Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A noisy delivery of 26 dogs arrived at PAWS Tuesday from overcrowded shelters in Texas. They get a shipment from there every month.
On Saturday, 30 dogs came to Seattle humane from parts of California hit by wildfires. Last year, Seattle Humane rescued more than 6,500 animals from other states and countries.
Quote:
"People are obsessed with their dogs in Seattle," said Jessica Charlton with Seattle Humane Society.
Quote:
Even with the imports, adoption doesn't take long here. At Seattle Humane, the average wait time is 10 days. At PAWS, most dogs are out in five days.
"We'll get dogs that are in shelters for years and they come here and they're adopted right away," said Laura Follis with PAWS.
Quote:
Plus, spaying and neutering is more standard here, so breeding is less rampant, and many rescues are well-funded and staffed so they can take dogs from regions with overcrowding and still have a policy that no animals are euthanized for space.
But many (if not most) of the dogs that arrive here just come from other parts of Washington.
In Washington, 6,000 dogs have been euthanized this year. That's far from the 120,000 in California, but the goal of these rescues is to make Washington a no-kill state.
I think it is, too bad more places aren’t. lots of dogs, old and young, that need homes
The Bay Area is the same way, but IME they’re less restrictive with where you can take them, this area can be a bit restrictive with dogs on beaches, trails, etc
A lot of the rescues here save animals from other shelters, usually in Eastern Washington or California.
I volunteered for a cat rescue and we had truckers who would bring back cats in their cab from shelters in Southern California. Airlines will also send shelter animals to rescues at a discounted rate.
Pretty much. The culture here is vastly different than, say, California and the south. People are so much more diligent about TNR (trap, neuter, return) and are generally really responsible with their pets.
Pretty much. The culture here is vastly different than, say, California and the south. People are so much more diligent about TNR (trap, neuter, return) and are generally really responsible with their pets.
In many areas of the south there is the attitude that dogs are property, not living, breathing, feeling creatures that are treated with respect. It is not everyone in the south, but that does exist quite a bit.
However, you are wrong about California. There are some groups of people in California that are as you describe, and that would include mostly gang members and the group of people that also participate in rooster fighting. Dogs in shelters in California are always health screened, behavior-observed, spayed/neutered, vaccinated for rabies, and microchipped before adoption. Adopters are given a certificate for one free vet check.
The problem is that there are just too many dogs in California. Washington benefits financially by taking dogs from California and Hawaii.
The problem is that certain “rescue groups” and “humane societies” in Washington lie about the dogs, especially regarding their known history and/or propensity to bite, then either refuse to take the dog back, or to assist with proper training of a dog that they were well aware had serious problems.
Seattle and Washington in general are not “dog friendly”, more like money-hungry.
I do agree that CA takes good care of their animals.
The problem is that CA has too many animals. This is largely a function of population: that is, more people = more pets, and even if 80% of those pet owners (that's a very generous percentage, btw) keep their pets, that means 20% of pets from a highly populated area are not securely owned or not owned at all. They tend to multiply quickly from that point.
I went to Jackson Galaxy's event on Thursday night in Seattle and met up with a lot of local rescue groups in the area. Trust me, these folks aren't in it for the money. If anything, rescuing is poorly paid and largely propped up by volunteers and patrons (of which I consider myself to be a patron).
I DO think that people in Seattle tend to view pets as a "relationship" as opposed to an "ownership" (something Jackson Galaxy addressed) and that culture shift explains the gap in animals available in the PNW. The hunger for companionship animals is palpable up here. When I adopted my lovely cat lady @ Seattle Humane, the place was filled to the brim with people looking for animals. That kind of demand is rare in other parts of the country so, naturally, Seattle tries to rescue animals from parts of the country where companionship demand is a lot lower.
I am helping a friend rescue some kittens from Houston now. If those kittens don't leave the Houston shelter system, they will be killed in 2 days. Can you imagine? If cute kittens can't be adopted out, other animals don't stand a chance. By contrast, the turnaround for adoption in the PNW is generally a week, give or take a few days.
I have no experience with breeders or breed-specific rescues (I have dealt with general rescues), so I don't know how accurate your statement is about them but I will leave that be.
I've definitely noticed WA seems more pet friendly then other places. We have few to no kill shelters and the foster pet system is pretty extensive and large compared to other regions in the US. There also is a huge adopt vs shop moment here, most of the pet stores that sold puppies have stopped selling them completely or they advertise/foster shelter animals due to the supply and cheaper costs as your not paying a breeder the time and expenses of caring for the breeding, birth, and life up to adoption.
The other side of this is WA has an illegal/puppy mill problem. Because of how fashionable certain breeds can get you see those select breeds getting pushed out by these breeders who don't stop until they either get caught or the breed preferences change and they drop all the leftovers into shelters or abandon them. These animals tend to be sickly, have bad genetic problems from extreme inbreeding, and/or behavioral problems that won't ever be fixed making them unadoptable. People don't stop to think about that and shelters don't/can't always do a good enough job vetting the animals to know what additional needs the animal may need beyond the basics.
I would argue that most shelters aren't making money off adoptions. Yes, you're paying a $150 fee for a dog that the shelter got for "free". But they had to find/pay for the animal to be delivered up to WA, then they had to feed it, pay for its medical checks and any issues they may have, and pay for the utilities and shelter needs of the animal until it's adopted. Most shelter employees work for minimum wage and that's if they're employees, most individuals who work in shelters or foster animals are volunteers and are giving their time and money to these animals. So I think it's not fair to say that WA takes in shelter animals for the money because they don't make any. In fact I think WA takes in and operates differently then WA simply because there is a powerful minority group here that's insistent on helping animals despite it costing more then what you'll get out of it.
I would argue that most shelters aren't making money off adoptions. Yes, you're paying a $150 fee for a dog that the shelter got for "free". But they had to find/pay for the animal to be delivered up to WA, then they had to feed it, pay for its medical checks and any issues they may have, and pay for the utilities and shelter needs of the animal until it's adopted. Most shelter employees work for minimum wage and that's if they're employees, most individuals who work in shelters or foster animals are volunteers and are giving their time and money to these animals. So I think it's not fair to say that WA takes in shelter animals for the money because they don't make any. In fact I think WA takes in and operates differently then WA simply because there is a powerful minority group here that's insistent on helping animals despite it costing more then what you'll get out of it.
Are you kidding? Washington has a financial arrangement with both California and Hawaii. Washington is paid by those states to take dogs, then they are paid again by whoever adopts the dogs. It’s not a humanitarian thing, it’s a $$$ thing, with the poor animals in the middle.
I have had rescue dogs for 3 decades and only in Washington did I get not one, but two biting dogs, and I was lied to both times about how many times they were surrendered, and why. One shelter took the dog back, I could not risk being bitten anymore. The second dog came from a “rescue” group that thinks highly of themselves but does not screen adopters or dogs. I could have said I was anyone on the extensive application, no one checked. My dog had been returned twice to a shelter, then pulled by this rescue and placed in “foster care” for all of 2 days, (how is a dog “evaluated” in 2 days?) then given to me. I’m bonded to the dog, but she is a reactive biter when in public, and her history was known and not disclosed to me. I’ve never encountered these situations anywhere but Washington.
With regard to other expenses, such as employee salaries...these shelters and rescue groups have very few paid employees, most who work there are individuals working off court-ordered community service hours or are volunteers.
And, many of the shelters and rescues are heavily funded with large donations from companies, individuals, and proceeds from lavish fund-raising galas.
So if you want a rescue dog in Washington, caveat emptor, and don’t expect honesty or assistance from the placing “rescue” organization once you pay your money.
Last edited by happygrrrl; 12-01-2018 at 04:23 PM..
Are you kidding? Washington has a financial arrangement with both California and Hawaii. Washington is paid by those states to take dogs, then they are paid again by whoever adopts the dogs. It’s not a humanitarian thing, it’s a $$$ thing, with the poor animals in the middle.
I have had rescue dogs for 3 decades and only in Washington did I get not one, but two biting dogs, and I was lied to both times about how many times they were surrendered, and why. One shelter took the dog back, I could not risk being bitten anymore. The second dog came from a “rescue” group that thinks highly of themselves but does not screen adopters or dogs. I could have said I was anyone on the extensive application, no one checked. My dog had been returned twice to a shelter, then pulled by this rescue and placed in “foster care” for all of 2 days, (how is a dog “evaluated” in 2 days?) then given to me. I’m bonded to the dog, but she is a reactive biter when in public, and her history was known and not disclosed to me. I’ve never encountered these situations anywhere but Washington.
With regard to other expenses, such as employee salaries...these shelters and rescue groups have very few paid employees, most who work there are individuals working off court-ordered community service hours or are volunteers.
And, many of the shelters and rescues are heavily funded with large donations from companies, individuals, and proceeds from lavish fund-raising galas.
So if you want a rescue dog in Washington, caveat emptor, and don’t expect honesty or assistance from the placing “rescue” organization once you pay your money.
Can you provide any proof of your allegation that Washington has a financial arrangement with both CA and HI, that the state is paid by those other states to take dogs? I've been involved in rescue for over a dozen years and have never heard of such a thing.
Can you provide any proof of your allegation that Washington has a financial arrangement with both CA and HI, that the state is paid by those other states to take dogs? I've been involved in rescue for over a dozen years and have never heard of such a thing.
No, I won’t discuss that here. I’m not going to be interrogated by anyone on an internet forum. I also just noticed from your information that you do not live in Washington, you are on the east coast. Every state, maybe even counties within the state, have different procedures for obtaining and adoption of surplus pets. And “rescue” has become a money-making business.
Now I have a question for you: Do you feel that it is appropriate for a animal shelter or “rescue” organization to withhold the truth, fabricate, or lie about a dog’s history so that it will be adopted? Do you think it is responsible and professional for a shelter or rescue organization to not warn prospective adopters that a dog was returned, possibly more than once, because it is a biter? Do you think that it is appropriate for a shelter or rescue organization, when confronted with the fact that they placed a documented biting dog, to refuse to take the dog back, or deny the owners any assistance, thus leaving the dog owners totally liable for a situation that they were uninformed of? Is it THAT important for these “rescues” to look like they are doing honorable work?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
