Rescue Adoption Rates Plummeting

[_PL_]

https://thewest.com.au/news/animals/australias-compassion-fatigue-results-in-lowest-pet-adoption-rates-and-forced-euthanasia

[_PL_]

Flamesuit on. I'm prepared for all the excuses as to why rescue makes it all too hard or too expensive.  I've heard them all. 
The rescue sector is buckling under the pressure of endless unwanted animals and the high cost of vetwork and upkeep while in care. Targeted blame on people who have chosen an unpaid and bloody difficult occupation is all too common.  

[Little Gifts]

As a foster carer for a long long time with both RSPCA and a couple of independent groups I think something has to give. RSPCA can't continue to be the funded body and not doing the work. All these independent rescue groups would  not even exist if they were doing the job the general  public thinks they are with all their donations. Its one big scam.

 

The last rescue group I was with is constantly screaming out for foster carers to the degree that it is putting me off them now. I know it is hard but you can't commit to dogs and then guilt  people into taking them. You can't recruit new carers by banging on at the same group of supporters and you can't  keep  bringing in dogs if you have nowhere for them to go. And the risk of bringing in dogs and sending straight to carers is that their behaviours are unknown. There have been several badly matched fosters (we had one that I felt would physically harm me if he stayed any longer) and that doesn't help retain carers either.

 

I've ended up with a foster fail that I did not plan and who is terrified of other dogs. He was so ill at rescue they did their first ever Go Fund Me to cover his vet bills. If I had my way I guess I'd still be fostering as many as I could. And I'd be in the thick of fundraising for them (or other rescues). But I'm not doing either because I'm definately still burnt out after things went south with Craft for Paws. So yeah it's a hard emotional slog that continues endlessly and I'm in my down cycle about it all still...

[tdierikx]

The unspoken fact of the matter is that government has effectively outsourced their responsibility for unwanted/stray animals to a completely unfunded system of private rescues. They are reluctant to change this model, as they refuse to spend the money required to do something constructive about the issue when they know that big hearted volunteers will do it for them. The only way to change this is for rescues to basically stop all operations until government steps up and deals with the issue... but that's not going to happen because no-one wants to see euthanasia rates soar due to space constraints in the few pounds we do have operating nowadays. The government are banking on rescues continuing to do this work for free... so we are caught in a terrible Catch 22 situation if we want the current system to change in any significant way.

 

RSPCA have decided to scale back their shelter business section (in NSW), and to focus more on their inspectorate activities... meanwhile, government refuses to be locked into any significant funding for that part of their business - and until the inspectorate does their job properly and fairly, I wouldn't suggest giving them any more funding either. The NSW government has finally put in some measures to make the inspectorate more accountable for the funds they do receive, but those could still go further, like maybe some KPI's that can be used to measure value for money spent... don't you think?

 

T.

 

 

[_PL_]

@Little Gifts

Overcommitment is a real thing isn't it. 

It's so awful to have to say no. No matter how many times, it never gets any easier.  But saying yes every time is a trap.   

[_PL_]

23 minutes ago, tdierikx said:

we are caught in a terrible Catch 22 situation if we want the current system to change in any significant way.

 

 

Yes! Just this week, the regular proposal from an MOP that if we stopped rescuing quote 'doing the council's job for them', then things would change and rescue wouldn't be needed. A catch 22 as old as Methuselah. 

[Little Gifts]

Let's be real - pet ownership, abuse and abandonment are educational and social issues. I still think the RSPCA (or another peak national body) should be focussed on the educational and enforcement side of things and either improve laws or stop banging on about how the laws aren't strong enough and do something about it. They have failed at sheltering, rehabbing and adopting animals so  should stop pretending they do much on that front. Councils have an important role to play in Lost and Found animals and sheltering them in a basic way until they can be reunited with their owners or moved to a foster/adoption option. I think pound fees hinder successful return of some animals and don't really encourage any compliance. The people whose dogs get out regularly are the people who lack the funds, commitment and ability to repair fences. But is the dog better off with them or dead?  It seems like the animal  only has 2 options and it didn't ask for either. It also gives the pound a bad name in the communities eyes of being money makers and killers. That of course leaves the unfunded rescues who do all the assessing, vet work, fostering and adoptions. What a mess! The most under rated (the  'money makers'!) in the communities eyes is doing such important work! I honestly don't know what to do there - shelters have their place but home based foster care better reflects an animal's  future. But each rescue has their own value base and I really don't know if they could  all come together in agreement on  what an animal within  rescue  needs?

 

But the biggest issues are of course the number of animals still being bred and sold  every year as part of a money making business, with no warranties and no checking that the purchaser is capable of owning and raising a live creature. Or that they are even allowed a pet. We need more control on how  many animals can be at risk of homelessness and who is producing and owning them for real  change to occur.

 

There are lots of genuine surrenders (owner deaths and homelessness) and there are lots of 'my pet is unmanageable' surrenders (where education and better matching of pet to human could assist) and lots of 'my pet is sick and vet care is too expensive' surrenders (again, where education and  better matching could've been useful). We have to stop producing and selling pets like we are running an animal Temu. We have to change the mindset on how expensive owning a pet can be so  it doesn't come  as a surprise and how many years you might need to be responsible for it (you don't get to abandon it when they get old either). We have to change the mindset on the intrinsic needs of a pet so they aren't purchased like you would a t-shirt,  fed on shit, then left alone outside in tiny yards or on apartment balconies for hours on end every day. We have to make it easier to leave our houses with them and for them to interact safely with each other. We need to blend our  worlds more, but in a responsible  way. And I say that as  someone who can't even take her dog out where other dogs are.

 

Just my thoughts of course - easier said than done.

 

I just feel like so much needs to change on so many levels that it is disheartening. We can't even co-exist with our precious wildlife! And I think about the terrible neglect Albert suffered for his first year and what it took from his future. That's what we have to positively impact. What did he do to deserve any of that? Nothing except be born and raised by someone neglectful, ignorant or in denial. All the money spent on him will never fix everything he suffered - his eyesight is permanently damaged and he remains absolutely terrified of other dogs  because of the harm  they have caused him. He still eats his own vomit  like he may never get another meal. We have to change how animals like him  are valued in our communities or nothing will change. Maybe we even need to make it harder to own a companion animal? Like we need  to sit an animal care test to get a pet license first? A bit like what rescue is doing for potential adopters with their application forms? I wish it wasn't needed, but????

[DogsAndTheMob]

15 hours ago, Little Gifts said:

Let's be real - pet ownership, abuse and abandonment are educational and social issues.

I suspect it’s also economic. Inflation, and especially increased housing costs, is putting the costs of pet ownership out of the reach of many people. Add on the commodification of the pet industry, with social marketing of expensive pet care products of dubious necessity, and many pet owners are mis-spending any disposable income they may have. This is compounded by another social change I’ve seen in my lifetime - the rise of the two income family. When both adults in a family are working full time, often with unpaid overtime or a second job, who finds the time to care for a pet? Even if people get a pet at a stage of life when they have spare time and money, their lives will change and evolve over the next fifteen years. Unfortunately. I think pet ownership is a cultural relic that is becoming increasingly impractical for many people.

 

15 hours ago, Little Gifts said:

But the biggest issues are of course the number of animals still being bred and sold  every year as part of a money making business

I agree, but attempts to control breeding seem to have done more harm than good. To a large extent, demand dictates supply, so when well-intentioned breeders of the type who breed small numbers of puppies and match them to carefully screened purchasers are forced out of breeding by onerous regulation, the gap in supply is met by puppy mills, whose “mass production” of puppies covers compliance costs, or by criminals and the criminally careless, who simply disregard regulations.

Education needs to address demand, by encouraging people to take a hard look at how pet ownership will affect their lives throughout the next 15 years, BEFORE they get a puppy or kitten. 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by DogsAndTheMob
Grammar

[_PL_]

 

 

 

  

Edited 13 hours ago by _PL_
n/a

[Little Gifts]

This story came up on my FB feed and hundreds of people commented the same thing - they turned to puppy farmers and Gumtree because they found it too hard to get a  pet through a rescue group - constant knockbacks or too many hoops to jump through. I thought that was interesting on many fronts because every rescue I've worked with absolutely just wants the perfect forever home for their animals. So either people couldn't be bothered sharing enough about themselves or thought it was too intrusive a process. Or maybe they thought it took too long to have their application processed and their attention span already took them  elsewhere. Or even worse, in assessing their application it was clear how they would share their lives with a dog was not enough for the dog and they really had no concept of an animal's needs.

 

From my experiences the rescue (and foster carers) are all about the dogs, while some applicants can be very 'them' focussed,  just wanting what they want without considering the practical and suitability side of things.

 

I remember the first time adoptees left my home with a dog they'd only just had a meet and greet with, like I was running a bloody shelter. They left,  got in their car, parked down the road and rang the rescue,  said they wanted him and  paid for him over the phone but did not even have a bed at  home,  let  alone a harness,  leash, food or car restraint. I had to give them  some of my stuff  and they were going to drop in at Kmart on their way home to get the rest. I was horrified the rescue were happy for him to leave with them the same  afternoon and still  don't  know if it was because I wasn't ready or I felt the doggo wasn't ready or if the rescue were worried he wouldn't get a lot of interest so took the offer. He  came  back  to the  rescue 6  months later (we couldn't take him again). I was gutted for him because he'd  already been abandoned at the pound by his original owners (he searched for them a lot when we first fostered him) and had one failed adoption that only lasted a week (owner was due to move from a unit to a townhouse in a couple of weeks but couldn't manage him in the unit - I was happy to keep fostering him until she made the permanent move to be honest but had no say in things), then a second adoption fail, all within a year. That's a lot for a dog. That's why things need to be thorough - someone has to be Team Dog. Rushing things is to make the humans happy - not the animals.

[tdierikx]

One thing that confuses me a lot is who has literally thousands of dollars to "impulse" buy a puppy? Commercially bred pups aren't cheap.

 

Those same people may also say they think that rescue pets (and even some registered purebreds) are "too expensive"... so yet another Catch 22...

 

In most cases, even backyard bred pups can be more expensive to buy than a rescue pet.

 

We had LOTS of applications for Lala's pups, and as they will be very large dogs once grown, we were blunt about that fact with every potential adopter. Most of the applications were for the merle/harlequin pups, as if they were somehow "better" than the other coloured pups we had... people want "pretty" more than they want a perfect match... *sigh* We only had one person we knocked back cause a fuss, and to be perfectly honest, by his reaction and tirade of abuse when he wasn't immediately given what he wanted, we were spot on with our summation of his lack of suitability for one of these pups.

 

Hopefully with the new NSW laws, we may be able to trace what happens to poorly rehomed pets. If we can see trends of poor rehoming and bouncing in and out of the pound/shelter/rescue system, then we can maybe address that issue... we all know it happens with far more regularity than we care to admit. I don't think we'll find the issue coming from the registered purebred sector as much as from the completely unregulated rescue sector... there are still way too many cowboys in rescue trying to quickly rehome animals in their desperate need to "save" more, and that needs to stop. Cowboys give the entire rescue sector a bad name, and perpetuate the myth that rescue pets are somehow "broken" or "less than" pets sourced from other sectors.

 

Make no bones about it, the rescue sector will end up being regulated... it's just a matter of when and how that is implemented.

 

T.

[DogsAndTheMob]

RSPCA NSW guide: I found kittens! What should I do?

 

I guess the seasonal influx of kittens combined with the drop in adoptions explains this guide from the RSPCA, which keeps popping up in my FB feed. I understand their dilemma, but it makes me wince every time. Leaving the kittens with a feral mother cat means adding to the feral cat population  - if the poor things survive. I also believe that the other recommended option - taking them home and raising them - is contrary to the law in NSW, because anyone who finds a dog or cat is required to surrender it to the RSPCA. Finally, what would be the requirements when the finder wants to rehome the kittens? They would need to microchip the kittens, I believe. Do they also need a Breeder Identification Number?

 

 

[tdierikx]

2 hours ago, DogsAndTheMob said:

is contrary to the law in NSW, because anyone who finds a dog or cat is required to surrender it to the RSPCA

 

Actually, stray dogs are to be taken to the pound (or call a ranger to pick up and take), but cats are allowed to roam in NSW by law, so you are supposed to leave them alone.

 

RSPCA NSW doesn't operate any pounds any more.

 

The legislation is not very forthcoming on what happens in the scenario you describe about a private person (not affiliated with an approved rescue) taking in stray kittens and then trying to rehome them. Your best bet for answers would be the Office of Local Government, who are responsible for these matters. I would suggest that it would be best to contact rescue groups and offer to be a foster carer for those kittens, then all the legal stuff will be covered when the kittens need to be rehomed.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that if you don't microchip them and privately rehome them without overt advertising, then that would be the most obvious course of action. That's pretty much not covered under the current legislation - and incredibly hard to police - so I'm tipping it will be happening a lot.

 

T.