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.
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.
I would have informed PC's breeder that I am interested in adopting a dog, not starting an intimate relationship with the breeder. I would allow a one-time initial site visit and that is it. If he showed up on my property after that, he would be trespassing and might find his posterior filled with rocksalt as a result. Nor would I wait over a year for a dog I want to rescue. That tells me that the dog is not even born yet and therefore not in need of being rescued.
There are plenty of dogs in need of rescue, mixed-breed and pure-breed, older dogs and puppies alike. The last thing I would want is a dog bred specifically for me. I would much rather save one that is already in need.
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.
Very well said, I couldn't agree more. If someone has owned and cared for a dog before, a brief conversation about food, exercise, vet expenses, and behavior issues will tell you whether that individual would be a loving, caring dog owner. A one-time initial site visit will also confirm or repudiate what you talked about. If they are a renter, the only thing the shelter should be concerned about is whether or not the landlord will allow the dog on their property.
And you brought up another good point, both of the shelters where I volunteered immediately disqualified you if you worked full-time. I have friends that volunteer in shelters and rescues all over the country. Every single one of these places will not adopt to you if you work full-time outside of the home and I hear that cited as a huge reason to avoid adoption.
That is just nuts. I work full-time, in addition I commute two hours every day. So my dogs only have each other for companionship for 10 hours a day, 5 days a week. By the way, that is exactly why I have two dogs, so they can keep each other company while I am working. When I get home we play together outside rain or shine and then go for a walk in the woods. During the weekends, my dogs are always with me.
i'm just saying, *every single time* adoption comes up in any context, people feel compelled to share their negative impressions of rescues and shelters (and generally give the impression that all shelters and rescues are the same as the ones they had negative experiences with). i just don't get it. this thread had very little to do with the pros and cons of adopting, but it seems like the mere mention of the word "shelter" brings out the same old gripes.
i'm certainly not accusing anyone of making anything up, but there is a hell of a lot of generalizing going on.
and glitch's very first post on this subject, the one you're all implicitly (in some cases explicitly) agreeing with, posits that buying from a puppy mill is better than adopting from a shelter. he even scoffs at the idea of a reputable breeder. but he's trashing shelters so everyone piles on.
This thread began because people were demonizing puppy mills and pet stores, hence the title of the thread "Outlawing the sale of animals in pet stores." As if shelters were trying to become a monopoly on who can or cannot own a dog and want to eliminate all competition. My point was that as long as shelters exist, there will be puppy-mills, backyard breeders, and pet stores to fill a need that many shelters are obviously unwilling to fill.
If shelters did such a marvelous job at placing dogs in homes, there would be no demand for puppies or other dogs from puppy-mills, backyard breeders, or pet stores. The very fact that these places do exist, and apparently in large numbers, tells me shelters are not doing their job because people who want pets are not able to get them from shelters so they get them elsewhere.
do you really think the first thing most people think of when they want to get a pet is a shelter? i can guarantee you that is not the case.
like i said elsewhere, there are many, many reasons people buy pets from stores over shelters. i'm willing to bet the difficulty of adopting from a shelter is nowhere near the most common reason. the number one reason is probably that it just doesn't occur to people to go to a shelter. you get stereos from the stereo store, and you get pets from the pet store.
the idea that the movement to shut down puppy mills and bybs is just a ploy by shelters to eliminate competition for pet sales is patently ludicrous. and the idea that puppy mills and bybs exist BECAUSE (some) shelters have stringent adoption policies is just laughable. really, the reverse is true - bybs and puppy mills selling animals to whoever can pay for them is the main cause behind the pet overpopulation problem, which is why we have shelters.
i love this underlying theme in your posting that shelters are pure evil, run by evil people with evil intentions, just because you didn't like the application one or two shelters near you had.
do you really think the first thing most people think of when they want to get a pet is a shelter?
No. If they want to rescue a dog, the first thing they probably think of is the pound. If they can find a puppy or an adult dog at the pound they want, they will be saving its life. If they can't find what they are looking for at the pound, or want a breed specific dog, then they probably think of shelters or a breeder next.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groar
like i said elsewhere, there are many, many reasons people buy pets from stores over shelters. i'm willing to bet the difficulty of adopting from a shelter is nowhere near the most common reason. the number one reason is probably that it just doesn't occur to people to go to a shelter. you get stereos from the stereo store, and you get pets from the pet store.
I'm willing to bet that you are wrong. Nobody wants to visit a shelter that is more invasive than an IRS agent, and certainly no one wants to start up an intimate relationship with a shelter or breeder just to obtain a family dog. They don't have to submit to this indignity if they buy their dog from a pet store, the back of a pick-up truck in a parking lot, or on Craig's list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groar
the idea that the movement to shut down puppy mills and bybs is just a ploy by shelters to eliminate competition for pet sales is patently ludicrous. and the idea that puppy mills and bybs exist BECAUSE (some) shelters have stringent adoption policies is just laughable.
The more shelters tighten their grip on who can own a dog and who cannot, the more puppy mills and backyard breeders will flourish. It is no different than government's ever increasing taxation of tobacco, they are creating more and more blackmarkets.
I would have informed PC's breeder that I am interested in adopting a dog, not starting an intimate relationship with the breeder. I would allow a one-time initial site visit and that is it. If he showed up on my property after that, he would be trespassing and might find his posterior filled with rocksalt as a result. Nor would I wait over a year for a dog I want to rescue. That tells me that the dog is not even born yet and therefore not in need of being rescued.
There are plenty of dogs in need of rescue, mixed-breed and pure-breed, older dogs and puppies alike. The last thing I would want is a dog bred specifically for me. I would much rather save one that is already in need.
We weren't interested in adopting or rescuing a Bulldog, we had a specific breed in mind and after contacting several Bulldog rescues, were told that if we want a healthy one, to contact the Bulldog Club of America for a list of breeder referrals. As I stated before, the President of the Bulldog rescue in this area openly admits that healthy Bulldogs don't need to be rescued and pointed us in the right direction to find a reputable breeder. You are not going to find a healthy Bulldog puppy in rescue, just not going to happen. Unlike other breeds, these dogs are very overbred and the ones that end up in rescue due so because of extensive health/temperament issues and the people just can't afford them.
We lived in NJ at the time and knew we'd be moving to San Diego in about a year. We found one in San Diego and contacted him over a year before we knew we wanted the dog. It wasn't a spur of the moment decision, we knew it would be at least one year before we were ready to bring him home due to the cross-country move. Once he had a list of people, he planned to breed. That's how reputable breeders work, they have waiting lists for people and don't blindly breed. We got him at a time that was perfect for us. We moved to San Diego in October and PC came home a month after that. He was born in August. And we are the ones who went to visit the breeder, not the other way around. In fact, he lives 5 minutes away and PC sees him and his dad all the time. We like that relationship and have a happy, healthy dog as a result of doing extensive research. We wouldn't have done it any other way and would gladly wait another year if it meant the dog was just like PC. He's healthy, has a great personality and just a joy to be around.
No. If they want to rescue a dog, the first thing they probably think of is the pound. If they can find a puppy or an adult dog at the pound they want, they will be saving its life. If they can't find what they are looking for at the pound, or want a breed specific dog, then they probably think of shelters or a breeder next.
um, "the pound" is a kind of shelter. what do you think a shelter is? how is it distinguished from a pound? i think most people, when they refer to shelters, include pounds that make any kind of effort to adopt in that category. in pittsburgh, animal control mainly feeds into the SHELTER where i adopted my dog, and to a lesser extent into the two other shelters. there is no city pound here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
I'm willing to bet that you are wrong. Nobody wants to visit a shelter that is more invasive than an IRS agent, and certainly no one wants to start up an intimate relationship with a shelter or breeder just to obtain a family dog. They don't have to submit to this indignity if they buy their dog from a pet store, the back of a pick-up truck in a parking lot, or on Craig's list.
none of that means that the reason most people go to a pet store rather than a shelter means that they know of and want to avoid these things. and again, you speak as if all shelters and rescues have these kinds of policies. i know for a fact that you are wrong about that, because my personal experience tells me otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
The more shelters tighten their grip on who can own a dog and who cannot, the more puppy mills and backyard breeders will flourish. It is no different than government's ever increasing taxation of tobacco, they are creating more and more blackmarkets.
another assertion based on the assumption that most people try to rescue before they buy. i doubt there's any way to prove it definitively, and i'm sure we'll never agree, but i seriously doubt this is the case.
in pittsburgh, there are 3 major shelters. the one where i adopted is in the middle in terms of ease of adoption. one is a bit more stringent and one is a bit less. none of them actually performs home visits except in special cases and none of them asks for detailed financial information from potential adopters. none of them requires a fenced yard or a person at home 24/7. adoption fees are low. there are also a ton of rescues with varying levels of scrutiny given to adopters. there is an adoption option for everyone here. but there are still pet stores and bybs doing a healthy business, and the two open door shelters still have to euthanize for space sometimes. why is that? shouldn't everyone just be rescuing in a city where it's so easy to adopt? what exactly are the evil shelters doing wrong in pittsburgh?
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.
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. 
