Suggestions to Help Adopters
Adoption Groups
There are ways pet adoption groups can immediately improve
facilitation of assistance to prospective adopters for making the best
decisions as to selecting a pet to adopt.
I state these from the perspective of a canine aficionado, but felines
are included too. Information! Adopters looking for a pet need as much
information as is practical for rescue/adoption groups can provide and this is
without unreasonable effort. As
capsulized as possible, here are suggestions---
1) Please state in numbers/numerical
digits the exact weight of the pet!
Small, medium, large are too indefinite.
There’s a prominent site that uses Small, Medium, Large terms and Medium
they say can be 27 to 60 pounds. At the
low end of this range they designate, a dog is 45% the size of the high end;
yet a 27 pound dog and a dog of 60 pounds are supposed to be in the same
arbitrary bracket. This wastes
everyone’s time to not post exactly in numbers what a dog weighs. Imagine the chaos if bank statements were
reckoned this way; no, we get told down to the last cent! Adopters are forced to send inquiry to ask
for this specific numerical weight detail, essential to their decision process,
and wastes their time, and wastes time of the adoption groups being asked to
answer this basic question. In an
extreme case, I inquired twice by email and once by phone as to the exact
weight of a dog designated as small. I
was refused response, and in the call I was hung up on. You can’t make an assessment of “well, were
you rude” unless you were party to the messages. This wastes everyone’s time for adoption
groups to not openly state on website profiles just what does the dog
weigh! If the dog is believed to still
be growing, please state that also; if uncertain as to the eventual weight,
just say so. www.petfinder.com is a major site and persists with
these insufficiently specific small, medium, large designations. People will look to see the weight in ounces
in a can of orange juice, whether it’s 12, 12.5 ounces; how much more important
to know a dog’s weight? Please don’t be
stubborn and think “we’re already doing everything perfectly, how dare anyone
ask us to post a pet’s exact weight!”
You’re making a barrier to the pet being adopted. I’ve asked 25 persons at random about this,
and all agreed the exact weight should be stated in numbers and not in vague
terms! Additionally I asked them did
they think the annual food costs for a 27 versus a 60 pound dog might be
significant, all replied yes.
Really! Give adopters precise
rather than hazy, foggy information!
2) I feel sites are
doing an OK job with stating the known or estimated age of pets. If there is any way to better this, please
think it over. No one is being asked to
be psychic.
3) I adopted a dog from
a well known source. Before adopting I
asked “how well does the dog ride in a car?”
And I was told “we don’t know.”
In some cases, when someone brings a dog in to surrender it, they know
the answer to that question. The
question “how well does the dog ride in a car” should always be asked in pet
surrenders of the person surrendering the dog.
If the answer isn’t clear, a volunteer should be sought to ride dogs
around a city block to see how they behave in a car ride without being in a
carrier or crate. Naturally I’m not
applying this to cats. This procedure
should be conducted in any case as a person surrendering the pet may not be
trustworthy on that question; they may not care. I had experience with ten dogs, 1962-2018,
and all rode very well in a car.
However, the dog I adopted in summer 2018 was extremely afraid once we
started riding. That was after I was
told they didn’t know how the dog would ride, and they refused a test ride with
a volunteer along; it made no difference whether my vehicle, someone else’s
vehicle, or who the driver would be! I
was absolutely not entitled to get a determination on this question, and it was
intimated that I was not a proper person to even ask the question!
This was a young dog of 51 pounds, lean and fairly strong,
and I was nearing age 64 at the time, and smaller than most men. I had to drive with this dog for more than 13
miles to arrive at my area. The entire
time I was at risk of being in a car wreck due to struggling to hold the dog
off, clinging to me then trying to wedge himself behind me as I drove. If this had been a dog turned biter due to
fear, a wreck most certainly would have been caused. Wrecks often involve more than property
damage! I did ask the adoption agency
“how well does the dog ride” before signing and they indicated essentially it
was an unknown grab bag situation, a can without a label and I was welcome to
find that out for myself. You are told
if the dog causes property damage as to a dwelling, it’s entirely your
problem. I’m unclear however what would
take place in a courtroom with a jury if a newly adopted dog precipitated a
collision with serious injuries, when the adoption group could have designated
a volunteer to determine the dog’s behavior with a short test ride, before
placing the dog up for adoption in an online profile, and neglected to perform
this SIMPLE chore before uploading a photo profile! It might prevent a collision and difficulties
with attorneys. Adoption groups/agencies
can get plenty of recently retired people to conduct these determinations. If a pet is going to be a problem riding,
that should become obvious in a transit of less than around a city block. If a pet must be transported in a
cage/carrier, this should be stated up front.
These details are not difficult of ascertainment and all adopters need
to know up front.
4) The dog I tried to
adopt described in #3 I had for five nights and four days. I discovered this dog would literally tear
the house apart whenever I left him alone inside. That behavior was despite his being extremely
friendly to me. That having been in the
summer, I wanted him to have a temperature controlled environment while I had
to transit 29 miles daily to visit my 93 year old mother. Additionally, we all know about leaving dogs
in hot cars. He caused much destruction;
pulling down drapes and venetian blinds, chewing up objects kept on counter
tops, accessing the dining table top. I
TRIED to train this dog to stay away from the table top and countertops by
placing containers of pennies at the edges such that with a slight disturbance,
the pennies would tumble down and the dog would learn to stay away. That failed.
The one day out of four I left the dog tethered in the dining area, on
my return nothing had changed. But as I
reside alone, it strikes me as a bad idea to tether or crate a dog in the
remote event chance of a fire. There
could also be a strangulation risk. I
have a gas stove and worried he might turn a knob and cause a gas
explosion. We never crated any dogs when
we left; all ten earlier dogs were very well behaved. So I decided, with reluctance, to return the
dog and I was demanded to check a list acknowledging the dog MIGHT be euthanized
because I returned him! After the return
I continued going to this same adoption center.
Finally in September I indicated I was interested in adopting a
particular dog. The second dog I
expressed interest in was after I’d made nine trips to this facility. While on site I saw, every time, a dog of 75
to 85 pounds which was incredibly aggressive, snapping and snarling with all
four feet momentarily off the concrete surface of the enclosure as it jumped up
in remarkable fury. As of my final trip
to this facility, that hyper aggressive dog hadn’t been euthanized; so I regard
it as somewhat of a low blow to require me to check a line indicating the dog I
returned might be put down because I returned him, considering they were
maintaining an extremely combative dog for at least seven weeks that I noticed. I definitely do remember that dog’s exact
name, it was a five letter word starting with “R.” A few of you may be familiar with that exact
dog.
To keep a dog in a setting in which the dog and the adopter
are unable to be content long term is a disservice to the pet. Adoption groups must be willing to review
public input and if their methods can be improved, should do so. A stance of “he isn’t in our line of
business, so who’s he to give us any advice” is not constructive.
Had I been informed at the START that this dog does poorly to
ride in a motor vehicle, I absolutely wouldn’t have adopted him to start with
and no one would have been inconvenienced and traffic collision wouldn’t have
been risked. My property damage was the
least of it. They refused to give me
information critical to my adoption decision; information which they certainly
could have made a definite determination about had they cared to be as thorough
as they should be---for the sake of their dogs as well as that of the adopters! The four and a half days I had that dog, had
he been at the adoption facility instead, he might have been better placed as
with a large family who could give him the constant supervision and direction
he needed; possibly he couldn’t stand to be left alone, that is a new one in my
experience. To continue; when I asked
about adopting the second dog, a staffer pulled up info on a monitor and found
via my driver’s license ID that I’d recently returned one of their dogs. Well, I returned that dog because I saw he
needed an environment different from what I could offer him; that determination
I couldn’t make at their offices because I have the limitation of not being
psychic plus as noted, they wouldn’t let a determination to be made before I
agreed to take him, as to how he’d do riding in a car, a staffer could have
accompanied and acted as driver, or another vehicle used, my sensible request
was totally trashed by staffers; on returning him I suggested he needed to be a
working dog on a farm or ranch; or be adopted by a family of five or more in
which setting he’d get the constant attention and regulation he needed. I was treated very offensively by this very
callous staffer. She said in a huff “YOU COME IN HERE ASKING QUESTIONS!” Well?
Isn’t asking questions to get answers the way someone is assisted to
make an adoption decision? It’s not like
I’d asked any personal questions about any staff! I needed a particular detail on the first dog
and they insisted they “couldn’t provide it.”
Additionally, with the first dog, they refused to allow a test drive
with the dog; I then requested a staffer drive the dog around the block, with
me in the back seat, or in the front seat.
They refused that request also! I
was attempted to be made to feel near criminal guilt because I asked a VERY RELEVANT
question! Unreasonable and a low blow! A detriment towards getting the dog placed
where he could fit it!
Then after they told me they felt what I needed was a smaller
dog, I replied that I didn’t return the first dog due to his SIZE; I returned the
dog because of his BEHAVIOR! Everyone
can’t afford a professional dog trainer!
Over the years as an adult, I had six (6) dogs all larger than their 51
pound dog, including one that was 91 pounds lean, and none had the behavior
difficulties of car riding, and ripping the interior of the house apart while
left alone. Yes! I did put that dog out into my back yard for
ten minutes before bringing him back in before I left for several hours, to
give him a good chance to relieve himself.
And YES! I did remain in the yard
with that dog the entire time, as he was still very new to me and I couldn’t
know without watching him if he’d go over the five foot chain link fence. I notice the number of private rescue and
adoption groups is increasing who tell prospective adopters that the adoption
is not FINALIZED until the pet has had a five to seven day stay with you! That is most appropriate for the dogs and the
adopters, as few adopters are clairvoyant!
I was poorly treated, degraded, insulted and nearly demonized and denied
essential information critical to my adoption decision, placed at risk of a
motoring collision possibly involving injuries or fatalities, because this
group refuses to get a volunteer to take dogs on a test ride! I refuse to accept any guilt for returning
that dog! The adoption group is
DEFICIENT in not giving more complete info on dogs when they very easily could
do so!
People need to clean up their act and improve their standards
of information available to adopters and accept that when fault is present, it
might not be with an adopter who returned a pet. I don’t notice any water walkers anywhere.
Furthermore, I emailed a nearby large church offering to
refund the adoption fee for that same dog I returned if anyone would go and
adopt him and send me copy of the adoption document. I also contacted farm and ranch groups and
specific rescue groups working with dogs to try and get that dog placed. I didn’t ask return of the adoption fee I
paid either. Getting dogs adopted is a
challenging activity, but adoption groups shouldn’t be so hasty to decide
someone is another Joseph Stalin if they return a dog. Adoption groups increase the chances of a
return by refusing to dispense reasonable information. Certain rescue groups also state they don’t
adopt a dog out on a first come, first served basis, because they’re trying to
exercise best judgment where the dog would thrive best. Input from prospective adopters shouldn’t be
routinely trashed as to why they brought a pet back.
5) All dog rescue and adoption groups, whether private groups
or city operated animal shelters, are harming some members the public and their
pets if the only thing they say about spay is “overpopulation.” They should all say spay is for
overpopulation and prevention of mammary cancer and uterine infections. The public needs complete information. They’re thinking just mention overpopulation
only, because we don’t adopt out breedable dogs. They overlook that many people obtain a dog
outside a mandatory spay to adopt framework.
They overlook that someone visiting their sites could receive a very
valuable and life extending Key of Knowledge if warnings about spay for mammary
cancer and infections were included with mention of overpopulation. Everyone needs to be included in the
information loop as best we can. It
shouldn’t be an “us four and no more” clique.
Unless people know that spay reduces mammary cancer and infections and isn’t
strictly for overpopulation only, many thousands of Texas dogs will continue
dying well before their lifespan potential due to mammary cancer invading their
lungs. This absence of full info on the
part of many groups is a thoughtless disservice to the significant segment of
uninformed public and their at risk dogs.
6) A city operated animal shelter posted image of a 46 pound
female Shepherd mix. On arrival, the
prospective adopter discovered this dog had been adopted out but then returned
by the adopter. The shelter said the
reason for the dog’s return by the adopter was “unrealistic expectations” on
the part of the adopter. However, in the
online photo profile and description of this particular dog, the city animal
shelter chose to leave prospective adopters completely uninformed that this dog
was heartworm positive; and that despite a financial angel offering to
underwrite a fraction of the cost of heartworm treatment, the eventual adopter
nevertheless would have to spend $1100 to $1300 more on the treatment. I feel it’s likely when the first adopter
brought the dog back, they hadn’t been informed by the shelter as to what the
treatment cost would be. The adopter
most likely couldn’t afford to take the dog on that basis; then the shelter
cast blame on the adopter rather than admitting the “unrealistic expectations”
issue was on their part, not on the part of the attempted adopter. Everyone wants to place blame on others; why
not just outright accept responsibility for misleading the public with
incomplete information? The fact that
the online profile I saw failed (by intent) to mention that dog was heartworm
positive tells me quite loudly that the shelter mislead the first adopter who
returned the dog. Then the shelter
placed blame on the attempted adopter.
In any case, whether this conclusion is correct or not, this is a
serious matter of not giving the public adequate information about a pet to
make a completely informed decision!
Leaving out of an online photo profile of a dog the fact of it being
heartworm positive, accompanied by also consequently leaving out an estimate of
the treatment cost, is wrong and misleads the public. Many people are on a tight budget with no
emergency funds. It also does disservice
to dogs allowing them to have false hope that they’ve been adopted, and then
returned to the shelter they hoped to “graduate” from. PLEASE give COMPLETE information! This doesn’t necessarily include is the pet
housebroken or not; however, if that detail is known, it should be included.
