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.
I have wanted to adopt a shelter dog many times, and as much as I completely understand shelter people must make sure the dog is going to someone that will truly care for it (with which I agree), they impose almost-impossible conditions in endless lists that are hard for some people to fill.
I have no fenced-in yard, but I take my dog for walks every day. I give her great quality food that I take the time to prepare, and we play and have fun together, but I am not at home everyday 24/7... people who work in shelters could be a little more sensitive to that (what they understand as the perfect owner might not exist at any given time!), and allow the ones who would love to save a life and share it for years to come to genuinely have a chance to adopt a pet.
Over the past 7 weeks, my family has joked about how, if I had wanted to adopt Kizzy from a shelter, I would never have been able to.
I understand, to an extent, the "qualifications", but, especially now with all of the budget cuts in government, I don't quite get the mentality of euthanasia over a non-fenced in yard. I think all of us know at least one or two people with a fenced-in yard or who work from home who should NEVER have a pet, yet do.
And, like Glitch said, so long as these rules are in place, and this "euthanasia over an owner than works out of the home" mentality is around, the less-scrupulous breeders will remain in business.
I have wanted to adopt a shelter dog many times, and as much as I completely understand shelter people must make sure the dog is going to someone that will truly care for it (with which I agree), they impose almost-impossible conditions in endless lists that are hard for some people to fill.
I have no fenced-in yard, but I take my dog for walks every day. I give her great quality food that I take the time to prepare, and we play and have fun together, but I am not at home everyday 24/7... people who work in shelters could be a little more sensitive to that (what they understand as the perfect owner might not exist at any given time!), and allow the ones who would love to save a life and share it for years to come to genuinely have a chance to adopt a pet.
I have a fenced third of an acre in tic-free, heartworm-free, doggy paradise, with an 18' x 10' outside kennel that attaches to a heated indoor kennel inside my garage. I never got as far as filling out their applications, so there was never a site visit. When I saw that their application required financial information I told them I wasn't interested in giving them my personal information beyond my name and address and I left. They had no business knowing my annual income or who my employer was, and I'm sure not going to give them my Social Security number.
The ONLY criteria someone truly interested in placing a dog in a good home is: 1) Have you ever owned and cared for a dog before? 2) Do you understand the costs involved, particularly with puppies? and 3) A one time site visit, only to ensure that the dog is not going to an animal abuser.
If you are fortunate enough to live in a condo that allows pets, or find that one apartment complex out of a hundred that allows pets, and can satisfactorily answer the three questions above, you should be allowed to take home your new dog.
As dog owners are keenly aware, dogs are typically not welcome in rentals and even many condominiums. It has been my experience that somewhere between 80% to 90% of the rentals (including homes with fenced yards) do not allow pets, particularly dogs. They may make an exception for birds or a cat, but usually not dogs.
If someone is willing to go to the expense of taking care of a dog, and the extra aggravation of finding a place to live that allows your dog, then that tells me they really do want a dog and they are willing to do what it takes to care for the dog. Very few people have the luxury of living in doggy paradise, but that should not automatically disqualify someone from giving a dog a loving, caring home.
If someone is willing to go to the expense of taking care of a dog, and the extra aggravation of finding a place to live that allows your dog, then that tells me they really do want a dog and they are willing to do what it takes to care for the dog. Very few people have the luxury of living in doggy paradise, but that should not automatically disqualify someone from giving a dog a loving, caring home.
GREAT post. It seems like the overall mentality is that they're doing YOU a service by LETTING you have one of the dogs. Shouldn't the general sentiment be the other way around?
GREAT post. It seems like the overall mentality is that they're doing YOU a service by LETTING you have one of the dogs. Shouldn't the general sentiment be the other way around?
I could not agree more. That is why I label them "shelter-snobs." As if you had to measure up to their impossibly high standards. When I am looking to rescue a dog, I am not going to be very particular where that dog comes from. They way I see it, every dog that is not already owned is in need of rescue. I figure those dogs already in the pound are in more urgent need of rescue, so I always begin there. If I am looking for a particular breed in the past I would contact breed-specific shelters, but not any more. From now on, if I cannot find what I am looking for at the pound, I will pick up a dog being sold in parking lots, a pet store, or on Craig's list.
Despite the hyperbole to the contrary, the majority of dogs in need of rescue do not come from puppy mills. By far the biggest number of dogs in need come from loving, caring families whose dogs have had puppies. They also want to see those puppies go to loving, caring homes. Not everyone whose dogs have puppies are in it for the money.
The ONLY criteria someone truly interested in placing a dog in a good home is: 1) Have you ever owned and cared for a dog before? 2) Do you understand the costs involved, particularly with puppies? and 3) A one time site visit, only to ensure that the dog is not going to an animal abuser.
i agree that this sounds like a reasonable application process, but the puppy mills, pet stores and backyard breeders do not care if people meet these qualifications. their only qualification is "do you have the money to pay for this dog?" or "are you willing to take this unwanted dog off of my hands?"
it's because of puppy mills and any other breeders that "conveniently" provide dogs to anyone who can pay or will take an animal for free that animals end up with the "shelter snobs".
yes, i think some shelters and rescues go too far with their application process, and some shelter/rescue people are probably on a power trip about it. but the vast majority of the time the motivation is not to be exclusive or mean - it's to ensure that the animals end up in good homes and that they will not end up in a shelter again. reputable breeders have similarly stringent application processes, and for the same reason, but for some reason that never comes up.
when i adopted my dog, i had to fill out a questionnaire where i stated how much i thought i would spend a year on her, how long she would be left alone, where she would be when i was out, how often i felt she needed to be walked, whether we owned our home or had permission from our landlord to have a dog, etc. my husband and i work full time and do not have a fenced in yard and we were able to adopt with no problem. i had to agree to a home visit but they never did one (and i happen to know that this shelter only includes that stipulation so they can exercise it if they need to, and to put off people who have something to hide at home). i have adopted many times, from different shelters, and have never faced the kind of scrutiny people here describe. i'm sure it happens, but i seriously doubt it's as universal as some people like to portray it.
and all that being said, i personally know of a dog adopted from the same shelter where i got sadie who ended up chained up in her owners' backyard 24/7. neighbors have called the humane officer a few times and now they no longer have the dog. i'm not sure what happened to her. so yeah, it was easy for me to adopt sadie, but it was also easy for these neglectful owners to adopt. could more scrutiny of the adopters have prevented that situation? maybe. that's certainly the view of the "shelter snobs". a home visit, especially post-adoption, would have been a start, and there are posters on this forum who think even a home visit is unreasonable.
yes, i think some shelters and rescues need to take a hard look at their adoption requirements and consider the balance between keeping dogs out of neglectful/abusive homes by being too lenient and keeping them out of good homes by being too strict. but incessantly posting about it whenever the subject comes up just scares people away from even trying to rescue. i've seen it happen on this board more than once.
I agree with Glitch as well. My friend wanted to adopt a kitten 3 years ago and went to the local shelter since they had over 40 due to it being kitten season. She was told she can't adopt from them, because she's a single college student! Her neighbor had a stray cat that always visited his yard and she had a litter on his deck very soon after this. When they got older, my friend took one of them and has had him for 3 years now, through 2 moves and a marriage. They lost out on an awesome pet owner because of their ridiculous rules!
And the shelter I used to volunteer for back on the East coast had an 8 page application. 8 pages or some of the most ridiculous questions ever. I get it, you want the best homes, but that was a huge deterrent to many people who simply walked out with the application and never came back.
I've seen countless adoption applications from rescues/shelters. We'd be denied at every single one of these places because we are renters and do not have any kind of yard. I assure you, my dogs don't suffer because there is no yard. We just simply exercise them elsewhere. And to add, we had a very stringent application with by PC's breeder. Just because you have money, doesn't mean he'll give you a pup. Somehow people seem to think that if you show them the money, they hand you a puppy, no questions asked. Doesn't work that way! Try being on a waiting list for over a year, that's how long it took us. He turns down many people because they don't fit his criteria, and is quite involved in the pups' lives after they go to their new homes.
mak, just because an application asks if you rent or if you have a yard doesn't mean you'll be denied if you answer the questions a certain way.
the shelter where i adopted my dog asks both those questions (and btw i think the application was 1 or 2 pages). i know for a fact that they adopt to renters who have their landlord's permission and they adopt to people without yards. as i mentioned, we have a yard but it's not fenced, and i stated that on our application. it didn't even come up as an issue when we applied for sadie.
mak, just because an application asks if you rent or if you have a yard doesn't mean you'll be denied if you answer the questions a certain way.
the shelter where i adopted my dog asks both those questions. i know for a fact that they adopt to renters who have their landlord's permission and they adopt to people without yards. as i mentioned, we have a yard but it's not fenced, and i stated that on our application. it didn't even come up as an issue when we applied for sadie.
Both of the shelters I volunteered in were in Jersey. One of these was the biggest one in the state, with over 200 dogs at any given time. They used that question to weed out applicants and would throw out the application if someone did not live in a house with a yard. Yea, these are just 2 shelters, but between them, housed a huge portion of homeless dogs in the state.
I don't think shelters should ask these "do you have/yes/no" questions on the application then.
I think a truly serious individual would agree to be interviewed and answer or explain the yard/working/whatever question/issue they had in person. Then the shelter people would make a decision. It is such a case-by-case thing...
It is the application that scares people from adopting from shelters, not the posts on this forum.
I was briefly interviewed once when I wanted to adopt one Maltese and ended up adopting two. They lived with me until they passed, a very happy life, they were very loved and well-cared for. Along with the one I already had, they were my three graces.
I had no fenced-in yard (this is just one reasonable item, there are many other crazy ones that shelters ask for!) or could meet all criteria, but as they had no crazy application I was encouraged to apply in person and we were a great match. This is what should be done, imo.
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.
When I am looking to rescue a dog, I am not going to be very particular where that dog comes from. They way I see it, every dog that is not already owned is in need of rescue. I figure those dogs already in the pound are in more urgent need of rescue, so I always begin there. If I am looking for a particular breed in the past I would contact breed-specific shelters, but not any more. From now on, if I cannot find what I am looking for at the pound, I will pick up a dog being sold in parking lots, a pet store, or on Craig's list.
They lived with me until they passed, a very happy life, they were very loved and well-cared for. Along with the one I already had, they were my three graces. 
