Not all shelters/rescues have the same requirements. My suggestion is you keep looking until you find one that you feel comfortable with 'all their rules'. The rules, while they may seem excessive and silly to you, are there for a valid reason I'm guessing. If I wasn't comfortable with one of them, I'd ask them about it to open a discussion or simply move onto the next shelter. There are lots of animals out there waiting for good homes

 

I checked all the shelters within 20 miles of me and they all had similar except from one which specialises in a breed I am not comfortable with owning. Been tempted to call them to find out why the rules are just letting you rent the dog, The main parts that p!$$ me off are that your dog can be taken away for things as simple as you using a dog food they don't like (though my family uses a dog food we always have and have never had a dog die young).
But most importantly you do not get to chose your companion, considering the level of affection and how much tim,e I spend with my dog/companion - it is like having an arranged marriage.

 

Some rescues are just nutty. A couple of rescues near me want you to be at least 21 and you must sign off on unexpected phone calls and home checks. Have you tried looking at Animal Control dogs? In my county, AC has cheaper dogs that will be PTS if they don't find a home. Pay $25, save a life, and none of the silly rescue questionnaires.

 

I was thinking of that (once I have my finances etc in order - currently researching in advance) but don't know where my local one is, are there sites that list this?

 

Like others have said, it all depends on the shelter or rescue and yes, some are nutty.

Others have rules like that, but never use them. Essentially, they have those rules in place so that if they get a call that you're abusing the dog, they can find a way to get it taken from you. However, for most 9 times out of 10, they'll never make those unexpected visits or check your vet records. They're too busy and understaffed unless they receive a complaint that you're feeding the dog only rice and keeping it locked in a crate for 22 hours of the day.

If you're concerned about all the rules, I'd probably talk to the rescue you're most wanting to work with about them. If they come off as extremists, then, yes, I'd walk away. If, during the conversation, they are able to reassure you, then it might be worth it to proceed. Otherwise, why not plan a day trip to a shelter further afield? It might be worth it to get the dog you want without the hassle you don't.

 

Do we really need another thread bashing rescues? None of those requirements are totally out of bounds. Of course they want to talk to the vet, of course they need to see your home, of course they want to place the right dog in the right home.

As for the food, just feed the food they recommend. Plenty of dogs live to old age on Beneful, it doesn't make Beneful a good food. Lots of humans live to old age eating McDonalds, smoking cigarettes and drinking to excess, that's not a good diet.

I was thinking of that (once I have my finances etc in order - currently researching in advance) but don't know where my local one is, are there sites that list this?

Go to petfinder.com and put in your zip code. All the shelters and rescues in your area will come up.

 

Do we really need another thread bashing rescues? None of those requirements are totally out of bounds. Of course they want to talk to the vet, of course they need to see your home, of course they want to place the right dog in the right home.

As for the food, just feed the food they recommend. Plenty of dogs live to old age on Beneful, it doesn't make Beneful a good food. Lots of humans live to old age eating McDonalds, smoking cigarettes and drinking to excess, that's not a good diet.


Go to petfinder.com and put in your zip code. All the shelters and rescues in your area will come up.

I'm not for mAmerica so petfinder is of no use.
I think that if they want to rehome animals then they need to vet the owner, but after the owner is shown to be the right candidate they should get out of the owner's life as long as the dog is not going to end up hurt. It is the reason for the RSPCA so I think the fact that they try to keep control as far as possible is downright ridiculous. Instead they should be getting a referral from your vet to say you are a good dog owner and the chance to check you out, then get out.

 

THANK YOU. I get denied almost all of the time because I live in an apartment, despite my activity level. I've also been denied at the human society because they felt we were too young to own a dog, and because we were honest in saying that we had to rehome a dog prior. We can't apply for ANY of their eligible dogs. I asked them if they'd rather have the dog put down then live in an apartment; they didn't respond. >_<

 

It's not a slam on you, personally. It's that they've had trouble in the past with young people (who are typically unsettled and unreliable, which isn't an insult, I was young, too.) They've had trouble with apartment dwellers who typically only live in an apartment 1.5 years on average, iirc, and then end up unable to find an apartment that accepts dogs (or unwilling to pay the deposit). As for having rehomed a dog, yeah, that is a HUGE red flag. Maybe not in your case, but general yes.

As to your last dig at them, well, sure, they could place every dog if they gave dogs to everyone who asked, but what good does it do to give people dogs who will return them in 6 months, or stick the dog in the back yard, or deny it vet care, etc? There have to be standards. Yes, good owners will get denied sometimes due to standards, but the answer isn't to not have standards.

 

You can google "Such and such county/city Animal control". Something should pop up. Some ACs don't use Petfinder anyhow. I would call and inquire about certain breeds or types of dogs you are interested in. If they have something in, they should be able to tell you. If they haven't any dogs in that fit you, give them your number and tell them to give you a call when a dog comes in. You can do this with almost all rescues.

 

I think it's important to remember that rescues are not public entities. They are private organizations and as such can have whatever kind of rules they want. They can take in dogs they want (and only dogs they want), based on age, breed, size, or anything else they want. They can adopt, or not adopt, to anyone they want, and can have whatever restrictions and requirements they want. They are supported by donations and people who... support them. If you don't like the rules, find another rescue whose philosophies and procedures you do agree with, and give them whatever means of support you want, to make sure THEY can continue to operate (volunteer, adopt, donate, whatever).

Dog rescues are not there to do PEOPLE a service. They are there for the dogs they choose to serve and help, in the way that they choose to do so. If that means they help 5 dogs a year all of whom must weigh under 5 lbs and be under 3 years old, and turn away adopters because they only want those 5 dogs being raw fed in homes of retirees who have a 12' fenced in yard and no other pets - well, again: it's their organization, they can do what they want. And you can go find another resource for getting a dog. *Shrugs* It's a privately owned small business, in essence. If you don't like their sell requirements, you can go find another business whose practices you do support.

Animal control has to provide a service to the larger community, and that service is to take in homeless and stray dogs and house them (they dont' even have to be made available for the public) for a set amount of time. Rescue groups do not have to do any such thing. If more people realized that and treated them the same way as any other small business, etsy shop, whatever, I think they'd be a lot less frustrated. Support and give your money to who you want to stay 'in business' and who serves your needs. Stop being offended that not all of them.

 

Some are too strict, some are too loose, some are just right. Like most things. Find one that will work with you, forget about the rest. I posted a rescue in the last thread like this I thought was ridiculous, but I'm glad they lay out their requirements because I know never to apply/look at their animals. Sure, they don't adopt that dog out, but it's their dog to adopt or not adopt out.

 

Some are too strict, some are too loose, some are just right. Like most things. Find one that will work with you, forget about the rest. I posted a rescue in the last thread like this I thought was ridiculous, but I'm glad they lay out their requirements because I know never to apply/look at their animals. Sure, they don't adopt that dog out, but it's their dog to adopt or not adopt out.

This. Much more concise than I managed, but absolutely this.

I can think their business practices (and it is a business practice) is ridiculous, but it's REALLY not my concern and it IS their dog.

 

No, but it is to give the owner the choice of the dog, and to let the owner live their life with their dog instead of watching their back before disciplining their own dog and the need to fear giving their dog a better brand, or more affordable brand of dog food if their dog develops allergies? And what about the people who would be nervous of having their companion being taken away because they went to the vet 'just in case', or in case they surprise 'visit' when their dog has been sick once and has shown no other symptoms so just needs a day of no food - but then the inspector may disagree due to paranoia, thus the rigorous tests. Also we are there to save a dog, we shouldn't need to win over someone who has clear paranoia due to having had to deal with the results of the minority and not often seeing the results of the many.
Nice way to deter adoption.

 

No, but it is to give the owner the choice of the dog, and to let the owner live their life with their dog instead of watching their back before disciplining their own dog and the need to fear giving their dog a better brand, or more affordable brand of dog food if their dog develops allergies? And what about the people who would be nervous of having their companion being taken away because they went to the vet 'just in case', or in case they surprise 'visit' when their dog has been sick once and has shown no other symptoms so just needs a day of no food - but then the inspector may disagree due to paranoia, thus the rigorous tests.
Nice way to deter adoption.

It's their dog. Same as if you were adopting from a single family who is rehoming. Their job is not to make you happy. They don't care if they make you happy. They care if those specific dogs are in the homes they feel good about. They dont' care about you. They dont' function to serve your need or desire to adopt. They don't have to. It's not part of the deal. If you don't like the way they conduct business, go find someone else. It's really that simple. They can do what they want. You can not give them your money and get your pet elsewhere.

What about people who? Don't know. Rescue doesn't care. They care about the DOG. Not all of them care about a high turn over and saving as many as possible; they can't save them all. Their goal is to get dogs into homes they deem RIGHT for the dog. Not as many dogs into A home as possible.

Do I agree? Personally? Not really. I doubt I'll ever adopt from a rescue again. Still doesn't mean I get to be huffy about the business practices of someone else's privately owned small business. None of my concern. I don't like it, I don't give them my patronage (or time, or money). It's really not hard.

 

In my case they probably have shot themselves in the foot.

My DH was first interested in a dog now that we bought and finally with plenty of land.
Our families (mine n DH's mom n dad) always had dogs n no pet is ever given up (shelter or otherwise).
My sister even got into showing Australian Silkies... fostered up to 4 at some point... while my own dog is a GSD/ doberman mix, had him till he passed. My sister's dog, one was stolen (champion lineage), the other also died from old age.
My father in law has tons of dogs... hunting dogs mostly.
His **** hounds won blue ribbons and are champions at many hunts all back in the 60s till 80s.
All died from old age and a couple from traffic accidents.

Dh wants a GSD as his first all his dog.
We saw one on pet finder, a GSD/pyr mix puppy.
A male which DH wanted
So we e-mailed the rescue quite a few times I might add and over 2 months... not only for the one we like but also extending interest in the other 3 puppies as well.
No answers not even a courtesey rejection.

We have researched GSD for a year... in the 2 months, researched the pyr part of the pup so as to better learn the temperament.
Well after no news from shelter, we decided to go pure breed PYR.

Thus we ended up with Roman.
No regrets.

Even if we have the house and land for more than 1 dog, he will be the only dog so we can give our all attention to.
I promised my dog he'll be my one n only. Also any dog in my contact to have the land& freedom he (the city dog) never had.
In a way, it is in my dog's memory to provide Roman with the best we can... and he was a great dog I had from puppy.

 

On a facebook group I am a member of, there are a huge amount of people "needing to find a loving home" for their dogs. The top reason given (truth or not) is that they have to move and cannot find a place that will take pets. The second reason is that they can't give their animals the time or attention they deserve, due to _______ (insert your reason).
SOMETIMES these folks add something like "D-day is such and such date, I will have to take him to the pound if no one wants him."

Now, I KNOW that a rescue's/shelter's policies might not necessarily improve/solve this issue. BUT, I think that situations like these may be behind some of the policies. So, a dog goes to a good home, stays a few months, the family moves, surrenders the dog, now the dog needs a new home. So, if someone was to look at this dog for adoption, they would see that the dog has already been rehomed. Sometimes, dogs go through several homes for reasons like these. It's not fair to the dogs to get attached, to get settled, and feel safe, only to be moved again. AND, if a dog has gone through several homes, it does sometimes cloud people's judgement as to whether to adopt the dog.

And, on a separate note, I am so frustrated with all the rehoming I see within this facebook group. Seriously, it's a local group, so all the rehoming is local......it really upsets me to see so many dogs' lives disrupted like this in my area.

 

I agree in some cases. Some policies seem reasonable to me, but to specify the food a dog has to be fed is just a level of control that is ridiculous to me.

All you can do is keep looking until you find a rescue who has policies you can live with. Meanwhile, dogs linger in the strict ones.

 

There should be some policies in adopting a dog but honestly some of them are a little ridiculous. I got Zoey from a municipal low kill shelter and all they wanted was my Vet's name and number to check that I had given my last dog vaccines ... I was OK with that.

I agree with sassafras - find the rescue/shelter that has rules you can live with and adopt from there.

 

Agreed with Ameryllis that not everyone should have a dog.

I will also add that I am actually OK with rescues wanting vet numbers etc., home ownership requests, followup checkups etc., (they did that with my cat) to make sure the dog actually goes to a good home.
That is also what good breeders require new owners of anyway to ensure their precious have that forever home.
It also verifies if people can financially take good care of that life... vet, food, care is not cheap afterall.

Seriously... not everyone can probably provide that one & only forever home.

 

It also verifies if people can financially take good care of that life... vet, food, care is not cheap afterall.

This one gets me every time.

First of all, I think a lot of people tend to over-blow the costs associated with pet ownership. I don't know if it's to make themselves feel better, or what, and while I realize they aren't free - what you really need is decent credit, a credit-card with a decent limit, pet insurance, or a savings account and the ability to pay either for the insurance, credit card minimum, or sock the money away in the bank account for each animal. This is not prohibitive for about 95% of the population - we're talking at something between 50-100.00 a month, which is less than a cable and internet package.

The other thing is HAVING money is not the same as being WILLING to spend the money. You do have to have, or be able to get it, to be able to spend it, but having it doesn't tell you much.

And on top of that - the kind of car someone drives, the way they dress, and the house they live in does not tell you a whole heck of a lot about what's in someone's back account. I know people with horrible credit, living WAY above their means, who ended up with nice cars, mortgages that they're underwater with, a lot of electronics, and eating ramen because its caught up with them. Conversely, we drive a THIRTY year old car (it. won't. die. and I won't get a new one until it does and when it does we will buy it outright, with cash), live in a house that we're still renovating (that we paid for with CASH). We have no debt. Seriously. Zero. We do have decent savings for retirement, savings for our kids (for college or living expenses), money set aside for the care of our disabled son when we're gone, and A LOT of money in the animal's savings account. You judge us by the car, the house, the thrift store shopping and we are dirt poor; we're not.

And I feel release of bank account information is unreasonable for a rescue to ask for. "How will you handle expenses associated" however, is fine.

 

Well. I guess the rescue did pretty well with their screening methods this time. . .

 

Yeah, emergency response is not "discipline", and I really doubt a rescue has people lurking around to catch you responding to an emergency. If someone engages in emergency response behaviors on a regular basis, or in non-emergencies, they really need to work on their own behavior.

 

Yep. I train my kids, for instance, to stay out of the road, by teaching and consistent modeling (well my kids are 14, but). If they then try to run in front of a car, I make a grab for them and yank them back by any body part I can reach. I do not teach them by yanking them out of the road by the hair every time they get near it.

 

And children grasp act = consequence far more easily than dogs, but even so...all a kid learns from being hit is to work harder not to get caught, not why they shouldn't do something.

I find it sad because the people who resort to threats, violence, and yelling as their primary way of teaching their kids and dogs or of disciplining them most often do so because of a very, very dark view of human and canine nature. The dog pees on the rug when you're not home because it is trying to make you angry or gain some kind of upper hand. The child misbehaves because they are a bad kid that will become a criminal if you don't spank them. I prefer to have a high opinion of my kids and my dogs...and I enjoy watching them work hard to meet that opinion.

 

I never know if those people are horribly jaded cynics, or if they've just got egos so fragile that everything is a threat to them - and that anything that they can't control by force of will is somehow a personal affront. It makes me sad, though. It's so much better to have a partnership going on.

(and I'm just waiting for someone to make suppositions about my children and dogs behavior and how horrible it is *snorts*)