Guest muttrus Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I know every dog is a risk and there are hidden costs at every turn its a luck of the draw. While I know many rescues need help and donations and some seem to always have there hand in the publics pocket Please don't bite my head off but if a rescue saves a dog knowing there are high costs involved such as expensive op on going treatment etc is it really fair to then ask for huge amounts of public donations to cover costs? I think sometimes decisions should be made with your head and if YOU KNOW there will be high costs involved and you can't meet those costs then is it fair . Remember I mean those cases where you know there will be high costs. I seem to see the same rescue name pop up asking for huge amounts of money to not only cover vet costs but for kennel fees .While in an ideal world there wouldn't be a need for ''rescue'' if you don't have anywhere for the dog to go or the money to provide for the dog then are you really helping? I hate seeing the so many needing here and I still don't know why I look sometimes.I have my foster dogs and I do what I can within my limits sure I would love to do more and sometimes I try too but at some point I believe you have to pull yourself back and work with what you do have and build on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwaY Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I agree, I would have thought groups would go for the easy to rehome dog, vs a costly dog. Easy to rehome and low costs dogs would surly mean you could save more in the long run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninahartland Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 If all the rescues went for the easy to rehome dogs...ie the littlies and SWF's what would happen to all the bigger, boofer types, the big scruffers, the brindle ones.....etc I agree the turnover (for want of a better word ) would be faster but its not always about saving the easier ones, they all deserve a chance, but I do understand what you're saying Muttrus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwaY Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 If all the rescues went for the easy to rehome dogs...ie the littlies and SWF's what would happen to all the bigger, boofer types, the big scruffers, the brindle ones.....etc Plenty of people still want the bigger, boofer ones etc - Muttrus is talking about taking in ones that groups knows are going to cost a lot of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordogs Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 It is a case of heart ruling the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plan B Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) If all the rescues went for the easy to rehome dogs...ie the littlies and SWF's what would happen to all the bigger, boofer types, the big scruffers, the brindle ones.....etc I always find this a bit of a weird thing to say. Why do "littles" etc count as easy to rehome? We primarily rehome Staffies, Amstaffs, Rotties, and all their crosses etc, and have found them much easier to rehome than the little dogs we've had in care. I think one person's "easy rehome" is another person's "harder rehome." Anyway, totally agree with the original post. We are just not set up to take on the hard cases. I hope one day we are because it's horrible to bypass them in the pound but it just wouldn't be responsible for us to take those cases on at the moment. Edited January 21, 2012 by Plan B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweety Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I try to balance out my rescues. For example... I can take about 5 younger, easier to rehome dogs to one special needs one. I have been doing that for a while now and it seems to be working for me. The balance of adoption money left over from some adoptions are then put towards older or sicker dogs that need a lot more vetwork done. That way I feel like I can help all types of dogs where possible. I never take on more than I can chew and I never committ to a dog I am unable to financially support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keetamouse Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I know this thread is about the ones we do know about before hand that will cost money and I have a $1500 vet bill for a 6 month old girl who needed one of her front legs broken and then reset, I knew this was going to cost but still took her on as I dreaded to thing what would happen to her. I only do the smalls and most of the ones that come to me out of say 10, at least, 8 need dentals, now, I don't know this until they get to me, some rangers are pretty bad at judging the ages of the smalls (this is not a critism just a fact)I NEVER rehome dogs who have obvious dental problems, I always get the work done, and yes it is costly but once they are in my care I am responsible for them and will do what is best for the dog. Maree CPR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 In this category I would put that bully boy a Sydney rescue group took on last year who had been burnt. They were asking for money to assist with his vet care and ongoing recovery. I think if you were a group that had successfully rehabilitated and rehomed a damaged dog previously it would give you the inclination to keep taking on the harder cases. It might become like your niche. But the risk is that funds could dry up and you have taken on a dog you can't afford. Poor dog. I don't mind donating for dogs with extra needs as long as I can see the group is able to manage what they take on and that these dogs are rehomed rather than languishing in foster care with no chance of a suitable home or even worse that they have poor quality of life as a result of their health or behavioural issues. I also think I'm one of those people who would be willing to adopt a special needs/high cost dog and there are probably other people like me out there. And I applaud rescue groups who choose to go the other way and save more dogs for the same money. I really think there is a place in rescue for both approaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Can people please clarify? Dogs who cost more are less worthy of rescue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plan B Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Can people please clarify? Dogs who cost more are less worthy of rescue? Definitely not my point of view. Every dog is worth a chance. We just save what we can, when we can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffyluv Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Just my opinion but I believe rescue tries to save as many rehomeable dogs as possible (those with good temperaments)... I also think that our heart does rule our heads because we do it for the love of dogs... There is no other reason... Rescue don't make money out of this, it is purely for the love of the dogs... In my eyes, all dogs have equal right to a loving home, be they sick or healthy.. Personally, it is the ol staffys that break my heart.. I would save them all if I could... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Can people please clarify? Dogs who cost more are less worthy of rescue? I think what is being asked is more along the lines of why are some people regularly taking in dogs that they don't have the funds to cover the needs of to get them to a rehomable state - then publicly asking for money from others to cover those costs... As for taking in special needs dogs - well - I adopted one of my special needs fosters. I seriously was worried about what type of person would apply to adopt a pup with serious mobility issues, and what would happen when the novelty factor wore off... oh - and I had completely fallen in love with her... *grin* But... I have the support of some great vets who also love my "special" girl - and give me pretty good rates for anything she may need in that respect. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) I rescue both Italian Greyhounds and other dogs and like many others in rescue, it does cost a great deal of money much of the time. And sometimes you end up with no dog. In October, I was in the very unfortunate position of not having $5000+ available for an urgent specialist high risk surgery for an older dog I took from a country pound. My vet recommended i let him go, I was completely devastated but had to either remortgage my house or let the dog go. The surgery itself was high risk of failure, it would likely have required a second surgery for the same amount, also with a high risk of failure. Each time there would have been lengthy recuperation periods with a high degree of care and monitoring for the rest of the dog's life plus a special diet. I simply did not have all the resources needed and the dog would have suffered throughout the surgical procedures, perhaps to no avail. This dog had been in the pound for 7 days, a kennel for 3 days and then transported. Only the transporter noticed the issue which I could see as soon as I spent 30 seconds with the dog and raced him off to the vet. I don't personally foster large or young dogs - I don't have the space nor the time. The only time I've had complaints from neighbours have been when young dogs have been playing and barking at the same time so I've learned I can't rescue them and have them here, I have to depend on the 1 or 2 foster carers I have to have them which does limit things. I do have foster carers for young dogs and that works fine. They are mainly Italian Greyhounds and they are an expensive breed to rescue - they often require dentals, even at 2 yrs of age. You can't always predict when you are going to have extra costs - there can be hidden problems that only surface during blood tests etc. There's no easy answer but I don't criticise anyone for only rescuing small dogs, white dogs, young dogs or a particular breed. We all have to do what we believe we can manage. Edited January 21, 2012 by dogmad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Just my opinion but I believe rescue tries to save as many rehomeable dogs as possible (those with good temperaments)... I also think that our heart does rule our heads because we do it for the love of dogs... There is no other reason... Rescue don't make money out of this, it is purely for the love of the dogs... In my eyes, all dogs have equal right to a loving home, be they sick or healthy.. Personally, it is the ol staffys that break my heart.. I would save them all if I could... I'm with you. If I had the option I'd fill it with grey muzzles..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest muttrus Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I rescue both Italian Greyhounds and other dogs and like many others in rescue, it does cost a great deal of money much of the time. And sometimes you end up with no dog. In October, I was in the very unfortunate position of not having $5000+ available for an urgent specialist high risk surgery for an older dog I took from a country pound. My vet recommended i let him go, I was completely devastated but had to either remortgage my house or let the dog go. The surgery itself was high risk of failure, it would likely have required a second surgery for the same amount, also with a high risk of failure. Each time there would have been lengthy recuperation periods with a high degree of care and monitoring for the rest of the dog's life plus a special diet. I simply did not have all the resources needed and the dog would have suffered throughout the surgical procedures, perhaps to no avail. This dog had been in the pound for 7 days, a kennel for 3 days and then transported. Only the transporter noticed the issue which I could see as soon as I spent 30 seconds with the dog and raced him off to the vet. I don't personally foster large or young dogs - I don't have the space nor the time. The only time I've had complaints from neighbours have been when young dogs have been playing and barking at the same time so I've learned I can't rescue them and have them here, I have to depend on the 1 or 2 foster carers I have to have them which does limit things. I do have foster carers for young dogs and that works fine. They are mainly Italian Greyhounds and they are an expensive breed to rescue - they often require dentals, even at 2 yrs of age. You can't always predict when you are going to have extra costs - there can be hidden problems that only surface during blood tests etc. There's no easy answer but I don't criticise anyone for only rescuing small dogs, white dogs, young dogs or a particular breed. We all have to do what we believe we can manage. Thats what I mean we do whats within our limits and yes sometimes you can't see the hidden costs I m not out to judge what breed of dog that is rescued while I love all dogs the dogs I own and prefer are MY choice and the breeds I foster are anything from chi to mastiff its who ever comes to me whenever ----I just noticed that some groups (one stands out more than others but to save a war Ill say some) tend to rely heavily on public donations but its not just asking it seems that they always have a dog who is need of large amounts because they can't cope sure it happens but looking back on all their saves it reads like its completely public funded .Now I know rescue comes not only from the heart but your pocket too Ijust feel if you rely so heavily on public donations to continue then maybe you're either you should limit yourself or you're in it for the wrong reasons .My vet is over priced and they don't do me too many favours however limited with transport and my location makes it hard to choose otherwise so there really isn't much left over and what is just goes towards the next one I KNOW this so I work with it.I keep a kitty and I can only do what I have enough for so I know I can't take on cases beyond my reach as for the unexpected ones well it goes with the job ---------------But to rely on the public and constantly playing the bleeding heart story really gets up my nose So is there groups praying on people out there to fund themselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sterlingsilver Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I am happy to donate to help vet bills for the rescue groups I am familiar with, and know they are doing a good job. I would hate to think that a dog with a health problem, that can be fixed is left to die in the pound and only healthy ones are chosen. I know that sometimes the health issues dont surface until the dog is examined by a rescue groups vet,as the pound didnt know about the problem or have a vet check done before the dog was permitted to go to rescue. Even if they take out a dog specifically that they know has a problem and endeavour to help it, I would support them.Sad to think of them being left to die because of money. I have adopted a dog with special needs and would hate to think that she may have been left in a pound because of costs in treating her. Healthy dogs dont necesarily ALL make good companions,some can be DA or HA, and a dog with a health problem can still be a wonderful companion, so to just save only the healthy is not the way to go, in my honest opinion. From what I have seen and heard the public like to be able to help financially with vet bills.They know that they cannot always help in other ways but donating money is something that they can do. The groups I support I do so because I know them and know that they are honest and have high rescue and rehome rates and are reputable. I know there have been dogs with vet bills of many many thousands, and I know I have pondered the thought that ALL that money could have helped MANY MANY dogs, so I do see where the OP may have been coming from, but in the end, have been pleased to see those particular dogs treated and rehomed. I dont know to whom the OP was referring as I am not familiar with a lot of rescue groups work. How do you choose who is to live and who is to die if you are a rescuer? You just do what you can I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissMolly Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I agree, I would have thought groups would go for the easy to rehome dog, vs a costly dog. Easy to rehome and low costs dogs would surly mean you could save more in the long run? Just because a dog might need costly vet work doesn't mean it is not worth saving.. There are so many dogs that end up at shelters that need some sort of vet work, I would hate to think rescues would stop rescuing them because they might be costly.. I lot more dogs would be PTS if that was the case.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HugUrPup Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 All charity's run on donations.. I see no different when it comes to rescue groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garnali Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I think it has to be a personal or rescue group decision.. I have a set criteria for what rescues I will take as do many others.. I guess it does sometimes come down to costs but also the animals welfare is taken into account. Many of you have chatted with me about Jake the sick kelpie I have.. He did not appear to have any issues when he first arrived at 8 weeks old.. He is now my golden boy (gold credit card) as every week there have been health issues.. He is currently going through allergies and requires antihistamines and pain meds on most days.. Would I have taken him on had I known the problems and long term expenditure.. possibly not. Now that he is here though he gets the best of everything.. I have never asked my rescue group for payment of his vet bills as I had the option of pts at the start. The way I figure it is it was my choice to perservere so it's my choice to pay the vet bill.. Just my opinion.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now