Remote ranch home for BC denied by Rescue groups

[Pippin's person]

Becca, I think you hit the nail on the head and my experience of doing rescue was exactly as you describe too--rescue took every second I had to the detriment of many things, most especially my own dogs.

 

I couldn't do it anymore and am always impressed with people who can stick it out for years.

 

At the time I was doing it (about three years ago), the people who pushed the hardest with the most unreasonable seeming demands were the people wanting us to take their dog into rescue and who often got really mad when they heard that the one open foster home we had was taking a dog that was about to be put down. I had more than one person tell me that "they'd just have to take their dog to the kill shelter, then." I used to think people expected the Border Collie Rescue Wagon to be ever at the ready.

 

Now, reading this topic on these boards every time it comes up, I am literally shocked at the vitriol that some (ETA: mattinky, I'm talking about you) aim when they don't get the service they expect and the dog they want in the time they expect it. Seriously, who do you think you are talking to people like that and denigrating the crushing work they volunteer to do?

 

I don't think you're an old fogey, Becca--just calling it like you see it.

[Malvie]

That wasn't CBCR was it Nancy? We always prided ourselves on considering homes on a case-by-case basis when I was there. But, the foster homes had the last say in where a dog was placed so for an individual dog sometimes one of us might say, "No, we're looking for a home with a fenced yard."

 

Rescues develop with rules based on the experiences of the people who set them up - sometimes a particular hobby horse, or a way they were taught themselves was ideal for adoptive homes, or sometimes based on what resources are available.

 

I've been a rescuer, and a farmer, at the same time. I added in homeschooling mother, and attempted to train for and compete in, three or four different "dog sports." My group's resources were spread very thin, and I was at the time, the one who had the most room for "just one more." And there always was. So guess what I did all the time? For a couple of years, I let rescue eat every moment of time I had - spending hours on the phone, on the net, driving hours to home visits and adoption meetups and of course always the dog transports. I killed three vehicles, and my own dogs hung around getting old waiting for their turn.

 

Never again. Especially now I see this kind of attitude every time this comes up. When I first started, people understood (with a very few exceptions) that rescue wasn't a canine Walmart. Now one meets with ire and aspersions at every reasonable requirement and necessary delay.

 

I'm sort of wondering what the change is, and suspect it may be the instant gratification of the internet at work. The "shopping mall" of photos and desciptions perhaps imply that there are shelves of dogs and eager sales people waiting to execute whim of clientele. I don't know. Anyway, I sense a lot more hostility out there than there used to be.

 

I sound like an old fogey.

 

 

I knew I liked you! Always liked your posts, anyway, and this one is no exception.

[kajarrel]

I am literally shocked at the vitriol that some aim when they don't get the service they expect and the dog they want in the time they expect it.

 

I really didn't sense any vitriol from the OP . . . just confusion and frustration. I also didn't sense that she was seeking "instant gratification."

 

Kim

[Pippin's person]

I really didn't sense any vitriol from the OP . . . just confusion and frustration. I also didn't sense that she was seeking "instant gratification."

 

Kim

 

You're right--I was really responding to mattinky (and other similar kinds of posts from similar past threads). I've amended my comment to make it clearer who I was directing that to.

[ejano]

Back in the late 1990s, when we were looking for a BC mix to adopt, I contacted several rescue groups.

 

Our yard is not fenced. We live on an acre lot, in a neighborhood of 81 houses on such lots. We have an 8-acre common land win a pond of about 2 acres. No real neighborhood association, just a rather informal group who volunteer to pay what is needed (taxes of $1 a year), mow when needed, pick up trash, and feed the ducks.

 

I can't see how we could fence our yard without cutting down many of the trees that give us our privacy. We have a few feet out around the house that we have to mow. The rest is the woods that were here before our house.

 

 

Fergie has never been in our yard without us. She has never even tried to leave our yard - although she may step over the line behind the wood pile. But only by inches. She fetches the newspaper on our way in from our before-breakfast walk. She carries the mail in every afternoon. But that is with one of us.

 

I lost my dearest and bestest friend in the world because we thought our unfenced five acre back lot would be enough for any dog as our female dog never strays. I distinctly remember Ken explaining to the rescue folks that we diligently walked Ladybug on a long lead around the property until she knew the boundaries and that we would do the same with Scotty, which we did.

 

Each dog is different and while one dog might respect the rules, another will not respect the boundaries at all, and one, like Scotty will pretend to obey then always be glancing over the next hill....also, one dog might obey everyone and another give the most response to just one person. We lost Scotty because while I was recovering from a knee replacement, my husband was taking them outside in the morning and Scotty followed Ladybug into the woods for their morning squirrel chase but instead of running up the hill with her, he made his way down the hilll behind the garage and into the road after (we think) some pungent road kill all the while my husband was standing on the back porch calling him, thinking he'd followed Ladybug up the hill in their usual pattern. It only took a second. Ken heard the car slow,apparently seeing him on the edge of the road, then speed up -- as the driver did so, Scotty lunged for the wheel and a fender hit him. He was killed instantly. The driver never even looked back . Because I'd worked so much with him, and Ladybug clearly defined my husband as "her" property, Scotty gave his loyalty and obedience to me. If I'd been out there calling him, he would have immediately turned around and not made it to the road and I live with that guilt with each tear I shed for him.

 

If you live within sight of a road, before you get another dog, either from rescue or a breeder, get a fence. We did. Oh yeah, we were checked out by the breeder when we put in our names for a pup even before the litter was born! When she saw our fence and the back hill she offered us a couple of sheep as well .

 

Liz

[nancy]

Becca, it was 13 years ago, so, thanks to my increasing "cuteness", I can't remember what rescue groups I called. All that I could find anywhere near Durham, NC.

 

What bothered me was that none, except for a group out of Benson (I think) called ARF, that also helped teen mothers, was even willing to come see our place. No fence meant no adoption. I think they were also upset that I knew we would be spending a week in Florida with DH's folks within 2 months of when I called. I was interested in a pup old enough to board then or one we could adopt when we returned. And I was willing to wait up to a year, if that's what it took to find the right dog for us. DH's folks depended on our regular visit. But the rescues thought that adopting a dog should make us willing to cancel our visit. I thought that kind of odd. If I were willing to blow off elderly parents, how would that make me a better dog owner?

 

That said, keep in mind that, when anyone asks me about getting a border collie, or about getting any dog, I refer them to a rescue group or a local shelter.

[Ooky]

If you live within sight of a road, before you get another dog, either from rescue or a breeder, get a fence.

 

Or, just never put your dog outside unsupervised. (Although, rescues have every right to have any rule they need or want to have, even "automatic fails", IMO).

 

This thread is timely to me b/c a good friend is looking at BC rescue right now. She is sure they won't accept her because she's never had a dog, and particularly she's never had a border collie. But, it reminds me how much I like this person because she really puts no anger, "why me??", "why are they like this???" into her discussions. She doesn't question their right to deny her. She's sort of crazy, but the way she sees it, these dogs are so great and cute EVERYONE must want them. She's saddened they "will never take her" (her words) but only because she wants a rescue border collie so bad, and again, it's like she wants to get into a really good college and is not mad they won't accept her, but sad she can't meet the standards.

 

I keep telling her to turn in an application anyway - I know she'd make a fantastic forever home for the right BC and most importantly, she is NOT denied yet. Her and her fiance are buying a house right now, and when they are in it, I'll push harder. I honestly don't know IF a rescue would turn down someone categorically for those reasons; the only indication I got from breed-specific rescues is that they wouldn't likely adopt me a puppy with no dog or border collie experience. Again, IMO, that's a pretty smart rule to have, even if it didn't apply to me. But how would a rescue know?

 

I feel a little responsible for my friend- I think she'd be looking at aussies or labs if it weren't for me and Odin. But talking to her has shown me that even when a person isn't full of vitriol and really, really offensive selfishness (like I read in mattinky's post, which, btw, WHOA), they often don't understand a LOT about rescue. What it is, how it works, why things are the way they are, how it is different than shelters, and --sort of most confusingly (to me) -- that you are not officially denied until you turn in a complete application (which may include a home visit) and are then, well, officially denied.

[Dal & Mad's Mom]

I absolutely understand how you feel. It would be easier to adopt a child. When my dear sweet Roxie died a couple years ago I thought I would lose my mind I was so upset over losing her. I knew the best thing for me to do was get another dog and I too thought that a rescue would be the way to go. Like you, I was short on money at the time and also thought it would be great to rescue a dog and give it a good home. After 3 or 4 months of trying to deal with these people I gave up and just bought my current puppy, Kate, from a local breeder that I know.

 

I fully understand that rescues want to be sure that the dogs find a good home where they will be well cared for. But... they get way too personal with the questions and want way too much information, like pictures of the inside and outside of your home. Sorry, but pictures of my home are nobody's business, this is'nt Nazi Germany we're living in. I used to feel really sorry for the rescue services but I don't anymore after trying to deal with a few of them.

 

Just fwiw, Kate has a great life here, she has lots of space to run and play, she's spoiled rotten, gets tons of love, attention and play time with me, goes everywhere I go in the truck and basically leads the life of Riley

 

A friend of mine recently wanted a couple of kittens for her little girl so she went to a local shelter that had tons of kittens. She said they made her feel like a terrorist being interogated by the FBI, would not let her take any kittens that day and said they'd review her application and get back with her. A week later they called her back and told her that they thought she was unfit to have any kittens since they would be staying outside. Shes lives on a big farm and they would have had a great life, I guess it's better to just put them to sleep....

 

I say just look around and find a puppy that you can afford like I did and stop wasting your time dealing with rescues - my experiences with them were all bad. P*ss on 'em.

 

 

Since I routinely rescue from Ky and know that bc are 50 dollars at the flea market on Sunday's I cant even imagine why you would consider asking a rescue to adopt from them. Let alone some shelters charge only 5 dollars to adopt without so much as a drivers license. If price was an issue I'm sure you weren't looking to rescue. Sound more like an ax to grind to me.

 

We bring 70% of our dogs out of Ky and most are in poor condition. They shelter we take from regularly responds to dogs who have fallen out of trucks along the highway and are left to lie there. Dog turned loose in parking lots when they are no longer cute fuzzy pups. The list goes on and on.

 

As for the op are you willing to drive the many miles to adopt the dog? That is a huge issue often people in remote areas expect rescues can drop an unintroduced dog in your lap on your door step. If I had a dime for all the rude people who wont understand why I'm not like "joes shipping" and send them the dog they picked 5 states away.

[ThunderHill]

Hi, Sheridan. I sure hope you and your future dog(s) hook up soon. It sounds like you're the kind who will keep looking till you find what you need. And it sounds like your future canine companion(s) will be very lucky to land with you. It'll happen, hang in there.

 

Meanwhile, I just wanted to express some sympathy for your position. I come from an urban/suburban background. About 6-7 years ago (depending on when I measure from) I moved to a location that isn't remote at all, compared to where you are. I'm in the Confused Middle Atlantic, about 40 minutes south of Harrisburg, PA.

 

But (although surburban sprawl is already breathing down my neck) -- I'm now in a rural area.

 

Rural.

 

It's given me some serious culture shock from time to time. And it just amazes me how much People (From the Burbs) Don't Get It. They think they do, but they just don't get how fundamental some of the day-to-day differences are.

 

What it means, NOT to have all the urban/suburban conveniences in easy reach. Not just being on a well, and a septic sytem, and having informally maintained roads with no curbs or shoulders. Not just having no option for public natural gas. No street lights. No cable. No local fire and rescue. No police closer than the state barracks (about an hour's drive away). Even where I work, a mere 27 miles away, people are bewildered to learn these things are just not available where I live. (At least it's only 20-25 minutes to the grocery store.)

 

And then there's the internet. People just can't seem to process that I CANNOT just hop on the internet to surf and fool around with all the cool multi-media stuff that's out there.

 

I would love to. But as close as I am to the city, I don't have cable (of any kind), or any type of high-speed internet access, except for possibly satellite (which isn't particularly fast or secure, and is definitely not affordable) or a wireless phone modem/card (not affordable by itself right now, plus I would also have to spring for updated computer equipment). So I'm stuck with a local dial-up service (which keeps threatening to close its local node and go to a long-distance telephone connection), which at least is cheap but so far has never exceeded 26.4 kbps, is usually slower, and often cuts out. (My equipment can handle higher speeds; there just isn't any higher speed available.) Half the time my system times out before complete loading of graphics on some web page -- even with the image quality set to almost illegible. I'd love to watch some of those YouTube videos which sound so wonderful, but it's simply not possible. I can't afford to upgrade my computer (for the forseeable future) so I have to work with what I have. Slow. Simple. Not a lot of bells and whistles, program-wise. If I can't make some electronic interface work (which happens fairly often) and written forms are at stake, I have to request plain old-fashioned paper through the US mail. The WHAT? These days, reverting to actual pieces of paper seems to be almost as unthinkable as adopting a dog to a person without a fence.

 

And no, there isn't a local library I can go to, if I want to surf more freely. There used to be a tiny library a couple of towns over which was open a few hours a couple of days a week. (While I'm at work. Oops.) I don't know if they even had a public computer; but I'm pretty sure they are closed down right now, thanks to the current economy.

 

There is no local Animal Control. Regulation (except for agricultural and environmental issues) is minimal and enforcement of the county animal laws (except by shotgun or .22) is virtually non-existent. I can explain that *before* I rant about my neighbor's Weimeraners showing up on my front doorstep and hollering at me and peeing on my house; and people *still* earnestly recommend that I report it to Animal Control. Over and over.

 

Hello?

 

There are a variety of public animal "shelters" around, but they're not particularly easy to get to in person. (I'm single and I work full time in an office, as well as running a small farmette with four dogs and 46 sheep.) Even if I had hours and hours to spare in the evenings to wait for their web pages to load, they can't keep their internet information up to date, and don't even try to post all their dogs. (For understandable reasons.) If you call them, and are actually able to get through to a live human being (not always possible), the volunteers mean well, but they'll tell you *any* dog is a high percentage of the breed of your preference, even if they know better, just because they're so desperate to get Fido, any Fido, out of there and into some kind of home. I'm sympathetic to what drives that, but I've taken half days off work before, only to find out that the dog they want to show me is actually some kind of pit mix with skin and skeletal problems and no socialization. I don't get that much time off work, and on weekends I'm usually running farm errands when I'm not doing essential chores. So even with shelters relatively nearby, making the rounds in person would be virtually impossible for me, if I were trying to find another dog right now.

 

And I don't live in a spot that's actually all that remote.

 

As for rescues, the best are really good, there are some wonderful and caring folk involved, and my hat is off to them and the fine work they do under tough circumstances. But my own personal experiences (and I've fostered and worked with two metropolitan purebred rescues, and two any-and-all-breed rescues in the past, so I have personal knowledge about the behind-the-scenes mechanics) have been that there are lots more well-intentioned rescues out there than well-functioning ones. After my last experience, I won't get involved with rescue any more (except for extremely selective and limited instances) because of rescue politics and rescue group dysfunction. It's easy to say from a distance and the far side of a computer screen, "You should go to rescue." It's hard to actually connect with a good, thoughtful, functional rescue group -- even in an area as populous as the middle Atlantic region. Especially if you are interested in one specific breed of dog, and one particular type of that dog. If it's that daunting here, I can't imagine what it's like out there in the southwest, as isolated as where Sheridan is living.

 

I understand that it isn't easy for rescue groups, or for shelters, and that the kind of dog that Sheridan is looking for probably won't pop up in a hurry. (On the other hand, though, it might.) But I feel the frustration, too. When you carefully explain your circumstances, and clearly state what you've done and tried, and people say they understand, and then follow up with off-target rote answers which make it clear they haven't actually processed what you've said, it's hard to feel like you're ever going to get anywhere.

 

So anyway, Sheridan, good luck to you out there. May you and your new companion(s) find each other soon.

 

Liz S in South Central PA

(practically a metropolis and yet still bass ackwards)

[Laurie S.]

Having just recently gone through the adoption process with ABCR, I would like to pay them a very high compliment on the work they do and efforts they go through to put the dogs in the right home. I did the online application in at the end of March. I was going away on a 10-day road trip in mid-April so I figured that would give them time to process the application. I actually was contacted the next day and had a home visit a few days later. While on the road trip, I took a good look at the dogs on the website and picked several favorites. One was gone before I got back, but the first weekend in May, I arranged to see two dogs in different cities. I saw Cheyenne second, and knew she was the perfect dog for me. All together, it probably was about six weeks from application to adoption and I had no problem with that timeline. The dogs need to go to the best home for them, and if it takes time, it takes time. It's worth it in the end for both the dog and the new owner.

[mattinky]

Seriously, who do you think you are talking to people like that and denigrating the crushing work they volunteer to do?

 

I don't think you're an old fogey, Becca--just calling it like you see it.

 

I'm sorry, I thought this was a public forum, I did'nt know it was wrong to have an honest opinion about something. Maybe I'm not politically correct or in the "click" here but I have just as much right to post my opinions here as you do don't I? On the contrary, I think it's great that folks rescue these wonderful animals but by the same token I think it's pure BS that Jane has to go through all this hassle to adopt a dog.

 

 

Since I routinely rescue from Ky and know that bc are 50 dollars at the flea market on Sunday's I cant even imagine why you would consider asking a rescue to adopt from them. Let alone some shelters charge only 5 dollars to adopt without so much as a drivers license. If price was an issue I'm sure you weren't looking to rescue. Sound more like an ax to grind to me.

 

We bring 70% of our dogs out of Ky and most are in poor condition. They shelter we take from regularly responds to dogs who have fallen out of trucks along the highway and are left to lie there. Dog turned loose in parking lots when they are no longer cute fuzzy pups. The list goes on and on.

 

So are you saying that since I live in KY (btw, I just live here, I was'nt born or raised here) that I don't take good care of my dog? I assure that I'm not included in the 70% you speak of and I've yet to see any $50 BCs for sale at flea markets here. And no, I don't have an axe to grind with anyone here. I just voiced my opinion about the adoption process and got slammed for it. I'm terribly sorry that I don't fit in with the status quo and the "holier than thous" here. I was just trying to tell Jane that she was'nt alone with her frustration with the adoption process.

 

 

 

I rescued my first border Collie in 1986, the folks at the shelter told me of the special needs of Border Collies and asked me if I was sure if she was the type of dog I wanted. I was also told if I decided I did'nt like her I could bring her back, no questions asked. I paid the fees and took her home, no hassle whatsoever. Fast forward 23 years and things have sure changed. I see/hear commercial after commercial on television, radio, newspapers and magazines begging people to adopt a pet but when they try to do so they get slammed with the over-intrusive adoption process.

 

The reason I looked to rescue another BC was twofold, none of the local breeders I knew had any puppies at the time and the ones I looked at online were all priced at $750 - $1000 or more. Does it make me ineligible or unqualified to own a Border Collie because I can't afford one that costs $1500? I was more than willing to pay up to $500 to rescue a dog and travel a long distance as well if need be. And I also thought it would be a great thing to do, but when I saw the applications wanting to know my personal finances, proof that I owned my home, refrences, proof or employment, etc... I said no way, my personal life is nobody's business but mine. Over the years I've bought several BCs from breeders and not one, not one has ever asked me for any personal information. And don't tell me that all breeders care about is the money, the people I got Kate from were really nice folks and they too told me I could bring her back anytime no questions asked, we email each other all the time and I send them pics of Kate every few weeks so they can see her progress as she grows up.

 

While I applaude the efforts to find these dogs a great home, the restrictive, and often outrageous and demanding policies make it hard to see that they want to do the best by these animals. These agencies claim to have the best of the animal in mind but many times their overly strict rules cost the dog a great home. You can’t judge a person based on some of things that these places do. Just because somone does not wish to have thier lives turned inside out by an animal adoption agency means they do not have the time for a pet…. Maybe some people who are perfectly capable and loving enough to take care of a pet do not wish to have perfect strangers pick through their personal lives and finances then decide for them whether they are “qualified” to own a pet. Some of us do value our privacy, and I feel the adoption process is overly intusive. I know people lie, but by the same token I'm sure that there are some people that want to adopt a dog and have impeccable credentials but don't treat their pets as they should, even though they look like the perfect pet owners to the adoption agencies. And just because some folks maybe don't have unlimited finances and a "perfect" home for a dog does'nt mean the dog would'nt have a good life or will be mistreated.

[mbc1963]

I completely empathize with the rescuers. It's thankless, grinding, emotional work, and y'all have every right to do whatever you need to do for your dogs. It's terrible that you have to put up with meanness in return.

 

I also empathize with people who live way out in rural areas. Can't imagine have no library and no reliable Internet.

 

But, given the remoteness and difficulty communicating... maybe rescue doesn't make sense as a way to get a dog.

 

I walked into a local shelter to get Buddy, after seeing his photo online. I just as well could have walked in cold. Within an hour, he was in the car, coming home with me. In the commotion, I even forgot to write a check, and had to send one along later. I knew nothing about BCs (and didn't know that Buddy was one), knew nothing about his reactivity, and was in for a lot of big surprises. Coupla weeks later, I was kind of thinking, "Wow. They just let this dog come home with anyone. I wonder if they knew how weird he was!"

 

Certainly, the shelter method has its drawbacks. I've gotten Buddy to a more normal place after four years, but if he'd gone to the wrong home, it could have been a disaster. The "quick pick" method certainly worked for me and my dog, and I know it's worked for all my siblings and their dogs. It's much quicker and easier than going through rescue. It would mean driving from the remote location to a shelter, but that's gotta be quicker than waiting for a rescue to drive to the remote location.

 

If it's a working dog that's needed, well... I don't know how any rescue or shelter could be expected to have proven working dogs available, unless a foster happened to live on a sheep farm. So getting an untrained dog from anywhere - rescue, shelter, or breeder - is a game of chance, right?

 

Mary

[juliepoudrier]

I also empathize with people who live way out in rural areas. Can't imagine have no library and no reliable Internet.

 

But, given the remoteness and difficulty communicating... maybe rescue doesn't make sense as a way to get a dog.

I was thinking the same thing. Until I moved 2 years ago, I too was stuck with dial-up service (imagine how fun that is when you work in publishing and work from home and need to be able to transmit large files). Video and large graphics were simply not doable. I had no cell service where I lived. Heck, even my (land) phone lines were intermittent (can you say frustrating?), often going out when it rained. Ironically at that time, I lived half an hour from where I worked in north Durham. I now live in what would probably be considered an even more rural area in many respects, but thanks to a local phone company I have DSL. I was at the library in town the other day and wanted to renew a book (and so hadn't brought it with me). I was told there was a request for the book and so it couldn't be renewed. So could I please drop the book in the book drop that evening? I explained that trips "into town" weren't made on a daily basis, and I certainly wouldn't be making a special trip just to return a book to the library! So I accepted the responsibility for the late book, and when I did make my next trip to town, took the book and paid the late fees. After all, it's not their fault I choose to live where I do.

 

Yes, it is a different lifestyle. But it's one we choose, certainly knowing full well that there will be drawbacks, the main one being a lack of convenience for many things. I agree with Mary that the rescue system probably isn't Sheridan's best choice for finding a dog, unless she is willing and able to come off the mountain and do some of the legwork herself. And even then it might not work. And many shelters do have odd or inconvenient hours, as noted by Liz S. But if you (the general you) really want to adopt a dog, then I imagine you would take the time and make the arrangements with work to enable you to get to a shelter during business hours. We routinely do it for other stuff that needs doing--like going to the doctor, picking up a sick kid from school, taking a pet to the vet, meeting a repairman, etc.

 

I still think Sheridan's best choice--if she really needs a working dog--is to contact regional stockdog associations and find out if there are breeders of working dogs within a reasonable distance of her. I'm sure there are even folks on this forum that could point her to stockdog associations/working dog breeders in her "local" area. She might have to wait to get the sort of pup she wants, but even folks in more suburban/urban areas often have to wait for a pup from a particular breeding. If she's really just looking for a companion/watch dog, then I think her best bet is to take some time to find out when the local (whatever that means) shelters are open and make a trip and find a dog that appeals to her. JMO.

 

J.

[Sue R]

There are a lot of us here who, while perfectly capable of providing a loving, safe, and suitable home for a rescue dog, would still not "qualify" for one reason or another - job schedule, no fence, children, and so forth.

 

I believe that all rescues have the right and responsibility to set their own rules and restrictions. If someone doesn't like those rules or cannot meet them, they will need to seek an alternative source for a dog or pup. Even if they meet the criteria, that doesn't mean the right animal will come along in short order.

 

A photograph may capture your heart but it's only a momentary glimpse at a dog which may or may not give a good picture of what the dog is like (and likely won't as it generally won't convey personality, quirks, problems, and so on). It can be very risky to "fall in love with" a dog in a picture - it is only a picture, after all.

 

I hope Sheridan can find the right dog from a good source. I thank those who rescue because it is a hard job, time-consuming, resource-dependent, and emotionally draining - and, most of all, saves many dogs and places them in suitable, forever homes.

[kajarrel]

I believe that all rescues have the right and responsibility to set their own rules and restrictions.

 

I read similar statements time and time again and am uncomfortable with it.

 

I agree to a certain extent, but not completely. When organizations have 501 C3 status they have a responsibility to serve the public and this responsibility includes "listening" to their constituents . . . I know most rescuers are hardworking, good hearted people (as are most adopters, don't forget), but sometimes even good hearted people "get things wrong."

 

I worked in healthcare for quite a while (and now study businesses, and healthcare orgs in particular), and many times what health care workers THINK is best for their patients isn't necessarily so. We all, to a certain extent, get "locked into" thinking about things in certain ways and, consequently, can only really serve others well by LISTENING. Maybe the OP has a point . . . At least consider whether or not she does, and in doing so, you might be able to serve the DOGS better. Certainly all organizations have time, money and other constraints but when we get defensive, and stop listening and trying to improve, we miss opportunities to fulfill our mission better.

 

Kim

[PSmitty]

Yes, it is a different lifestyle. But it's one we choose, certainly knowing full well that there will be drawbacks, the main one being a lack of convenience for many things. I agree with Mary that the rescue system probably isn't Sheridan's best choice for finding a dog, unless she is willing and able to come off the mountain and do some of the legwork herself. And even then it might not work. And many shelters do have odd or inconvenient hours, as noted by Liz S. But if you (the general you) really want to adopt a dog, then I imagine you would take the time and make the arrangements with work to enable you to get to a shelter during business hours. We routinely do it for other stuff that needs doing--like going to the doctor, picking up a sick kid from school, taking a pet to the vet, meeting a repairman, etc.

 

I still think Sheridan's best choice--if she really needs a working dog--is to contact regional stockdog associations and find out if there are breeders of working dogs within a reasonable distance of her. I'm sure there are even folks on this forum that could point her to stockdog associations/working dog breeders in her "local" area. She might have to wait to get the sort of pup she wants, but even folks in more suburban/urban areas often have to wait for a pup from a particular breeding. If she's really just looking for a companion/watch dog, then I think her best bet is to take some time to find out when the local (whatever that means) shelters are open and make a trip and find a dog that appeals to her. JMO.

 

J.

 

Great points. I totally agree with both paragraphs above.

 

I don't even live in a remote area (exactly the opposite) and yet I still traveled 16 hours round trip for my last rescue dog. Worth every second of it, too.

[Caroline Reichard]

I'm sorry, I thought this was a public forum, I did'nt know it was wrong to have an honest opinion about something. Maybe I'm not politically correct or in the "click" here but I have just as much right to post my opinions here as you do don't I?

 

I know that Eileen doesn't want us to post about the style of other folks' posts (and very right she is, too), but my innate crankiness compels me to point out that when you enter a thread with a post whose parting words are "piss on 'em," and that the "them" that you're intending to shower with your urine are vocal, active memers of the Forum, the you have got expect some outrage.

 

I am not a member of the rescue community and sometimes they seem a bit overzealous to me, too, but when I consider that they have firsthand experience of dealing with abused and neglected animals, I sympathize with their point of view.

[elegy]

While I applaude the efforts to find these dogs a great home, the restrictive, and often outrageous and demanding policies make it hard to see that they want to do the best by these animals. These agencies claim to have the best of the animal in mind but many times their overly strict rules cost the dog a great home.

 

Huh. I have never adopted through a formal rescue (just shelters, one of which required a home check in order for me to adopt a pit bull, which I had no problem with, and another who rejected me initially because they don't adopt pit bulls outside of their county, but was responsive to a letter detailing why I wanted that dog specifically and was sent with a list of assorted contacts including trainers, coworkers, and neighbors) but to me their rules and policies, though I don't always agree with them, illustrate that they do indeed want to do the best by their animals. They have in their heads what the "perfect home" is, and while I may or may not agree, at least they care enough to try. I think, in many cases, their bottom line is that they want to place the dog once, in a home where he will be successful, and not have him bounce. I also think, in some cases, if they started being more flexible and thinking outside the box and working with people, they'd have a bigger selection of homes. But having worked briefly with a rat rescue, I understand the huge amount of time and energy and work responsibly placing animals in homes takes.

 

I have no problem opening my life to someone in order to prove myself a deserving owner. How else are they to know that I am a great home? I did it with the shelter, allowing an ACO into my home. I talked at length with the breeder I got Steve from, before she'd grant me one of her pups. I was incredibly nervous both times, fearing rejection, and I would have been upset if I'd been judged and found not worthy, but I'd have gotten up and gone out and looked for somebody whose ideas I better meshed with.

[eclare]

I read similar statements time and time again and am uncomfortable with it.

 

I agree to a certain extent, but not completely. When organizations have 501 C3 status they have a responsibility to serve the public and this responsibility includes "listening" to their constituents . . . I know most rescuers are hardworking, good hearted people (as are most adopters, don't forget), but sometimes even good hearted people "get things wrong."

 

I worked in healthcare for quite a while (and now study businesses, and healthcare orgs in particular), and many times what health care workers THINK is best for their patients isn't necessarily so. We all, to a certain extent, get "locked into" thinking about things in certain ways and, consequently, can only really serve others well by LISTENING. Maybe the OP has a point . . . At least consider whether or not she does, and in doing so, you might be able to serve the DOGS better. Certainly all organizations have time, money and other constraints but when we get defensive, and stop listening and trying to improve, we miss opportunities to fulfill our mission better.

 

Kim

 

While I'm always in favor of listening and learning, ultimately it is the rescuers who are responsible for matching their dogs up with the right people. There is no one right way to do this. Certainly good hearted people sometimes get things wrong, but I think most of the rules and regulations that rescue groups establish stem from past experiences where they have probably gotten things wrong before.

 

I work with an all breed rescue that is really nothing more than a reasonably well organized network of people communicating across the mid-atlantic region. We're actually a fairly large group, and each adoption counselor makes decisions somewhat autonomously. Some of the individuals work with a large number of dogs and have set rules because it allows them to make decisions more easily. Does this suck for a potential applicant who might otherwise be great but doesn't meet one of the set criteria established? Of course it does. But at the same time, it allows the rescuer to keep a streamlined system in place which makes the process more efficient.

 

Personally I only work with one or two dogs at a time, so I'm able to take time to talk to the adopters to figure out if certain red flags can be worked around. Today I'm adopting out a beagle mix to first time dog owners. A lot of the volunteers would have overlooked this couple because they had no dog experience and not much in the way of knowledge. But when I met with them they struck me as very responsible and eager to learn, as well as patient and willing to put in the work. At the same time, sometimes you get what seems like the perfect application, but when you talk to the person something just rubs you the wrong way.

 

What it comes down to is that everyone is just trying to do their best. People will always disagree about what the best is, and if you have problems with the way a rescue organization runs you can almost always find another organization with different policies - or heck, you can start your own! But organizations have policies for a reason and if you as an adopter don't or can't meet their criteria, please don't take it personally. Everyone is just trying to do right by the dogs.

[kajarrel]

Oh well . . . sigh.

 

Kim

[BustopherJones]

I don't have a dog in this fight (pardon the expression); I am not a rescuer, and the only dog I ever had that could be considered a rescue came from a local dog pound. I do, however, have experience in this argument. DW and I are oriented toward dogs with hard luck stories, and that need special love and care. Some time ago, a BC with special needs was listed by a local rescue organization; we had just lost our Missy, and wanted another dog in our home. I attempted to adopt that particular dog, only to be stopped by the paperwork and protocols involved. Like the OP, I vented about the topic on this board; and I received an education. The responses to my post ranged (as in the case of this thread) from the informative to the downright nasty. But what I better understood was the self-sacrifice of volunteers involved in these efforts, and their commitment to the dogs themselves. This quote by MaryP helped drive home what rescue is really about:

Rescue is not about first come, first served. It's about placing the dog in the best home, as the rescue sees fit… the rescue has to make judgments based on the application, references, home checks, interviews, etc. They have to weigh all the information and decide where the dog would best fit. It's not a slap in your face if they don't choose you. It just means that they thought another home was a better fit.

And this quote from phej illustrates the approach of fosters:

Our foster homes simply do their best to find a perfect home for each of our rescued dogs -- and yes, that means that sometimes, you will have to wait for the right match to come around even if you can provide a good home for a BC.

Ultimately, I came to the realization that my criticism of the rescue organization was unfair and unwarranted; and I gained a far greater appreciation for what is involved in rescue organizations.

 

In the end, we must sometimes accept the fact that the time cycle involved in adoption from rescue, constrained by limited resources and time, may not be in synch with the sense of urgency we feel in wanting a dog. There are therefore two alternatives: be patient and work through the process, or explore other alternatives (with perhaps less desirable results). Rescuers are deeply caring, loving, committed people who fill a role that most of the rest of us can neither fully appreciate, nor commit the time and/or resources required.

 

As for my fitness for a rescue dog...well, based on this response I received, I guess I am probably better off working through my vet or some other option:

I know at this point I'd turn him down for my rescues. My number 1 reason would be because these dogs have had enough trauma without getting with an owner with too much attitude to fill out a couple of pieces of paper.

[sweet_ceana]

And I also thought it would be a great thing to do, but when I saw the applications wanting to know my personal finances, proof that I owned my home, refrences, proof or employment, etc... I said no way, my personal life is nobody's business but mine.

 

This may have been the case with the rescues YOU went through. I am a volunteer for ABCR, but before that I was an adopter through ABCR who the OP listed specifically. I lived in an apartment when I adopted Poke. We obviously had no fence since we clearly didn't own a home. No one ever asked for the proof of my employemnt, finances, or references and I do not know of ABCR ever asking a potential adopter for any of these things. It is not fair to make a comment on a rescue's policies that you are unfirmiliar with. Each organization is different.

 

ETA: Kajarrel I am not quite sure I understand where you are coming from with this statement :

I agree to a certain extent, but not completely. When organizations have 501 C3 status they have a responsibility to serve the public and this responsibility includes "listening" to their constituents . . .

A constiuent is :

one who authorizes another to act as agent : PRINCIPAL

No one has voted for anyone, nor has anyone come to us and "authorized," us specifically to tackle this issue. Could you please elaborate on what you mean? I know you are refering to the duty of the non-profit tax status, but how does this apply to the OP's problem? Technically we are serving the public by pulling these dogs out of shelters and taking them into our own homes with no fee to tax payers. (As opposed to shelters that tax payers support.) We help keep dogs off the street and give them medical care. We nueter and spay dogs to bring down the population of stray dogs with our money and time. This is a basic way that rescues serve the community. I don't see how adoption screening has anything to do with civic responcibility. Rescues exist to help take the burden off the state and local governments in this way. Would you please elaborate?

[mattinky]

I know that Eileen doesn't want us to post about the style of other folks' posts (and very right she is, too), but my innate crankiness compels me to point out that when you enter a thread with a post whose parting words are "piss on 'em," and that the "them" that you're intending to shower with your urine are vocal, active memers of the Forum, the you have got expect some outrage.

 

I am not a member of the rescue community and sometimes they seem a bit overzealous to me, too, but when I consider that they have firsthand experience of dealing with abused and neglected animals, I sympathize with their point of view.

 

You're right, I should'nt have said piss on them, it was a very poor choice of words and I sincerely apologize to anyone that I offended. But I do feel like I have a valid gripe about adoption services, when I read about Jane's frustration it really hit home with me and I guess it made me a little "cranky" as well. Unlike the vast majority of people these days, I value my privacy DEARLY, or rather what little bit of it we have left, it's one of the cornerstones that this great country was founded upon.

[Ms.DaisyDuke]

I can't believe how much distain there is for rescue! WOW!

95% of the dogs we rescue have been beaten, neglected, left to fend for them selves, covered in mange or with other health issues, dumped on the side of the road, whatever. None of them have had a good life. None of them have any use for humans when we get them. A lot of hard work goes into these dogs and some of them stay in foster care for up to a year or more before they are ready for a new home. It is in the dogs best interest that we make sure the dog gets a better life. We recently drove 10 hours into Montana to rescue some dogs that had been left abandoned in a shelter for at least 3 weeks with no medical care, food or water, it was disgusting and some of them did not make it, most of them we had to nurse back to health. Your darned right we aren't going to give them up to the first "Jo blow" who thinks we owe him a dog.

 

Anyway, to the OP. I hope you haven't given up, but perhaps, as others have said, rescue isn't your best bet, especially if you need a working dog. That is never a guarantee. Good luck on your search.

 

Edit to fix spelling.

[juliepoudrier]

I read similar statements time and time again and am uncomfortable with it.

 

I agree to a certain extent, but not completely. When organizations have 501 C3 status they have a responsibility to serve the public and this responsibility includes "listening" to their constituents . . .

Kim,

Just curious...is a requirement to serve the public a stated part of becoming a 501 © 3 organization? I know next to nothing about businesses and incorporation, etc., so I guess what I'm asking is what are the requirements of becoming a tax-exempt non-profit, and do those requirements include a mandate to serve the public?

 

I get what you're saying that it would pay for rescuers to listen to complaints and perhaps try to adjust policies accordingly--I'm just not sure I understand how that ties into a non-profit status.

 

J.