To think animal shelter charities push potential pet adopters towards breeders with their absurdly stringent adoption criteria?

[Thepeopleversuswork]

OK so I’m probably being grumpy about this because I have had bad experiences and maybe unfair.

But I have just been turned down for a third time in five years trying the adopt a cat, apparently (as far as I can tell) because I have a job and live in a city.

I’m a middle aged woman living in a quiet street on the outskirts of SE London with my own home and a teenager and partner. I have sufficient income to support a cat. I have a large back garden. I am an animal lover who has had cats before.

The last two charities I have applied to had ridiculously detailed diligence procedures including several home visits and a dodgy quasi isometric test. Another agency which imports stray cats from overseas required me to send videos of the traffic on every street within a half mile radius and character references.

After weeks of consideration I was told in each case that I couldn’t adopt due to traffic risk.

I get that the volunteers at these places become very attached to their animals and of course it’s only right that people are vetted before taking an animal, especially one that has been mistreated. But the rigmarole in the application process is ludicrously over the top and it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that they basically don’t want you to adopt a cat unless you live in a huge rural stately home and don’t have a job. As soon as they hear the word “London“ or any indication that you work outside the home they basically rule you out in my experience.

I’ve now gone down the route of getting a cat via Gumtree but it makes me sad and it seems so self defeating; these charities are putting well meaning and committed animal lovers off applying and making it far easier for unscrupulous people to breed and sell animals.

Can anyone who works for one of these charities try to explain why it’s so difficult?

This was funny.

No, I’ve never met anyone in the UK who kept tigers. Pretty much all ordinary domestic cats (although one of my neighbours has a Bengal that looks a bit wild).

'Imports stray cats from overseas'. Is there a cat shortage here? Bloody hell.

It seems mad. I think if the adoption people came round they'd probably disallow me because I smoke in the house. I've got my last 2 from gumtree. The youngest had ringworm and fleas, and a flea allergy. The vet didn't diagnose the ringworm initially so he had a lot of skin problems at the start. Thankfully all good now. So be aware they could have something wrong with them is all I would say.

No shortage of cats, just a shortage of rescues willing to actually rehome them.

I have been turned down twice by dog shelters. I work part time from home, have 2 dog savvy teens, years of experience and I live in the country. The issue I come across is I don’t have a secure garden, what I do have though is 3 acres of land attached to my home, it’s not classed as secure though as no enclosed6ft fenced garden. It’s ridiculous, so my last 2 pups have come from breeders. My dogs lead the most amazing life, I am sure a rescue would have been very happy here.

We tried to adopt after our spaniel died, and wanted another one. One of the rescues got very up in the air about us wanting a specific breed, and more or less told us that if we didn't want to take whatever they offered us, that we weren't true dog lovers; and shouldn't adopt at all.

I’ve only worked in rescues for a few years but I agree with all of this post. I felt strongly that rescues were too strict but now see why. It’s a heartbreaking job to be in and I do think you have to do it to gain an understanding of why the adoption criteria is what it is.

The first rescue I worked in was just with cats. They had a high failed adoption rate and I left because I didn’t agree with how they homed to basically anyone. I moved to a known cat rescue who were strict but had a much higher success rate and cared much more about getting the right home and owner. I’m now at a lesser known rescue who take all sorts of animals, they are strict but successful in rehoming.

I can understand this attitude completely. It's one I might share if I was the other side of the fence.

The issue is that from my side of the fence, an adopter's 'suitability' is judged by a tick-box exercise, not on the nuances of what they can actually offer. It's rather like taking out a bank loan: it used to be that your local bank manager knew you quite well if you'd been around a few years, and if he didn't, his staff did. So the fact that you'd paid your credit card late last month - for the first time in about a decade - would be ignored, because he (it was always a he!) knew this was very unusual, and you were a very low risk, and would lend you the money. Now you do the same thing, and the rejection is automatic.

I can see why rescues are cautious, but I think they are too ready to reject people and families who would provide perfectly decent and stable - if not utterly perfect - homes for animals.

While I understand rescues putting reasonable controls in place, they seem to become over vigilant in some areas now.
The result is what we are now seeing, people resorting to dodgy importers and back yard breeders because they can't get a rescue.
This is a revenge effect. Being too restrictive with homing by an individual charity may actually make the overall problem of stray animals and rehoming in the UK worse.

I have been on both sides but as my previous post says, I’m now firmly on the side of rescues need to be strict.

I’ve seen people tell us how ready they are for an animal, completely convinced that their small home with kids and nowhere for a cat/dog to escape to is ok and that living on a busy road with a cat is fine even though we know lots of cats and other animals are killed there.

Others tell us they’ve had cats before when they’ve been at work for 10 hours a day which may be true. People don’t want to see the problems because they desperately want an animal which I can understand. When you have seen failed adoptions because of people not being able to cope with their children as well as an animal, the cat is toileting around the house probably due to stress being left alone, the dog is barking too much when left alone to name a few reasons, it changes your perspective.

Maybe someone in a small house with no room for an animal to get peace would be good owners, maybe a cat wouldn’t get ran over on that busy road a few streets away, maybe the family with kids under 10 would work out, but the chances of failed adoption or the animal being unhappy are higher in these situations so that’s why rescues choose to be strict. The rescues I’ve worked at have never had a shortage of suitable applicants who meet the criteria.

The result is what we are now seeing, people resorting to dodgy importers and back yard breeders because they can't get a rescue.

That is not the fault of rescues. That is a result of people having low morals and little concern for animal welfare. The solution is not to lower standards in rescues, it is to properly regulate breeding and make laws that actually work.

This is true, but that lack of legislation doesn't help the daily experience of rescuing animals one bit. Those who want to rescue an animal aren't interested in that side of things in the slightest. Many people who can't successfully rescue will just go elsewhere.

The issue is that they are imposing criteria in excess of what the law requires, thus restricting people’s legal freedoms. The law doesn’t require you to have a big garden in order to have a dog. Most people would regard it as reasonable if the dog is walked regularly, even if you don’t have a garden. But rescues are saying no. So people are exercising their legal right to own a dog by purchasing one.

That is not the fault of rescues

I didn't suggest 'fault', I simply suggested that an unintended result of very tight rescue policies may have an overall negative effect on the number of abandoned animals.

That is no reason for rescues to lower standards and rehome animals to these people who have low morals. In fact it strengthens the rescues argument not to.

We need to keep campaigning for better animal welfare laws and these apparent animals lovers need to get some bloody morals instead of buying animals on gumtree from someone looking to make money from exploiting animals.

If they lived animals they wouldn’t do it. They are incapable of thinking of the bigger picture.

loved

Would you consider somebody who has consistently tried to rescue, only to go on to buy, as having low morals?

@DecafOatLatte

I agree entirely about better laws and regulation being needed (personally I'd completely ban the importing of rescue cats and dogs into the UK), so no disagreement there.

All I'm saying is that when many animal rescues have a sob story about one of their animals having been in their kennels for six months or more, a perhaps 'less than perfect' home would still be better for the animal than being stuck in a cage for months?

From a reputable breeder, not necessarily. It depends on circumstances. If you want a dog and plan on leaving it all day whilst you go to work, rescues have refused and so you buy one, then yes. If you have been refused because your child is 10 and not 13, you go on a waiting list from a reputable breeder, then no.

Most go to gumtree or pets4homes and pick a ‘breeder’ who can give them a dog with same day delivery. These are the people who likely are very unsuitable to own a plant, never mind an animal.

If a dog has been in a rescue for 6 months or more, it will be because they will have very complex needs and history. Settling for a home that isn’t right, could be a disaster. This shows inexperience and lack of knowledge from you.

The issue is that from my side of the fence, an adopter's 'suitability' is judged by a tick-box exercise, not on the nuances of what they can actually offer

This is how I feel. I had my previous cat for 15 years and pandered to his every whim, loved him and cared for him when he became old and ill. Now apparently I'm not good enough for any cat as my garden is enclosed. I know some cats will need more space than I can offer but that's fine, I was originally looking for an older cat who is happy to snooze and watch the world go by.

Another reason I'm not good enough is I don't have a spare room. I know some cats will need their own space but I specifically said I don't want a very timid cat for this reason (I know most cats will be shy at first). The cat is more than welcome to make a bolt hole wherever it wants, under the table, in an igloo, under the washing airer. It wasn't a problem 15 years ago so why is it a problem now?

I’m not going to go out and buy a dog because I’ve been turned down by rescues, I’ll wait for the right dog for me to come along.

But what I can’t comprehend is why it’s such an issue when I’ve already lived in my flat with a dog. Is going out six times a day - either for a walk or a 15 minute bathroom break - such a bad life. Is going camping and walking at weekends so awful.

Oh and a previous poster said it must be because my home is chaotic. I don't know how much chaos a 49 and 69 year old couple with no children can cause! I work from home 3 days a week and DH is retired so the cat will rarely be on it's own.

I don't agree with you about this (For info, I work for a rescue, but not dogs/cats, if it makes any difference). Yes, animals that have been up for rescue for over six months more often do have additional needs or requirements, but the restrictions and often black/white tick box exercises that come with the animal often aren't helpful at all. For animals under that category, it's a case by case scenario, and if they've been in rescue for that long the charity should be open to exploring other options.