To think that dog charities are so fussy about rehoming that they drive people to buy from breeders?

[FreshFreesias]

I volunteer and help fund a small very well-run dog charity. We are all volunteers, no one takes any remuneration and we are all united in our desire to help dogs in the direst of situations find a lovely home.

However I struggle with the strict rehoming policy. We are rescuing (healthy, attractive, assessed, socialised and rehomeable) dogs and puppies from the horrors of life in a concrete pen in a `shelter’ in 100 Fahrenheit from which they will never be released, even for a walk; or from a precarious life starving on the streets of in Greece or from life on a chain.

Given that these dogs have absolutely no hope where they are, a loving, sensible, experienced owner in the UK who may well live in a flat or in a big city can most probably give one of these dogs the fantastic opportunity of a new life.

But I’m constantly working with dare I say, dogmatic ladies who, while redoubtable and salt of the earth, have very restrictive ideas of where these hopeless hounds can be happy.

A recent conversation with the rehomer made my heart sink. She explained that while she didn’t rule out homes in London and cities, she didn’t think London was a good place for a dog and that a flat in London would automatically be ruled out. Ironic as I live in a London flat with 3 dogs who have the most wonderful life as I live in the middle of a Common! The most important thing is the right owner, who is determined to make it work.

While I agree that rehoming to someone who is working all day isn’t a good idea, if someone can take their dog to work with them, why not? Oh no’, she replied, what is the dog meant to do in the work place?’ Um, I should have replied, do whatever it will do when it’s at home… sleep, get petted by visitors, potter around or whatever.

This all came to a head when my sister in law recently applied for one of the rescues on the website. She is a really lovely woman who lives with my brother in a modest but comfortable terrace house in Bristol, with a nice garden and near parks. They are middle-aged, no kids, both work from home and have one old dog already for whom they seek a companion. I’m despondent to find out that she applied for a dog on the website but was told he already had a home. Fair enough. But soon after I find out that this home has fallen through and despite SIL having sent in her form and stated her keenness on this dog, has not been informed.

Consequently, this dog is being advertised again. I don’t think she has slipped through the net as the rehomer is supremely efficient but very fussy. (I haven’t let her know that this applicant is my SIL as I am interested in her being a `mystery shopper’ and giving me an insight from the other side, so to speak).

Because SIL lives in a city in a terraced house I have the feeling that she has been tacitly turned down as country homes are favoured. Of course it would be wonderful if all adopters lived in the greenbelt with acres of land but that is not the reality. Many of the best dog owners I know live in London and make good use of all the parks. Many people who live in the countryside have no access to `countryside’ and must drive for miles to access dog-walking fields, so country living is no panacea.

While I am in favour of home checks and dogs going to the right homes for them, do you feel that dog charities are over fussy? It breaks my heart when great homes are rejected and owners then go to breeders. The last thing the world needs are any more dogs when there are millions, even billions, living wretched lives, and yet kind-hearted, dogmatic rescuers are inadvertently making things even worse than they need be.

The other maddening thing is that dogs are often kennelled while homes are being found but due to all the turning good homes down, this can take months and this is a huge expense for the charity.
I’m so fed up I am pulling out of rescue and will stick to raising money for neutering programmes, which is even more vital anyway.

@BloomingHydrangea that is so SAD. What were they thinking? 😳

Yes. I tried 8 times to rescue a dog. The shelters totally ignored my applications, even though I followed them up with calls and offered references from a guide dogs trainer and a vet who are close friends. I now have two from a breeder. I wfh, have no other pets, a large house and secure garden, was a volunteer dog walker for the RSPCA, have done god-knows how many dog-training courses, no children at home. My dogs live a 5* life and I’ll never understand why I was not deemed good enough!

I agree with the positive experiences of the Blue Cross for cats. After the second of my two elderly cats died, I approached a number of local cat charities, all of which refused me due to the alleged 'busy' road I live on, despite neither of my cats never having ventured to the front of the house. I eventually went to the Blue Cross, who rehomed 2 monkeys kittens to me, who have survived 2 years here so far and have a great life - I blocked up all the fencing to the front, to minimise the chances of them venturing that way, and they pretty much keep to the back of the house.

There are some weird views on here

A lot of rescues are foster based so they won't be left to languish in a cage.

If they are to be rehomed as an only pet, this is for the safety of your other pets. The rescues will have tried to rehabilitate and socialise the dog, but if unsuccessful, then they won't want to put your pets in danger.

As for children, some dogs will have a history of aggression, fear or are an unknown quantity, so the rescue will say 'no children' for the safety of your children.

Overseas rescues are notoriously light on their requirements. Sometimes is works, sometimes it doesn't. Overseas adoptions have a much much higher return rate. Many have never been in a house, have been mistreated, scavenged for food.

Getting a puppy is not the same as getting a rescue dog. Rescue dogs have been through trauma, so yes they have specific requirements for all involved.

We approached several rescues when we were looking for our first dog - none would allow us to adopt as we had children (5 and 8) so we did our homework and went to a breeder.

We lost our dog due to illness last year and when we were ready, approached the local rescues. This time we weren’t allowed as DH and I work full time

We run our own business and take dog to work with us - work is pretty rural in a converted barn, with loads of secure out door space and miles of walks on the doorstep. They wouldn’t entertain the idea as dog might get bored at work. Back to a breeder we went

Opportunity Knocks, I think what most PP are objecting to are the blanket rules about FT work or DC, when a dog could be taken to work, or might have even come from a home with children and been fine with them.

Many rescues are limiting their homing options by being so inflexible.

One of the Rescues mentioned on here as being more “ sensible “ is the one who after agreeing that I was a perfect home for a dog said we couldn’t have him because I wouldn’t cancel a pre booked weekend away ( with other people) to drive 3 hours each way to collect him. I offered to do it on the Monday but was told I “ obviously wasn’t that bothered about the dog”
Funnily enough I homecheck for a couple of dog charities as well as CPL and one of those charities turned me down because I didn’t have a resident dog at the time.

I agree that the blanket rules about working are wrong.

The reality is that rescue dogs suitable for children are few and far between because it is incredibly rare that the background of the dog is known, and if it is known that the dog doesn't have issues. Many rescues don't want to take the risk, understandably.

Rescue dogs are not the same as puppies from a breeder... A lot of pp said they had to go to a breeder. Yes, some dogs can't be homed near a road. Or can scale a fence. These are important. For every 'my dog/cat was fine', us at the coal face of rescue know that there are those that aren't. You have no idea how hard it is to find out that a dog you placed has been pts because the dog showed aggression, or a cat got run over, even when not rehomed near a busy road.

"Hopefully with so many recommendations for pragmatic rescues in this thread, those that have been turned down will have another go and not end up lining a breeders pockets."

Well yes, hopefully, @FreshFreesias, but even then no guarantees. My friend was rejected by one of the rescues that has been recommended on this thread.

My friend is a vet, married to a farmer.

I'm a long time lurker and have genuinely just joined MN because I saw this thread, which resonates with me hard!

My partner and I have wanted a dog for years and we are now in a position where we feel it is right to have a dog (I'm now self employed and work from home!)

Our motto is "adopt don't shop" because there are so many doggies that need a loving home. We have tried Dogs Trust, Blue Cross, RSPCA and many other independent rehoming centres across the South of England, but the rehoming centres are SO fussy.

I understand the need to be vigilant, obviously they don't want any Tom, Dick or Harry who have no idea what they're getting in to to adopt and then give the dog back when they can't handle them!

For context - we live in a semi-detached house in a quiet part of a city. There are parks and commons within five minutes of our house. Again, I work from home so there is usually someone at home so the dog would have company. But we never seem to get anywhere with rehoming centres I would gladly have someone come out and check our home and garden but that never happens.

We are now at the point where we are considering going directly to a breeder but that isn't what we want to do. So I completely understand the frustration!

@amijustparanoid

Nice username :)

What are their reasons for rejection?

Imo the charities are correct. What's happened is that people's sense of entitlement overrides their sense of what really works for the dogs. There are far too many people now who have dogs in unsuitable circumstances and I think that has clouded popular perception of proper dog ownership. Of course a flat isn't a suitable environment for a dog. Of course a person who is out of the house all day isn't a suitable owner. I mean, come on, this is obvious.

But so many people do now have dogs in these situations that everyone else tells themselves it's fine and what do these dog experts know, rather than thinking that perhaps if all of these people whose job it is to know about animal welfare are all saying the same thing then maybe just maybe they're right.

@amijustparanoidorjuststoned sorry you're not having any luck. Perhaps you'll have more with a smaller rescue that takes a more personal approach?
Also there are often dogs being abandoned on Gumtree; I always dread those ads as they are catnip for dog fighting gangs.
People have recommended Many Tears and Mutts in Distress as taking a more dogcentric approach.

There are far too many people now who have dogs in unsuitable circumstances

Well yes, there are, but who decides what's 'suitable'? I've had dogs with children, dogs that have been left alone for stretches of time that are sometimes too long, I have dogs with cats and other pets, dogs near a road... are you going to tell me that I'm keeping dogs in 'unsuitable circumstances'? I have to work to earn money to keep those dogs in food, so I have to leave the house, if I have a dog and then a baby, I'm not getting rid of either the dog or the baby...

Life is never perfect. Yes, some people do unthinkingly get dogs that are not suitable for their lifestyle. But dogs can be incredibly adaptable too and, apart from people who get a breed far too big and unruly for their lifestyle and with no intention of giving it sufficient exercise, most people are just doing their best for their pets.

Even doing home checks can be misleading; one of my neighbours got a dog from the dogs trust the week before christmas. The one condition was that they fixed the none existent fencing. Years later the fencing was never fixed, the dog was tied on a chain in the garden and the only time it was walked was when a young girl with special needs took it out, and it was brought back injured after she'd thrown a brick at it (supposedly for it to chase). They also got a kitten , whic went on to have kittens itself and was then thrown out. An elderly neighbour ended up caring for it after it lived in her summerhouse for years.

At first appearance they seemed the perfect family, wealthy, country home, etc. but they were anything but.
I do think that dogs in dire straits need to be homed where the owner is the right individual or family, and that may mean compromise in certain areas.
In the main though we need to reduce the breeding of surplus animals.

Just to add that in the North East, Stray Aid take stray/unwanted dogs off the street and rehome.

They try to match dogs with owners and ensure the family is suitable, there are some dogs which can't be homed with other dogs or cats as they have issues, but on the whole they are very good about homing.
They don't do home checks, but do ask for proof of residency. They've saved thousands of dogs from euthanasia.

I think you have to sometimes grit your teeth with some rescues. I got a cat from the RSPCA that they had had for over a year, he was 10 years old, black and white, and an ex stray. They were funny about me working full time and one of the volunteers had got very attached to him and wanted the "perfect" home, I was initially declined. They called me back a few days later and basically said he was difficult to home and being with me was better than staying in the rescue centre. It was annoying, but I got to take him home. On the plus side, he had been in a really bad way when they found him and they looked after him, so I can't really slate the RSPCA too much.
After he died, I got my current cat from a small local rescue, who just handed him over, no questions, no checks. I thought this was a bit lax as I could have been been totally unsuitable.
I think it must be difficult for rescues, making a judgement on someone's suitability, often just on face value.

I agree I registered with a charity and a 9 week old puppy came up,I phoned to inquire about him and gave all the ages of my children and told them I'm a sahp and dp works full time. A volunteer visited our home and agreed it was suitable, then the next day they phoned and said we couldn't have it because we have a 2 year old. They already knew this when I called them and even the lady who visited saw my child. Her reason was because "the puppy was a bit excitable" it's a pappy fgs of course it's going to be excitable, that's what training is for! Other dogs came up and they kept saying the same thing. We gave up in the end and bought a dog. I think they need to chill a bit and give these dogs a chance. No wonder there's so many dogs needing home when the charities are so bloody fussy.

When we were looking for a dog years ago we went to Bath Cats And Dogs Home and every cage had "this dog would benefit from having a garden with a couple of acres to wander around in". Yep. Wouldn't we all.

There's a border collie rescue which rates its dogs on how long they can be left alone. Completely practical and accepting of the fact that they'd never rehome any dogs if they imposed what other rescues do. But a loving home which is imperfect in other ways is better than an abusive home.

Googled battersea dogs home out of interest, not one dog could cope with children, few with another dog or a cat. This is why I buy from breeders.

A big thing I find with cat rescues is the cat flap.
Some rescues when I was enquiring about a cat absolutely insist on a cat flap. No cat flap, no cat.

Others seem very anti cat flap, if you have a cat flap, you must brick it up (not just lock it). I don't have a cat flap and still got a 10 minute lecture on the evils of cat flaps from one rescue.
I can understand the busy roads, etc but the cat flap thing does seem a bit strange.

@OpportunityKnocks good old Green Day

So far the main reason is that as a couple, my partner and I haven't had experience of owning dogs . But we are both from families that grew up with dogs, so...

Blue Cross also told us that our location wasn't suitable because we are right in the city centre. I fail to understand how that constitutes as unsuitable when we are in a semi detached house with a garden (albeit small). I mean we wouldn't adopt a Great Dane or a Husky (as amazing as that would be. I just want all the dogs [laugh])

We have an appointment at a greyhound rescue next week. We've never had a dog before and they've been very cautious over email. I do wonder if they're going to put us off - I hope not.

Totally agree with the OP. My parents went into the rspca and viewed a working cocker spaniel, of which we'd owned several before, we know the breed really well. They said they couldn't have him because both my parents were working (despite my mum being able to take him to her work which was in seven acre grounds). They let him be rehomed to a family with two young children who had never owned a dog before.i was so cross.

Who decides what's suitable? The animal welfare professionals who run these places, I would have thought. Particularly given that the vast majority of animals they have to care for and rehome are there precisely because people bought them thinking they know better than the advice they were given and that "it'll all work out".

As for dogs being better with a couple of acres to run around in, that isn't such an outrageous statement. Most dogs would indeed benefit from that. Just because you fancy having a dog and you live in a city but you're a nice person doesn't mean that living in a city is the best thing for a dog. I mean, it blatantly isn't.