Please Don't Bite My Head Off

[sas]

Nic, that is so inappropriate to bring up private phone discussions you had with GM.

I didnt MEH, and have never spoken with GM over the phone or even via Pm?

My apologies, I didn't see the IF bit.

[Just Andrea]

The argument between people re; If you save this dog (with needs) as opposed to 5 other dogs listed for pts is irrelevant.

Some foster carers suit a dog with special needs. Some suit large breeds, or specific breeds.

You work with what you have and what you can achieve.

If a small breed/ large breed based rescue wants to assist a dog with special needs you would have to be crazy (from a pound and shelter perspective) to then expect them to take every other dog instead of that one.

Rescue are specialised in different areas.

Ditto most of what NicB said.

At the end of the day, particularly those of us who's rescue efforts are self-funded (not coming from a rescue group kitty or publicly donated tax exempt charity), it is absolutely our choice for each and every animal we save - it is our time, money and resources invested in every one of them.

No-one has any right to tell me unless they are going to pay for them etc, what I should and shouldn't take instead.

If there were 6 dogs on the list, 5 were healthy maltese dogs and 1 one was a bulmastiff adolescent with a suspect hip issue potentially costing thousands and I am setup to take and prefer large breeds then I am going to take the bullmastiff.

If I take this dog and people who appreciate what I do or want to support me decide to donate some money to this dogs cause if we put up a donation appeal then that is 100% their choice - its their money. No-one has the right to decide that my dogs cause is less worthy of charity than someone elses. At the end of the day it is up to the person donating as to where and whether their hard-earned money goes.

If a rescuer has taken on a few special cases which have cost considerable money (possibly even more than expected) and they put a donation appeal on their site, hold a raffle etc etc to try and cover their costs I say good on them. You have a responsibility to remain viable in rescue. Anyone who wants to be a martyr feel free but I would rather put my hand out and ask for help when funds are low to cover the extra costs so that I can continue for many many years to come. No-one is any good to any animal if they go bankrupt or are broke. This same point is equally valid for rescues not taking special cases. There are always unexpected costs that aren't anticipated. If you are running into the red all the time and are too proud to put your hand up when you need it, more fool you.

NB I do believe there is a fine line between "milking" it and getting some support for some special cases and I do believe you should have the funds or be able to get them to support what you do without relying on public donations but they certainly do help and no-one should be ostracised for getting support to help them through some big bills if they chose.

Side note: I have no knowledge of the group in question which instigated this thread nor wish to. Either they are genuinely taking in special cases and seeking support or they are just using special needs dogs as a way bleed the unsuspecting public dry. I hope its the former.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Just Andrea

[_PL_]

Very well said Andrea. :)

[sterlingsilver]

Not knowing to whom the OP was referring, it makes this discussion to be in gereral about ALL rescue groups.

It maybe a rescuer that takes a dog with expensive health issues had valid reasons for doing so.

Do the rescue groups that seek public donations have success in rehoming all the dogs in their care and do they rescue other dogs which are in good health in any numbers?

If they dont then their rationale for just rescuing unhealthy dogs is a bit odd, but if they rescue both healthy and those with health issues, then good on them.They are not discriminating but rather trying to give all a chance at a new life. If they are successful in what they do why criticise them?

If the public didnt support their work and agree with what they are doing,then they wouldnt support them with donations to continue with their work.It doesnt mean that a donation to help with the treament of a dog with major health problems would have been available to rescue in general if it hadnt gone to that sick dog. It maybe the story about that particular dog spurred the person to donate ONLY to that cause because the story touched them in some way, and people wanted to help THAT dog.

Edited January 23, 2012 by sterlingsilver

[mita]

Very well said Andrea. :)

Yes, and Andrea (as well as some others) has been able to post about her actual experience in running a rescue.

The OP referred to her own observations of a rescue group (not identified) that has not posted their experience from their point of view.

I'm not having a go at you, muttrus. After all you acknowledged that, by turning it into a general issue for discussion.

Edited January 23, 2012 by mita

[Nic.B]

Nic, that is so inappropriate to bring up private phone discussions you had with GM.

I didnt MEH, and have never spoken with GM over the phone or even via Pm?

My apologies, I didn't see the IF bit.

No worries MEH, I have made far more mistakes on DOL and thank you Mita.

[k9angel]

Firstly great post Andrea.

I am only a small time rescuer but have taken on a few special needs cases.

A couple that come to mind;

Luki. A husky x pup. He was a very very sick little boy when he was about to be pts at the pound. He was actually not far off death when I picked him up. It was peeing down with rain and the pound called to tell me he was due, had no interest and was gravely ill and if I wasn't able to take him he was going to the vet to be pts. (he had missed that mornings pts on site). I couldn't find a babysitter so had to take the kids along too. As soon as I saw him I feared parvo. He was so lethargic, he barely moved. He was all bones too.

We rushed him to the vet (me and the kids) where he was tested and it came back a strong positive reading.

I knew when I took him on, that he was a very sick little boy and might not even make it.

But he was a pup, his life had barely started. He deserved a chance.

Now I am not rich by any standards (when it comes to $) but thankfully my vet allowed me to pay it off. If he hadn't of, I probably would of taken out a small loan or sold off something I owned to pay for it.

Luki was given a 50/50 chance of making it and treatment commenced immediately. Thankfully he did make it.

Two years on and Luki is a much loved member of our family. (foster failure). He is a healthy, happy boy living life to the fullest.

If I had of walked away, he would not be here today.

Husky Jasmine. She was rescued at the last minute with her Daughter Alaska and Alaska's brother Bailey. They'd come from a crap home. Both Jasmine and Alaska's ears were half chewed down due to fly bite. they were left in the yard and just had food thrown out to them. They didn't know much love and hadn't seen much of the outside world.

I took the 3 of them on. Jasmine was close to 10 yrs old when she came on season. She was suppose to be desexed, well according to her paperwork she was.

So I rushed her down to be desexed. The vet opened her up and said she should of been dead. She had cysts and tumours and pyometra. Some parts of the uterine wall were so thin it was falling apart as they operated. They rang while she was on the operating table and asked what I wanted to do. Continue or pts. They warned me it was going to cost alot of $ and there was no garentee she'd make it thru the surgery.

I asked them to continue and to do their best for her.

$1,000+ later she made it. I knew I would never recover those costs and it took a few months to pay off but it was well worth it. I will never forget the way she looked at me afterwards. As if to say thankyou. She was adopted by a lovely family and is doing fantastic to this day! She may of had a crap start to life, but she is certainly living a happy ending today.

If I had of known what I was in for ($ wise) from day 1 with her, I still would of taken her in and given her a chance at a proper life.

I actually got a lovely card from her family for Xmas just gone, with a gorgeous pic of her and the family's horses on the front. It also had a little note letting me know that she continues to be happy and well. I cried when I read it. Happy tears. :)

Then there was Sasha, the sibe from Hawkesbury pound. A lovely, lovely girl. She had a growth on her private that had to be removed. I knew this prior to taking her on. She had no other options.

Got her home, she went into surgery and it turned out the growth was quiet big on the inside and the surgery turned out to be a little more intrusive than first thought. But all was good, she made it, made a full recovery and went on to be adopted to a lovely family and is still happy and healthy to this day. :)

Although I am extremely grateful for donations, I do not depend on them to rescue.

[Nic.B]

Very well said Andrea. :)

I agree :)

[cryptic]

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.

I think a bit like you Tweety. If you do see a dog that tugs at the old heart strings you can take the dog knowing that you have a bit put away for this from your dogs that have been more rehomable due to being younger,cuter unusual,& so on. The latest rescue that i have taken on is one of these dogs who will need a lot of work. Does that make me a total sucker?? perhaps but i have committed to her & sometimes there is always going to be a dog like this that screams at you take me!! Taking many dogs at once that need a lot of vetwork is not something feasable for a small rescue but the rewards you get from the odd oldie is more than worth it. Marketing the dogs is another area that is very important to me as the more you can do for them to get out there to attract the right home the better . I see dogs sitting on Petrescue month in month out with poor photos & very little about the dog. That is sad as some of these are golden oldies who were at my local pound 12 months ago.

[mita]

No worries MEH, I have made far more mistakes on DOL and thank you Mita.

Me, too! :)

[~Anne~]

In the end it all comes down to the rescue group, the rescuer and the day.

In having said that, I firmly believe that all rescues should operate as a business and not as a charity firstly and as an organisation that prevents unneccessary euthanasia of animals secondly. Without the first you can't do the second.

What cases, dogs and homes each rescue takes on is their decision though and should be made with forethought and within the guidelines set down by that group.

[Mags]

Whilst I understand where people are coming from with the better to rescue more than those needing surgery etc. it is not always about thinking with the head. I know we have personally rescued several dogs over the years because we couldn't walk away from them - did we consider their health problems yes and we took them on anyway because for whatever reason we couldn't walk away from that particular dog. Our tiny Pap X was one of these dogs. My OH who has never looked twice at a small dog saw him and that was that - he was not being left to be pts. I was OK with that as I assumed once we got him better, trained and a good weight he would be moving on - that is not happening he is my OH's dog - and that is fine too he is a lovely boy not the type of dog I ever thought we would have as a family member but a wonderful companion for my OH who he follows everywhere. He also gets on well with the other fluffies and the grey which is important to us. We all know we can't rescue them all but we choose for whatever reason who we will rescue. I assume sometimes rescue groups find a dog that they feel the same way about. I don't blame them for coming to their rescue - they do a job that at times is soul destroying if this stops them burning out so be it.

And then their are those that do breed rescue - they will take one of their choose breed over all else and that too is their choice. And sometimes there are too many for them to rescue them all but even after they are full they still some how manage to find space for the odd oldie in need - why because they have to if they are to keep rescuing at all.

[Greytmate]

I only rescue on a very small scale with my local shelter.

Rightly or wrongly I am not able to assist other shelters, this is happening in my own back yard, we have enough dogs to care for in my local area and fitting dogs into my own home or with foster carers is a very individual process.

The argument between people re; If you save this dog (with needs) as opposed to 5 other dogs listed for pts is irrelevant.

Some foster carers suit a dog with special needs. Some suit large breeds, or specific breeds.

You work with what you have and what you can achieve.

If a small breed/ large breed based rescue wants to assist a dog with special needs you would have to be crazy (from a pound and shelter perspective) to then expect them to take every other dog instead of that one.

Rescue are specialised in different areas.

If I rang you today GM about 4 greys in the pound and you said no, would that motivate you to take the kelpies or cattle's or working breeds or JRT'S? Not to mention the SWF's.

You are right, you are not paying the vet fees.

You are being unfair IMO on Miss Molly and other posters.

How many Greys have you taken from HP? RF or BP?

While you worked with GAP you were supported with donations from the racing industry and you were paid a full time wage.

Some of us don't have that luxury.

I am not being unfair. I am arguing that putting resources into adopting out healthy dogs will result in more dogs being rehomed than if unhealthy dogs are sourced by rescue. I have no problem with people doing this, I do have a problem with people throwing up bullshit reasons to justify why they do it.

I know you will keep throwing up examples of dogs that have been saved that would be dead if not helped. That doesn't mean that a greater number of dogs are being helped. It means a lot of time and money was put into that particular dog. I'm not going to tell people what dogs they should rescue, as long as they have the resources to do it properly.

But if people are going to back up this practice using an argument that more dogs will be saved overall, they can expect people to pull them up on that. Unhealthy dogs cost more to bring up to rehomable standard than healthy dogs do. You would have to be rather stupid at maths not to understand that. Rescue what you want, but don't try to mislead people that fewer dogs would be euthanasia if rescue took the sick ones and left the healthy ones behind.

I'm not sure why the topic has changed from the one that Muttrus has started. How about a few of you actually look at your own activities and rehoming rate rather than have a go at me. It might be unfair that sick dogs take more time and resources than healthy ones and this has an effect on a rescue's rehoming rate, but it's what happens.

[tdierikx]

Simple maths also says that special needs animals bring in the donations... *grin*

For those that use commercial kennel space, how often do people from the actual rescue go out there and interact with the dogs they have kenneled? How well to they really know that dog when it comes time to rehome it?

What happens to the dogs that donations are required to cover vet fees for if the donations don't come in?

My take on the whole charity/donations thing is that it should be used to supplement the funds for the dogs in care - not be relied upon to fully fund the care required.

T.

[_PL_]

edit rambling

To get back to the original topic, yes I understand a plea for help needs to be made sometimes. But I'm guessing continuously getting in over your head and asking for a bail out over and over and over again is the irritant? Like every dog needing a carer or kennel sponsor?

Edited January 26, 2012 by Powerlegs

[moonbaby]

If I've read the original post correctly, I think the point that's being made is - public donations are never a given. They are supposed to supplement rescue, not fund it (not including the legitimate fundraising events, etc that are important, I think it's moreso about the constant asking for your money). And for those who cannot afford to cover the vetwork for certain dogs, is it responsible for them to pull the dogs from the pound, and solely rely on public donations? If they can't afford to care for the dog and donations end up not coming in, what happens then?

Totally Agree, do they have a 'Plan B'

I am not being unfair. I am arguing that putting resources into adopting out healthy dogs will result in more dogs being rehomed than if unhealthy dogs are sourced by rescue. I have no problem with people doing this, I do have a problem with people throwing up bullshit reasons to justify why they do it.

I know you will keep throwing up examples of dogs that have been saved that would be dead if not helped. That doesn't mean that a greater number of dogs are being helped. It means a lot of time and money was put into that particular dog. I'm not going to tell people what dogs they should rescue, as long as they have the resources to do it properly.

But if people are going to back up this practice using an argument that more dogs will be saved overall, they can expect people to pull them up on that. Unhealthy dogs cost more to bring up to rehomable standard than healthy dogs do. You would have to be rather stupid at maths not to understand that. Rescue what you want, but don't try to mislead people that fewer dogs would be euthanasia if rescue took the sick ones and left the healthy ones behind.

I'm not sure why the topic has changed from the one that Muttrus has started. How about a few of you actually look at your own activities and rehoming rate rather than have a go at me. It might be unfair that sick dogs take more time and resources than healthy ones and this has an effect on a rescue's rehoming rate, but it's what happens.

Agree again, you cant save every dog. Some rescue groups also seem to 'use' the 'unhealthy dog that needs alot of work' as a form of promotion for how good they are, RescuEGOds, I call them. There have been several dogs that have been saved with horrific injuries that really it would be in the dogs best interest to be pts, but instead they post the 'progress' as a form of promoting their rescue. The dogs will never have quality of life and can never be rehomed.

Simple maths also says that special needs animals bring in the donations... *grin*

For those that use commercial kennel space, how often do people from the actual rescue go out there and interact with the dogs they have kenneled? How well to they really know that dog when it comes time to rehome it?

What happens to the dogs that donations are required to cover vet fees for if the donations don't come in?

My take on the whole charity/donations thing is that it should be used to supplement the funds for the dogs in care - not be relied upon to fully fund the care required.

T.

And this last post I totally agree with, I have seen dogs in commercial kennels that have been 'rescued' but are still here some 8 mths later and I have never seen anyone visit them from the rescue group who 'saved' them, again where is their quality of life and what damage had been done to their mental state, and how can that rescue group rehome a dog they have never visited or interacted with?

and finally, my last point of view stems from the original question about taking in the dog and THEN asking for donations, it is not unlike the Rescue Groups who put saves on dogs and get them out of the kennels and THEN put out posts of 'URGENT FOSTER CARERS NEEDED' we have a dog coming.????? Thats defineately putting the cart before the horse.

Of course all of this is IMO :-)

[Nic.B]

I only rescue on a very small scale with my local shelter.

Rightly or wrongly I am not able to assist other shelters, this is happening in my own back yard, we have enough dogs to care for in my local area and fitting dogs into my own home or with foster carers is a very individual process.

The argument between people re; If you save this dog (with needs) as opposed to 5 other dogs listed for pts is irrelevant.

Some foster carers suit a dog with special needs. Some suit large breeds, or specific breeds.

You work with what you have and what you can achieve.

If a small breed/ large breed based rescue wants to assist a dog with special needs you would have to be crazy (from a pound and shelter perspective) to then expect them to take every other dog instead of that one.

Rescue are specialised in different areas.

If I rang you today GM about 4 greys in the pound and you said no, would that motivate you to take the kelpies or cattle's or working breeds or JRT'S? Not to mention the SWF's.

You are right, you are not paying the vet fees.

You are being unfair IMO on Miss Molly and other posters.

How many Greys have you taken from HP? RF or BP?

While you worked with GAP you were supported with donations from the racing industry and you were paid a full time wage.

Some of us don't have that luxury.

I am not being unfair. I am arguing that putting resources into adopting out healthy dogs will result in more dogs being rehomed than if unhealthy dogs are sourced by rescue. I have no problem with people doing this, I do have a problem with people throwing up bullshit reasons to justify why they do it.

I know you will keep throwing up examples of dogs that have been saved that would be dead if not helped. That doesn't mean that a greater number of dogs are being helped. It means a lot of time and money was put into that particular dog. I'm not going to tell people what dogs they should rescue, as long as they have the resources to do it properly.

But if people are going to back up this practice using an argument that more dogs will be saved overall, they can expect people to pull them up on that. Unhealthy dogs cost more to bring up to rehomable standard than healthy dogs do. You would have to be rather stupid at maths not to understand that. Rescue what you want, but don't try to mislead people that fewer dogs would be euthanasia if rescue took the sick ones and left the healthy ones behind.

I'm not sure why the topic has changed from the one that Muttrus has started. How about a few of you actually look at your own activities and rehoming rate rather than have a go at me. It might be unfair that sick dogs take more time and resources than healthy ones and this has an effect on a rescue's rehoming rate, but it's what happens.

I agree with most of what you have written. I am not saying more dogs will be saved overall if those with special needs are always rescued.

What I am trying to say, is that if there are 6 dogs in need (and one has special needs which a specific rescue can responsibly meet) it would be crazy from a "shelter" perspective to say "no, you cant take this special needs small breed as treatment will be very expensive" though you can take the other 5 large healthy crossbreeds.

As I said rescue is a very individual process, I know you are experienced in this area. The rescue may have foster care which is geared for special needs, or small breeds, or large breeds, or specific breeds etc.

Having said that, I have witnessed a number of very sick dogs, or those with marked behavioural issues who I 100% agree need to be offered a humane death and I wont hesitate to say so. It is honestly the kindest thing we can do at times.

Most of the time I have spent with special needs dogs has been under DOC with me at home. I am thrilled to see many go to great rescue, though I have also pts after vet advice and after consult with the rescue.

IME a dog identified with health issues in the pound environment, is often found to have further issues once in care. A dog with a slight limp may have an old injury that needs surgery, a dog with dental issues may have heart issues. We had one dog (who was not assesed by me) who was considered in whelp, she had massive heart issues.

Until pounds and shelters can afford vets, behaviourists and trainers we take a risk (even with healthy dogs)

I have never, ever taken a donation from anyone for any dog I have rescued. Having said that, if a reputable group share a dogs story, and people offer to help with donations, I dont have a problem with that at all :) .

[Nic.B]

In the end it all comes down to the rescue group, the rescuer and the day.

In having said that, I firmly believe that all rescues should operate as a business and not as a charity firstly and as an organisation that prevents unneccessary euthanasia of animals secondly. Without the first you can't do the second.

What cases, dogs and homes each rescue takes on is their decision though and should be made with forethought and within the guidelines set down by that group.

This is spot on :)

[sterlingsilver]

With the instances that my friends and I have donated to, the appeals have not stayed up on their web site for months on end, and there is an update as to the progress of the dogs concerned.We got receipts and a note explaining what the money was used for and how the dog was going.

Unlike a certain sydney pound which had an appeal running on a donation web site for months and months on end.Initially the site had a thermometer so you could see how much was being donated, but then the pound had the thermometer removed so the donor was not aware if money was coming in or not and if the surgery costs etc would have been covered, The appeal was on the site long long after the dog was rehomed.As a consequence I would never donate to that place again.

If there seems to be transparency I am happy to donate to help a dog in need.

I think as a donor you can get an overall impression of how the rescue is operating.

I cannot do a lot to help rescue groups but I can donate from time to time to what I see as a worthy cause.

[Steve]

its difficult for anyone to be critical as each person and each case has to be different but I have to admit when I see something like a kitten which was set alight on a railway station being kept alive and suffering burns for months with calls for donations it does bother me.