that you try to "throw it in everyones faces" that you didn't adopt a dog for a surprise gift.

What I'm really curious about is that with those kind of traits you've shown in this thread, what you do for a living in the adult world?


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

.308 said:


> You strike me as a person with either very low convictions, being lazy, or having childish tendancies, I'm not sure which, or perhaps all three.
> 
> You take a course of action (adopting a dog for a surprise) then gripe online how difficult it is for you.
> 
> ...


I am glad you asked . I have great convictions as I have stated I HAVE already adopted two wonderful dogs . I cannot fit anymore comfortablely in my house and yard . SO for now I am done. This alone should show a lot. That I didnt buy a dog from a puppy mill or harm them . I also have had one border /sheltie since birth born in my kitchen. Managed to get her to 12 years old without ever being harmed she is healthy and active today. This to should support my ability to handle animals. My girlfriend has a special needs daughter with a 75.000 service dog also up in age and very very healthy. 
I posted everything on here pointing out the fact that although the folks get a dog in bad shape and pour there heart into it .That doesnt mean everyone on the planet thinks its a great idea to answer 50 questions and have them tromp all over there house asking stupid questions. It it very good for some not for all. 
I also wanted to point out that even though almost every rescue effort has the very best intentions . They often over step there bounderys in there idealist quest to save the planet. 

I believe they should keep doing there wonderful work , be involoved but make the process a bit easier . Let go some nobody wants to see a dog hurt or returned . The point is if they helped found a home a some come back or whatever thats life. You cannot micro chip the new owner and have him call with check ups if he or she doesnt feeel comfortable with it. 

I posted I was not getting the dog in florida because I want folks with really good intentions to understand this would have been a dog saved instead it was not. This is my family we talked some it was still gonna be a suprise. It became a miserable experience . 

so yes I tossed it in everyones face to make the point . IT Is saving dogs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that is important. NOT ??????????? s. 
Dogs are gonna die everyday that is life. SOme rescues act like they are judge and jury. The first dog I rescued they said it probably wont work , I have had my autrailian cattle dog for 2 years , had to argue with them to get her and sit thru some dog physc b.s. NO ISSUES what so ever..

as to me I do H>V>A>C work with the public in and out of homeowners homes every day. I have a flawless record no complaints . I have never had a fellony or a speeeding ticket. I just dont fall in line with your way of thinking perhaps , or tricked you into thinking a little different . If your truely angry with me . I apologize.. I can agree to dis agree with someone I dont see I to eye with.. maybe that is the case ....... Thank you for asking :
"You strike me as a person with either very low convictions, being lazy, or having childish tendancies, I'm not sure which, or perhaps all three."
about me so I can explain craig


----------



## Nargle (Oct 1, 2007)

solow said:


> IT Is saving dogs !


I'm sorry, but you're not saving any dogs if you're giving them to someone and you don't even know that they WANT the dog, and might put the dog straight back into the shelter.

You're right, it IS about saving dogs, and that's why they ask so many questions. They don't want the dogs to end up right back where they started: in a shelter.


----------



## phileaglesfan (Dec 11, 2009)

I wouldn't pass that test and I don't know how you can hold someone to not having kids for 3 years. Some dogs seem to thrive around children.

I'm ok with an application to let the potential owner know what they are getting into because some really don't understand what it takes to own a dog.


----------



## .308 (Jul 26, 2009)

> I posted I was not getting the dog in florida because I want folks with really good intentions to understand this would have been a dog saved instead it was not.


Apologies, but at least for myself, you're not making any sense. Why didn't you adopt the dog out as a surprise as you originally intended? Because there was a questionaire that you didn't want to fill out? Or was it because perhaps some people actually made sense that it may not be a wise idea to get a dog as a gift. Why didn't you "save" a dog in your opinion?



> also wanted to point out that even though almost every rescue effort has the very best intentions . They often over step there bounderys in there idealist quest to save the planet.


Hmmm, a questionaire on ensuring that an animal may be a proper fit for a home is trying to save the planet?



> The point is if they helped found a home a some come back or whatever thats life.


That's not life, that's ensuring that you have better odds that the animal will have a forever home.



> If your truely angry with me . I apologize


I think I have better things to do than to get angry with people on a general internet forum. I'm just trying to understand your reasoning, which I'm still scratching my head. First you want to adopt a dog out as a surprise, then you don't, then it's like "see, another dog dead" because you didn't get a dog.



> I apologize.. I can agree to dis agree with someone I dont see I to eye with.. maybe that is the case ....... Thank you for asking :


In a nutshell, where we disagree is that you think any animal taken out of a shelter and put into ANY home is better than having the animal put down. To some extent, I'd agree with you as long as the animal in question is spayed or neutered and the animal can't procreate due to the owners ignorance.



> as to me I do H>V>A>C work with the public in and out of homeowners homes every day


Ironically enough, I know how to do a manual D/J and calculate superheat and subcool.



> I have never had a fellony or a speeeding ticket.


You're a better man than I. I've gotten numerous speeding tickets.


----------



## solow (Nov 19, 2009)

.308 said:


> Apologies, but at least for myself, you're not making any sense. Why didn't you adopt the dog out as a surprise as you originally intended? Because there was a questionaire that you didn't want to fill out? Or was it because perhaps some people actually made sense that it may not be a wise idea to get a dog as a gift. Why didn't you "save" a dog in your opinion?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am exhausted with this thread ... I am practical person . I believe in training the human and the dog saving as many as possible and killing any dog that damages a kid with the exception of a kid breaking into a property. I believe in placing dogs in any home within reason instead of killing them. and If there are to many dogs euthanize them. Seems simple. I am quite sure this will bring a thousand comments which I will read . THis is me in a nutshell. It is ironic that you can actually get your freon dialed in on your a/c never have I heard that from anyone especially on here.. common ground I guess we have.. happy holidays everyone.


----------

