Independently really is no different other than no one can tell her what to do or not to do when it comes to placing the dog. She places them in loving forever homes, and keeps the dogs until she finds a home she feels in her heart is the right one.
I worked with numerous rescues until I moved- Amazing Aussies, The Lost Paws, ASHRA, HALO, and I volunteered several hours a week at Animal Control. I was extremely involved in placement and the adoption events- through my job, in a bit over a year, I personally placed about 40 pits/pit mixes from TLP in forever homes after spending several hours of my shift training them and working out their quirks, and offered FREE at home training if the dogs ever had a behavior that worried the owners, so that the dogs would not have to suffer through another rejection. When I left, I even ensured that a friend who was also a trainer would be the contact if any of the dogs still had issues arise since I'd be gone, and the people still have my number and e-mail for anything that just needs clairfying or advice.
I really would say I have a grasp on rescue work. It's practically what I dedicated my life to until we moved to Colorado. And right now, I just have too much going on with myself to get back into it.
The ultimate goal of anyone doing this kind of work is to find the dog that perfect family that will forever be theirs, and to set them up for success. However, not each dog, not each family, has the same "requirements" and should be shunned for not having a yard, having a fence, not having owned ___ breed, not having a big family, we were 18 when we got Koda, 21 when we got Rogue, etc.
I have not had a yard or a fence in the past. My husband and I have both worked full time, all day jobs. We were brand new owners to huskies when we got Koda. It's just us. And there is NO ONE here or anywhere that could EVER tell me I am not providing my dogs with adequate care, exercise, and love. Ever. I went above and beyond what a vast majority people do for their dogs.

And FYI, no one is hurting my feelings by untreating me for not conforming to what they think is right. I wouldn't have even noticed if it wasn't pointed out, and it has zero effect on my ego.

I think working independently has a difference than volunteering for a rescue that is owned and run by someone else. The volunteers could have the same views and opinions as we, on the forum, do. But the owner may not, and trying to convince that person otherwise may not be easy when in the end they have the final say.

Some rescues are more open, and some may have been around long enough to have specific guidelines that must be met before they even call that applicant because they have been in certain situations one too many times.

It is unfortunate that there are rescues that are very strict because good homes are overlooked. But then there are rescues that are too lenient that cause good pets that deserve a good home to be bounced around.

Like Tori said, there needs to be a balance.

I also do believe that if someone wants to adopt a pet, they will have patience, and won't give up after being denied from the first rescue/shelter they apply to.

Heather! wrote:

The ultimate goal of anyone doing this kind of work is to find the dog that perfect family that will forever be theirs, and to set them up for success. However, not each dog, not each family, has the same "requirements" and should be shunned for not having a yard, having a fence, not having owned ___ breed, not having a big family, we were 18 when we got Koda, 21 when we got Rogue, etc.
I have not had a yard or a fence in the past. My husband and I have both worked full time, all day jobs. We were brand new owners to huskies when we got Koda. It's just us. And there is NO ONE here or anywhere that could EVER tell me I am not providing my dogs with adequate care, exercise, and love. Ever. I went above and beyond what a vast majority people do for their dogs.

This was my whole point not to say rescues were bad and too picky because to be honest I don't have a clue what rescues do. And I'm not going to pretend I do. My point was solely that the man being picky IMO was a little over the top. Almost everyone here seems to work and there is not a single person on this forum who doesn't do everything for their dogs. No we all aren't perfect with a family and a white picket fence but my husky has a great life. The point is we don't have to be married and not working to provide a perfect home for our furbabies. That is what I don't understand about that man and his post. Christopher and I go to school, live in an apartment, and are first time husky owners but I think we provide Anna with a great home. Heck our lives revolve around Anna. I think the perfect family doesn't have to be everything this man wants. There are plenty of people willing to give his dog and many other dogs a great home even if they don't fit the ideal certain people have.

Obviously I have personally witnessed here a rescue who's owner I don't agree with but share a similar outlook with their volunteers (Jenn and you). But the thing is, even if someone has been at it for years, you just cannot lump people into one big category and not analyze each situation individually. Like if I ended up pursuing an adoption application on that pie I wanted when we first moved here... if I got denied for living in an apartment or anything of that sort, I would have raised hell against them because it's flat out offensive, especially when I know more about dog handling than the owner. The puppy I got as a rehome in that "less than desirable situation" is one of the best dogs I've ever met and constantly receiving praise for what a good dog she is.
There will be plenty of people who don't fit all the qualifications that would be FANTASTIC dog owners and made a dog the happiest it's ever been. There's also potential adopters who fit every qualification but would be terrible homes. I know lots of people with money, a big house, a big fenced tall yard, someone home a lot, have owned dogs, yadda yadda yadda, and I would rather shoot myself than place a dog with them. A lot of the worst clients I worked with fit all these qualifications. It really depends on the person.


Not to mention, the person you place a dog with could always be a completely different person than who they are portraying themselves as. It's never a 100% safe bet unless you personally know the person.

I'm lucky that aside from Amazing Aussies (which is more understable for being strict.. these dogs are deaf/blind and a lot of people take interest in them because it's a white merle dog with bi eyes/blue eyes and don't recognize the extra commitment some of our dogs had), all the rescues I worked with were very open minded and assessed each dog and potential adopter separately. People got denied for specific reasons- like having no yard/fence or being gone a lot- but it was strictly because they could not provide an alternative that would make up for it, ie were not willing to provide long walks, runs, or dog park time, and were not willing to have a dog walker/daycare/stop by on lunch when gone for 12 hours a day.

Sounds like the moral of this thread is don't judge a book by its cover. For as much as we shouldn't judge potential adopters without getting to know them, we shouldn't be judging other rescuers without getting to know them.

cmanding wrote:

I think working independently has a difference than volunteering for a rescue that is owned and run by someone else. The volunteers could have the same views and opinions as we, on the forum, do. But the owner may not, and trying to convince that person otherwise may not be easy when in the end they have the final say.

So it's not the same as volunteering? I may have no one to report to and make my own rules but the responsibilities fall solely on myself. As does everything else about each dog I place. While you may think its not the same, I think it justifies my opinion as valid just as much as anyone volunteering for a "real" rescue. I see every angle and live every angle every time I place a dog. If myself, as one person, can make an effort to get to know people... I feel so can a larger rescue with more man power.

I love volunteering for my local rescue BUT I wasn't able to adopt from them. When we first talked about a dog, a pit was definitely an option. In fact, there was a girl at the rescue that we would've loved to have brought home. But the rescue here requires a 6ft fence for all pits/pit mixes. And I live in base housing, where there isn't a fence that tall (besides the fact that base housing doesn't allow pits, but I didn't know that at first.) And they do home inspections so we wouldn't have passed. It was sad because this girl was gorgeous and super sweet. So in the end, we went with Karli, but I still volunteer at the rescue. The pups there need love too.

back to topic


http://tallahassee.craigslist.org/pet/3436687875.html

A fee and asking no breeders, So I am guessing they aren't fixed yet? I prefer pics though and of course more info than they gave.

Yea I emailed and asked for some pics and about their general health and spay or neuter status. In my response to the last CL ad I asked a lot of questions. Never got a response, prolly came off a little strong.

Yeah, I usually start with, I am interested but would like some more information. Don't want to go all crazy on them, might be a legit bad issue they need to rehome the dogs. I got my latest one Sophie because of bad reasons, the lady cried when I called and also when I came to see her. So there are some legit ones out there, but alot look at it for the $$ sadly, not all though.

arooroomom wrote:

cmanding wrote:

I think working independently has a difference than volunteering for a rescue that is owned and run by someone else. The volunteers could have the same views and opinions as we, on the forum, do. But the owner may not, and trying to convince that person otherwise may not be easy when in the end they have the final say.

So it's not the same as volunteering? I may have no one to report to and make my own rules but the responsibilities fall solely on myself. As does everything else about each dog I place. While you may think its not the same, I think it justifies my opinion as valid just as much as anyone volunteering for a "real" rescue. I see every angle and live every angle every time I place a dog. If myself, as one person, can make an effort to get to know people... I feel so can a larger rescue with more man power.

Yes, you do everything as does a rescue - I didn't say you didn't. The difference is, when you see a potential good home, you can place the dog in that home. When I see a potential good home, it's an opinion and it can still be denied. I have fought for some and won and would think there would be more trust, but on some things, the rescue I volunteer for, will not budge. It started to get to the point where it seemed that every rescue we had 'needed' to be placed in a home with a companion dog. I tried to fight for an application where they guy worked from home and his work was open to bringing their pets to work so the husky wouldn't be left alone for very long. This guy is an avid runner and hiker. Still, his application was denied because there was no companion dog and he lived in an apartment.

my removed as I misunderstood something earlier in thread. Sorry folks

tr3mor wrote:

Ok folks, I have no experience with any of this, but enough is enough. We're kinda beating a dead horse here now...

The main thing to take from this would be, no matter how the rescuer works, they are still working to protect the animals they love, but if some guidelines could be set through some national groups wouldn't this possibly help in the long run? so Instead of basically doing a point counter point here on the forum, why not work together and try and get some guidelines for everyone to follow? Or is that even possible?

just my

There is nothing wrong with healthy discussion where people present points and discuss them in a mature and rational manner. This is the type of discussion that I encourage here and hope to see.

Secondly, I'd have to disagree with your suggestion to go national with guidelines. I think that would make the problem exponentially worse. The whole point is that the issue isn't black and white (and we ALL agree on that). Guidelines and regulations ARE black and white. That's exactly the problem. Going nationally would only compound that. You can't make a national guideline for "get to know the family and make the best judgment."

Feel free to join in the discussion, but the staff monitors all threads and we will let members know when the discussion gets out of hand. Until then, happy posting

Just to shed light on some of the why's, and it's all about risk to the animal. These reasons are the ones given when animals are turned into the shelter or back to the rescue.

The top 10 reasons that owners give up their dogs by National Council on Pet Population & Study:

Moving
Landlord issues
Cost of pet maintenance
No time for pet
Inadequate facilities
Too many pets in home
Pet illness(es)
Personal problems
Biting
No homes for litter mates

Apartment -
Leases change, owners tend to move more often, most apartment leases are not dog friendly especially to dogs that can be very destructive like huskies.

Fences -
Huskies love to roam. It's not about having a fence for exercise aspect as much is it is about having to take a dog out on a leash 3 or more times a day to potty for their entire life. This increases dramatically the opportunity for escape.

Military -
Again tend to move around and always have to possibility of deployment.

Age -
Young couples / singles are dynamic in lifestyle. They can have children, move for work.

Financial stability -
Pet ownership expenses, vet care, emergency funds, etc.

Work Schedule -
Time for pet, separation anxiety, chances of destructive behavior.

I agree it would be nice to be able to take things on more an individual basis. Just like insurance companies or pretty more any other aspect in society where risk is involved it's just not the way it works. Minimizing risk means not taking chances. Sure risk can never be eliminated but over time patterns can be found that help minimize risk and increase success.

Most rescues a don't come close to recouping the money invested in an animal from the adoption fees alone and each time an animal is returned there is a cost both financial and emotionally on the animal.

Since I personally am having a hard time with tone on the forum lately with topics regarding adoption, rescue and pet over population issues I will be MIA for a while. Not doubting that most everyone here loves THEIR dogs but for me it goes far beyond to those dogs that need but don't have love.

Brian, no one here disagrees with you or misunderstands the reasoning behind all of those criteria. However, people are still going to feel that taking the time to get to know people might help weed out some "less than perfect" criteria, but MORE than perfect owners.

Take the number of people on this forum who live in "less than ideal" circumstances. Look at ME. While I don't disregard your point of view at all... when I see the same rescue with the same TWELVE DOGS after FOUR YEARS... I start to question whether sometimes those "criteria" are more harm than good when I was clearly a good home for both Koda and Hailey.

You also have to consider that just because each person should be gotten to know before a decision is made, that also doesn't mean that we should ACCEPT every person we get to know. In many cases it just might mean the same decision, but at least we were sure based on things other than "they don't have a fence." And in some cases, you'll find a Heather, or a Tori, or another one of our forum members that would have made a loving FOREVER commitment to a rescue dog but were denied.

I guess I only care about my dogs and have never invested my heart and soul into trying to give a better life to other dogs who are not as fortunate as my own. It's apparent by all those years I spent all my free time caught up doing rescue work.

No one is sitting here demeaning you, so I wish you would stop making it look like everyone who disagrees with your outlook is ignorant to the world of rescue- because I'm not. Kristina's not. And Tori obviously has personally went through a struggle with a rescue when she would have made a dog very happy and has every right to harbor the feelings towards rescues that discriminate, EVEN if there is some reason behind those requirements.


See ya.

Yoo whoo all you red and white fans!

http://buffalo.craigslist.org/pet/3437033816.html

Those statistics toward younger people owning a dog drive me nuts! I've lived in the same place for 3 years and only moved once when it was just Embry. I don't have a fenced yard and my dogs don't ever get out. Just because I'm young doesn't mean I don't have a savings account, pet insurance and emergency credit cards. It doesn't mean that my job status is unstable, I've worked at the same place for 6 years. Just because I work and am a college student doesn't mean that my boyfriend isn't home with them ALL day Monday-Thursday. When my boyfriend and I took a break last summer, none of the dogs were rehomed, Embry went with me and Zoey was with me also 75% of the time, the other 25% she was with him.

Ugh. /rant.

Not a husky but

http://dayton.craigslist.org/pet/3439365161.html

Haha but what in the heck IS that? XD

I have no idea

No pics on that one Len, got my hopes up on a red one..oh well. My SIL sent me a link to a red one today here locally, I got online and it was flagged and unable to be seen.

MayaAndSophie wrote:

Not a husky but

http://dayton.craigslist.org/pet/3439365161.html

That is totally a troll post, lmao.

MayaAndSophie wrote:

Not a husky but

http://dayton.craigslist.org/pet/3439365161.html

wtf is that?? Stubby hahaha