jdarling Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 I found THIS video on CNN. I apologize if someone has already posted it. There's two issues here. 1. A pet store rescuing dogs from the shelter and then re-selling them. I haven't taken the time to process this yet, or investigate the ins and outs of what this particular pet store is doing, but something isn't sitting right with me. I wonder how much they are tacking on to the price of the pup over and above what it cost them to get the pup from the shelter. Also ... what about the idea of other pet stores doing this ... is it a good idea? What are the pros and cons of such a practice, etc.? 2. Caesar keeps mentioning this "superficial" relationship with pretty (i.e. purebred) dogs. I do not agree with him here at all. While yes, people may fall in love with a dog superficially ... but it doesn't take long to get attached to it, normally, no matter what it looks like. But he's a public figure ... so he must be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 2. Caesar keeps mentioning this "superficial" relationship with pretty (i.e. purebred) dogs. I do not agree with him here at all. While yes, people may fall in love with a dog superficially ... but it doesn't take long to get attached to it, normally, no matter what it looks like. But he's a public figure ... so he must be right. Since I don't follow him at all, I haven't heard this before. What exactly does he mean by that? What contexts does he say that in? "Superficial" as opposed to what, exactly? What does he think people should not be doing that's supposedly "superficial"? What does he think they should be doing instead? I run across a lot of his devotees among clients and fellow students, so I definitely appreciate an heads up on this one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 I don't follow him, but I would guess what he means is that people are taking superficial things into account when getting a dog (which I think we already knew) and that potential puppy/dog buyers probably use the pure breed, whatever breed that is, as a status symbol (superficial reason), when for many people's purposes (family pet to be left to its own devices much of the time) a mutt from the shelter would be just as (if not more) suitable. That's completely my take on things, but I do agree with it. Why do many people want a border collie? For the superficial reason that they're "the world's smartest dog." Why do many people want the traditional protection type breeds? Because they present a certain image. Why do people want PWDs? Because the President has one. And so on. All superficial reasons.... Why did I get my first dog, when I didn't even want a male? Well, because he was cute as he!!--a pretty superficial reason if ever there was one (of course he's a mixed breed). Of course people fall in love with the dogs they get (in general), but I think what he's trying to say is that the reasons people are drawn to certain pure breeds are largely superficial ones. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackson's mom Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 I found THIS video on CNN. I apologize if someone has already posted it. There's two issues here. 1. A pet store rescuing dogs from the shelter and then re-selling them. I haven't taken the time to process this yet, or investigate the ins and outs of what this particular pet store is doing, but something isn't sitting right with me. I wonder how much they are tacking on to the price of the pup over and above what it cost them to get the pup from the shelter. Also ... what about the idea of other pet stores doing this ... is it a good idea? What are the pros and cons of such a practice, etc.? 2. Caesar keeps mentioning this "superficial" relationship with pretty (i.e. purebred) dogs. I do not agree with him here at all. While yes, people may fall in love with a dog superficially ... but it doesn't take long to get attached to it, normally, no matter what it looks like. But he's a public figure ... so he must be right. This topic happens to be my biggest pet peeve (no pun intended). We have a very active Humane Society on our County. Dogs are in and out within a week and it's a blessing to see these dogs go to families that want them. In addition, the HS is filled with purebred dogs! At first I thought it was just our economy -- everyone bought a purebred dog and then realized they couldn't care for them. I actually saw a pair of Portuguese Water Dogs in there -- my husband wanted to adopt them, but I was unsure and the next day they were gone. Adopted by a rescue group. As time went on we noticed more purebreds coming in and more leaving through rescue groups. (we spend way too much time there) BUT here's the kicker -- why is a rescue group better than the Humane Society? Now I know you are all grumbling about what an idiot I am because you know very respectable rescue groups that help the breed tremendously and find good homes that fit the dogs they represent. BUT NOT ALL RESCUE GROUPS ARE THE SAME! My Dex came from the Humane Society but not in the traditional way that Jack was adopted: a friend of mine went to the Humane Society to see Dex (an advertised Springer Spaniel); she fell in love (you all know how that is!); she went back on a Saturday to adopt him and a 'rescue' representative was there to adopt. They would not let my friend have the dog even though she was already approved by the Humane Society. Since the young lady was 'in love' with Dex she asked where the dog would be going and how she could find him. They gave her a phone number. It was to a rescue group where the 'director' told my friend that she could have the dog as a 'foster' if she would bail him out of the kennel that they had put him in! My friend went to the 'kennel' which was over 50 miles away and paid to have the dog released. When they got home the 'director' told her that she had to take him to the vet (and pay that bill too) and then she owed the rescue group $250! She paid $100 for the kennel, $200 for the vet and $250 to the rescue. A week later she found out her youngest son had autism. He was having problems adjusting to the dog and was freaking out. She called the rescue and asked if someone could pick up the dog and foster him until she either got her son settled down or they could find another home. THE RESCUE TOLD HER TO TAKE THE DOG TO THE VET AND HAVE HIM PUT DOWN!!!!! My young friend called me crying! I told her I would immediately pick up the dog. When I got there I noticed one thing right off -- THIS WASN'T A SPRINGER SPANIEL -- Dex is a Brittany! But how would the rescue know when they never met him except to send one of their minions to taxi him to a kennel! To end this story, I told my young friend to lie and do whatever she had to so that the rescue would back off -- it didn't take much -- she never told the rescue that she gave the dog to me AND the rescue already got their money. Dex is a beautiful Brittany spaniel (not Springer), he is less than 1 year old (not 4 years old) and he hasn't got a mean bone in his body. We love him very much. I only look forward to the day that my friend can bring over her young son to see Dex and realize how loving he is. It doesn't surprise me that pet stores have caught on to this scam. It's a great source of inventory. I am sure that the rescue that didn't rescue Dex has done this many times. It makes me so mad just to think about it...........S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 Jodi, In answer to your first question (and now having watched the video), on the surface I don't think it's a bad thing. If a store is going to be selling dogs, why not have them be shelter dogs vs. puppy mill dogs? Doing so serves several purposes: 1. It frees up more room in the shelter for other dogs coming in (pretty much a never ending cycle anyway). 2. It shifts demand away from puppy mill pups/dogs, which can't be a bad thing. 3. It opens up another avenue for unwanted dogs to find homes. 4. If, as I noted below under "cons" the pet store is giving some of the $$ back to the shelter, then the shelter is in a better position to help more dogs (since we know many shelters suffer from lack of adequate funding). Cons that I can think of: 1. It may take the most adoptable dogs out of the shelter, leaving the shelter with the less adoptable dogs (although with shelters always in need of space, I don't know if this is a huge problem, and it seems as long as dogs are finding good homes, it could be a win-win situation). 2. It may take adoption revenue away from the shelter (unless there's some sort of profit-sharing going on that allows some part of the sale of the dogs to be reinvested in the shelter system). The biggest thing for me is that if a pet store must sell dogs, better that those dogs be dogs already here and in need of homes than creating additional demand for the millers to fill. As for Cesar's comments on superficiality, I think what he's trying to say is that people would do better to try to connect with *individual dogs*, no matter what the breed (or non-breed) instead of making choices based solely on superficial reasons, because the former is a better guarantee of the human wanting to make a *relationship* with a dog, rather than making a statement with a particular breed. Of course there's nothing wrong with wanting a purebred dog, if your reasons for wanting one actually take the *dog* into account and not just your (the generic you) own personal desires to make a statement. ETA: I think we could be inviting some confusion by using the term "rescue." In this case, it seems the dogs are being taken from shelters and resold at a pet store. This is not a breed rescue going out and reselling dogs. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody & Duchess Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 Some shelters show their dogs at a big box pet store - I volunteer at one that does. From what I understand, the store does it as a service - the shelter charges the same amount for the dog as if you came to the shelter directly. The same adoption protocal is also supposed to be followed. I can not do this portion of the volunteer work - I have to face the fact that I would be a lot tougher on adopting families ( I would want the "perfect" family for each dog). I watched the video - I don't know if this is the situation presented. The superficial thing? All I know is that when we get puppies in ( which the shelter get a lot) they go fast. They are so cute and cuddly.There was a BC mix - I hated to see him adopted. He was really high energy and was adopted by a family with young kids. Love BC ( of course) and was worried that the adopters really did not know what they were in for. I would have loved to have that dog - wish I was rich and could rescue them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaisingRiver Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 When I fostered my first dog, it was for a BC rescue, the dog wasn't even a BC and probably not a mix, but that's what the rescue was told when they were sent to be picked up and they didn't want to turn the pair away. The dog was advertised on the BC rescue site (PNW) but I could think about was that it wasn't getting the visibility it would then if it had been in a shelter. Maybe it's good for special breeds (high energy, etc) like a BC to have a rescue to place them to appropriate families, or dogs that have some issues or need training, but for a regularly behaving dog, etc, the more exposure to match it to its owner the better, right? Most dogs do just fine with regular quazi-dog folks, esp lab types which run rampant in shelters. 'Selling' dogs in pet stores that come from a shelter? I agree with Julie, sounds great if done right. Exposure! I totally agree with superficial. Describes me to a T. I am what I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenajo Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 PetSmart does the same thing here. They "adopt" out dozens each weekend, with the fees payable to the Banfield clinic in the store. Sometimes people drop off the pets for them to "adopt" out (puppies and kittens), others are found strays by the staff. There are also "adopt"athons in the store every weekend. $75, $50 gets you an unaltered pet with no vaccines and no health check that you are supposed to bring back for a partial refund when you get it speutered. No home check, no references, nothing at all required but cash, check, or credit card. The word "adopt" is a glossover for "profit" for more rescues than we would want to admit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Coyote Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 My pet peeve with rescue operations is that a whole lot of good owners can't qualify. Sometimes its because they have children, some times they don't have a fenced yard. I don't know all of the reasons but seems like I hear from a lot of really nice people who would be good owners that can't get dogs from rescue. I got all of my rescues from my vet. People brought in border collies to be put down. He had them sign the dogs over to him and then he would call me. Selling rescues? If it gets them a good forever home I surely don't have a problem with it. And having people pay for the dogs probably helps to find them better homes. People who are willing to pay a fee are a lot more likely to take care of their dogs - I think? Although I have seen some really expensive dogs just get treated like trash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 TC, There have been a number of threads in the past regarding rescues and their adoption rules. You may want to do a search and read some of them. It's a rescue's perogative to place whatever restrictions they want on dogs they want to place. Do some potentially great owners get accidentally weeded out that way? Sure, but then the rescue's goal is to find the best possible forever home for every dog it places, and if they feel that homes with children under 5 or unfenced yards or two workaholic adults aren't suitable for their dogs, that's their choice. As you noted, there are other places to get dogs, and not all rescues have the same adoption rules. And not all rules are hard and fast, and determinations may be made on an individual basis. A determined person can find what he/she wants, and if they persist beyond a few obstacles "thrown in their way" by rescues, then perhaps their commitment will be even greater. Yes, some people have bad experiences with rescues, but I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority have had great experiences. I know I did. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Coyote Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 TC,There have been a number of threads in the past regarding rescues and their adoption rules. You may want to do a search and read some of them. It's a rescue's perogative to place whatever restrictions they want on dogs they want to place. Do some potentially great owners get accidentally weeded out that way? Sure, but then the rescue's goal is to find the best possible forever home for every dog it places, and if they feel that homes with children under 5 or unfenced yards or two workaholic adults aren't suitable for their dogs, that's their choice. As you noted, there are other places to get dogs, and not all rescues have the same adoption rules. And not all rules are hard and fast, and determinations may be made on an individual basis. A determined person can find what he/she wants, and if they persist beyond a few obstacles "thrown in their way" by rescues, then perhaps their commitment will be even greater. Yes, some people have bad experiences with rescues, but I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority have had great experiences. I know I did. J. And the rescue people do not know these personally like I do. I just happen to know that they would be great owners and would take good care of the dog. And they can go to the shelters to get their dogs. There are several big shelters here in KC area. I know that when my Ellie is gone I will be trying to find another rescue. My last 4 were all rescues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 TC, What I was trying to say is that making blanket statements about rescues not adopting to people you know personally to be good owners is a pet peeve of many of the rescuers on this forum, who certainly don't appreciate--and I can't blame them--people who aren't themselves doing rescue (as in taking dogs out of shelters, fostering, screening potential adopters, paying for vet care, agonizing over potential forever homes, etc.) coming along and sniping at them because the sniper feels that they or someone they know has been "wronged" by a rescue. The fact that you "happen to know" something is meaningless to most rescues. They are the ones dealing with the heartbreak of abandoned dogs on a constant basis. Sorry to use this cliche, but it's quite appropos: "Until you've walked a mile in their shoes..." If you really want to start a heated discussion, go ahead and start a thread on your thoughts on rescue and how they are unfair to perfectly good potential adopters. You'll get a (figurative) earful. ETA: Here are two threads from last year that will give you a better idea of how rescuers feel about their rules and other people's perceptions of those rules: thread 1 thread 2 J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 We are currently fostering a Chihuahua that was rescued from a Detroit pound. We have had Rico for a couple months now looking for the right home. Here is what we have learned since we got him. 1) He is very fear aggressive with strangers, but settles in quickly and has shown no signs of aggression to either DW or myself after about day 3 or 4. This means he WILL try to bite you for the first couple days. After that, he is fine. 2) He absolutely DOES NOT like small (under about 10 years old) kids. 3) If you are out with him he will stay in sight, but turn your back and he is off wandering. Some recall, but selective. 4) He must be crated if left alone. Seems to forget housebreaking at those times. 5) He is prone to separation anxiety and howls for the first 30 minutes or so when left alone either in the crate or out. 6) He likes to play with Tasha, Chloe and Bernie (hates Nisa and feeling is mutual), but if they start to play back a little too rough he becomes Psycho Chihuahua biting at them and is basically a wuss. (Another reason for the crate) Its a good thing those 3 are so easy going or they would kill him in a heartbeat. So with all we know about him, we know he would be a great dog for the right owner and a disaster (and potential lawsuit for our rescue and death for the dog) for the wrong one. This is why we interview, do home checks and so on to make sure the placement is right and if we are overly cautious or turn someone down it is because of our concern for the dog. Because the rescue we work with is all breed, including a LOT of Pitties from the North end of Flint, the liability insurance is ridiculous. We have had people that we adopted to drop off dogs that did not work out at the Genessee pound, which is a death sentence, rather than calling to take the dog back. It seems that all to often when we "bend" the rules a bit, it comes back to bite us in the ass and it is always the dog that suffers along with the reputation of the rescue which makes it all that much harder to place additional dogs. Sorry if peoples feelings get a bit mussed sometimes, but we do not really make all these rules just to piss people off. Most of them are based on judgement and experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theshine Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Jackson's mom, Shiner came to me in a similar way, but the rescue in my case is a very good one...I saw him online and went to see and possibly adopt him (he was listed as an aussie), but he was on hold for a rescue group and they wouldn't release him to me. I found out which rescue and emailed them...they responded very quickly and were actually confused as to why the shelter would not let me adopt him...they were supposed to pull him if he was not adopted by his euth date, but they did not know he was being held and potential adopters were being turned away. Long story short, the rescue, ARPH, were super nice about everything, knew that I wanted him and offered to pull him and adopt him out to me, provided I let them neuter and vet him him and pay their adoption fee (which was a reasonable $200). He was home with me five days later. It was crazy because he was pulled from a shelter 5 minutes from my house, driven 2 hours to be neutered and fostered for 3 days, then I had to drive 2 hours to get him and bring him right back where he started , but the end result was good...I blame the shelter policy and not the rescue, as they told me all purebred dogs that end up there are automatically go to rescue if there is one for their breed, before being offered to the public....the reason they said was they don't have $ to process every dog that comes in...I guess they pass off the ones they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 TC,What I was trying to say is that making blanket statements about rescues not adopting to people you know personally to be good owners is a pet peeve of many of the rescuers on this forum, who certainly don't appreciate--and I can't blame them--people who aren't themselves doing rescue (as in taking dogs out of shelters, fostering, screening potential adopters, paying for vet care, agonizing over potential forever homes, etc.) coming along and sniping at them because the sniper feels that they or someone they know has been "wronged" by a rescue. The fact that you "happen to know" something is meaningless to most rescues. They are the ones dealing with the heartbreak of abandoned dogs on a constant basis. Sorry to use this cliche, but it's quite appropos: "Until you've walked a mile in their shoes..." If you really want to start a heated discussion, go ahead and start a thread on your thoughts on rescue and how they are unfair to perfectly good potential adopters. You'll get a (figurative) earful. ETA: Here are two threads from last year that will give you a better idea of how rescuers feel about their rules and other people's perceptions of those rules: thread 1 thread 2 J. I would certainly not meet the criteria of many excellent rescues, and I say, "Hooray!" to those that have stringent screenings because they are doing it for the sake of the dogs. I also would be very leery of rescues that don't have sound and discriminating standards for potential homes, although I do think that home evaluations and similar assessments could/might help "make exceptions" when a case truly merits them. We had a so-called "rescue" in our county - they would take in unwanted pets of all kinds, and held "adoption days" at the next county's big box pet store. Well, too bad they were a sham because they were taking in pets, possibly breeding them as well, and selling pups and other animals to just about anyone with the cash in hand, no questions asked. Many "adopters" found their new pets to be ill and/or infested with parasites. When they were raided and the animals taken to shelters and fosters, they were found to have parvo as well as parasites, and other issues of bad health and management. My hat is off to those who do legitimate rescue, and take placing those deserving animals in homes very seriously, even if many of them would turn us down as potential adopters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 To bring this back on topic (since I helped take it off topic), I'd sure like to hear what others think about the practice of pet stores taking dogs from shelters and reselling them. That's probably more interesting than rescue-bashing (or defending) anyway.... J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson Crazies Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 So I'm assuming that the "rescues" are coming to the pet stores already altered? If that's the case I think it certainly bears consideration. Sure, they're not going to be screening homes like a Rescue would, but neither do most shelters. It seems like taking dogs from shelters and reselling them should cut down on buying from puppy mills, and THAT is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aljones Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Our local shelter here in Bowling Green, Kentucky, has collaborated with a local businesswoman to create a variation on this theme: she has created a retail store in a busy strip mall that supports the efforts of the shelter. Not the same model as the CNN piece (or at least what I could tell from the video), but a similar idea of taking adoptable pets to a "pet store" setting in a higher-traffic area. So far, it seems to be very successful. The few times I have stopped in, after dinner at a neigboring restaurant, there have been several people looking at the available pets and buying pet supplies. And I know the shelter appreciates having another location to feature its animals. For anyone interested, here's the store's website (its name stands for "RecycledPets"): RePets. The "About Us" link explains more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 I went to the "Repets" website - it seems like they are doing a very admirable job. As for the original question, if it is done right and done for the sake of the animals, and enabling more animals to find good and forever homes, along with people finding suitable pets and companions, shouldn't it be a good thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaryP Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 I'm staying away from the rescue debate, since it always seems to go no where. But, as far as the selling of dogs from a shelter, I guess it would depend on how it was handled. I should say that I haven't watched the video, yet, so I am just commenting on the concept. First, I'd want to know what my advantage is to getting the dog from the pet store versus just adopting straight from the shelter. If the pet store is taking the dogs and vetting them fully, including s/n, then I think that is a good thing and would be worth my getting the dog from the pet store versus the shelter. A lot of shelters don't have the resources to provide even the most basic vet care. So, the pet store would certainly be helping out the shelter by providing services that the shelter cannot. Plus, it would be freeing up some space for the shelter. Doing this right, though, would mean that the pet store would have to hold the dogs for at least two weeks to be sure that they didn't have any illness. I would not want to see the pet store just pull the dog one day and turn around and sell it the next day. If they are going to sell it, they need to be providing some service on top of just changing the location of the adoption of the unwanted dog. Next, I'd want to see some sort of education component to the practice. I'd want them to have info about why dogs (and other animals, for that matter) end up in shelters and the dire situation that many shelters are in. I'd like to see info about the evils of puppy mills and indiscriminate breeding for profit. I'd like to see information about what is responsible pet ownership. Last, I would like them to have some sort of screening/interview process. I don't think it does the dogs a lot of good if they are just placed with the first person who is willing to plunk down the cash. I'm not saying that they have to have the more stringent type of screening/interview process that many rescues have, but I'd like to see them use some intelligent reasoning when deciding who to sell the dog to. I guess the bottom line for me is that I would want to know that this was something a little more than just a money-making scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 You know, I don't know about other regions, but in many rural areas where I've lived, the animal shelter is often in a very out-of-the-way place, and if that's the case, giving shelter animals a presence in areas where people are more likely to congregate could be a good thing for getting dogs out of shelters and into homes. I agree with Mary that it doesn't make sense if the animals aren't receiving veterinary care or haven't been neutered prior to sale. Here's an interesting discussion of welfare laws relating to animals in pet stores. The laws vary widely and seem to be pretty minimal for the most part. Sad. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debbie Meier Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 To bring this back on topic (since I helped take it off topic), I'd sure like to hear what others think about the practice of pet stores taking dogs from shelters and reselling them. That's probably more interesting than rescue-bashing (or defending) anyway.... J. I'm not sure yet, it will be interesting to see what it evolves into over time. It might stay a great resource to rehome dogs or it might make it acceptable again for people to see dogs in stores and eventually lead back to the beginning, pure bred puppies (or psudo purebred) due to the customer demand. Over the course of time how will you be able to tell which are bringing in rescues and which are offering low priced puppies that were "rescued" from a breeder that bred for the purpose of supplying them rescue pups of a particular breed. Pros and cons.... Your dealing with retailers, bottom lines, profits and human nature. Hopefully all the new start ups will have a catch in them to prevent the program from moving off task. I just don't know, but at this point if it decreases the numbers being produced at the mills or by byb's that supply the gatherers I would have to say yeah! Oh, another thing, will it/could it spawn more psudo rescues? There's always someone looking to cash in on retail markets. Deb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aljones Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 You know, I don't know about other regions, but in many rural areas where I've lived, the animal shelter is often in a very out-of-the-way place, and if that's the case, giving shelter animals a presence in areas where people are more likely to congregate could be a good thing for getting dogs out of shelters and into homes. Exactly--our shelter here is between the river and the interstate, in an industrial drive-by district. Plus, I know several people who just flat-out refuse to go there ("it's so sad--I couldn't possibly look at all those animals in need" or fear of disease). The RePets store, on the other hand, is in a strip mall with several popular restaurants and shops--it is also open in the evenings when people are visiting those restaurants. As a result, it seems to attract a lot of walk-ins who are browsing around, including (which seems strange to me) people who won't set foot in the shelter. Even if they're not actually adopting a pet, they are (I hope) being educated a little more about pet overpopulation and becoming more aware of adoption as a future option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrRipley Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 I wish I had more information about how this store is "selling" rescue dogs. Is it very clear that the dogs being sold are from shelters, and is the cost of the dog referred to as an "adoption fee"? Are people truly aware that these are rescue dogs they are purchasing? Is there any screening system in place? The problem is that the vast majority of the population is completely ignorant about dogs. I worry that people see dogs being "sold" in a store, and therefore they think that every mixed breed dog in a store is a "rescue" and they wind up buying a puppy mill dog from a different pet store. Plenty of pet stores sell mixed breed dogs (even ones besides the labradoodles, yorkiepoos, etc). I knew a girl who claimed that no rescue would allow her to adopt because she lived alone in an apartment, but wanted a dog so bad she bought a GSD/schnauzer mix from a pet store. Yeah right, I'm sure there was NO shelter ANYWHERE around where she could find a dog!? I am not a Cesar Millan fan, and his heart is in the right place here, and *I* understand what he means. But I wish he was rambling less about how wanting a purebred dog is "superficial" and getting a mutt isn't. Joe Public acually listens to this guy but I don't think they are gonna "get" his message. I don't give ignorant people much credit. Cesar should have put more emphasis on ADOPTION, period. And that it's possible to adopt even purebred dogs. I really, really like the idea of adoption centers in strip malls and more "approachable" locations than shelters. I just want at least some type of screening process and it to be clear that people are "adopting" the dog and not "buying." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 I'm not sure yet, it will be interesting to see what it evolves into over time. It might stay a great resource to rehome dogs or it might make it acceptable again for people to see dogs in stores and eventually lead back to the beginning, pure bred puppies (or psudo purebred) due to the customer demand. Over the course of time how will you be able to tell which are bringing in rescues and which are offering low priced puppies that were "rescued" from a breeder that bred for the purpose of supplying them rescue pups of a particular breed. Pros and cons.... Your dealing with retailers, bottom lines, profits and human nature. Hopefully all the new start ups will have a catch in them to prevent the program from moving off task. I just don't know, but at this point if it decreases the numbers being produced at the mills or by byb's that supply the gatherers I would have to say yeah! Oh, another thing, will it/could it spawn more psudo rescues? There's always someone looking to cash in on retail markets. Deb Good questions! I think it will, like every other thing, boil down to individual/corporate ethics. Someone will do it well and for the right reasons (and, if they can make a reasonable profit off of something good, fine with me) and someone else will take advantage and milk the concept no matter who or what it hurts. I guess that leads us all back to the idea that everyone needs to be educated, needs to do their research, and try as best they can to help pass on the good word about responsible pet acquisition and ownership. If nothing is tried because no one can guarantee that someone won't misuse a concept, then we will never make any progress. PS - The shelters in our counties tend to be out-of-the-way and often not appealing but they do the best they can on very limited budgets and resources. But, the local pet shops (supply shops only, those that sell small pets or rehome cats, or big box) get lots of customers and through-traffic, and I am sure would provide many more opportunities for animals to be seen by the pet-loving public than the shelters may be able to provide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.