Rescue is all about the dog; not the adopter! (Rant)

ORIGINAL: Chuffy
OK, I'll give an experience with one shelter (will remain nameless) that a friend of mine tried to adopt a cat from. They turned her down flat the moment they found out she worked full time. She offered to take 2 cats as company for each other (adults, not kittens) and they still turned her down. She said she would be taking time off work to make sure they settled in OK - and they still turned her down. Same organistaion, different shelter, refused to adopt out a dog (a small-medium sized adult spayed bitch) because the family had young children. They just didn't adopt out to families with young kids apparently. On another occasion they were in our local paper for "seizing" a dog back because there was a dog kennel in their yard. The family insisted that had been there for their previous dog and that they didn't make the new dog use it - the dog preferred to be in the house and they were OK with that. On yet another occasion they refused to help an elderly lady and give her any animal because she specified what kind of dog she felt was best for her. She was told "we are not a supermarket". ????!!!!!!!

That is just awful.  Yes, there certainly are some shelters out there that should re-visit their policies.  My local shelter doesn't have very stringent policies and should probably implement more.  They also do not respond to phone calls requesting Animal Control Assistance after 4pm or Weekends.   I'm afraid to get too involved with them because I've heard from others that it is very political and most of the employees don't show much empathy for the animals there or appreciation for what few volunteers there are.  I've also heard from other rescue organizations that they aren't easy for the rescues to work with either.
The rescue I work with is small, local to me, and personal; I like it that way.

Thank you for noticing that we were willing and offering further education and assistance for weeks to come for these potentials, and that is exactly what seemed to set these 2 off the most.  They had already "jumped through all of the hoops".  Go figure.

Well like I said, the education and support thing is the right attitude IMO and if that makes people take a hike then so be it.  Lack of compromise and unbending blanket policies just mean more dogs locked up in a kennel when they could have a fireplace of their own and more dogs being produced b/c naive buyers are going to less reputable places.

You know, if my grandma didn't know any better, like most people, she could just go to a breeder or a pet store. Is that what your asking people to do? Are the dogs better of dead than on a farm in an Oh Noooo unfences yard in the middle of no where?

 
what happens when grandma becomes physically unable to manage the dog's exercise/bathroom needs?  She lets him out the door, and any number of things happen - a car arrives, the postman gets jumped on (one might presume that saying she's way in the middle of nowhere means she gets few visitors, hence fewer opportunities for dog to accept strangers), a bear/deer/other wildlife draw the dog's attention away from grandma.  Heck, just some random smell and doggie is off like a shot in the woods.  What then?
 
I'm asking the question because I think these are the things rescues consider when placing a dog in a home w/an unfenced yard and (presumably - you don't say how old Grandma is), elderly person.  Whether this applies in your situation or not, I wonder what the answer is.  "That's the chance you take?  You can't predict the future?"  Well, the rescue can predict the future if they keep him with them - he WILL be contained.

ORIGINAL: tzumommy

So a dog would be better of dead than enjoy a long life on a farm?

We are a rescue organization, not a kill shelter; so I absolutely positively feel that they are better off in foster care than outdoors on an unsupervised farm.  Apparently the shelter you referred to isn't a kill shelter either if they've had the cat for 5 years.

I am familiar with the resuce Jojo is talking about, and the problem is that cat is taking the place of other VERY adoptable cats.  This rescue turns down cats all the time, partially because they are full of cats that they will not adopt out for this reason or that reason.  This is an issue I have with no kill shelters in general.  Many of them reject adoptable animals while keeping those that they deem "unadoptable" in a kind of shelter pergetory.  Won't be PTS, won't adopt them out.  The cats and kittens they turn away partially because of that cat and others like it generally end up dying in Animal Control because there was no where else for them to go.  Some "rescue."

I'm asking the question because I think these are the things rescues consider when placing a dog in a home w/an unfenced yard and (presumably - you don't say how old Grandma is), elderly person. Whether this applies in your situation or not, I wonder what the answer is. "That's the chance you take? You can't predict the future?" Well, the rescue can predict the future if they keep him with them - he WILL be contained.

 
Great point miranadobe! In almost all cases, the organizations that have the most stringent standards are private rescues that have all their dogs in safe, loving, foster homes where there is no danger of euthanasia. High-kill shelters and pounds often have the least amount of requirements, and in many cases, none at all.
 

Lack of compromise and unbending blanket policies just mean more dogs locked up in a kennel when they could have a fireplace of their own

 
That's not necessary true. As tzumommy already pointed out, having a dog returned to a rescue often uses way more of their resources than if they had to wait a few extra months for a more suitable home. This unfortunate fact seems to be most detrimental to puppies, who are easily adopted out when they are little and cute, but 9 months later if they get surrendered (like so many dogs that age) the rescue is stuck with a large, unsocialized untrained dog that takes up a space in a kennel or foster home, which means another dog looses their chance. It might seem counter-intuitive, but a shelter or rescue needs to focus on the long term future of the dogs and be less concerned about just trying to get them into homes.
 
A few months ago a lady adopted a lab mix puppy from Petland's "Adopt-A-Pet" program (don't get me started on that!) and just had to fill out a basic questionnaire. Two weeks later, when the puppy chewed everything she owned, she surrendered it to a local private rescue. Now this dog is taking up time and money from a non-profit organization all because this Petland's "rescue" wasn't thorough enough. Sure they got the dog out of the kennel, but that's not solving the problem.
 

So, perhaps what jojo is suggesting (and what I am definately suggesting) is that shelters could work more to educate the people taking their dogs rather than have blanket policies that ensure dogs miss out on potentially great homes because one of their unbending standards was not met.

 
I don't think anyone here is arguing that education is a very important, but considering that the majority of shelters and rescues are over worked and under funded, it leaves little time to sift through applications and educate each and every applicant who doesn't meet the set requirements. Here's my suggestion to you: offer to volunteer for a rescue by going through their denied applications and investigate each situation to see if they could be potentially be a good home, and educate the ones who aren't. Trust me, after a month or so you'll see our side of it! []

I think my biggest gripe is all of the rescues that will give a dog every chance to succeed, but won't consider giving people the same opportunity.

My sister has contacted a local Dane rescue to see about adoption/foster. She has already rescued two Danes through work. They won't consider her application because she doesn't have a fenced in yard. She lives on 20+ acres in the middle of nowhere. Has boundary-trained both Danes but still never lets them out unsupervised. She has gone to college for animal science/pre-vet and worked as a vet-tech for 7 years. She has shelled out over $2,000 or Norma Jean's knee surgury and would happily spend more to make sure her dogs' health is great. She feeds excellent quality food and makes sure her dogs are kept at a perfect weight to prevent problems.

But, because she doesn't have a fence she doesn't qualify as a good dog owner. This according to the person in charge of the rescue. Who has a yard the size of my sister's garage. (Yeah - that's big enough for several Danes.) This person feeds grocery store food and her dogs are overweight. But she's a better Dane foster/owner than my sister. Yeah, right. I guess my sister's priorities are all messed up.

Sadly, I think that particular rescue (and perhaps the one jojo and Christina refer to) sound all too similar to "rescuers turned animal hoarders".  It happens more frequently than some might want to admit. 

I have already done volunteer work and that is why I see both sides of it.  I got very frustrated that some of the dogs had very little life in a kennel environment and were highly stressed and potentially good homes were turned down because "we don't adopt out to homes with young kids" or "we don't adopt out to people who work full time". 
 
I'm with you on puppies, as well as certain breeds that do need higher-than-average maintenance, handling and training though.... the extra questions, screening and leg work are necessary in those circumstances IMO.